Magnetic field on current loop, involves rotational energy

AI Thread Summary
A rectangular current loop pivots about a fixed axis in a uniform magnetic field, with initial conditions including a current of 3.2 A and an angle of 35° to the x-z plane. The discussion focuses on calculating the loop's angular velocity at 0° using energy conservation principles, equating initial potential energy to final kinetic energy. A mistake was identified regarding the signs in the potential energy equation, leading to confusion in calculations. The correct potential energy expression includes a negative sign, which resolves the issue of obtaining a negative value under the square root. The final consensus confirms that the correct approach to the problem involves adjusting the signs in the potential energy equation.
cdingdong
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A rectangular loop of sides a = 0.3 cm and b = 0.8 cm pivots without friction about a fixed axis (z-axis) that coincides with its left end (see figure). The net current in the loop is I = 3.2 A. A spatially uniform magnetic field with B = 0.005 T points in the +y-direction. The loop initially makes an angle q = 35° with respect to the x-z plane.
https://tycho-s.phys.washington.edu/cgi/courses/shell/common/showme.pl?courses/phys122/autumn08/homework/09/rectangular_loop_MFR/p8.gif

The moment of inertia of the loop about its axis of rotation (left end) is J = 2.9 × 10-6 kg m2. If the loop is released from rest at q = 35°, calculate its angular velocity \omega at q = 0°.

Homework Equations



this is kinetic energy:
KE = 1/2I\omega^{2} but moment of inertia is specified to be J, so

KE = 1/2J\omega^{2}

this is potential energy for a loop with current and magnetic field acting on it:
PE = \muBcos\theta
moment vector \mu = NIA where N = number of loops, I = current, A = area, B = magnetic field

so, PE = NIABcos\theta


The Attempt at a Solution



I recognize that the angular kinetic energy equation can be used to find the angular velocity. KE = 1/2J\omega^{2}.
Final kinetic energy = initial potential energy. Initial potential energy = NIABcos\theta. so, we could say

1/2J\omega^{2} = NIABcos\theta

the right side is potential energy. that equals

N = 1 turn; I = 3.2 Amps; A = 0.003*0.008 = 2.5e-5 meters; B = 0.005 Teslas; \theta = 35 degrees

(1)(3.2)(2.5e-5)(0.005)cos(35) = 3.276608177 * 10^-7 Joules. we'll call this 3.2766e-7
so, now we have

1/2J\omega^{2} = 3.2766e-7

J = 2.9 × 10-6 kilogram meters squared. we'll call this 2.9e-6

1/2(2.9e-6)\omega^{2} = 3.2766e-7

\omega = \sqrt{(2*3.2766e-7)/2.9e-6} = 4.753655581 * 10^-1

BUT, the answer happens to be what I did except that they did not take the square root at the end.
so, they got 2.259724138 * 10^-1.

did i do something wrong? what i did makes sense in my mind. is their answer wrong? why did they not not take a square root at the end? is kinetic energy not = 1/2J\omega^{2}, but instead 1/2J\omega without the square?

i thank everybody in advance!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
cdingdong said:

The Attempt at a Solution



I recognize that the angular kinetic energy equation can be used to find the angular velocity. KE = 1/2J\omega^{2}.
Final kinetic energy = initial potential energy. Initial potential energy = NIABcos\theta. so, we could say

1/2J\omega^{2} = NIABcos\theta
What's the final potential energy, when θ = 0?
 
wow, now that you bring it up, i realize my mistake. you're right! i forgot the final potential energy. so, the answer works, but there is something that bothers me.

Ki + Ui = Kf + Uf

there is no initial kinetic energy because it came from rest, so that is zero

Ui = Kf + Uf

rearranging it,

Ui - Uf = Kf

NIABcos35 - NIABcos0 = 1/2J\omega^{2}

NIAB(cos35 - cos0) = 1/2J\omega^{2}

(1)(3.2)(2.5e-5)(0.005)(cos35 - cos0) = 1/2(2.9e-5)\omega^{2}

-7.233918228 = 1/2(2.9e-5)\omega^{2}

when i find the potential energy, initial PE - final PE, i get a negative number. so, when i set it equal to 1/2J\omega^{2}, i get a square root of a negative number, which is not possible. if i take the square root of the absolute value of that number, the answer is correct. is there something wrong with my signs?
 
cdingdong said:
is there something wrong with my signs?
Yes, your signs are messed up. The correct expression for PE is PE = -IABcosθ (note the minus sign).

So Ui - Uf = (-IABcos35) - (-IABcos0) = IAB(cos0 - cos35).
 
ahhhh, i see. well, that will solve my problem. thanks Doc Al!
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Back
Top