Change frame of reference to simplify acceleration calculation?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a particle moving in a two-dimensional orbit defined by specific parametric equations for x and y. The task is to find the tangential and normal acceleration as functions of time, using Newtonian mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster considers simplifying the problem by changing the frame of reference to one moving at the same speed as the particle, questioning the validity of this approach. Other participants discuss the need to find the tangential and normal components of acceleration and suggest using Cartesian coordinates to derive the acceleration vector.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring different methods to approach the problem, with some suggesting the use of unit vectors for tangential acceleration. There is acknowledgment of the complexity involved in the calculations, and some participants are questioning the appropriateness of using polar coordinates given the nature of the particle's motion.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of constraints related to the problem being solved with Newtonian mechanics and the original poster's concern about the complexity of the expressions derived from the parametric equations.

wotanub
Messages
230
Reaction score
8
I'm working problem from the upper division classical mechanics course on MIT OCW. No solutions are available. This is form the first P-set, question 4.

Homework Statement



A particle moves in a two dimensional orbit defined by

[itex]x = A(2αt-sin(αt))[/itex]
[itex]y = A(1-cos(αt))[/itex]

Find the tangential acceleration at and normal acceleration an as a function of time where the tangential and normal components are taken with respect to the velocity.

Homework Equations


If you derive Newton's 2nd law in polar coordinates, we find that the acceleration on a particle is given by

[itex]a = (\ddot{r}-r\dot{θ}^{2})\vec{e_{r}}+(r\ddot{θ}+2\dot{θ}\dot{r})\vec{e_{θ}}[/itex]

The Attempt at a Solution



Now I know I could use [itex]r^{2} = x^{2} + y^{2}[/itex] and [itex]θ = arctan(y/x)[/itex] and then take derivatives and so on, but this approach is very messy and time consuming. And the problem has to be solved with Newtonian mechanics. I was thinking to myself that it would be simpler if it weren't for those terms in front of the sine and cosine terms in x and y.

Then I had an idea: why not just ignore them? And here's my hand-waving reasoning I conjured. The particle is basically moving in a circle that is shifting to the right at constant speed. If I measure the particle's acceleration in a frame of reference that is moving to the right at the same speed at the particle, it would simplify the math considerably since the radius would now be constant. In effect I'd just be finding the acceleration of a particle moving in a circle of constant radius, and the answer for the acceleration in this frame would also be the answer in the lab frame since the moving frame is not accelerating (right?). It'd be like back in freshman physics.

But this seems too easy. I have never seen a problem done this way, and I can't find any problem like this one. Could anyone tell me if this is sound reasoning? I can't think of a reason this approach would be invalid, but it feels wrong.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You have to find the components of acceleration tangent to the orbit of the particle and normal to the orbit. The velocity is always tangent to the track, so you can find the tangential unit vector, and from that the outward normal vector.

Determine the acceleration vector in Cartesian coordinates and multiply by the tangential unit vector: It is the tangential acceleration.

You speak about cosine term but I do not see any in the equations given.

You are right, the acceleration is the same in both frames of reference, but the tangential unit vectors are different.

ehild
 
Yes, sorry the y term was incorrect, I fixed it and I'll try your suggestion.
 
I ended up getting stuck again. I found the acceleration in cartesian basis

[itex]\vec{a} = \ddot{x}\hat{x} + \ddot{y}\hat{y}[/itex]

and dotted it with the polar unit vectors:

[itex]\hat{r} = cos(θ)\hat{x}+sin(θ)\hat{y}[/itex]
[itex]\hat{θ} = -sin(θ)\hat{x}+cos(θ)\hat{y}[/itex]

But I feel like I'm going to end up with a very complicated and irreducible expression once I substitute in the functions of t for x and y. Did I make a wrong turn?

By the way, I used

[itex]cos\left(arctan\left(\frac{y}{x}\right)\right) = \frac{1}{\sqrt{\frac{y^{2}}{x^{2}}+1}}[/itex]
[itex]sin\left(arctan\left(\frac{y}{x}\right)\right) = \frac{y}{x\sqrt{\frac{y^{2}}{x^{2}}+1}}[/itex]

Here's a picture of my chicken scratch.
http://i.imgur.com/B1CXuR3.jpg (direct link because image is big)
 
See my first post and also http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Acceleration for "tangential acceleration" . The particle does not move along a circle. No sense to use polar coordinates.
Find the velocity and the tangential unit vector from it. Multiply the acceleration with the tangential unit vector. It is not the same as the polar unit vector aΦ

ehild
 
wotanub said:
I ended up getting stuck again. I found the acceleration in cartesian basis

[itex]\vec{a} = \ddot{x}\hat{x} + \ddot{y}\hat{y}[/itex]

and dotted it with the polar unit vectors

echild already explained that, to get the tangential component of acceleration vector, you dot the acceleration vector with a unit vector in the velocity direction. The unit vector in the direction of the velocity vector is equal to the velocity vector divided by its own magnitude. You already wrote down the expression for the acceleration vector as [itex]\vec{a} = \ddot{x}\hat{x} + \ddot{y}\hat{y}[/itex]. Write down the velocity vector in the analogous way.

Chet
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K