Need Help Understanding Cycloid Rolling vs Slipping

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter shoushou
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the parametrization of cycloids and their behavior during rolling versus slipping. Specifically, the parametrization (sin(t)-t, cos(t)+1) results in rolling, while (sin(t)-at, cos(t)+1) with a not equal to 1 leads to slipping. Key factors include the distance traveled by the circle during a complete revolution and the necessary distance to prevent slipping. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding these parameters to grasp the mechanics of cycloidal motion.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of cycloid geometry
  • Familiarity with parametric equations
  • Basic knowledge of rolling motion physics
  • Concept of angular displacement
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the properties of cycloids in physics
  • Study the implications of parametrization in motion equations
  • Learn about the conditions for rolling without slipping
  • Explore angular displacement and its effects on motion
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, mathematicians, and engineers interested in the dynamics of rolling motion and cycloidal paths.

shoushou
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone,
i have a problem concerning with the reason to why taking the cycloid to be parametrised by (sin(t)-t, cos(t)+1) causes it to roll, whereas taking (sin(t)-at, cos(t)+1) for a is not quals to 1, would cause it to slip.


can anybody explain to me or give me a hint, thanks a lot.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

shoushou said:
Hi everyone,
i have a problem concerning with the reason to why taking the cycloid to be parametrised by (sin(t)-t, cos(t)+1) causes it to roll, whereas taking (sin(t)-at, cos(t)+1) for a is not quals to 1, would cause it to slip.

Hi shoushou! Welcome to PF! :smile:

Hint:

i] from each of the equations, how far has the circle gone when it completes a 360º revolution?

ii] how far does it need to go to avoid slipping?

iii] then prove it for smaller angles. :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
5K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
4K
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K