Bead moving down a Helical Wire subject to Constraints

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a bead moving down a helical wire, focusing on the constraints related to the geometry of the helix. Participants explore the relationship between the angle of rotation and vertical position, specifically questioning the definitions and implications of the pitch of the helix.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants attempt to clarify the meaning of the constraints, particularly the relationship between the angle ##\phi## and the height ##z##. There are questions about the definition of pitch and its implications for the formula provided.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the definitions related to the pitch of the helix and its impact on the constraints. Some participants have acknowledged misunderstandings and are seeking clarification, while others are questioning the assumptions made in the original problem setup.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the absence of a diagram to aid in understanding the relationship between the variables. There is also a mention of editing the original question to clarify the definition of ##h## as the increase of ##z## in one turn of the helix.

deuteron
Messages
64
Reaction score
14
Homework Statement
What is the constraint for the bead on a helix wire moving under gravitation ignoring friction?
Relevant Equations
##q=\{r,\phi,z\}\ \hat=## cylindrical coordinates
One of the constraints is given as ##r=R##, which is very obvious. The second constraint is however given as

$$\phi - \frac {2\pi} h z=0$$

where ##h## is the increase of ##z## in one turn of the helix. Physically, I can't see where this constraint comes from and how ##\phi=\frac {2\pi}h z##.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think ##h## is the total height of the helix, since it has a constant slope, ##\phi## is the angle turned as a function of the vertical position ##z##

Is there a digram of the helix that would contradict that?
 
Last edited:
I think h is the pitch.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lnewqban
Gordianus said:
I think h is the pitch.
I agree.

@deuteron
Please, see:
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Cylindrical_coordinate_system

Cylindrical.png
 
Last edited:
Lnewqban said:
I agree.
Can you explain the ##2 \pi## in the numerator? The pitch is the vertical rise per unit angle turned. So lets say the pitch is ## h = \frac{1 \text{[m]}}{ 2 \pi \text{[rad]}}##, if we let ##z## be ##1 \text{[m]} ##, then the angle turned ##\phi## would be ## 4 \pi^2 \text{[rad]} ## according to the formula...that seems to be a contradiction?
 
Last edited:
erobz said:
I think ##h## is the total height of the helix, since it has a constant slope, ##\phi## is the angle turned as a function of the vertical position ##z##

Is there a digram of the helix that would contradict that?
There isn't a diagram but I edited the question to clarify what ##h## is, it is given as the increase of ##z## in one turn
 
deuteron said:
There isn't a diagram but I edited the question to clarify what ##h## is, it is given as the increase of ##z## in one turn
So if ##h## is indeed the pitch, am I having a brain fart in post #5?
 
erobz said:
Can you explain the ##2 \pi## in the numerator? The pitch is the vertical rise per unit angle turned. So lets say the pitch is ## h = \frac{1 \text{[m]}}{ 2 \pi \text{[rad]}}##, if we let ##z## be ##1 \text{[m]} ##, then the angle turned ##\phi## would be ## 4 \pi^2 \text{[rad]} ## according to the formula...that seems to be a contradiction?
Wrong definition of pitch. From Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix):
"The pitch of a helix is the height of one complete helix turn, measured parallel to the axis of the helix." (Emphasis added.)
 
renormalize said:
Wrong definition of pitch. From Wikipedia (https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Helix):
"The pitch of a helix is the height of one complete helix turn, measured parallel to the axis of the helix." (Emphasis added.)
I guess I should have checked the definition. Thanks. @deuteron sorry for any confusion.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: hutchphd
  • #10
erobz said:
Can you explain the ##2 \pi## in the numerator?
Hi @erobz
Sorry about delayed answer.
Is this still confusing?
I agreed because I believed that the values of h and z should be equal for one full turn (2π radians) or rotation of the particle.
 
  • #11
Lnewqban said:
Hi @erobz
Sorry about delayed answer.
Is this still confusing?
I agreed because I believed that the values of h and z should be equal for one full turn (2π radians) or rotation of the particle.
@renormalize set me straight. I assumed an incorrect definition of pitch for a helix. I don't know if its still confusing for the OP @deuteron however?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lnewqban
  • #12
Sorry for the late reply, it is clear now! Thanks everyone!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Lnewqban and erobz

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K