B How to find the Moment of Inertia for a Sphero robot?

AI Thread Summary
To determine the moment of inertia of a sphero, it should roll without slipping down an incline from rest, reporting its speed at the bottom. The experiment relies on energy conservation, where the potential energy lost during the drop is converted into translational and rotational kinetic energy. The moment of inertia can be expressed as I_cm = qmR^2, allowing for the calculation of q using the formula q = (2gh/V_cm^2) - 1, where h is the height of the drop and V_cm is the speed at the bottom. It's crucial to ensure there is no slipping during the experiment, as this affects the results. The discussion also raises questions about the robot's rotation and its impact on the moment of inertia measurement.
GopherTv
Messages
7
Reaction score
1
TL;DR Summary
A Sphero is a programable robot that has a Moment of inertia somewhere between 2/3MR^2 (Thin spherical shell) and 2/5MR^2 (Solid Sphere)
What kind of experiment can I design to determine the actual value of the moment of inertia. What should I instruct the sphero to do and what data should I collect?
 

Attachments

  • 1651112198259.png
    1651112198259.png
    109 KB · Views: 127
Physics news on Phys.org
Get it to roll without slipping down an incline starting from rest and have it report its speed at the bottom of the incline. Energy conservation says that for a vertical drop ##h## the potential energy is converted into kinetic energy of the center of mass and rotational energy about the center of mass,$$mgh=\frac{1}{2}mV_{\text{cm}}^2+\frac{1}{2}I_{\text{cm}}\omega^2.$$As you noted, you can write the moment of inertia about the CoM as ##I_{\text{cm}}=qmR^2## where ##q## is the constant fraction that you want to determine. If this thing rolls without slipping, ##\omega =\dfrac{V_{\text{cm}}}{R}## in which case the energy conservation equation becomes $$mgh=\frac{1}{2}mV_{\text{cm}}^2+\frac{1}{2}(qmR^2)\left( \frac{V_{\text{cm}}}{R}\right)^2.$$After the obvious cancellations you get $$gh=\frac{1}{2}V_{\text{cm}}^2+\frac{1}{2}qV_{\text{cm}}^2\implies q=\frac{2gh}{V_{\text{cm}}^2}-1.$$So all you have to do is measure the vertical height by which it drops and have it tell you how fast it is moving after it drops by that height and plug in. Its mass or radius don't matter with this technique. This is counterintuitive when what you are trying to determine is its moment of inertia but there you have it. Just make sure there is no slipping.
 
kuruman said:
Just make sure there is no slipping.
And that it rolls down without power
 
Last edited:
Ok, this makes sense, i appreciate the help.

Thanks!
 
kuruman said:
Get it to roll without slipping down an incline starting from rest and have it report its speed at the bottom of the incline. Energy conservation says that for a vertical drop ##h## the potential energy is converted into kinetic energy of the center of mass and rotational energy about the center of mass,$$mgh=\frac{1}{2}mV_{\text{cm}}^2+\frac{1}{2}I_{\text{cm}}\omega^2.$$As you noted, you can write the moment of inertia about the CoM as ##I_{\text{cm}}=qmR^2## where ##q## is the constant fraction that you want to determine. If this thing rolls without slipping, ##\omega =\dfrac{V_{\text{cm}}}{R}## in which case the energy conservation equation becomes $$mgh=\frac{1}{2}mV_{\text{cm}}^2+\frac{1}{2}(qmR^2)\left( \frac{V_{\text{cm}}}{R}\right)^2.$$After the obvious cancellations you get $$gh=\frac{1}{2}V_{\text{cm}}^2+\frac{1}{2}qV_{\text{cm}}^2\implies q=\frac{2gh}{V_{\text{cm}}^2}-1.$$So all you have to do is measure the vertical height by which it drops and have it tell you how fast it is moving after it drops by that height and plug in. Its mass or radius don't matter with this technique. This is counterintuitive when what you are trying to determine is its moment of inertia but there you have it. Just make sure there is no slipping.
The CM might not be in the center of the sphere ( its axis of rotation) as it is in a solid sphere or shell with uniform density which I think adds another parameter to finding the MOI, thus making this inconclusive?

Does the robot itself rotate, or does it remain "level" while the shell rotates?

EDIT:
From what I can tell, the shell rotates, the "bot" driving it tries not to. So, if its rolling down a hill ( and it its on ) it is actively applying forces to the shell through it rollers to maintain it orientation. These forces ( and other internal rotating components ) are probably the reason the MOI appears to be between the shell and the solid sphere.
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Gauss' law seems to imply instantaneous electric field'
Imagine a charged sphere at the origin connected through an open switch to a vertical grounded wire. We wish to find an expression for the horizontal component of the electric field at a distance ##\mathbf{r}## from the sphere as it discharges. By using the Lorenz gauge condition: $$\nabla \cdot \mathbf{A} + \frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \phi}{\partial t}=0\tag{1}$$ we find the following retarded solutions to the Maxwell equations If we assume that...
Hello! Let's say I have a cavity resonant at 10 GHz with a Q factor of 1000. Given the Lorentzian shape of the cavity, I can also drive the cavity at, say 100 MHz. Of course the response will be very very weak, but non-zero given that the Loretzian shape never really reaches zero. I am trying to understand how are the magnetic and electric field distributions of the field at 100 MHz relative to the ones at 10 GHz? In particular, if inside the cavity I have some structure, such as 2 plates...

Similar threads

Replies
49
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
948
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
138
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Back
Top