Dropped object in a rotating frame

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around analyzing the motion of a dropped object within a rotating frame, specifically focusing on the forces acting on the object, including the Coriolis and centrifugal forces. Participants are exploring the implications of these forces in a context that may involve artificial gravity, as suggested by the rotating frame setup.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are examining the equation of motion in a rotating frame and questioning the treatment of the centrifugal force. There is also discussion about the derivation and implications of the Coriolis force expression. Some participants are attempting to reconcile their findings with previous analyses conducted in inertial frames.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants raising questions about the assumptions made in the problem, particularly regarding the neglect of certain forces and the approximation of the Coriolis force. There is acknowledgment of the complexity of the problem, and some participants are considering the validity of the approximations used in their analyses.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem may involve a space station scenario, where the object is dropped from a height within the station, potentially complicating the analysis due to the varying contributions of forces based on the object's position.

etotheipi
Homework Statement
A rotating space station (at ##\omega##) has a radius R. Alice climbs up a tower of height H and drops an object from rest, in the rotating frame. Calculate the velocity and horizontal distance to the tower when it hits the floor. It is given that ##R \gg H##
Relevant Equations
N/A
I solved this in an inertial frame, but now I want to do it in the rotating frame. As far as I can tell the equation of motion is $$\vec{F}_{cent} + \vec{F}_{cor} = mr\omega^2 + 2m\vec{v} \times \vec{\omega} = m\frac{d^2\vec{r}}{dt^2}$$The solutions take a different approach. They state that the Coriolis force is $$F_{cor} (t) = 2m \omega^2 R t \omega = 2 m \omega^3 R t$$and they simply integrate this w.r.t. time. There are two things I don't understand. Why have they ignored the centrifugal force (or used it in a weird way, that I can't see), and also where did their expression for the Coriolis force come from? Thanks :smile:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Adesh
Physics news on Phys.org
Seems, to me, that the problem is suggesting some things:
The rotating of the object create some artificial gravity, that will accelerate the body by -w²*(R+h) ~ -w²*R
so a = -w²*R
v = -w²*R*t
And the object was dropped in some point where the angular rotating vector is perpendicular to the velocity that will rise up, so |Fcor| = 2mwv = 2mw*w²*(R)*t = 2mw³Rt

I am just trying to construct any space sphere station with this properties, but is a little hard.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: etotheipi
LCSphysicist said:
Seems, to me, that the problem is suggesting some things:
The rotating of the object create some artificial gravity, that will accelerate the body by -w²*(R+h) ~ -w²*R
so a = -w²*R
v = -w²*R*t
And the object was dropped in some point where the angular rotating vector is perpendicular to the velocity that will rise up, so |Fcor| = 2mwv = 2mw*w²*(R)*t = 2mw³Rt

I am just trying to construct any space sphere station with this properties, but is a little hard.

Thanks for the reply, I think you might be right.

It looks like they're approximating the centrifugal force to be constant at ##mR\omega^2##, even though it will actually vary between ##mR\omega^2## and ##m(R-H)\omega^2## which is maybe a fair assumption if ##H \ll R##. More worryingly they also seem to be neglecting the contribution of the horizontal component of velocity to the Coriolis force, which again is perhaps a fair(ish) assumption if the horizontal displacement ##d_x## is small.

If we make these two assumptions, then we do indeed find that the Coriolis force is approximated as a constant ##2m \omega^3 Rt##.

Funnily enough this approximate method does give the same results as I got for the analysis in the inertial frame, so maybe it's not so bad after all. I might try and finish off the vector analysis too and see if it gives a similar thing :smile:
 
LCSphysicist said:
I am just trying to construct any space sphere station with this properties, but is a little hard.

And also just in case I didn't specify, the platform of height ##H## is inside the space station, i.e. the object falls from the centre out towards the edge :wink:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
967
Replies
25
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K