Inertia of two masses m2 connected to a rod.

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the moment of inertia for a system consisting of a rod and two spherical masses attached to its ends. Participants explore the application of the parallel axis theorem and clarify the assumptions regarding the placement of the masses relative to the rod's center. The context is a physics lab preparation, with participants seeking to understand the underlying concepts and calculations involved.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion about calculating the moment of inertia and seeks help due to time constraints.
  • Another participant clarifies that the moment of inertia of the spheres should be calculated about their centers and then adjusted using the parallel axis theorem.
  • There is a discussion about how the moment of inertia of the rod and the spheres should be combined, with references to the parallel axis theorem.
  • Participants debate whether the distance used in calculations should include the radius of the spheres or just the distance from the center of the rod to the center of the spheres.
  • One participant suggests that the spheres may need to be considered as being connected to the rod in a specific manner to arrive at the expected answer.
  • Another participant confirms the interpretation of the parallel axis theorem and its application to the problem.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the application of the parallel axis theorem but have differing views on the exact placement of the spheres and how that affects the calculations. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the specifics of the configuration and its implications for the moment of inertia.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about the configuration of the spheres and their distance from the rod's center, which are not fully clarified. The absence of a diagram adds to the ambiguity in understanding the setup.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students preparing for physics labs, particularly those dealing with rotational dynamics and the moment of inertia in systems involving multiple components.

cooev769
Messages
114
Reaction score
0
I have never dealt with moment of inertia before, this is a physics lab i need to do some pre planning for which involves topics we have never covered and are expected to learn. I've been busy working two jobs and am struggling to get time to pick up this before my lab tomorrow so some help would be extremely helpful.

We have a rod with length 2d, spinning at its centre. With 2 masses on either side of mass m2, the masses are spherical with radius r. What is the moment of inertia?

The answers is:

I=2 m_2 (d^2 + \frac{2}{5} r2)

By my logic the moment of inertia is the sum of each component, we have two masses m2 and their centre of gravity is d+r away from the centre hence each sphere will contribute, based on the inertia of a sphere:

I_(spheres) =2 \frac{2}{5} m_2 (r + d)^2

And then add the component of the rod, which I believe is ignored as we don't have any value for the mass of the rod. Obviously my assumption is wrong as it isn't the same as the answer. Any tips would be choice. Cheers.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
By the way I should emphasise that the first equation is not 4m(etc), it's 2 m2, meaning mass 2. Just thought i'd clarify just in case don't know how to subscript.
 
The spheres have radius r, not r + d. You'll take the moment of inertia of each sphere about its center (which you know) and then compute its moment of inertia about the center of the rod using the parallel axis theorem: Parallel Axis Theorem
 
So how come the rods contribute moment of inertia about themselves and around the centre too? that seems slightly confusing.
 
Ah i see because the axis running through the sphere is parallel to the axis running through the centre of the rod, the parallel axis theorem says that the I through the rod will be equal to the moment of inertia through the axis through the sphere plus the mass multiplied by the distance between the two parallel axis? Is this interpretation correct? So I get.

I_t = I_c + m_2 (d+r)^2

Where I_c is moment of inertia with the axis through the centre of the sphere. Is this correct, i used d+r squared because the distance between the two axis would be d+r?
 
Last edited:
cooev769 said:
Ah i see because the axis running through the sphere is parallel to the axis running through the centre of the rod, the parallel axis theorem says that the I through the rod will be equal to the moment of inertia through the axis through the sphere plus the mass multiplied by the distance between the two parallel axis? Is this interpretation correct?
Multiplied by the distance squared, I think you mean.

So I get.

I_t = I_c + m_2 (d+r)^2

Where I_c is moment of inertia with the axis through the centre of the sphere. Is this correct, i used d+r squared because the distance between the two axis would be d+r?
Is the distance from the center of the sphere to the axis of rotation r+d or d? If the spheres are just tacked on to the ends of the 2d rod, then you are correct.
 
Okay so to get the answer they arrive at I must therefore assume that somehow the spheres are not just glued on a distance d from the centre but the centre of the spheres are connected to the rod with a hole or something and that the centres of The spheres are actually d away from the central axis?
 
cooev769 said:
Okay so to get the answer they arrive at I must therefore assume that somehow the spheres are not just glued on a distance d from the centre but the centre of the spheres are connected to the rod with a hole or something and that the centres of The spheres are actually d away from the central axis?
Yes, exactly. (Did they provide a diagram?)
 
Nope. Yeah I guess at poorly worded to question. But pretty trivial now I know the theory. Thanks so much.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 69 ·
3
Replies
69
Views
6K
  • · Replies 138 ·
5
Replies
138
Views
9K