Computing angular speed wrt CM I get a contradiction

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the computation of angular speed with respect to the Center of Mass (CM) in rigid body dynamics, specifically comparing cases involving two particles and a disk. Participants explore the relationships between kinetic energy, angular momentum, and the resulting angular speeds derived from different approaches.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant computes the kinetic energy of a system of two particles and derives an expression for angular speed, leading to a consistent result.
  • In a second scenario involving a disk, the same participant calculates kinetic energy using the CM and derives an expression for angular speed that appears to introduce a square root of a sum, raising concerns about its validity.
  • Angular momentum is computed separately for the disk and the particle at rest, leading to a different expression for angular speed that contradicts the earlier result.
  • Another participant points out that the angular momentum calculated is not in the CM system but rather around a different point, suggesting a misunderstanding in the application of the concepts.
  • There is a reiteration that the two independent point masses do not form a rigid body, emphasizing the importance of fixed distances in rigid body dynamics.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express disagreement regarding the correct application of angular momentum and kinetic energy calculations in the context of rigid body dynamics. There is no consensus on the correct result for angular speed in the second example involving the disk.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight potential limitations in their calculations, including the distinction between angular momentum around different points and the definition of rigid bodies. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the correct interpretation and application of the principles involved.

arestes
Messages
84
Reaction score
4
Hello!
I have been brushing up my Rigid Body Dynamics.
I tried computing the angular speed with respect the Center of Mass (CM) using the usual split of kinetic energy and also the split of Angular momentum using the CM.
First, a simple case: Two particles of mass M each separated by a distance 2R. One going to the positive x direction with speed v and the other at rest.
preguntame_1.png

The Kinetic Energy, computed separately is:
KE=\frac{1}{2} M v^2
whereas the same KE computed using the split:
KE=\frac{1}{2} (2M) (v/2)^2 + \frac{1}{2} I_{CM} \omega_{CM}^2
Where, obviously, the speed of the CM is \frac{v}{2}. Also, it's easy to see that I_{CM} =2MR^2
therefore, equation both expressions for KE:
\omega_{CM} = \pm \frac{v}{2R}

Then, to check, I compute the angular momentum of the system (with respect to the point where the particle in rest is), using the same trick of splitting it using the CM (which clearly is exactly in the middle, at a distance R of each particle):
Separately: L_O=-Mv(2R)
As a system: L_O=-MvR+ I_{CM}\omega_{CM}=-MvR+(2MR^2)\omega_{CM}
Equating both expressions I get the right answer expected (this time with the correct sign):
\omega_{CM} = - \frac{v}{2R}

So far so good. Now comes the problem. I repeat the ordeal this time with a disk moving with speed v to the right but rotating with angular speed \omega_0. The CM is again exactly in the middle of the particle at rest and the center of the disk.
preguntamelo_2.png

The Kinetic Energy of the system, computed separately (KE of the disk + 0 of the particle at rest):
KE=\frac{1}{2}Mv^2+\frac{1}{2} I_{0} \omega_0^2=\frac{1}{2}Mv^2+\frac{1}{2}(\frac{1}{2}MR^2 )\omega_0^2 =\frac{1}{2}Mv^2+\frac{1}{4}MR^2\omega_0^2
where I_{0} is just the moment of inertia of the disk wrt to its own cm, not of the system. Now I compute the same KE using the split and the CM:
KE=\frac{1}{2} (2M) (v/2)^2 + \frac{1}{2} I_{CM} \omega_{CM}^2=\frac{1}{2} (2M) (v/2)^2 + \frac{1}{2} (MR^2+(\frac{1}{2}MR^2+MR^2)) \omega_{CM}^2=\frac{1}{2} (2M) (v/2)^2 + \frac{1}{2} (\frac{5}{2}MR^2) \omega_{CM}^2=\frac{1}{4} M v^2 + \frac{5}{4} (MR^2) \omega_{CM}^2
using the parallel axis theorem (terms in parentheses) for the moment of inertia of the disk.
Equating both expressions I solve for \omega_{CM}
\omega_{CM}=(\frac{1}{5}((v/R)^2+\omega_0^2))^{1/2}

Something already seems odd. A square root of a sum... I then check what the angular momentum split tells me. First the angular momentum computed separately. The disk + 0 of the particle at rest:
Separately: L_O=-Mv(2R) +(I_{CM} \omega_0)=-2MvR +(\frac{1}{2} M R^2 \omega_0)
As a system: L_O=-(2M)(v/2)R+ I_{CM}\omega_{CM}=-MvR+((\frac{1}{2}MR^2+MR^2)+MR^2)\omega_{CM} =-MvR+ I_{CM}\omega_{CM}=-MvR+(\frac{5}{2}MR^2)\omega_{CM}
Equating both expressions I get
\omega_{CM} =\frac{1}{5}(-(v/R)+\frac{1}{2}\omega_0)

And clearly it's a contradiction. What is the correct result for \omega_{CM}?
Any help to resolve this?
 

Attachments

  • preguntame_1.png
    preguntame_1.png
    1.3 KB · Views: 561
  • preguntamelo_2.png
    preguntamelo_2.png
    2.9 KB · Views: 499
Physics news on Phys.org
arestes said:
Then, to check, I compute the angular momentum of the system (with respect to the point where the particle in rest is), using the same trick of splitting it using the CM (which clearly is exactly in the middle, at a distance R of each particle):
Separately: L_O=-Mv(2R)
That is not the angular momentum in the CM system, where you have 2 particles of mass M at distance R moving with v/2 for a total of L=MvR.
It is the angular momentum around the lower object, for example, but that is a different quantity.
 
mfb said:
That is not the angular momentum in the CM system, where you have 2 particles of mass M at distance R moving with v/2 for a total of L=MvR.
It is the angular momentum around the lower object, for example, but that is a different quantity.
Yes, It is in fact the angular momentum around the lower mass (at the origin).
Then I compute the same angular momentum but viewed as a system, therefore (as a system) there's a moment of inertia and I understand that the angular momentum around any point (in particular, again around O) can be split into L (of the center of mass point) _(around the chosen point) + rotational L.

I still get the right answer in the case of the point particles but something is wrong when I put forth the second example.
 
arestes said:
Yes, It is in fact the angular momentum around the lower mass (at the origin).
Then I compute the same angular momentum but viewed as a system, therefore (as a system) there's a moment of inertia and I understand that the angular momentum around any point (in particular, again around O) can be split into L (of the center of mass point) _(around the chosen point) + rotational L.

I still get the right answer in the case of the point particles but something is wrong when I put forth the second example.

I didn't read all your post, but two independent point masses don't form a rigid body. In a rigid body, by definition, the distance between any two points must remain fixed.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 45 ·
2
Replies
45
Views
4K
Replies
335
Views
17K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
38
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
1K