Bowling balls rolling up a ramp (conservation of energy)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the conservation of energy principles applied to two identical bowling balls rolling up different ramps. Ball A, which encounters a frictionless ramp, reaches a height of H_a, while Ball B, rolling up a regular ramp, reaches a height of H_b. The calculations reveal that H_a equals 5 meters and H_b equals 7 meters, confirming that Ball B goes 2 meters higher than Ball A. The confusion arose from the interpretation of the term "2m," which refers to meters rather than a multiplication factor.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of conservation of energy principles
  • Familiarity with translational and rotational kinetic energy equations
  • Knowledge of gravitational potential energy (GPE) calculations
  • Basic algebra skills for manipulating equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the principles of conservation of energy in physics
  • Study the equations for rotational kinetic energy, specifically for solid spheres
  • Learn how to derive gravitational potential energy from kinetic energy
  • Practice solving problems involving rolling motion and energy conservation
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics and energy conservation, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to rolling motion and energy transformations.

macaholic
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
This is from an old course I took. I'm not sure what I'm doing incorrectly.

Homework Statement


Two identical bowling balls are rolling on a horizontal floor without slipping. The initial speed of both balls is V = 9.9 m/s. Ball a encounters a frictionless ramp, reaching a maximum height H_a. Ball B rolls up a regular ramp (i.e. rolls without slipping), reaching a maximum vertical height H_b. Which ball goes higher, and by how much?


Homework Equations


GPE = mgh
KE_{trans} = \frac{mv^2}{2}
KE_{rot} = \frac{I\omega ^2}{2}
I_{solid-sphere} = \frac{2 M R^2}{5}
\omega = \frac{v}{R}

The Attempt at a Solution


I just did conservation of energy. Ball a will still have rotational energy when it reaches the top, ball b will not. Both balls start with the same total kinetic energy. Ball a's final GPE will come entirely from its initial translation energy. Ball b's will come from both its rotational and translational kinetic energies. Solving:
\frac{mv^2}{2} = mgH_a
\frac{mv^2}{2} (1 + \frac{1}{5}) = mgH_b
H_a = \frac{v^2}{2g}
H_b = \frac{3v^2}{5g}

However, the answer says that I should get that H_b is "2m" higher than H_a. Did I do something wrong here?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you should be thinking about it like this: Ball A and B have some total energy, both equal to ##{\frac{1}{2}}mv^2##. The must have the same amount of energy at any point during the motion. Ball A's total energy will be converted entirely into potential energy. Which you have done. Ball B's total energy will be converted into rotational kinectic energy and gravitational potential energy so ##{\frac{1}{2}}mv^2=mgH_b+{\frac{1}{5}}mv^2##

I'm not very familiar with the rotational kinectic energy, so I'm assuming you are right about it. I'm commenting on the setup of your equations.
 
macaholic said:
\frac{mv^2}{2} (1 + \frac{1}{5}) = mgH_b
Check to make sure the fraction 1/5 is correct here.
 
Except that both balls don't always have total energy equal to \frac{mv^2}{2}. They're said to be rolling withoutt slipping initially, which means that they have both translattional and rotational kinetic energy, i.e. KE_{tot} = \frac{mv^2}{2} + \frac{I\omega^2}{2}.

Ball a is still rolling with when it reaches its highest point, hence its full conservation of energy equation should look like this:
KE_{trans} + KE_{rot} = GPE + KE_{rot}
\frac{mv^2}{2} + \frac{I\omega^2}{2} = mgH_a + \frac{I\omega^2}{2}

That's where my equations come from. I was fairly certain that part was okay but I could be wrong...
 
macaholic said:
KE_{rot} = \frac{I\omega ^2}{2}
I_{solid-sphere} = \frac{2 M R^2}{5}
\omega = \frac{v}{R}
If you follow your equations from above, you have:

KE_{b} = \frac{mv^2}{2} + \frac{mv^2}{5}

but then you factor out \frac{mv^2}{2} from \frac{mv^2}{5} and get 1/5?
 
@Tsny, I will try to be more explicit, let's see...

For B:
KE_{trans} + KE_{rot} = GPE
\frac{mv^2}{2} + \frac{1}{2} \frac{2mR^2\omega^2}{5} = mgH_b
v^2(\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{5}) = gH_b
H_b = \frac{7v^2}{10g}
 
macaholic said:
\frac{mv^2}{2} (1 + \frac{1}{5}) = mgH_b

Where does 1/5 come from?

H_b = \frac{3v^2}{5g}

Why 3/5?

However, the answer says that I should get that H_b is "2m" higher than H_a.

What is 'm'? The unit meaning meters?
 
macaholic said:
@Tsny, I will try to be more explicit, let's see...

For B:
KE_{trans} + KE_{rot} = GPE
\frac{mv^2}{2} + \frac{1}{2} \frac{2mR^2\omega^2}{5} = mgH_b
v^2(\frac{1}{2} + \frac{1}{5}) = gH_b
H_b = \frac{7v^2}{10g}

Looks good.
 
Thanks guys, I stink at algebra apparently haha. So is this stuff about the "2m" nonsense problaby just some sort of weird mistake?
 
  • #10
macaholic said:
H_b = \frac{7v^2}{10g}
That fixes it, 7/10 instead of 3/5.
 
  • #11
macaholic said:
Thanks guys, I stink at algebra apparently haha. So is this stuff about the "2m" nonsense problaby just some sort of weird mistake?

If 'm' is 'meters', then it makes perfect sense. What number do you get?
 
  • #12
macaholic said:
Thanks guys, I stink at algebra apparently haha. So is this stuff about the "2m" nonsense problaby just some sort of weird mistake?

I think the "2m" means 2 meters and not 2 times the mass!
 
  • #13
voko said:
What is 'm'? The unit meaning meters?

No idea. It just says "2m higher". I didn't actually plug in the numbers though...

H_a = 5 meters
H_b = 7 meters.

WELP. Mystery solved. It's listed in italics... so I didn't think it was a unit. Thanks again haha.
 
  • #14
Thanks for the tag team help everyone :). I feel slightly silly now.
 
  • #15
macaholic said:
No idea. It just says "2m higher". I didn't actually plug in the numbers though...

H_a = 5 meters
H_b = 7 meters.

WELP. Mystery solved. It's listed in italics... so I didn't think it was a unit. Thanks again haha.
Yup.

(9.9 m/s )2 = 98.01 m2/s2,

so v2/g is very close to 10 meters.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
937
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K