Cylinder lying on conveyor belt

[JD_PM]

Homework Statement

You buy a bottle of water in the store and place it on the conveyor belt with the longitudinal axis perpendicular to the direction of movement of the belt. Initially, both the belt and the bottle are at rest. We can approach the bottle as one cylinder with radius $R$, mass $M$ and moment of inertia $I = M R^2$, in which the mass is not distributed uniformly. The speed of the belt at time $t$ is $V (t)$.

a) Find an expression for the speed $v(t)$ of the centre of mass of the bottle.

Homework Equations

Second Newton's Law for rotation:

$$\tau = I \alpha = Rf$$

The Attempt at a Solution

I got two expression for the speed of the centre of mass of the bottle, and I wanted to know if both are equivalent and correct.[/B]

Using the second Newton's Law for rotation you end up with the expression:

EQ1:

$$R\alpha=2a_0$$

Additionally, the total acceleration is the sum of the tangential and centripetal vector components of the acceleration. Thus:

EQ2:

$$a = a_o + R\alpha$$

With this info we can deduce that:

EQ3:

$$a_0=\frac13 a$$

EQ4:

$$R\alpha=\frac23 a$$

EQ5:

$$f=\frac13 Ma$$

Therefore, using the second Newton's Law for rotation I got the following speed:

EQ6:

$$v_{CM} = \frac{3R \omega}{2}$$

And using kinematics:

$$v_f^2 = v_o^2 + 2a(x_f - x_o)$$

I got:

$$v_{CM} = \sqrt{ \frac{6fd}{M}}$$

Note that $d$ is the distance the rolling cylinder covers.

Are these correct and equivalent?

Thank you

 

[kuruman]

We can approach the bottle as one cylinder with radius $R$, mass $M$ and moment of inertia $I = M R^2$, in which the mass is not distributed uniformly.

This statement is problematic. If the cylinder has radius $R$ and the moment of inertia about its axis is $I = M R^2$, then all the mass must be at radius $R$. If in addition the distribution is non-uniform, it can only depend on the angle. The velocity of the cylinder $v(t)$ will have to depend on the angular distribution of the mass and that is not given.

Setting that aside and assuming that the moment of inertia is just $I$ and the mass distribution has no angular dependence, it seems to me that since the velocity of the belt is given as $V(t)$, the answer to the problem must have it on the right hand side. You should not assume that the acceleration of the belt is constant.

Additionally, the total acceleration is the sum of the tangential and centripetal vector components of the acceleration.

These components are perpendicular to each other. You cannot add them as scalars. You need to rethink the problem. Imagine the belt starting from rest moving with velocity $V(t)$ and acceleration $\frac{dV}{dt}$. What is the instantaneous velocity of the point on the cylinder that is in contact with the belt?

 

[haruspex]

Homework Statement

You buy a bottle of water in the store and place it on the conveyor belt with the longitudinal axis perpendicular to the direction of movement of the belt. Initially, both the belt and the bottle are at rest. We can approach the bottle as one cylinder with radius $R$, mass $M$ and moment of inertia $I = M R^2$,

First, unless the water is frozen things will get very complicated, so let's assume it is.
Second, are you sure it doesn't say I≠MR²? Or maybe I≠½MR²?

Using the second Newton's Law for rotation you end up with the expression:

EQ1:

$$R\alpha=2a_0$$

Additionally, the total acceleration is the sum of the tangential and centripetal vector components of the acceleration. Thus:

EQ2:

$$a = a_o + R\alpha$$

I assume you are defining a₀ as the acceleration of the centre of the cylinder.
Your eq 1 seems to be assuming I=½MR², which is not the case here.
You don't mean centripetal acceleration here. It looks like you are defining a as the linear acceleration of the point of the cylinder in contact with the belt, so your eqn 2 is just adding an acceleration to a relative acceleration in the same direction. But be careful with signs. Which way will the cylinder be rotating in relation to its forward movement?

 

[haruspex]

And using kinematics:

The equation you quote is only valid for constant acceleration. As @kuruman points out, you should not assume that.

 

[JD_PM]

This statement is problematic. If the cylinder has radius $R$ and the moment of inertia about its axis is $I = M R^2$, then all the mass must be at radius $R$. If in addition the distribution is non-uniform, it can only depend on the angle. The velocity of the cylinder $v(t)$ will have to depend on the angular distribution of the mass and that is not given.

Setting that aside and assuming that the moment of inertia is just $I$ and the mass distribution has no angular dependence, it seems to me that since the velocity of the belt is given as $V(t)$, the answer to the problem must have it on the right hand side.

Yeah I have been suggested before about the fact that $V(t)$ should appear on my $v_{CM}$ equation. This is because the motion of a rolling object is the combination of the translation and rotation! My bad.

This is what I think it happens:

So the translational velocity of the centre of mass is:

$$v_{CM} = \frac{3R \omega}{2} + V(t)$$

 

[JD_PM]

You should not assume that the acceleration of the belt is constant.

I do not understand why both you and haruspex suggested that.

 

[JD_PM]

What is the instantaneous velocity of the point on the cylinder that is in contact with the belt?

$V(t)$

 

[JD_PM]

Second, are you sure it doesn't say I≠MR²? Or maybe I≠½MR²?

Literally says: '...We can approach the bottle as one cylinder with radius $a$, mass $M$ and moment of inertia $I = M k^2$ ($k$ in units of length), in which the mass is not distributed uniformly...'

 

[JD_PM]

Your eq 1 seems to be assuming I=½MR², which is not the case here.

Absolutely, my bad! Actually, it is:

$$R\alpha=a_0$$

NOTE: I will continue posting in a few...

 

[haruspex]

Literally says: '...We can approach the bottle as one cylinder with radius $a$, mass $M$ and moment of inertia $I = M k^2$ ($k$ in units of length), in which the mass is not distributed uniformly...'

Ok, that makes sense. k is not the radius of the cylinder, just some constant. I think it is called the radius of inertia.

 

[haruspex]

I do not understand why both you and haruspex suggested that.

Because you are not told it is constant. Instead, you are given that the speed is V=V(t), i.e. some unknown function of time.
The equation you quoted under "and using kinematics" is only valid for constant acceleration. (And by the way, you mean kinetics, not kinematics.)

 

[kuruman]

Ok, that makes sense. k is not the radius of the cylinder, just some constant. I think it is called the radius of inertia.

I've heard it called the radius of gyration.

$V(t)$

Yes, I think it is safe to assume that the points of contact are at rest with respect to each other, i.e. kinetic friction does not play a role here. Now pretend that you are sitting on a chair placed on the belt, in other words transform to moving belt's frame. The belt is at rest relative to you and so are (instantaneously) the points on the cylinder that are in contact with the belt. Would you see the cylinder move? If so how would you analyze its motion in the belt's frame of reference? Once you do that, you can transform back to the room's frame of reference.

 

[JD_PM]

Absolutely, my bad! Actually, it is:

$$R\alpha=a_0$$

NOTE: I will continue posting in a few...

Back at it.

Thanks to the haruspex comment I highlighted on #9, I realized that my calculations were wrong because of the bad selection of moment of inertia equation. Corrections:

$$R\alpha=a_0$$

$$a_0=\frac12 a$$

$$R\alpha=\frac12 a$$

$$f=\frac12 Ma$$

$$v_{CM} = 2R \omega$$

Based on this, the speed $v(t)$ of the centre of mass of the bottle is:

$$v(t) = v_{CM} + V(t) = 2R \omega + V(t)$$

 

[JD_PM]

Back at it.

Thanks to the haruspex comment I highlighted on #9, I realized that my calculations were wrong because of the bad selection of moment of inertia equation. Corrections:

$$R\alpha=a_0$$

$$a_0=\frac12 a$$

$$R\alpha=\frac12 a$$

$$f=\frac12 Ma$$

$$v_{CM} = 2R \omega$$

Based on this, the speed $v(t)$ of the centre of mass of the bottle is:

$$v(t) = v_{CM} + V(t) = 2R \omega + V(t)$$

Now I am confused on the following:

I know that the translational speed of the centre of mass for pure rolling motion on a non moving floor and measured from an inertial reference frame is:

$$v_{CM} = \frac{ds}{dt} = R\omega$$

Where $s$ is the arc of the cylinder

But how is it possible that I get $2R \omega$ just with the difference that in this case the floor (belt) is moving?

 

[JD_PM]

Now pretend that you are sitting on a chair placed on the belt, in other words transform to moving belt's frame. The belt is at rest relative to you and so are (instantaneously) the points on the cylinder that are in contact with the belt. Would you see the cylinder move?

OK you propose I am on a non inertial reference frame now. Yes, I would observe the cylinder rolling. The cylinder rolls because of the torque exerted by the external force of static friction on the cylinder. Actually, the cylinder would move in the opposite direction to that of the friction and in the same to that of the fictitious force F (as we are on a non inertial reference frame we have to add a reaction force F; the action force is clearly f).

 

[kuruman]

Actually, the cylinder would move in the opposite direction to that of the friction and in the same to that of the fictitious force F (as we are on a non inertial reference frame we have to add a reaction force F; the action force is clearly f).

Careful here. In the non-inertial frame, the belt is at rest, yet the cylinder accelerates. An observer in that frame deduces that there must be an external force acting on the cylinder. In what direction is that force, what is its magnitude and at what point on the cylinder is it applied?

 

[JD_PM]

Careful here. In the non-inertial frame, the belt is at rest, yet the cylinder accelerates. An observer in that frame deduces that there must be an external force acting on the cylinder. In what direction is that force, what is its magnitude and at what point on the cylinder is it applied?

Let's say the cylinder accelerates backwards. The external force exerted on the cylinder is the static friction $f$ ,which acts on the only point of contact with the belt, pointing backwards:

$$f = Ma_o$$

Where $a_o$ is the tangential acceleration.

But this is not the only force exerted on the system. There is a fictitious force $F$ acting on the COM of the system.

Here it is a picture of what is going on (there was a mistake in the attached image to this post, now fixing):

 

[haruspex]

Where $a_o$ is the tangential acceleration.

Please clarify what you mean by that. Why isn't f/M the linear acceleration of the cylinder, i.e. of its mass centre?

 

[haruspex]

There is a fictitious force F acting on the COM of the system.

I don't know what to write here. I would not have taken you along a non-inertial path. Not sure what @kuruman has in mind.

 

[JD_PM]

I don't know what to write here. I would not have taken you along a non-inertial path. Not sure what @kuruman has in mind.

On a non inertial frame of reference we have the following scenario:

Where $F$ is the fictitious force and $f$ is the static friction.

Though I am not sure, as I am wondering if they should be opposite instead...

Actually, after having some thoughts, I think F should point backwards and the friction force forwards. Thus the diagram flaws.

 

[haruspex]

On a non inertial frame of reference we have the following scenario:

View attachment 236869

Where $F$ is the fictitious force and $f$ is the static friction.

Though I am not sure, as I am wondering if they should be opposite instead...

Ok, though I believe they would be inopposite directions, but that doesn't matter. If so, the sign will come out negative.
So what equations follow from that?

 

[JD_PM]

Ok, though I believe they would be inopposite directions, but that doesn't matter. If so, the sign will come out negative.
So what equations follow from that?

OK let's carry on with opposite directions. Using Newton's second law for translation we get:

$$-F + f = ma_o$$

$$a_o = \frac{-F + f}{m}$$

 

[haruspex]

OK let's carry on with opposite directions. Using Newton's second law for translation we get:

$$-F + f = ma_o$$

$$a_o = \frac{-F + f}{m}$$

I assume you are now defining a_o as the linear acceleration of the mass centre of the cylinder in the belt's reference frame.
Ok, so what about rotational acceleration.

 

[JD_PM]

I assume you are now defining a_o as the linear acceleration of the mass centre of the cylinder in the belt's reference frame.
Ok, so what about rotational acceleration.

OK before starting with rotation one question about signs. I think $a_o$ would be negative as $F>f$... Does this mean that both forces should have the same direction instead?

 

[haruspex]

OK before starting with rotation one question about signs. I think $a_o$ would be negative as $F>f$... Does this mean that both forces should have the same direction instead?

Yes F will have a greater magnitude than f, but that just means the resulting observed acceleration is in the same direction as F,

 

[JD_PM]

Yes F will have a greater magnitude than f, but that just means the resulting observed acceleration is in the same direction as F,

OK I think that what happens is that $a_o$ has a negative sign as well, because is pointing backwards. Thus:

$$a_o = \frac{F - f}{m}$$

 

[JD_PM]

Ok, so what about rotational acceleration.

$$\tau = Rf$$

$$f = \frac{\tau}{R}$$

 

[haruspex]

$$\tau = Rf$$

$$f = \frac{\tau}{R}$$

That does not mean anything unless you specify the axis.
What about the angular acceleration?

 

[kuruman]

(as we are on a non inertial reference frame we have to add a reaction force F; the action force is clearly f).

It looks like you are confused about action and reaction forces. Only action forces act on the system, here the cylinder. Reaction forces act on entities outside the system and are not part of the system's free body diagram. For example, the horizontal contact force of static friction acting on the cylinder has a reaction counterpart that is in the opposite horizontal direction and is part of the belt free body diagram, the action force of gravity $m\vec g$ acting on the cylinder has a reaction force $-m\vec g$ acting on the Earth, etc. etc.

I don't know what to write here. I would not have taken you along a non-inertial path. Not sure what @kuruman has in mind.

I do not wish to detract @JD_PM from the current path. When this problem has been solved to everybody's satisfaction, perhaps I will post my solution for consideration.

 

[haruspex]

I do not wish to detract @JD_PM from the current path.

Yes, I was reluctant to remain involved for the same reason, but we seem to be in different timezones and I did not want to leave the OP dangling. Anyway, it seems to me that the thread has since then stuck with the non-inertial view, so no need for you to hold back.

 

[kuruman]

Yes, I was reluctant to remain involved for the same reason, but we seem to be in different timezones and I did not want to leave the OP dangling. Anyway, it seems to me that the thread has since then stuck with the non-inertial view, so no need for you to hold back.

OK, then. We still need to hear from @JD_PM about what reference axis one ought to calculate the torque acting on the cylinder. One choice is better than others in the sense that Newton's 2nd law for rotations is sufficient to determine the acceleration of the CM in the non-inertial frame.

 

[JD_PM]

OK, then. We still need to hear from @JD_PM about what reference axis one ought to calculate the torque acting on the cylinder. One choice is better than others in the sense that Newton's 2nd law for rotations is sufficient to determine the acceleration of the CM in the non-inertial frame.

To Recap: I am still convinced that the right answer is(see #9 for more details):

$$v(t) = v_{CM} + V(t) = 2R \omega + V(t)$$

Do you agree with me?

 

[JD_PM]

To Recap: I am still convinced that the right answer is(see #9 for more details):

$$v(t) = v_{CM} + V(t) = 2R \omega + V(t)$$

Do you agree with me?

And I still have the following doubt(stated previously on #10):

Now I am confused on the following:

I know that the translational speed of the centre of mass for pure rolling motion on a non moving floor and measured from an inertial reference frame is:

$$v_{CM} = \frac{ds}{dt} = R\omega$$

Where $s$ is the arc of the cylinder

But how is it possible that I get $2R \omega$ just with the difference that in this case the floor (belt) is moving?

 

[JD_PM]

My solution is obtained from an inertial reference frame.

@kuruman you were interested in solving the problem from a non inertial reference frame. why?

 

[JD_PM]

That does not mean anything unless you specify the axis.
What about the angular acceleration?

I would say that the axis plays a role if we use:

$$\tau = I \alpha$$

The angular acceleration is obtained from the stated equation:

$$\alpha = \frac{\tau}{I}$$

 

[kuruman]

To Recap: I am still convinced that the right answer is(see #9 for more details):

$$v(t) = v_{CM} + V(t) = 2R \omega + V(t)$$

Do you agree with me?

I do not agree with you. In the special case $V(t)=0$ for all $t$, your expression predicts that the cylinder will be moving. Does that make sense? Besides, what is $\omega$? Your final answer must be in terms of the given quantities and these are $M,~k,~R$ and $V(t)$.

My solution is obtained from an inertial reference frame.

@kuruman you were interested in solving the problem from a non inertial reference frame. why?

The strategy for finding $v_{cm}(t)$ is to use dynamics to find $a_{cm}(t)$ and integrate. $\vec F_{net}= M\vec a_{cm}$ is insufficient to complete the task because there is also angular acceleration. So you need $\tau=I\alpha$. I am arguing that if you transform to the non-inertial frame, it is sufficient to use $\tau=I\alpha$ in order to find the acceleration of the cm in the non-inertial frame and hence in the inertial frame. However, for that to happen, you need to choose wisely the axis about which you the torque and the moment of inertia are to be expressed.

I would say that the axis plays a role if we use:
$$\tau = I \alpha$$
The angular acceleration is obtained from the stated equation:
$$\alpha = \frac{\tau}{I}$$

It's not "if we use", it's "because we have to use".

 

[haruspex]

I would say that the axis plays a role if we use:

$$\tau = I \alpha$$

The angular acceleration is obtained from the stated equation:

$$\alpha = \frac{\tau}{I}$$

The torque of a force is always in respect of an axis. Different axis, different torque. Likewise moment of inertia. Even the angular acceleration changes with axis; if your axis is not through the mass centre then the linear acceleration of the body contributes to its angular acceleration about the axis. You must use the same axis for all three.
E.g. consider a force F applied at the mass centre, but an axis distance s off to one side. The force has torque Fs about the axis. The body does not rotate about its own centre, but the axis sees the body as accelerating around it at angular rate a/s=F/(ms). The moment of inertia about this axis (since the body is not rotating about its own centre) is ms². Torque Fs=(ms²)(F/(ms)).

Further, it is advisable to use either a point fixed in space or the mass centre of the body as the axis. Anything else can yield the wrong answer.

 

[kuruman]

Further, it is advisable to use either a point fixed in space or the mass centre of the body as the axis. Anything else can yield the wrong answer.

Yes! In the inertial frame there is no point on the cylinder that is fixed in space, so one must use the cylinder axis for referencing torques and the moment of inertia. In the non-inertial frame, however, there is a point that is fixed in space and one can use it as reference instead of the cylinder axis.

 

[haruspex]

In the inertial frame there is no point on the cylinder that is fixed in space

True, but you do not have to use a point that is fixed to the cylinder. Any point fixed in space will do.

 

[kuruman]

True, but you do not have to use a point that is fixed to the cylinder. Any point fixed in space will do.

Yes, of course.

 

[JD_PM]

I do not agree with you. In the special case $V(t)=0$ for all $t$, your expression predicts that the cylinder will be moving. Does that make sense? Besides, what is $\omega$? Your final answer must be in terms of the given quantities and these are $M,~k,~R$ and $V(t)$.

The strategy for finding $v_{cm}(t)$ is to use dynamics to find $a_{cm}(t)$ and integrate. $\vec F_{net}= M\vec a_{cm}$ is insufficient to complete the task because there is also angular acceleration. So you need $\tau=I\alpha$. I am arguing that if you transform to the non-inertial frame, it is sufficient to use $\tau=I\alpha$ in order to find the acceleration of the cm in the non-inertial frame and hence in the inertial frame. However, for that to happen, you need to choose wisely the axis about which you the torque and the moment of inertia are to be expressed.

It's not "if we use", it's "because we have to use".

Using $\tau=I\alpha$ I got:

$$\tau=I\alpha = Rf $$

$$Mk^2 \alpha = RMa_{CM}$$

$$a_{CM} = \frac{k^2 \alpha}{R}$$

NOTE: I used an axis passing through the centre of mass of the cylinder. You will get the same result using $\tau=I\alpha$ no matter from what reference frame you analyse the rotation. This is because the fictitious force F (in non inertial reference frame case) exerts no torque on the cylinder.

Before proceeding to calculate $v_{CM}$ please tell me how you see the reasoning above.

 

[haruspex]

Using $\tau=I\alpha$ I got:

$$\tau=I\alpha = Rf $$

$$Mk^2 \alpha = RMa_{CM}$$

$$a_{CM} = \frac{k^2 \alpha}{R}$$

NOTE: I used an axis passing through the centre of mass of the cylinder. You will get the same result using $\tau=I\alpha$ no matter from what reference frame you analyse the rotation. This is because the fictitious force F (in non inertial reference frame case) exerts no torque on the cylinder.

Before proceeding to calculate $v_{CM}$ please tell me how you see the reasoning above.

From the above I deduce you are assuming $f =Ma_{CM}$. Presumably a_CM is inthe reference frame of the belt. What happened to the fictional force?

 

[JD_PM]

From the above I deduce you are assuming $f =Ma_{CM}$. Presumably a_CM is inthe reference frame of the belt. What happened to the fictional force?

Note that the fictitious force F is exerted on the centre of mass of the cylinder i.e. F produces no torque on the cylinder.

See on my diagrams how F acts on the COM.

 

[haruspex]

Note that the fictitious force F is exerted on the centre of mass of the cylinder i.e. F produces no torque on the cylinder.

See on my diagrams how F acts on the COM.

I have no issue with your torque equation. As you say, F does not have a torque about the cylinder's centre. The problem is with your second equation in post #41, where you introduce a_CM. It seems to me that to get that you must have assumed $f=Ma_{CM}$. I can't see where you define a_CM. If it is the acceleration of the mass centre in the belt frame then F should appear in the equation.
If you disagree, please post the missing steps in your working.

 

[JD_PM]

I have no issue with your torque equation. As you say, F does not have a torque about the cylinder's centre. The problem is with your second equation in post #41, where you introduce a_CM. It seems to me that to get that you must have assumed $f=Ma_{CM}$. I can't see where you define a_CM. If it is the acceleration of the mass centre in the belt frame then F should appear in the equation.
If you disagree, please post the missing steps in your working.

OK I see what you mean. Actually there is a mistake, as the second line at #41 should be:

$$Mk^2 \alpha = RMa_{o}$$

Having $f =Ma_{o}$, where $a_{o}$ is the tangential acceleration.

@kuruman suggested solving the problem being on a non inertial reference frame and using 2nd Newton's law for rotation. Well, in that scenario we have the picture #20 but with the fraction pointing to the right (I made I mistake when I posted the diagram #20). In such a scenario, using 2nd Newton's law for rotation we have:

$$\tau=I\alpha = Rf$$

From this equation there is no way you get $a_{CM}$ because:

$$F = Ma_{CM}$$

And F exerts no torque on the cylinder, therefore it does not appear on $\tau=I\alpha = Rf$

I made some research and found you can get both $v_{CM}$ and $a_{CM}$ using:

$$v_{CM} = \frac{ds}{dt} = R\frac{d\theta}{dt} = R\omega$$

But for that you need to assume constant acceleration...

And this approach does not use 2nd Newton's law... so I am basically stuck.

 

[haruspex]

OK I see what you mean. Actually there is a mistake, as the second line at #41 should be:

$$Mk^2 \alpha = RMa_{o}$$

Having $f =Ma_{o}$, where $a_{o}$ is the tangential acceleration.

@kuruman suggested solving the problem being on a non inertial reference frame and using 2nd Newton's law for rotation. Well, in that scenario we have the picture #20 but with the fraction pointing to the right (I made I mistake when I posted the diagram #20). In such a scenario, using 2nd Newton's law for rotation we have:

$$\tau=I\alpha = Rf$$

From this equation there is no way you get $a_{CM}$ because:

$$F = Ma_{CM}$$

And F exerts no torque on the cylinder, therefore it does not appear on $\tau=I\alpha = Rf$

I made some research and found you can get both $v_{CM}$ and $a_{CM}$ using:

$$v_{CM} = \frac{ds}{dt} = R\frac{d\theta}{dt} = R\omega$$

But for that you need to assume constant acceleration...

And this approach does not use 2nd Newton's law... so I am basically stuck.

I might return to this when I've more time to suggest how you could continue with that line, but for now I'd like to suggest a far simpler approach.
In the inertial frame, can you think of an axis about which there are no torques? What would that allow you to do?

 

[JD_PM]

I might return to this when I've more time to suggest how you could continue with that line, but for now I'd like to suggest a far simpler approach.
In the inertial frame, can you think of an axis about which there are no torques? What would that allow you to do?

SCENARIO ANALYSED FROM AN INERTIAL FRAME

We have to point out that in an inertial frame of reference we just have one external force: the static friction (no slipping rolling motion).

You asked for a selection of an axis which allows the system having $\tau = 0$ . That would be achievable if we were to select the point of contact cylinder-belt as the one the axis passes through perpendicularly.

With respect to that axis angular momentum is conserved. Is it that your idea? If that is the case, how could we get $v_{CM}$ from AM conservation?

 

[jbriggs444]

SCENARIO ANALYSED FROM AN INERTIAL FRAME
With respect to that axis angular momentum is conserved. Is it that your idea? If that is the case, how could we get $v_{CM}$ from AM conservation?

If I am understanding the problem correctly and seeing where @haruspex is going, we have a pretty simple known and unchanging quantity to utilize.

1. Starting angular momentum is zero
2. Angular momentum is conserved in the absence of external torques.
3. There are no external torques.

If angular momentum is zero and we know the velocity of the bottom contact surface of the cylinder with the belt, what else can we calculate?

 

[haruspex]

select the point of contact cylinder-belt as the one the axis passes through perpendicularly.

It depends exactly what you mean by that. Recall that we must choose a reference axis that is either the mass centre or is fixed in space. Since the belt is moving, the "point of contact" moves.

Your other equation should express that it is rolling contact.

 

[JD_PM]

If angular momentum is zero and we know the velocity of the bottom contact surface of the cylinder with the belt, what else can we calculate?

I guess you are driving me to the vectorial angular momentum equation:

$$L = r p$$