A Mass dropped onto rotating disk

AI Thread Summary
A mass dropped onto a rotating disk with a radial vane will be influenced by both radial and tangential forces as it slides along the vane. The mass will travel off the disk at an angle due to these force components, but the exact direction depends on the dynamics of the system. If the vane is curved, it can potentially minimize the radial velocity component while maximizing the tangential component, suggesting an optimal shape for the vane could exist. The discussion emphasizes the importance of frictionless conditions, which dictate that forces act perpendicular to the surfaces involved. Overall, the interaction of the mass with the vane and disk is complex and requires careful consideration of physical principles to accurately predict the mass's trajectory.
Jazzjohn
Messages
1
Reaction score
2
TL;DR Summary
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)
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...

Similar threads

Back
Top