How Long Will It Take for the Entire Chain to Slide Off the Table?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Satvik Pandey
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Chain Table
Click For Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the time it takes for a chain, initially one-third hanging off a table, to slide off completely. Participants explore using conservation of energy and momentum, debating the correct approach to account for the chain's motion and potential energy. There are concerns about the problem's clarity, particularly regarding whether the entire chain moves or just a part of it. The conversation highlights the complexities of modeling the chain's descent, including potential energy changes and the implications of horizontal motion. Ultimately, the participants aim to derive a correct integral to solve for the time taken for the chain to fall off the table.
  • #31
voko said:
Hmm, indeed. I am not sure why that seemed incorrect to me initially.
Are limits which I have mentioned in #post24 correct?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
haruspex said:
One should certainly not assume conservation of energy without some justification. If you think about how the process would operate in detail (for the bunched chain), you run into some interesting issues.

Clearly the simple picture of the chain just falling down (or moving horizontally and then vertically) is much too simplified. However, it seems to me that any more complex model will just make this sort of problem unsuitable for beginners. So I guess one has to ignore the discrepancies with the reality.

Your point about a different answer when using momentum is well-taken. I hope Satvik will try that.
 
  • Like
Likes Satvik Pandey
  • #33
Satvik Pandey said:
Are limits which I have mentioned in #post24 correct?

Yes, they seem correct to me.
 
  • #34
voko said:
Yes, they seem correct to me.

So ##t=\frac { 1 }{ \sqrt { g } } { \log { \left| x+\sqrt { { x }^{ 2 }-\frac { 1 }{ 9 } } \right| } }_{ 1/3 }^{ 1 }##

##=\frac { 1 }{ \sqrt { g } } \left\{ \log { \left| 1+\sqrt { 1-\frac { 1 }{ 9 } } \right| } -\log { \left| \frac { 1 }{ 3 } +\sqrt { \frac { 1 }{ 9 } -\frac { 1 }{ 9 } } \right| } \right\} ##

##\frac { 1 }{ \sqrt { g } } \left\{ \log { \left| 1+\sqrt { \frac { 8 }{ 9 } } \right| } -\log { \left| \frac { 1 }{ 3 } +0 \right| } \right\} ##

##\frac { 1 }{ \sqrt { g } } \left\{ \log { \left| \frac { 3+2\sqrt { 2 } }{ 3 } \right| } -\log { \left| \frac { 1 }{ 3 } \right| } \right\} ##

##\frac { 1 }{ \sqrt { g } } \left\{ \log { \left| 1.94 \right| } -\log { \left| 0.33 \right| } \right\} ##

##\frac { 1 }{ \sqrt { g } } \left\{ 0.28-(-0.48) \right\} ##

##t=\frac { 1 }{ \sqrt { 9.8 } } \left\{ 0.76 \right\} =0.243sec##
Is this correct?
Is't it too small?
 
  • #35
While your current line of thought will lead you to the correct expression in the end, let me just mention an alternative approach. You have:
Satvik Pandey said:
##\frac { m{ v }^{ 2 } }{ 2 } =\frac { m{ x }^{ 2 }g }{ 2 } -\frac { mg }{ 18 }##
where ##v = \dot x##. You could differentiate this relation with respect to ##t## and end up with a differential equation that is fairly straight forward to solve instead of having to deal with the rather messy integration which will require substituition, looking in tables, or recognition.
 
  • Like
Likes Satvik Pandey
  • #36
Do you understand that ##\log## in your formulae means "natural logarithm"?
 
  • #37
voko said:
Do you understand that ##\log## in your formulae means "natural logarithm"?
No I took common logarithm.
Should the answer be ## 2.303 (0.243)=0.566##?
 
  • #38
Yes, I get a number close to this.

However, as discussed above, you may want to use a non-energetic method to solve this.
 
  • Like
Likes Satvik Pandey
  • #39
Orodruin said:
While your current line of thought will lead you to the correct expression in the end, let me just mention an alternative approach. You have:

where ##v = \dot x##. You could differentiate this relation with respect to ##t## and end up with a differential equation that is fairly straight forward to solve instead of having to deal with the rather messy integration which will require substituition, looking in tables, or recognition.
Do you want me to differentiate ##v = \dot x## wrt t.
##a=\frac { { d }^{ 2 }x }{ d{ t }^{ 2 } } ##
 
  • #40
Satvik Pandey said:
Do you want me to differentiate ##v = \dot x## wrt t.
##a=\frac { { d }^{ 2 }x }{ d{ t }^{ 2 } } ##

The suggestion was to differentiate the part of your post that I quoted. You should obtain a second order linear homogeneous ODE for x.
 
  • #41
voko said:
Yes, I get a number close to this.

However, as discussed above, you may want to use a non-energetic method to solve this.
The bunched chain assumption with the momentum approach gives me ##t = \int_{x=x_0}\left[\frac{2g}{3}\left(x-\frac{{x_0}^3}{x^2}\right)\right]^{-\frac 12}.dx##, where x is the hanging length at time t.
 
  • #42
haruspex said:
The bunched chain assumption with the momentum approach gives me ##t = \int_{x=x_0}\left[\frac{2g}{3}\left(x-\frac{{x_0}^3}{x^2}\right)\right]^{-\frac 12}.dx##, where x is the hanging length at time t.

I also get this. Evaluated with the initial conditions given, this results in 0.44 seconds.
 
  • #43
voko said:
I also get this. Evaluated with the initial conditions given, this results in 0.44 seconds.

In problem the chain was lying straight on the table.Suppose if the chain was heaped on the table such that only the part of chain which is hanging from the table travels with velocity "v",then I think that I should not use equation in #post5 to find the time.(as haruspex suggested)
How can I use conservation of momentum here?
 
  • #44
Satvik Pandey said:
In problem the chain was lying straight on the table.Suppose if the chain was heaped on the table such that only the part of chain which is hanging from the table travels with velocity "v",then I think that I should not use equation in #post5 to find the time.(as haruspex suggested)
How can I use conservation of momentum here?
Suppose there's length x hanging at time t. In time dt, what force acts to accelerate the system? What momentum does it impart? What is the change in momentum of the chain?

You say that in the actual problem, the chain starts straight and taut on the table. In that cas, the technical difficulty is that the chain wil not fall straight down but describe an arc. Search net for 'chain fountain effect'. To make the problem work, it needs to specify some kind of smooth guide to deflect the chain down as it leaves the table. Some formulations have the chain falling through a hole in the table, though I'm not sure that completely resolves it.
 
  • #45
haruspex said:
Suppose there's length x hanging at time t. In time dt, what force acts to accelerate the system? What momentum does it impart? What is the change in momentum of the chain?
The force which acts on the chain is ## Mxg/L##
As ##\triangle p/ \triangle t=F##

So ## \triangle p=\frac { Mxg }{ L } dt\quad ##
 
  • #46
And what is ##\Delta p##?
 
  • #47
voko said:
And what is ##\Delta p##?
Change in momentum.
 
  • #48
Satvik Pandey said:
Change in momentum.

Very nice. Now you just need to express it via the known variables.
 
  • #49
voko said:
Very nice. Now you just need to express it via the known variables.
Δp=mv-mu(final momentum-initial momentum)
I am confused.In time interval 'dt' the length of chain hanging below will be increased by 'dl'.Hence it's mass of chain below the table is also increased.Should I assume this change in mass negligible?
Also in 'dt' velocity will also increase by some amount.Should I assume this change in velocity negligible?
Should I use conservation of energy to find ##v(x)##?
 
  • #50
Satvik Pandey said:
Δp=mv-mu(final momentum-initial momentum)

Yes.

I am confused.In time interval 'dt' the length of chain hanging below will be increased by 'dl'.Hence it's mass of chain below the table is also increased.Should I assume this change in mass negligible?

No.

Also in 'dt' velocity will also increase by some amount.Should I assume this change in velocity negligible?

No.

Should I use conservation of energy to find ##v(x)##?

No.
 
  • Like
Likes Satvik Pandey
  • #51
voko said:
Yes.
No.
No.
No.
I can find change in mass due to the increase in the length of chain below the table.
##M(x)=\frac { M }{ L } x##
after time interval 'dt' length of chain will be increased by 'dx'
##M(x+dx)=\frac { M }{ L } (x+dx)##
Is this right?
How should I find ##v(x)##?
 
  • #52
Satvik Pandey said:
How should I find ##v(x)##?

How fast is the chain moving if in time ##dt## the length below the table increases by ##dx##?

Edit: Do note that (as suggested by the form of the solution in post #41) the resulting differential equation is going to be quite nasty.
 
  • #53
Orodruin said:
How fast is the chain moving if in time ##dt## the length below the table increases by ##dx##?
##dx/dt##
 
  • #54
Yes, so how can you express the momentum ##p##?
 
  • #55
Orodruin said:
Yes, so how can you express the momentum ##p##?
##p=mv## or ##p=m dx/dt##
But here mass is also changing with time.So is it correct to express momentum like this.
 
  • #56
Yes, the assumption is that the chain below the table is moving with the same velocity and that the part still on top is not moving. So ##m## in this case is the mass of the chain below the table. What do you get if you write this out as a function of ##x##? What is the resulting differential equation?
 
  • #57
Orodruin said:
Yes, the assumption is that the chain below the table is moving with the same velocity and that the part still on top is not moving. So ##m## in this case is the mass of the chain below the table. What do you get if you write this out as a function of ##x##? What is the resulting differential equation?
##m(x)=Mx/L##
putting this value I got
##\frac { m }{ l } x\frac { dx }{ dt } ##
Is it right?
 
Last edited:
  • #58
Both the mass and the velocity change. What is the derivative of the momentum then?
 
  • #59
voko said:
Both the mass and the velocity change. What is the derivative of the momentum then?
By product rule
##\frac { d(mv) }{ dt } =m\frac { dv }{ dt } +v\frac { dm }{ dt } ##
 
  • #60
So, inserting this and the force into Newton's second law ##dp/dt = F## gives you what?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 100 ·
4
Replies
100
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
351
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
3K