Geometry Help: Solving Lagrangian Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Xyius
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Geometry
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving a geometry-related issue within a Lagrangian mechanics context, specifically regarding the relations for x and y in a problem involving a cube rolling on a sphere. The user expresses confusion about deriving the formula for y, which includes terms like (r+b)cos(θ) and rθsin(θ). Clarifications are made about the assumptions regarding the cube's initial position and the implications of rolling without slipping. Ultimately, the user gains understanding and thanks the contributors for their help. The conversation highlights the importance of clear assumptions in geometric problems related to physics.
Xyius
Messages
501
Reaction score
4
This is a Lagrangian problem, I am posting it here in introductory physics because what I need help with isn't in Lagrangian mechanics, but rather geometry.

http://img97.imageshack.us/img97/7504/what3.png

I am confused as how they got those relations for x and y. I have tried to make sense out of it but cannot figure it out. I am sure it is something really simple!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's start with y. You can probably understand where the (r+b)cos(θ) comes from I hope. Now imagine that you roll the cube around the sphere by an angle θ. The length of the line CB is then what? That's right! It's rθ. So obviously this adds a height rθsin(θ). Now you have

y = (r+b)cos(θ) + rθsin(θ)
 
Hm. I agree with Xyius; I don't think that, as stated, the formula necessarily holds. Consider a much smaller cube in the same place, at the same angle.

The unstated assumption is that the cube was originally placed square and centered on top of the cylinder and rolled to its current location, but that hasn't been specified.
 
Joffan said:
Hm. I agree with Xyius; I don't think that, as stated, the formula necessarily holds. Consider a much smaller cube in the same place, at the same angle.

A much smaller cube would not be able to get to as large of an angle, because the cube must roll without slipping. The formula is valid.
 
Ah! I understand now! Thank you very much :]
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...

Similar threads

Back
Top