Falling (toppling) rigid tower (uniform rod)

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the physics of a rigid vertical tower, modeled as a thin uniform rod, toppling to the ground from a vertical position with its lower end attached to a frictionless axis. The primary goal is to determine the angle of the rod relative to the ground over time, utilizing principles of pendulum motion. The relevant equations of motion involve the pendulum's differential equation and require the initial angular velocity and acceleration due to gravity. The trajectory can be calculated using an integral that, while not solvable in closed form, can be tabulated for specific angles. The analysis emphasizes the moment of inertia and gravitational effects without considering friction or other forces.
zaphat
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am working on an animation, which involves a rigid, vertical tower falling (toppling) to the ground, and I am stuck at its core physics.

Actually this is the same as the thin uniform rod initially positioned in the vertical direction, with its lower end attached to a frictionless axis.


I would need the angle (compared to the ground) of the rod in a given time.

The tower is 50meters long. (It is a simple animation, the effect of gravity only is enough: no friction, no radial acceleration, no stress forces etc. is needed)

Thanks in advance
 
Physics news on Phys.org
So what have you tried to do to solve your problem?
Here is something to grit your teeth on with regards to moment of inertia.
http://www.uta.edu/physics/courses/wkim/lctr_notes/phys1443-fall06-1116-20(F).pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Your tower is a pendulum, whose initial angle from "pointing down" is 180 degree. Starting from the pendulum's differential equation,

<br /> <br /> x&#039;&#039; + a \sin x = 0<br /> <br /> \\<br /> <br /> x&#039;&#039;x&#039; + a (\sin x)x&#039; = 0<br /> <br /> \\<br /> <br /> \frac {x&#039;^2 - {x&#039;}_0^2} {2} - a(\cos x - \cos x_0) = 0<br />

## x_0 = \pi ## (the pendulum is upward from "pointing down"), so

<br /> \\<br /> <br /> x&#039; = \sqrt {{x&#039;}_0^2 + 2a(\cos x + 1)}<br /> <br /> \\<br /> <br /> \int_{\pi}^x ({x&#039;}_0^2 + 2a(\cos x + 1))^{-1/2} dx = t<br />

The latter integral, as far as I can tell, does not exist in the closed form, but it can be tabulated between ## \pi ## (upward) and ## \pi/2 ## (toppled), which will give you the trajectory you want. You will need ## {x'}_0 ## which is the initial angular velocity, and you will need ## a ##, which is ## \frac {3g} {2L} ## for a uniform rod, ## L ## being the length.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top