Calculating speed and angular momentum

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the dynamics of an elastic collision involving a rod and a point particle, focusing on the calculations of kinetic energy, angular momentum, and the effects of constraints such as a fixed center of mass (CoM) versus a free-moving rod. Participants explore the implications of conservation laws in different scenarios, including the prediction of velocities and energy transfer during the collision.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that in a fixed CoM scenario, the particle will bounce back at 18 m/s, while others question the derivation of this result.
  • There is a contention regarding the conservation of linear momentum, with some arguing it is not conserved due to an external force at the fulcrum.
  • Participants discuss the conservation of angular momentum as a potential second equation to solve for unknowns in the collision scenario.
  • Some participants assert that the energy acquired by the rod through the collision is not equivalent to that of a ball of the same mass.
  • There is a debate about whether the final velocity of the particle, denoted as ##v_f##, is an unknown or a given, affecting the calculations of energy transfer and angular velocity of the rod.
  • Participants express uncertainty about how to proceed with calculations without a clear agreement on the initial conditions and conservation principles to apply.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally disagree on the conservation of linear momentum and the implications of the collision outcomes. There is no consensus on the final velocities or the energy transferred to the rod, leading to multiple competing views on how to approach the problem.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the dependence on definitions of conservation laws, the role of external forces, and the assumptions made about the system's constraints. The discussion highlights unresolved mathematical steps and varying interpretations of the initial conditions.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for those interested in collision dynamics, conservation laws in physics, and the complexities of analyzing systems with constraints.

  • #31
From conservation of kinetic energy we get:
$$\frac{i \omega _0^2}{2}+\frac{m v_0^2}{2}=\frac{i \omega _1^2}{2}+\frac{m
v_1^2}{2}$$
From conservation of angular momentum we get:
$$ i \omega _0+m r v_0=i \omega _1+m r v_1 $$
From conservation of linear momentum we get:
$$ mv_0 + mv_1 = Mv_r → 22 + 11.85 = 33.85 → v_r = 3.385 → E_k = 57.29 J $$

DaleSpam said:
1) We know that the rod will not react in
DaleSpam said:
.2)The equations are the rule and they are the way to predict the behavior.
I am not sure what you mean by "resistance".
.
By resistance I mean that the rod reacts like a ball of mass of 10/3
1) the rod has reacted in the same way 10/3 both with and without fulcrum.
2) I know I am asking too much, but as they found that a rod has I = 1/12, they might have studied that 1/12 corrsponds to 1/3 of the real mass in the collision. That would have made things easier and we might have got immediately ##v_1 = 7/13 v_0 = 11.85 , v_r = 20/ (13[*M]) = 3.385##
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
What about the contribution to kinetic energy due to the rod's final linear motion? What about the contribution to momentum due to the ball's final linear motion?

The naming convention for the variables needs thought as well. It was one thing to talk about ##v_0## and ##v_1## when we only had an initial and a final velocity of the ball. Now we have an initial and final velocity of the rod as well. I am a firm believer in documenting variable names.
 
  • #33
bobie said:
From conservation of kinetic energy we get:
$$\frac{i \omega _0^2}{2}+\frac{m v_0^2}{2}=\frac{i \omega _1^2}{2}+\frac{m
v_1^2}{2}$$
You are forgetting the term for the translational KE of the rod. If we denote the velocity of the center of mass of the rod as ##V## (to go along with the mass of the rod as ##M##) then that will be ##\frac{1}{2} M V^2##. With ##V_0## before the collision and ##V_1## after the collision.

bobie said:
From conservation of linear momentum we get:
$$ mv_0 + mv_1 = Mv_r $$
This is not correct. The conservation of momentum relates the momentum before the collision (subscript 0) to the momentum after the collision (subscript 1). On the left hand side you should have two terms, one expressing the linear momentum of the particle (lower case m and v) before the collision and the other expressing the linear momentum of the rod (capital M and V) before the collision (subscript 0). On the right hand side you should have two terms, one expressing the linear momentum of the particle (lower case m and v) after the collision and the other expressing the linear momentum of the rod (capital M and V) after the collision (subscript 1). All of the subscript 0's should be on the left, and all of the subscript 1's should be on the right. There should be no subscript r anywhere.

bobie said:
By resistance I mean that the rod reacts like a ball of mass of 10/3
This concept of resistance is not a standard concept. Let's drop it. It is just a distraction and is not necessary for determining the physics.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
5K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
5K