Moment of Inertia of 2-Spheres Connected by Rod

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the moment of inertia for two solid spheres connected by a massless rod, with a focus on two axes of rotation. The initial setup involves using the parallel and perpendicular axes theorems, with the moment of inertia for a solid sphere given as (2/3)Mr^2. A key point raised is the correct formulation of the integral for the distance from the axis of rotation to the mass element, which should account for both the radius of the sphere and the distance to the axis. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding the center of mass in relation to the chosen coordinate system, ultimately clarifying the setup for the calculation. The participants conclude that the integral related to the center of mass is zero, affirming the correctness of their approach.
bjnartowt
Messages
265
Reaction score
3

Homework Statement



What is: Moment of inertia of two solid spheres, radii each r[0], attached by massless rod which is also of length r[0], so that the distance between the two solid spheres' centres is "3*r[0]"?

The axis of rotation could either be 1) through both spheres and along the connecting-rod or 2) through the connecting rod so that the two spheres "orbit" about in a radius of 1.5*r[0]. I know how to get either by the parallel and perpendicular axes theorems.


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



We stick an axis of rotation through a sphere, and turn, turn, turn:
{I_{solid{\rm{ }}sphere,{\rm{ }}radius{\rm{ }}{r_0}}} = \int_{sphere} {{R^2} \cdot dm} = ...{\rm{steps I know}}... = {\textstyle{2 \over 3}}M{r_0}^2
Now: imagine translating: instead of rotation through the sphere’s symmetry axis, let’s rotate through that point on the massless-connecting rod. In general:
\begin{array}{c}<br /> {I_{solid{\rm{ }}sphere,{\rm{ translated by }}{\rho _0}}} = \int_{sphere} {{{(R + {\rho _0})}^2} \cdot dm} \\ <br /> = \int_{sphere} {{R^2} \cdot dm} + \int_{sphere} {{\rho _0}^2 \cdot dm} + \int_{sphere} {2{\rho _0}R \cdot dm} \\ <br /> {I_{solid{\rm{ }}sphere,{\rm{ translated by }}{\rho _0}}} = {\textstyle{2 \over 3}}M{r_0}^2 + M{\rho _0}^2 + 2{\rho _0}\int_{sphere} {R \cdot dm} \\ <br /> \end{array}
In specifics: our problem calls for:
{\rho _0} = 1.5{r_0}
My question:
\int_{sphere} {R \cdot dm} = ?

I have a feeling I’m going down a blind-alley, though. This is from Giancoli’s book, and I think there’s a shorter way to do the calculation…
 
Physics news on Phys.org


That integral would be 0. The first moment is the location of the center of mass.

You made a mistake in setting up your initial integral. The distance from the axis of rotation to the mass dm isn't simply (ρ0+R); it's |\vec{\rho}_0+\vec{r}|, where \vec{\rho}_0 is the vector from the axis of rotation to the center of the sphere and \vec{r} is the vector from the center of the sphere to the bit of mass dm.
 


vela said:
That integral would be 0. The first moment is the location of the center of mass.

But the location of the centre of mass would have units of metres, not kilogram*metres as that integral has?
 


Right. I should have said it's proportional to the location of the center of mass.
 


vela said:
Right. I should have said it's proportional to the location of the center of mass.

Oh! I see it now. What you're describing would be the numerator of the mass-centre formula:

{x_{CM}} = \frac{{\int {x \cdot \rho (x) \cdot dx} }}{{\int {\rho (x) \cdot dx} }}

...right? If so, I definitely see why:

2 \cdot {\rho _0} \cdot \int {r \cdot dm} = 0 = {\rm{very yes!}}

...because we have chosen the origin of our coordinate system to be the centre-of-mass of the rotating body (I think without me realizing it), and so the centre-of-mass would have a zero that would kill it before the "missing":

\int {\rho \cdot dm}

...would effect its dividing power on the already-zero-by-coordinate system denominator.

Okay, you prolly got a little more about how my brain works than you wanted to, but I think you answered my question. (Or maybe, worse yet, I'm wrong and think I'm right). Thanks vela : )
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top