Determination of moment of inertia

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around determining the period of a pendulum and the accuracy of equations presented in a referenced document. The user questions the omission of the sine of theta in equation 5, arguing that it should not be disregarded unless the angle between the force vector and position vector is 90 degrees. They also clarify their understanding of torque components and the role of tension in the pendulum's motion. The conversation highlights the importance of approximations, particularly regarding small angles, where cos phi can be assumed to be 1. Overall, the user seeks clarification on the equations and their derivations related to the moment of inertia.
ajcoelho
Messages
18
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



I've been trying to find out what is the period os this kind of pendulum decribed here: http://www.eng.uah.edu/~wallace/mae364/doc/Labs/mominert.pdf

The thing is, I've came to the same result shown in equation (11) but my reasoning it's different. I would even say that there is an error on this website on equation 5: in this equaition where is the sin of theta?? It can be omitted, only if the angle between the force vector and position vetor is 90º, but it's not the case clearly!

Am I thinking well? In my reasoning I had also to the aproximattion of cos theta ≈ cos of phi ≈ 1 and in this site things are really simplified just because of that lack of sin of theta...

If you're interested i can also post my reasoning but I'd like to get some help on this equation 5 first...

Thanks a loot!


Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution

 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
At best there is a cosΘ (which is very close to 1), but the suspension points are still 2a apart on the equilibrium line, so the F point a little more outward than drawn in the figure.
 
the thing is: what goes to torque equation is Tx right? Beacause Ty and Mg/2 cancell one another
 
The torque equation would be numbered (5) ? That is for the z component of the torque vector ##\tau = \vec r \times \vec F## (I suppose you will learn that vector version much later on, for now: it is for the torque about a vertical axis going through C). The expression is correct, the drawing is not. F should point more outwards.

I can't find much wrong with (6) for the magnitude of F.

For the torque around the x-axis (front view, fig.1, from C towards you) you indeed have
(mg/2 a/2) + (mg/2)(-a/2)=0.
 
But suppose you're viewing from end view. Then, the forces are above...

So, what really makes torque isn't Tx??

Then we make Ty=Mg/2, and so on...
 

Attachments

  • Sem título.jpg
    Sem título.jpg
    7.4 KB · Views: 547
From the pdf I gather the x-axis is (in the front view) pointing towards the viewer. Take C as the origin. If the y-axis is pointing to the right, then the z axis is pointing up. ##I\ddot \theta## is then the z component of the torque ##\tau##
 
I get it now... But i still have that cos (phi) that i have to aproximate to 1 right?
 
Where is that ##\cos \phi##??
 
Ty = Mg/2 = T cosϕ

therefore: T = mg/2cosϕ

therefore: Tx = mg sin ϕ / 2 cosϕ
 
  • #10
Ah, my mistake. Your T is the tension in the wires, not a torque as I was stupily reading. You are absolutely right. And yes, assume ##\phi## is so small that the cosine is 1.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Back
Top