Basic theory behind conservation of momentum and impulse.

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the conservation of momentum in a system involving a rod and a table during an impact event. It is established that momentum conservation does not hold true due to the significant mass difference between the rod and the table, leading to an approximation where the table's velocity change is negligible. The restitution constant, e=0.6, plays a crucial role in determining the final velocity of the rod post-impact. Participants conclude that while momentum is generally conserved, approximations must be made in real-life scenarios involving eccentric impacts.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of conservation of momentum principles
  • Familiarity with the concept of restitution in collisions
  • Basic knowledge of linear momentum calculations
  • Experience with approximations in physics problems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of conservation of momentum in elastic and inelastic collisions
  • Learn about the calculation of restitution coefficients in various materials
  • Explore the effects of mass and velocity in collision scenarios
  • Investigate the implications of eccentric impacts on momentum conservation
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics, collision theory, and momentum conservation principles.

theBEAST
Messages
361
Reaction score
0
Conservation of momentum does not hold true?

Homework Statement


Here is the problem. State 2 is shown in the picture, it is right before impact. State 3 is after impact.

Wx4wt.png


I used conservation of momentum of the entire system (rod and table. However as you can see it shows us that the rod has the same momentum before and after the impact. This is impossible because e=0.6. Why is it that my conservation equation does not hold?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Because you have said the speed of the table does not change. In reality, it would change. This makes the equation for v3 more complicated, but luckily you can use an approximation. Think about the mass of the table compared to that of the rod. What approximation should you use?
 
Hmmm I'm not sure what approximation to use. I thought that linear momentum is not conservated because the impact
Is eccentric (the line of impact
does not cross the center of gravity).
 
momentum is conserved. For the approximation, think about a real-life situation where something strikes a table. Is the change in velocity of the table significant? The answer to this suggests what your approximation should be. Don't be surprised is momentum is not conserved in the approximated equation. (That is because the equation is only approximately true).
 
BruceW said:
momentum is conserved. For the approximation, think about a real-life situation where something strikes a table. Is the change in velocity of the table significant? The answer to this suggests what your approximation should be. Don't be surprised is momentum is not conserved in the approximated equation. (That is because the equation is only approximately true).

Alright, so the mv3_table term should not be zero. Because you have a huge mass and a tiny velocity. And thus you make the approximation that velocity is zero so you can solve for the final velocity of the ball using the restitution constant equation? Am I right?
 
exactly :)

Edit: yep, so that gives you the velocity of the edge of the rod after impact, so then you can use this to answer part a
 

Similar threads

Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K