Does Applying Force Away from the Center of Gravity Affect Energy Conservation?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Davidoux
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Torque Velocity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the effects of applying force at the center of gravity (COG) versus off-center on a body, specifically regarding the implications for energy conservation, linear motion, and rotational motion. Participants explore the relationship between force application, torque, and the resulting energy dynamics in both scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants assert that applying force at the COG results in linear motion without rotation, while applying the same force off the COG generates both linear motion and torque, leading to rotation.
  • One participant challenges the claim that linear velocity remains the same when force is applied off the COG, arguing that the linear acceleration of the center of mass will be less due to energy being used for rotation.
  • Another participant agrees that while both linear and angular accelerations occur when force is applied off the COG, the linear acceleration of the center of mass remains the same due to the force being constant.
  • It is proposed that the apparent increase in energy when applying force off the COG is due to the additional work done, as the point of application moves through a greater distance.
  • Participants discuss the acceleration of the center of mass, with some stating that it will be the same in both scenarios, referencing Newton's 2nd law.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on whether the linear velocity remains the same when force is applied off the COG. Some participants agree that the center of mass accelerates the same regardless of force application point, while others argue that energy considerations complicate this view.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying assumptions about energy conservation and the relationship between work, force, and distance, which may not be fully resolved within the discussion.

Davidoux
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I know that when I apply a Force on the center of gravity of a body, I generate a linear motion and no rotation around any axe. (supposing here there is no drag)

Now when I apply the same force off COG, I get a torque T = F.d making the body rotate
AND a linear velocity, which is strictly the same that I get when applying the force on the COG.

So in the second case, it seems that the system has MORE energy (translational + rotational) than in the first case (translational) for the same amount of applied force.
Can someone explain me this apparent violation of energy conservation ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The violation comes when you say "AND a linear velocity, which is strictly the same that I get when applying the force on the COG." The linear velocity will be less.

Take the example of a stick laying left-right on a frictionless surface in front of you. Push in the center, and F=ma and the stick accelerates away from you with no rotation. But push 1/2 way between the center and the right end, and you get less than the original a of the COM, and you impart a CCW rotation. The energy that is invested in the rotation takes away from the overall COM acceleration.
 
Davidoux said:
I know that when I apply a Force on the center of gravity of a body, I generate a linear motion and no rotation around any axe. (supposing here there is no drag)
The force produces a linear acceleration of the center of mass.

Now when I apply the same force off COG, I get a torque T = F.d making the body rotate
AND a linear velocity, which is strictly the same that I get when applying the force on the COG.
Right, now you have both a linear acceleration of the center of mass and an angular acceleration about the center of mass. And, yes, the linear acceleration of the center of mass is the same, since the force is the same.

So in the second case, it seems that the system has MORE energy (translational + rotational) than in the first case (translational) for the same amount of applied force.
Can someone explain me this apparent violation of energy conservation ?
It requires more work to maintain that off-center force, since the point of application moves more. It's work--force through a distance--not just force, that determines the energy required.
 
Hi Davidoux!
Your analysis if the problem is the good one.
When you apply the same force off COG, the object does acquires the SAME linear speed plus rotational speed. The object acquires more energy.
But, no panic, the supplementary energy comes from supplementary work that your force has done. The reason is that the point of application of the force has displaced through a grater distance than in the case of the force applied on the COG. See why?
 
Hi Doc Al, lpfr,

thanks for your explanations, now I fully understand :smile:
And yes lpfr, I see why the distance is greater, it is because it moves along a circular path !
 
i was just reading this thread and I have a similar problem. Would the center of mass accelerate at the same magnitude AND direction with a centered force as well as an off centered force?
 
Yes. You can "feel" it when you unreel a spool laying flat on a table.
 
skiracer88_00 said:
i was just reading this thread and I have a similar problem. Would the center of mass accelerate at the same magnitude AND direction with a centered force as well as an off centered force?
Yes. Per Newton's 2nd law, the same net force acting on the same mass produces the same acceleration of the center of mass (both magnitude and direction), regardless of where it acts on the object.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 52 ·
2
Replies
52
Views
7K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
6K