Moment of Inertia: Car vs Sphere

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the moment of inertia for a car and a sphere to understand their motion dynamics. The equations presented show that the ball has a smaller coefficient, suggesting it should reach the bottom of a slope faster than the car. However, participants clarify that the car's mass significantly influences its motion, as the majority of its kinetic energy is directed into linear motion rather than rotational motion of the wheels. The mass of the car is deemed more critical than that of the wheels, which can be considered negligible in this context. Ultimately, the conversation emphasizes the importance of the car's body mass in determining its overall energy and motion.
Heyxyz
Messages
8
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
A toy car and a solid metal sphere are rolled down an incline, why does the car reach the bottom first?
Relevant Equations
KE (total) = KE + KE (rotational) = 1/2mv^2 + 1/2Iw^2

Sphere: I = 2/5mr^2

v = wr

w = omega
Hello,

I tried to put it in an equation, but it didn't really work out. In this situation, the car was about the size of a model, and, while not exact, the radius of each wheel couldn't have been more than like a centimeter. Conversely, the ball was like twice the size of the car and had a diameter of 10 - 15 cm.

Ball:

=1/2mv^2 + 1/2I(V/R)^2, I = 2/5mr^2

= 1/2mv^2 + (1/2)(2/5)(m)(r^2)(v^2/r^2)

=7/10mv^2

Car:

Since wheels are practically cylinders, I figured I = 1/2mr^2. There are four wheels, so 4 * 1/2mr^2 = 2mr^2

=1/2mv^2 + 1/2I(V/R)^2, I = 2mr^2

= 1/2mv^2 + 2m(r^2)(v^2/r^2)

=1/mv^2 + mv^2

= 3/2mv^2I don't understand where I'm going. If I follow my above equations, it would appear that the ball reaches the bottom sooner due to the smaller coefficient, but I know that isn't true. Maybe the smaller radius of each wheel has something to do with it?

Thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Physics news on Phys.org
Heyxyz said:
Since wheels are practically cylinders, I figured I = 1/2mr^2
I doubt the car body is massless. I would take it as being far more massive than the wheels.
 
That's true. Does the car's mass make a difference? I know mass is there, but I just figure it could be ignored (we weren't given masses). I might sound like a fool, but I don't even know how an external mass such as the car would affect the wheels of their velocity.
 
Heyxyz said:
That's true. Does the car's mass make a difference? I know mass is there, but I just figure it could be ignored (we weren't given masses). I might sound like a fool, but I don't even know how an external mass such as the car would affect the wheels of their velocity.
The weight of the car is the primary driving force, much more important than the weight of the wheels. And the mass of the car does not rotate, so all its KE goes into linear motion.
Consider the wheels to be so light in relation to the car that they are irrelevant.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Okay. In other words, the wheels essentially exist so we can ignore friction, and my car's energy should be based on the body of the car rather than the wheels. That actually makes a lot of sense. Thank you.
 
  • Like
Likes Delta2
Heyxyz said:
Okay. In other words, the wheels essentially exist so we can ignore friction, and my car's energy should be based on the body of the car rather than the wheels. That actually makes a lot of sense. Thank you.
Correct.
 
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top