B Minimum Velocity Required for Loop-The-Loop Problem

  • B
  • Thread starter Thread starter JackFyre
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on determining the minimum velocity required for a particle to successfully complete a loop-the-loop without falling. It establishes that at the top of the loop, the particle must have a velocity greater than zero to maintain contact with the track, implying that the minimum velocity should be slightly more than 2√gr. If the particle only reaches this velocity, it will have zero kinetic energy at the top and lose contact, following a parabolic trajectory instead. The conversation highlights the importance of maintaining a non-zero normal force to ensure the particle remains on the track throughout the loop. Overall, achieving a minimum velocity above this threshold is crucial for successful completion of the loop.
JackFyre
Messages
15
Reaction score
7
A question regarding the minimum velocity required by a particle to 'do a loop' without falling-

Assuming the particle has a velocity v before reaching the loop. Then-
KE = mv²/2, at the bottom of the loop.

potential energy at the top-most point of the loop= 2mgr (2r = h)
then, by the law of conservation of energy, mv²/2 = 2mgr, and we get v = 2√gr
in this case, the particle will have zero kinetic energy at the the top of the loop, an will fall, as it has 0 velocity. However, if the initial velocity were slightly higher, say v+Δv, then the particle will have some velocity a the top of the loop.

By this logic, should not the minimum velocity for a particle to safely complete a loop be just a little more than 2√gr ?
unnamed.jpg
 
Physics news on Phys.org
In order for the particle to complete the loop, the normal force from the track onto the particle must be nonzero.

Do you see what that implies for the minimum velocity ( and hence kinetic energy ) the particle must have at the top of the loop?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes Lnewqban and JackFyre
JackFyre said:
. . . by the law of conservation of energy, mv²/2 = 2mgr, and we get v = 2√gr
in this case, the particle will have zero kinetic energy at the the top of the loop, an will fall, as it has 0 velocity.
The particle will lose contact with the track before it reaches the top. When that happens, it will describe a parabolic trajectory inside the loop and land on the opposite side of the track. The kinetic energy will never go to zero. Reaching zero KE could be the case if one had a bead on a ring that is constrained to stay on the circle and the normal force is allowed to change direction from radially in to radially out.
 
Last edited:
kuruman said:
The particle will lose contact with the track before it reaches the top. When that happens, it will describe a parabolic trajectory inside the loop and land on the opposite side of the track. The kinetic energy will never go to zero. Reaching zero KE could be the case if one had a bead on a ring that is constrained to stay on the circle and the normal force is allowed to change direction from radially in to radially out.
Thanks, that clears it up!
 
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. I am in no way trolling. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. Yes, I'm questioning the most elementary physics question we're given in this world. The classic elevator in motion question: A person is standing on a scale in an elevator that is in constant motion...
Thread ''splain this hydrostatic paradox in tiny words'
This is (ostensibly) not a trick shot or video*. The scale was balanced before any blue water was added. 550mL of blue water was added to the left side. only 60mL of water needed to be added to the right side to re-balance the scale. Apparently, the scale will balance when the height of the two columns is equal. The left side of the scale only feels the weight of the column above the lower "tail" of the funnel (i.e. 60mL). So where does the weight of the remaining (550-60=) 490mL go...
Let us take the Ampere-Maxwell law $$\nabla \times \mathbf{B} = \mu_0\,\mathbf{J}+\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \mathbf{E}}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ Assume we produce a spark that is so fast that the ##\partial \mathbf{E}/\partial t## term in eqn.##(1)## has not yet been produced by Faraday’s law of induction $$\nabla \times \mathbf{E}=-\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ since the current density ##\mathbf{J}## has not yet had time to generate the magnetic field ##\mathbf{B}##. By...
Back
Top