Circular Motion of two objects

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the differences in behavior between two wooden objects when torque is applied. Object 1 spins smoothly, while Object 2 exhibits wobbling. The wobbling in Object 2 is attributed to unbalanced centripetal acceleration. When torque is applied, the centripetal acceleration, which depends on the radius and angular velocity, becomes uneven, leading to instability. The formulas for centripetal acceleration are provided, highlighting the relationship between linear velocity, angular velocity, and radius. This imbalance is the key factor causing the wobbling effect in Object 2.
Exidez
i have a question which i have been told about but i still don't udnerstand...
ok..
you have two objects(say they are made out of wood):

1: *-------------* ... 2: *---------
.....|.......|
.....|.......|
.....|.......|
.....|.......|
.....|.......|
.....|.......|

"*" represents 1kg wieghts
"..." represent nothin, i needed to put those there so the picture would position correctly. Just say it is open air :)

you supply a torque to object number 1, you will notice that is spins perfectly. While if you supply a torge to number 2 it will wobble and isn't perfect like number 1.

so what i want to know is.. why does number 2 wobble?

its hard to explain the question, but i hope you all understand

also the torque is supplied at the rod:
...|
...|
...|
...|
...|
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Number two wobbles because there is an unbalanced centripetal acceleration. Given a point mass at radius r, and instantaneous velocity v, centripetal acceleration c is given by:
c=(v^2)/r
or if you use angular velocity (w is omega):
c=(w^2)r
In case you usually use rpm, I think v=rpm*Πr/30 and w=rpm*Π/30.
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top