Decomposing angular velocity and moment of inertia

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the decomposition of angular velocity and the calculation of moment of inertia in the context of rotational kinetic energy. The original poster attempts to understand the relationship between the moments of inertia and angular velocities for an object, specifically how they contribute to the total kinetic energy.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the assumption that total kinetic energy can be expressed as a sum of contributions from each axis of rotation, questioning the validity of this approach. Some participants also seek clarification on the implications of using principal moments of inertia versus other axes.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the relationship between angular velocity and moment of inertia. Some participants provide insights into the nature of the inertia tensor and its components, while others express uncertainty about proving the proposed kinetic energy formula. The discussion is productive, with guidance offered regarding the conditions under which the simplified kinetic energy expression holds true.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the exercise may not require a proof of the kinetic energy formula but rather an application of it under specific conditions related to principal axes of inertia. There is also mention of the complexity involved when considering axes other than the principal ones.

Wminus
Messages
173
Reaction score
29

Homework Statement


See the attached image.

Homework Equations


##T = 1/2 \omega^2 I##

The Attempt at a Solution


So ##I_1,I_2,I_3## are just the moments of inertia of the object with regards to the 3 axes. Right? OK, then I intuitively assume that the total kinetic energy must simply be $$T=\frac{1}{2} (I_1\omega_1^2+I_2\omega_2^2+I_3\omega_3^2)$$ since the kinetic energy around axis ##i## is just ##I_i\omega_i^2##. But I can't seem to prove it.. Can you guys help me?
 

Attachments

  • Skjermbilde 2015-04-12 kl. 14.24.04.png
    Skjermbilde 2015-04-12 kl. 14.24.04.png
    19.4 KB · Views: 347
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you show what you have done thus far?
 
robphy said:
Can you show what you have done thus far?
It's nothing of interest.. My thinking is that each of the ##\omega_i^2## with ##i \in \{1,2,3\}## multiplied by their moment of inertia ##I_i## will contribute to the rotational kinetic energy linearly, so you can just add them all up to get the total $$T=\frac{1}{2} (I_1\omega_1^2+I_2\omega_2^2+I_3\omega_3^2)$$. It makes intuitive sense, but I can't seem to prove it.
 
Yes, that's right. Thats the kinetic energy due to rotation for the principal moments of inertia. If you consider other axis of rotations but the principals, then that expression wouldn't be valid, think that the moment of inertia is a second order tensor, and has 9 components, not three. When you compute the rotational kinetic energy with respect to other moment of inertia but the principal, the expression for the rotational kinetic energy becomes quiet cumbersome. It is reduced to that simple expression when you compute it for the principal axes of inertia, the inertia tensor is diagonal in the principal axes. I think the exercise doesn't asks you to prove that formula, just to demonstrate that the kinetic energy reduces to formula (4), you just have to replace in the formula for the kinetic energy the given values for ##\omega_i##. If what you want is to proove that the kinetic energy is given by that formula, you could instead of taking a continuous body, start by thinking of a discrete (rigid) distribution of puntual masses and add the kinetic energy of rotation for all of them. And then get the expressions for the continuum. Then it will appear the expression for the moment of inertia naturally. But that formula is only valid when the moment of inertia is taken with respect to the principal axes of inertia.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Wminus

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K