Non-Constant Angular Acceleration

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a problem involving a mass with a known moment of inertia and a non-constant spring force acting at a lever arm. Participants explore methods to calculate the time required for the mass to rotate 90 degrees without assuming constant angular acceleration.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes calculating angular acceleration in small intervals using torque and moment of inertia, questioning the validity of this approach.
  • Another participant suggests using the equation ##\vec r \times \vec F= I \ddot \theta##, noting that an analytical solution may not be possible depending on the force's form, and recommends a numerical approach.
  • A participant mentions using the equation ##\omega_f^2 = \omega_i^2 + 2\alpha\theta## to find total time, treating the final angular velocity as the current iteration's velocity.
  • There is a suggestion to use the Stormer Verlet algorithm for numerical integration if analytical solutions are not feasible, emphasizing a fixed time step approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express uncertainty about the validity of using equations for constant acceleration in the context of non-constant angular acceleration, and no consensus is reached on the best method to solve the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight the potential complexity of the problem due to the non-constant nature of the forces involved, which may affect the choice of numerical methods or analytical approaches.

DCELL
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
TL;DR
Solving for time to rotate 90 degrees with varying angular acceleration
Hello, I am trying to solve a problem involving a mass with known moment of inertia about an axis with a lever arm at angle theta and length r with a non-constant spring force acting at the tip of the lever arm and fixed distance away from the axis of rotation.

I am wondering what the best way to solve for the time to rotate 90 degrees is without assuming the angular acceleration due to torque is constant.

I thought about solving for the acceleration in .1deg intervals using the equation T = alpha * I, and then using that acceleration to calculate the angular velocity at that degree interval using the previous velocity as the "initial" and so on and so forth and finally taking the change in angular velocities between intervals to solve for the time between and then summing the interval times for a total time. I'm not sure if this is the correct approach.

Any help would be appreciated!

Thanks!
 

Attachments

  • REF.jpg
    REF.jpg
    21.9 KB · Views: 196
Physics news on Phys.org
Are you familiar with calculus?
 
It's been a semester or two but yes.
 
So then we have ##\vec r \times \vec F= I \ddot \theta##. Indeed, depending on the form of ##\vec F## there may not be an analytical solution so you may have to compute it numerically

You also may find a Lagrangian approach to be helpful if ##\vec F## is difficult to figure out.
 
So I am able to calculate what ##\tau## is and subsequently ##\alpha## for each "iteration" that I have. The point of confusion comes in when I am trying to solve for the Total time of the event. Currently what I've tried is using the equation ##\omega_f^2 = \omega_i^2 + 2\alpha\theta## and treating ##\omega_f## as the current iteration velocity and ##\omega_i## as the initial/previous except for the first iteration where it is equal to zero.

Then using ##\omega = \omega_i + \alpha t## I solve for the time in between the steps where the total time between steps is the time of the event where ##\alpha## was the previous iterations acceleration due to that force/torque.

I've also thought about using ##\theta = \omega_i t + \frac 1 2 \alpha t^2## and solving for t using the quadratic equation which yields similar results as the above

I'm just not confident in the validity of the results and if using the equations for constant acceleration in specific reference frames (every .1deg) is a valid method.
 
If the equation cannot be solved analytically then you will be better served to use something like the basic Stormer Verlet algorithm described here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verlet_integration

This uses a fixed step in time rather than a fixed step in space.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: DCELL
Dale said:
If the equation cannot be solved analytically then you will be better served to use something like the basic Stormer Verlet algorithm described here:

https://en.m.wikipedia.org/wiki/Verlet_integration

This uses a fixed step in time rather than a fixed step in space.
Thank you for the information - Ill give this a shot!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 138 ·
5
Replies
138
Views
8K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K