Derivative of angular velocity of rotating co. system

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The time derivative of angular velocity in a rotating coordinate system is not zero, as established through the use of Cartesian vectors and the Einstein summation convention. The analysis shows that the inertial forces acting on a particle in a rotating frame can be expressed through a Newtonian equation of motion, which includes Coriolis and centrifugal forces, as well as a term for angular acceleration. This framework is essential for understanding dynamics in rotating systems, such as the motion of particles on Earth and the behavior of the Fourcault pendulum.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Cartesian vectors and tensors
  • Familiarity with the Einstein summation convention
  • Knowledge of rotational dynamics and inertial forces
  • Basic principles of Newtonian mechanics
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Newtonian equations of motion in rotating frames
  • Learn about the Coriolis effect and its applications in meteorology
  • Explore the mathematical representation of angular velocity and acceleration
  • Investigate the dynamics of the Fourcault pendulum and its implications in physics
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, engineers working with rotational systems, and anyone interested in the dynamics of motion in non-inertial reference frames.

Pushoam
Messages
961
Reaction score
53
What is time derivative of angular velocity ( measured w.r.t. an inertial frame ) of a rotating co. system w.r.t. the same rotating co. system?

I think a person sitting in a closed rotating box feels the an object at rest w.r.t. him as rest. He doesn't observe the angular velocity of the object changing.
So, the answer to the above question is 0.

Is this correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
No. In the following I work with Cartesian vector and tensor components. The Einstein summation convention is used, i.e., you always have to sum over repeated indices from 1 to 3.

Let ##\vec{e}_j## denote a Cartesian coordinate system fixed in an inertial frame and ##\vec{e}_j'## one fixed in the rotating system. Then you have
$$\vec{e}_j'=D_{ij} \vec{e}_i,$$
where ##\hat{D}=(D_{ij}) \in \mathrm{SO}(3)## is a time-dependent rotation matrix. For the position vector you have
$$\vec{x}=x_j' \vec{e}_j'=D_{ij} x_j' \vec{e}_i \; \Rightarrow x_i=D_{ij} x_j'.$$
Now you get
$$v_i=\dot{x}_i=\dot{D}_{ij} x_{j}'+D_{ij} \dot{x}_j'=D_{ij} [\dot{x}_j+(D^{-1})_{jk} \dot{D}_{kl} x_l'].$$
Now since ##\hat{D}^{-1}=\hat{D}^T## you have ##\hat{D} \hat{D}^T=1## and thus ##\dot{\hat{D}} \hat{D}^T+ \hat{D} \dot{\hat{D}}^T=0## or
$$\hat{D} \dot{\hat{D}}^T=-(\hat{D} \dot{\hat{D}}^T)^{T}.$$
That means that the matrix ##\hat{D} \dot{\hat{D}}^T## is antisymmetric and thus we can express it with help of the Levi-Civita symbol via an axial vector, i.e.,
$$(D^{-1})_{jk} \dot{D}_{kl}=\epsilon_{jkl}\omega_k',$$
and thus
$$v_i=D_{ij} (\dot{x}_j' + \epsilon_{jkl} \omega_k' x_l').$$
Or writing the components as column vectors ##\underline{v}## etc. you get
$$\underline{v} = \hat{D} (\dot{\underline{x}}' + \underline{\omega}' \times \underline{x}').$$
Now in the same way you can take another time derivative, leading to
$$\underline{a}=\dot{\underline{v}} = \hat{D} [\ddot{\underline{x}}' + 2 \underline{\omega}' \times \dot{\underline{x}}' + \underline{\omega}' \times (\underline{\omega}' \times \underline{x}') + \dot{\underline{\omega}'} \times \underline{x}'].$$
Multiplying by the mass of the particle you get finally the Newtonian equation of motion in the rotating frame as
$$m \ddot{\underline{x}}'=\underline{F}' - 2m \underline{\omega}' \times \dot{\underline{x}}' -m \underline{\omega}' \times (\underline{\omega}' \times \underline{x}') -m \dot{\underline{\omega}'} \times \underline{x}'].$$
So despite the "true force" represented by the components ##\underline{F}'## wrt. the rotating basis you get three sorts of "inertial forces" which, as the derivation shows, comes from the rotation of the rotating frame wrt. the inertial frame. Sometimes one thus calls them also "fictitious forces", because you can get rid of them by transforming back into an inertial reference frame.

The inertial forces on the right-hand side of the final equation are called Coriolis force (2nd term), centrifugal force (third term). The fourth term has no special name, as far as I know, but it's due to the angular acceleration for the rotating reference frame wrt. the inertial frame. In the usual application of the motion of particles (or as important in meteorology fluids like the air) on Earth the latter force usually can be negected since the rotation of the Earth is with pretty constant angular velocity in first approximation. For motion close to the Earth also the centrifugal term has to be lumped into the effective gravitational force, approximated by ##m \underline{g}'##. So that you finally have for this special case
$$m \ddot{\underline{x}}'=m \underline{g}'-2 m \underline{\omega}' \times \dot{\underline{x}}'.$$
You can use this formula to calculate the free fall on the rotating Earth or the fascinating motion of the Fourcault pendulum.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: FactChecker
Pushoam said:
What is time derivative of angular velocity ( measured w.r.t. an inertial frame ) of a rotating co. system w.r.t. the same rotating co. system?
The time derivative calculated in a coordinate system whose rotational rate is changing would not include (detect?) it's own rotational acceleration.
I think a person sitting in a closed rotating box feels the an object at rest w.r.t. him as rest. He doesn't observe the angular velocity of the object changing.
So, the answer to the above question is 0.
A person would certainly feel it if he was in a box whose rate of rotation changed. He would have to explain the difference between the physical force he feels and any time derivatives he calculates in the box coordinates.

The equations of motion that are used to understand the flight of an airplane have to take all the rotational accelerations into account in the calculations.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Pushoam

Similar threads

  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
948
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K