Centre of Mass Theorem false for a rotating body?

In summary: It's interesting to note that the centre of mass of a gyroscope does not move, but it does precess (about its support point). This precession is due to the torque that is applied to the centre of mass by the support. Without the support, the gyroscope would not precess.
  • #1
jmc8197
9
0
For a distributed mass, F = M dv/dt where F is the total external force, M
the total mass, and v the velocity of the centre of mass. But take the case of a gyroscope, where the force acting on the centre of mass is gravity, assuming it is uniform over the body. The gyroscope doesn't topple over, but precesses, which imples that the centre of mass theorem doesn't apply to rotational bodies. Why not? The Theorem seems to be correct for any system of particles, whether it is rotaing or not, if one looks at the derivation of the Centre of Mass Theorem:-

For each particle in a body, f = md^2r/dt^2.

If I sum all the forces, including the external forces applied to the body,
and make use of Newton's third law, then the internal forces all cancel, so I'm left with just the external force F.

F = sum(k=1, k=n)[mkd^2rk/dt^2] where mk and rk is the mass and radius
vector f the kth particle.

So F = d^2/dt^2[sum(k=1, k=n)[mk x rk]] . If the centre of mass is defined as R = (sum(k=1, k=)[mk x rk] )/M


Then external F = Md^2R/dt^2.

Which of the above lines is false for a rotating body?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
For rotating body, you have to use the moment of momentum
 
  • #3
jmc8197 said:
For a distributed mass, F = M dv/dt where F is the total external force, M
the total mass, and v the velocity of the centre of mass. But take the case of a gyroscope, where the force acting on the centre of mass is gravity, assuming it is uniform over the body. The gyroscope doesn't topple over, but precesses, which imples that the centre of mass theorem doesn't apply to rotational bodies.
Why not? If the gyroscope doesn't topple then it just means the net external force on the system is not given by the gravitational force alone.
 
  • #4
jmc8197-

Your theorem certainly applies to gyroscopes, tops, any rotating solids. Why do you think it doesn't? The center of mass of a precessing top doesn't move at all (or moves in a uniform straight line) - everything else moves around it. Be precise.

For rotating body, you have to use the moment of momentum

Centre of Mass theorems still hold.

Why not? If the gyroscope doesn't topple then it just means the net external force on the system is not given by the gravitational force alone.

The only external forces in this particular system are gravity, and the constraint force of the surface on which the gyroscope is sitting.
 
  • #5
jmc8197 said:
But take the case of a gyroscope, where the force acting on the centre of mass is gravity, assuming it is uniform over the body. The gyroscope doesn't topple over, but precesses, which imples that the centre of mass theorem doesn't apply to rotational bodies. Why not?
You seem to assume that the only force on a precessing gyroscope is gravity, which, of course, acts through the center of mass. But this ignores the force that supports the gyroscope, which does not act through the center of mass and thus exerts a torque. (As others in this thread have already pointed out.)
 
  • #6
rachmaninoff said:
jmc8197-

Your theorem certainly applies to gyroscopes, tops, any rotating solids. Why do you think it doesn't? The center of mass of a precessing top doesn't move at all (or moves in a uniform straight line) - everything else moves around it. Be precise.



Centre of Mass theorems still hold.



The only external forces in this particular system are gravity, and the constraint force of the surface on which the gyroscope is sitting.

But surely the centre of mass traces out a circle as it precesses, the com being in the centre of the fly wheel?
 
  • #7
Let's consider things simply. The forces acting on the centre of mass are gravity, and the reaction of the table to the support. So another torque must come from the fact that it is precessing, or maybe from spinning? or a combination of the two? I never knew that a gyroscope could generate an external force for itself...
 
  • #8
I think your question is: The center of mass of a precessing gyroscope moves in a circle, so what provides the centripetal force?

The answer: The force of the support must provide a centripetal component in order for the gyroscope to precess about its support point.

Good question!
 

1. What is the Centre of Mass Theorem for a rotating body?

The Centre of Mass Theorem states that the centre of mass of a system of particles will continue to move in a straight line at a constant velocity unless acted upon by an external force.

2. Is the Centre of Mass Theorem always true for a rotating body?

No, the Centre of Mass Theorem is only true for a rotating body if the rotation is around a fixed axis. If the rotation is not around a fixed axis, the Centre of Mass Theorem does not apply.

3. Can you give an example of when the Centre of Mass Theorem is false for a rotating body?

One example is a spinning top. The rotation of the top is not around a fixed axis, so the Centre of Mass Theorem does not apply. The top will eventually start to wobble and fall over due to the force of gravity.

4. Why is the Centre of Mass Theorem false for a rotating body that is not around a fixed axis?

When a body is rotating around a fixed axis, all particles in the body have the same angular velocity. However, when the rotation is not around a fixed axis, the particles at different distances from the axis have different angular velocities. This causes the centre of mass to not move in a straight line at a constant velocity, making the theorem false.

5. Are there any other situations where the Centre of Mass Theorem is false for a rotating body?

Yes, the Centre of Mass Theorem is also false for systems with non-uniform mass distribution, such as a rotating dumbbell. In this case, the centre of mass will also not move in a straight line at a constant velocity, as different particles have different distances from the axis of rotation.

Similar threads

Replies
35
Views
3K
Replies
30
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
793
  • Mechanics
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
889
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
548
Replies
3
Views
760
Replies
9
Views
702
Back
Top