Lagrange equation for block and incline

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

This discussion revolves around the application of the Lagrange equation in the context of a block sliding on an inclined wedge. Participants are exploring the kinetic energy expression of the block and the implications of the wedge's motion on the block's velocity components.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning the origin of a specific term in the kinetic energy expression. There are discussions about the correct representation of velocities in non-orthogonal axes and the implications of the wedge's motion on the block's kinetic energy. Some participants suggest using the cosine rule for vector addition of velocities.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and clarifications regarding the velocities involved. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of the cosine rule for adding velocities, but there is no explicit consensus on the correct approach yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants are navigating the complexities of non-inertial reference frames and the relationships between different components of motion. There is an acknowledgment of potential confusion regarding the representation of velocities and their respective frames of reference.

member 731016
Homework Statement
Please see below
Relevant Equations
Please see below
For this problem,
1714182484636.png

Does someone please know where the term highlighted in blue came from?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ChiralSuperfields said:
Homework Statement: Please see below
Relevant Equations: Please see below

For this problem,
View attachment 344125
Does someone please know where the term highlighted in blue came from?

Thanks!
Write the kinetic energy of the block in the inertial frame. ##\dot y ## is w.r.t. the ( accelerating) wedge.
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016
erobz said:
Write the kinetic energy of the block in the inertial frame. ##\dot y ## is w.r.t. the ( accelerating) wedge.
Thank you for your reply @erobz!

##T = \frac{1m}{2}(\dot x)^2 + \frac{1m}{2}(\dot y)^2##

Is the please correct?

THanks!
 
ChiralSuperfields said:
Thank you for your reply @erobz!

##T = 1/2m\dotx + 1/2m\doty##

Is the please correct?

THanks!
No, it is incorrect (even including if you add the missing squares). Note that the x and y directions of motion for the block are not orthogonal.
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016
ChiralSuperfields said:
Thank you for your reply @erobz!

##T = \frac{1m}{2}(\dot x)^2 + \frac{1m}{2}(\dot y)^2##

Is the please correct?

THanks!
No. The wedge is moving with velocity ##\dot x##, the block is riding on the wedge. ##\dot y## is with respect to the wedge, the wedge is not an inertial frame.
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016
Orodruin said:
No, it is incorrect (even including if you add the missing squares). Note that the x and y directions of motion for the block are not orthogonal.
Thank you for your reply @Orodruin!

Sorry I am confused. I know the axes are not orthongal, put that does not make a difference does it (since the velocity is both along the axes)?

Thanks!
 
ChiralSuperfields said:
Thank you for your reply @Orodruin!

Sorry I am confused. I know the axes are not orthongal, put that does not make a difference does it (since the velocity is both along the axes)?

Thanks!
Pretend you are standing in the ground watching this unfold. What velocity do you measure for the block in the horizontal and vertical directions? Remember ##\dot y ## is being measured with respect to the wedge.
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016
ChiralSuperfields said:
put that does not make a difference does it
It most certainly does. Imagine for example that they were parallel. What would the speed be?
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016 and erobz
ChiralSuperfields said:
Does someone please know where the term highlighted in blue came from?
The drawing is misleading. It shows two arrows labeled ##\dot x##, one on the wedge and another to the right of the sliding block. The first arrow clearly represents the horizontal velocity of the wedge relative to the ground. The second arrow is meant to be the horizontal velocity of the sliding block relative to the ground. It cannot be given the same symbol because it is the horizontal velocity of the sliding block relative to the wedge plus the horizontal velocity of the wedge relative to the ground ##\dot x##. The highlighted term is the cross term that arises when you square the correct expression for the horizontal velocity of the block relative to the ground.
 
  • Love
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DeBangis21 and member 731016
  • #10
erobz said:
Pretend you are standing in the ground watching this unfold. What velocity do you measure for the block in the horizontal and vertical directions? Remember ##\dot y ## is being measured with respect to the wedge.
Orodruin said:
It most certainly does. Imagine for example that they were parallel. What would the speed be?
kuruman said:
The drawing is misleading. It shows two arrows labeled ##\dot x##, one on the wedge and another to the right of the sliding block. The first arrow clearly represents the horizontal velocity of the wedge relative to the ground. The second arrow is meant to be the horizontal velocity of the sliding block relative to the ground. It cannot be given the same symbol because it is the horizontal velocity of the sliding block relative to the wedge plus the horizontal velocity of the wedge relative to the ground ##\dot x##. The highlighted term is the cross term that arises when you square the correct expression for the horizontal velocity of the block relative to the ground.
Thank you for your replies @erobz , @Orodruin and @kuruman!


I had another think about this and since the time derivative vectors of x and y, they form a non-right angle triangle, so I must use the cosine rule I think to find the correct magnitude of the velocity where I think the extra term comes from. Thanks!
 
  • #11
ChiralSuperfields said:
Thank you for your replies @erobz , @Orodruin and @kuruman!


I had another think about this and since the time derivative vectors of x and y, they form a non-right angle triangle, so I must use the cosine rule I think to find the correct magnitude of the velocity where I think the extra term comes from. Thanks!
I doesn’t sound to me like you understand the crux of the problem yet.

Let’s start with the straightforward part. What is the vertical component of the blocks velocity in the ground frame?
 
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016
  • #12
erobz said:
I doesn’t sound to me like you understand the crux of the problem yet.

Let’s start with the straightforward part. What is the vertical component of the blocks velocity in the ground frame?
The cosine rule is perfectly fine to use for addition of velocities here.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016 and erobz
  • #13
To add to what @Orodruin just said (and since I’d already done a diagram!), vector-addition of the 2 velocities using the cosine rule is a simple approach:
block and wedge.gif

Remembering that ##\cos(\alpha) = -\cos(180^o - \alpha)##.
 
  • Like
  • Love
Likes   Reactions: member 731016, Orodruin and erobz
  • #14
Orodruin said:
The cosine rule is perfectly fine to use for addition of velocities here.
Ok, I wasn’t familiar with it by name.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 27 ·
Replies
27
Views
10K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
934
Replies
13
Views
3K