Calculating the moment of inertia of a rod as a point mass

AI Thread Summary
The moment of inertia of a rod with uniform density rotating about its end is M(L^2)/3, while treating it as a point mass yields M(L^2)/4, which is incorrect due to the distance from the rotation axis squared. The kinetic energy of a rotating object consists of components related to both rotation and translational motion. Two methods can calculate kinetic energy: one considers pure rotation about the end point, while the other accounts for motion about the center of mass, incorporating translational energy. Both methods ultimately yield the same result for kinetic energy, highlighting the importance of correctly accounting for rotational dynamics. Understanding these principles is crucial for accurate calculations in rotational mechanics.
ItDoesn'tMatter
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
The moment of inertia of a rod with consistent density rotating about its end is M(L^2)/3. However, if you treat the rod as a point mass and try to calculate this using mr^2, you get M(L/2)^2=M(L^2)/4. Why doesn't this work?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Because the formula has a distance from the rotation axis squared in it ! That's why.

Simple case to try out: two point masses at the ends of a massless stick.
 
The moment of inertia is generally used to calculate the kinetic energy of a rotating object.

The kinetic energy of your rod -- or any rigid body -- is composed of one part having to do with the rotation of the body about some axis fixed in the body and one part having to do with the translational motion of a point on that axis. If the point with respect to which the rotation is defined is stationary, then translational kinetic energy does not factor into the calculation; if the point is moving then translational kinetic energy does factor into the calculation.

There are two ways of calculating the kinetic energy in your problem. One is to find the moment of inertia about the end point and treat the motion as a pure rotation (i.e. no translational part). This gives, as you say, $$T=\frac{1}{2}I\omega ^2 = \frac{ml^2}{6}\omega ^2.$$

The other way of doing it is to calculate the moment of inertia about the center of mass, which is moving, so that we must add in a translational part. The moment of inertia about the center of mass is ##\frac{1}{12}ml^2## so we have $$T=\frac{1}{2}I\omega^2 + \frac{1}{2} m v^2 = \frac{1}{24}ml^2\omega^2 + \frac{1}{2}m\bigg(\frac{l\omega}{2}\bigg)^2 = \frac{ml^2}{6}\omega^2.$$

Clearly they are the same. So what you are doing when you get the wrong answer is essentially you are calculating the energy due to translation of the center of mass and ignoring the fact that there is also a rotation about the center of mass.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top