Finding angular velocity using conservation of energy

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around finding the angular velocity of a cylinder using conservation of energy principles. Participants are examining the relationship between gravitational potential energy and kinetic energy, particularly in the context of a cylinder rolling off a table.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the use of specific values for kinetic energy in the answer key, particularly why 2.5 J is used instead of 6.25 J. There is also discussion about the conditions under which the kinetic energy formulas apply, especially regarding rolling without slipping.

Discussion Status

Some participants are exploring the implications of the cylinder's motion after it leaves the table, particularly how it affects the relationship between translational and rotational kinetic energy. Guidance has been offered regarding the conditions necessary for certain kinetic energy equations to hold true.

Contextual Notes

There are assumptions about the cylinder's motion and energy transformations that are being debated, particularly the transition from rolling to free fall and how that affects the calculations of kinetic energy.

Coderhk
Messages
59
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement



In the document below I need to try and find the angular velocity
I need help on part b

Homework Equations


F=ma
KE_Translational= 0.5mv^2
KE-Rotational= 0.5Iw^2
Assuming g=10m/s^2

The Attempt at a Solution


I have the answer key attached with the question but I am not sure why the answer key uses 2.5J as the sum of the kinetic energy. Why wouldn't the energy be 6.25J instead. 6.25J is the total gravitational potentia; energy relative to the ground. So shouldn't all that energy be converted into kinetic energy?
 

Attachments

  • a.png
    a.png
    31.8 KB · Views: 631
  • b.png
    b.png
    14.2 KB · Views: 639
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Coderhk said:

Homework Statement



In the document below I need to try and find the angular velocity

Homework Equations


F=ma
KE_Translational= 0.5mv^2
KE-Rotational= 0.5Iw^2
Assuming g=10m/s^2

The Attempt at a Solution


I have the answer key attached with the question but I am not sure why the answer key uses 2.5J as the sum of the kinetic energy. Why wouldn't the energy be 6.25J instead. 6.25J is the total gravitational potentia; energy relative to the ground. So shouldn't all that energy be converted into kinetic energy?
The problem says "Calculate the total kinetic energy of the cylinder when it reaches the table".
 
ehild said:
The problem says "Calculate the total kinetic energy of the cylinder when it reaches the table".
I need help on part b not a
 
Does the angular velocity of the cylinder change after the cylinder leaves the table?
 
TSny said:
Does the angular velocity of the cylinder change after the cylinder leaves the table?
No, since there is no net external torque
 
Coderhk said:
No, since there is no net external torque
Right. Does that help to see why they used 2.5 J to get the answer for part b?
 
TSny said:
Right. Does that help to see why they used 2.5 J to get the answer for part b?
I see since the angular velocity at the table is the same as at the floor, we just calculate the angular velocity at the table. But why can't we attempt to find it at the floor directly by saying all the gravitational potential energy relative to the floor becomes kinetic energy?
 
All of the gravitational PE relative to the floor does become KE. But, that alone doesn't tell you what fraction of the KE at the floor will be rotational KE.
 
TSny said:
All of the gravitational PE relative to the floor does become KE. But, that alone doesn't tell you what fraction of the KE at the floor will be rotational KE.
Ahh, So does that mean that it wouldn't work because the transnational kinetic energy follows a trajectory rather than a straight line thus we can't say it is 0.5mv^2?
 
  • #10
Coderhk said:
Ahh, So does that mean that it wouldn't work because the transnational kinetic energy follows a trajectory rather than a straight line thus we can't say it is 0.5mv^2?
I don't think that's the crucial point. In the solution, they use KE = ##\frac{3}{4}##M(Rω)2. Under what condition is this true? Is this condition met once the cylinder leaves the table?
 
  • #11
TSny said:
I don't think that's the crucial point. In the solution, they use KE = ##\frac{3}{4}## M(Rω)2. Under what condition is this true? Is this condition met once the cylinder leaves the table?
That can only be achieved if they assume the ball is rolling without slipping which implies v=rw. Would it be that it is no longer true because the bottom of the ball is no longer not moving with respect to the ground?
 
  • #12
d
Coderhk said:
That can only be achieved if they assume the ball is rolling without slipping which implies v=rw.
Yes.
Would it be that it is no longer true because the bottom of the ball is no longer not moving with respect to the ground?
I think you have it. Once the cylinder leaves the table it is no longer rolling without slipping. v increases while ω remains constant. So, as you say, v ≠ Rω after the cylinder leaves the table.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Coderhk
  • #13
TSny said:
d Yes. I think you have it. Once the cylinder leaves the table it is no longer rolling without slipping. v increases while ω remains constant. So, as you say, v ≠ Rω after the cylinder leaves the table.
I see, thankyou very much. I get it now.
 
  • #14
OK. Good work.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
817
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K