Minimum Acceleration for Ball to Reach Top of Vertical Ring

  • Thread starter Thread starter PipelineDream
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ball
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a small ball moving on the inner surface of a vertical ring with a radius R. The ball reaches a maximum height of R/2, and the question is about determining the minimum vertical acceleration required for the ball to reach the top of the ring.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to apply the conservation of energy principle to relate kinetic and potential energy at different heights. Some participants suggest considering centripetal acceleration and question the assumptions made regarding energy conservation when the system is accelerating.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring different interpretations of the problem, particularly the implications of the system's acceleration on the ball's motion. There is an acknowledgment of the need to consider additional forces and conditions that affect the ball's ability to reach the top of the ring.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the ball's energy being sufficient to oscillate back and forth to a height of R/2 when stationary, raising questions about the effects of the upward acceleration on the ball's trajectory and energy conservation.

PipelineDream
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Small ball moves on the inner surface of the vertical ring with radius R. Moving ball reaches maximum height equal to R/2. What minimum acceleration (in vertical direction) is required (to the system of ring and ball) to make the ball reach the top of the ring?


Homework Equations


All are provided in my solution... there might be another solving methods I haven't tried


The Attempt at a Solution


I've tried to apply energy conservation law in this situation: ball has kinetic energy Ek=m(v^2)/2 in the bottom of the ring. All kinetic energy is converted to potential energy when ball reaches the top position (height equal to R/2). I wrote down energy conservation law: m(v^2)/2=mg(R/2) ---> v^2=gR; When we give vertical acceleration a to the system, acting force is equal to m(g-a), not mg. Value of a must satisfy the condition that ball reaches top of the ring (height 2R). Then I've written down again: m(v^2)/2=2m(g-a)R ---> v^2=4(g-a)R ---> gR=4(g-a)R---> a = 3g/4; However, correct answer provided in my textbook is a=4g/5. I can't understand what's wrong with my solution... I would be very thankful for your help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hi PipelineDream! Welcome to PF! :smile:

It's just a sneakier version of those rollercoaster problems …

you haven't taken into account the fact that if the ball only has enough energy to approach the top at zero speed, it will have fallen into the middle long before it gets there! :rolleyes:

Use centripetal acceleration ! :wink:
 


tiny-tim said:
Hi PipelineDream! Welcome to PF! :smile:

It's just a sneakier version of those rollercoaster problems …

Not exactly. I mean, you don't typically take an entire roller coaster and its track and put it in a gigantic elevator that accelerates upwards at acceleration "a," do you? This is what the problem is saying. If there is enough energy in the system for the ball to oscillate back and forth in the loop up to height R/2 on each side when the whole system is stationary in the Earth's reference frame, then what happens if you put the track + ball in a reference frame that is accelerating upwards? I have to admit that right now I'm not sure.


tiny-tim said:
you haven't taken into account the fact that if the ball only has enough energy to approach the top at zero speed, it will have fallen into the middle long before it gets there! :rolleyes:

I'm dubious. Can you explain why this is true and what is wrong with the conservation of energy argument in that instance?
 
Hi cepheid! :smile:
cepheid said:
I'm dubious. Can you explain why this is true and what is wrong with the conservation of energy argument in that instance?

'cos …

i] the reaction force will be zero well before the top, and

ii] it gives the right answer! :biggrin:
 
Hey, I see centripetal acceleration works very well :wink: Thanks very much for your advises, they really helped me!
 

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 29 ·
Replies
29
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
7
Views
3K