Conservation of angular momentum / finding change in rotational kinetic energy

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the conservation of angular momentum and the calculation of changes in rotational kinetic energy for two disks of identical mass but different radii, spinning in opposite directions. The participants are exploring the implications of bringing these disks together and the resulting common angular velocity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the calculation of final angular velocity and the change in rotational kinetic energy. There are attempts to derive expressions for kinetic energy using the moment of inertia and angular velocity, with some participants questioning the correctness of their calculations.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the correct formula for kinetic energy and the moment of inertia of a disk. There is an ongoing exploration of the calculations involved, with multiple interpretations of the results being examined. While some participants express frustration, others suggest taking breaks to reassess their work.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of homework rules, which may limit the amount of direct assistance they can receive. There is a noted confusion regarding the calculations of rotational masses and kinetic energies, which is contributing to the difficulty in reaching a resolution.

ezperkins
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
Two disks of identical mass but different radii (r and 2r) are spinning on frictionless bearings at the same angular speed ωo, but in opposite directions. The two disks are brought slowly together. The resulting frictional force between the surfaces eventually brings them to a common angular velocity.

10-p-052.gif



(a) What is the magnitude of that final angular velocity in terms of ωo
[tex]\frac{3}{5}[/tex]ωo < - I know that's right.


(b) What is the change in rotational kinetic energy of the system? (Take K as the initial kinetic energy.) This is what I need help with.


I used Ke=Iω2, coupled the system, considered one direction negative and one positive, and got [tex]\frac{9}{50}[/tex]mr2ωo2, which is apparently wrong. . .

Thank you ahead of time!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
One mistake you made is that the kinetic energy is equal to K=(1/2)Iω2, not Iω2. If that alone isn't the problem, show the details of your calculation so we can see where you might have gone wrong.

ezperkins said:
Two disks of identical mass but different radii (r and 2r) are spinning on frictionless bearings at the same angular speed ωo, but in opposite directions. The two disks are brought slowly together. The resulting frictional force between the surfaces eventually brings them to a common angular velocity.

10-p-052.gif



(a) What is the magnitude of that final angular velocity in terms of ωo
[tex]\frac{3}{5}[/tex]ωo < - I know that's right.


(b) What is the change in rotational kinetic energy of the system? (Take K as the initial kinetic energy.) This is what I need help with.


I used Ke=Iω2, coupled the system, considered one direction negative and one positive, and got [tex]\frac{9}{50}[/tex]mr2ωo2, which is apparently wrong. . .

Thank you ahead of time!
 
Well, I tried it quite a few different ways, that was just the last wrong answer I got before deciding to ask for help. Here's what I did:

1) [tex]\Delta[/tex]Ke = Kf - Ki

2) [tex]\Delta[/tex]Ke = [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]If[tex]\omega[/tex]f2 - [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]Ii[tex]\omega[/tex]o2

3) [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]((2m)(3r2))[tex]\omega[/tex]f2 - [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]((2m)(3r2))[tex]\omega[/tex]f2

4) [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex](6mr2)[tex]\omega[/tex]f2 - [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex](6mr2)[tex]\omega[/tex]o2

5) 3mr2[tex]\frac{3}{5}[/tex][tex]\omega[/tex]o2 - 3mr2[tex]\omega[/tex]o2

et cetera

I guess I missed some steps the first way through, but I'm sure it's wrong just the same.
 
I don't follow how you calculated the moment of inertia. Could you explain that?
 
Perhaps I can just start you out on the right path. :smile: First off, the moment of inertia of a disk is

[tex]I _{\mbox{disk}} = \frac{mr^2}{2}[/tex]

From there, I suggest that you write out the individual initial kinetic energies of each disk, at least as a start. You can always simplify later.

[tex]K_i = \frac{1}{2}I_1 \omega_0^2 + \frac{1}{2}I_2 \omega_0^2[/tex]

Once you have this written out (as above) you can then simplify it a little now, or simplify it later.

Either way, note that

[tex]I_1 = \frac{mr^2}{2}[/tex]

and

[tex]I_2 = \frac{m(2r)^2}{2}[/tex]

Adding these together does not give the ((2m)(3r2)) that you were using in your previous post.
 
I know how to calculate the moment of inertia. What I don't get is what you did.
 
collinsmark said:
Perhaps I can just start you out on the right path. :smile: First off, the moment of inertia of a disk is

[tex]I _{\mbox{disk}} = \frac{mr^2}{2}[/tex]

From there, I suggest that you write out the individual initial kinetic energies of each disk, at least as a start. You can always simplify later.

[tex]K_i = \frac{1}{2}I_1 \omega_0^2 + \frac{1}{2}I_2 \omega_0^2[/tex]

Once you have this written out (as above) you can then simplify it a little now, or simplify it later.

Either way, note that

[tex]I_1 = \frac{mr^2}{2}[/tex]

and

[tex]I_2 = \frac{m(2r)^2}{2}[/tex]

Adding these together does not give the ((2m)(3r2)) that you were using in your previous post.

so [tex]K_i = \frac{3}{4}mr^2\omega_0^2[/tex] ?
and [tex]K_f = \frac{9}{50}mr^2\omega_0^2[/tex]
thus [tex]\Delta K = \frac{57}{100}mr^2\omega_0^2}[/tex]

I feel like such an idiot. . .
 
vela said:
I know how to calculate the moment of inertia. What I don't get is what you did.

Oh, I'm sorry. I basically treated the disks as one big disk.
 
  • #10
I have spent more than two and a half hours on this problem and have gotten nowhere. I give up. Thank you vela and collinsmark for your help.
 
  • #11
ezperkins said:
I have spent more than two and a half hours on this problem and have gotten nowhere. I give up. Thank you vela and collinsmark for your help.
You're really close; you're just not calculating the rotational masses correctly, probably just algebra mistakes. Once you clear that up, you'll get the right answer. It might be good to take a break and come back to it later. Errors you can't see right now may pop out clear as day later.
 
  • #12
vela said:
You're really close; you're just not calculating the rotational masses correctly, probably just algebra mistakes. Once you clear that up, you'll get the right answer. It might be good to take a break and come back to it later. Errors you can't see right now may pop out clear as day later.

I tried that already, on Monday and Tuesday.

I guess I'm just not "physics material."

I really appreciate your time though.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
26
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
3K
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K