Mass dropped onto rotating disk

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the dynamics of a mass dropped onto a rotating disk with a radial vane. Participants explore the direction in which the mass travels when it is spun off the disk and the optimal shape of the vane for maximizing tangential motion while minimizing radial motion. The conversation includes theoretical considerations and mathematical modeling related to the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants propose that the mass will have both radial and tangential velocity components when it is spun off the disk.
  • There is a suggestion that a curved groove in the vane could minimize the radial velocity component of the mass as it exits the disk.
  • One participant emphasizes that a frictionless surface can only exert forces perpendicular to the surface, affecting the direction of the mass's exit.
  • Another participant introduces conservation of energy arguments and mentions the centrifugal potential in a rotating frame.
  • A mathematical approach using Lagrange multipliers is presented, detailing the kinetic energy in polar coordinates and the resulting equations of motion.
  • There is a discussion about the potential for a curved spiral vane to capture and redirect the mass, though concerns are raised about the assumptions regarding material properties.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the direction of the mass's exit and the optimal shape of the vane. The discussion remains unresolved, with multiple competing ideas and no consensus reached on the best approach or solution.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of clearly stating assumptions, as the validity of the problem may depend on these conditions. There are unresolved aspects regarding the stiffness and elastic properties of materials involved in the system.

Jazzjohn
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
TL;DR
How would a mass fly off a rotating disk/vane system?
Picture a flat disk of radius r with a radial vane. The disk is rotating at angular velocity w. Assume the vane is straight, starts at the center and ends at the perimeter of the disk.
A very small round mass ( of m grams) is dropped onto the disk very near the center. The vane contacts it and pushes it. The mass slides along the vane and travels toward the disk rim.
Assume no friction along the vane and disk surfaces.
At the end of the vane (at the edge of the disk), the mass is spun off the disk.

1. What direction does it travel off the disk? Intuition tells me there will be a radial force component in addition to the tangential force component.

2. If the vane is not restricted to a straight line, what shape will increase the tangential direction while reducing the radial direction? Is there a theoretical optimal shape for a given mass size?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Jazzjohn said:
1. What direction does it travel off the disk? Intuition tells me there will be a radial force component in addition to the tangential force component.
There are both radial and tangential velocity components relative to the fixed surface below the disk.
Jazzjohn said:
2. If the vane is not restricted to a straight line, what shape will increase the tangential direction while reducing the radial direction? Is there a theoretical optimal shape for a given mass size?
If the groove curves towards the edge, then the mass may come out with minimal radial velocity component.
 
Jazzjohn said:
Summary: How would a mass fly off a rotating disk/vane system?

Intuition tells me there will be a radial force component in addition to the tangential force component.
Your intuition needs to be tempered by logic. All contacts are assumed frictionless. A frictionless surface can only a force perpendicular and away from it. The vane extends along a radius and can only exert a force tangent perpendicular to the radius. The disk is horizontal and can only exert a force "up", perpendicular to the radius.
 
Last edited:
Conservation of energy arguments work, even when made using the rotating frame. There is a centrifugal potential associated with a uniformly rotating frame.
 
Jazzjohn said:
Summary: How would a mass fly off a rotating disk/vane system?

1. What direction does it travel off the disk? Intuition tells me there will be a radial force component in addition to the tangential force component.
I would do this problem using the Lagrange multiplier approach. The KE in polar coordinates is: ##T = \frac{1}{2}m \dot r^2+\frac{1}{2}m r^2 \dot \theta^2##, and this problem has no potential so ##V=0##. Then the rotating vane can be represented by the constraint ##\theta=\omega t##. This gives us the constrained Lagrangian $$L=\frac{1}{2}m \dot r^2+\frac{1}{2}m r^2 \dot \theta^2+\lambda(\theta-\omega t)$$

The Euler Lagrange equations then give us $$ m(r \dot \theta^2-\ddot r)=0$$ $$\lambda-mr(2\dot r \dot \theta+r \ddot \theta)=0$$ $$ -t \omega + \theta=0$$ which, assuming ##r(0)=r_0## and ##\dot r(0)=0## we can solve to obtain $$r(t)=r_0 \cosh(\omega t)$$

Jazzjohn said:
Summary: How would a mass fly off a rotating disk/vane system?

2. If the vane is not restricted to a straight line, what shape will increase the tangential direction while reducing the radial direction? Is there a theoretical optimal shape for a given mass size?
You could do this by changing the constraint equation, but I will leave that as an exercise for the interested reader
 
@Jazzjohn You ought to make some attempt next time when posting a problem.

To improve reaction acceleration times & direction backwards in the axial direction rather than radial and tangential, one needs to capture the particle mass in a curved spiral that rotates the axis and captures the mass by spinning fast enough to have the rotational duration between vanes less than the mass linear velocity so as not to miss it.

But we think that the spiral will allow the mass to slide, scoop and redirect , we would be making an invalid assumption on the stiffness and elastic properties of both materials combined. Until all assumptions are stated, the question is actually invalid. (remember this in future as it can lead to false positive conclusions)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 67 ·
3
Replies
67
Views
5K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 28 ·
Replies
28
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K