Is the angular acceleration of a rolling object constant?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relationship between torque, angular acceleration, and angular velocity in rolling objects. It highlights that while torque from friction causes angular acceleration, the behavior of angular velocity during descent raises questions. Specifically, the participant wonders how angular velocity can decrease upon contact with the ground despite the absence of opposing torque. The conversation clarifies that angular velocity and angular acceleration can vary across different particles of the rigid body. Ultimately, the complexities of rolling motion reveal that both angular and linear speeds are not uniform throughout the object's motion.
applestrudle
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
I understand that the torque caused by the friction must cause an angular acceleration, and it makes sense that the angular velocity increases from the bottom to the top so if there was a particle on the rim, as it went upwards it's speed would increase but what happens when it comes down again?

My intuition tells me it would slow down and reach zero at the bottom (when it comes into contact with the floor) but I don't see how that can happen given the direction of the torque? There doesn't seem to be any torque which should cause the angular acceleration to decrease again.

Does that mean the angular velocity keeps increasing until it reaches the bottom where it suddenly decreases? But what torque is causing that?

:confused:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The angular velocity and angular acceleration of a rotating rigid body are same for every particle on the body .They may be variable in nature i.e may change with time .

The linear speed and the tangential acceleration of different particles may be different for different particles .
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top