Observation about the rotation of a disc

In summary, the conversation discusses the angular velocity of a rotating disc with a constant angular velocity about an axis parallel to a unit vector in the xy-plane. It is noted that the time for a point on the disc to revolve around this axis is the same as the time for it to revolve around the y-axis, despite the fact that the angular velocity about the y-axis is not equal to ##\omega_y##. It is explained that this is because the infinitesimal rotation about the x-axis also contributes to the rotation about the y-axis. The concept of angular velocity as a vector is also discussed and it is noted that it is actually a pseudovector.
  • #1
etotheipi
Someone that I tutor asked a simple but pretty good question today which I thought I'd share the answer to. In a tidied up form: a disc with centre at the origin and central axis parallel to a unit vector ##\mathbf{n}## in the ##xy## plane rotates with a constant angular velocity ##\boldsymbol{\omega} = (\omega_x, \omega_y, 0) = \omega \mathbf{n}## about this axis. A point ##P## on the disc revolves around this axis in a time ##T = 2\pi / \omega##. However, the time it takes for ##P## to revolve once around the ##y## axis is also clearly ##T = 2\pi / \omega##, and not ##2\pi / \omega_y## so what actually is ##\omega_y## and why does a point on the disk rotate about the ##y##-axis faster than ##\omega_y##?

By symmetry, we can restrict our attention to the first quadrant of the motion. Consider that at time ##t## the point ##P## is at polar angle ##\theta_y## about the ##y##-axis. The first infinitesimal rotation is about the ##y##-axis, and takes ##P## to ##P'##. This changes this polar angle to ##\theta_y' = \theta_y + \omega_y \mathrm{d}t##.

Now let the point ##M## be the the orthogonal projection of ##P'## onto the ##x##-axis, and consider the triangle ##OMP'##. The second infinitesimal rotation by ##\omega_x \mathrm{d}t## about the ##x##-axis takes the triangle ##OMP'## to a triangle ##OMP''##. For convenience define ##s := MP'##. Since the arc ##P'P''## is of length ##s \omega_x \mathrm{d}t##, if ##\theta_x## is the polar angle about the ##x##-axis (which satisfies ##\cos{(\theta_x)} = -y / s##) then the amount by which the ##z##-coordinate increases is ##\xi = s \omega_x \cos{(\theta_x)} \mathrm{d}t##. This can easily be related to an increment ##\delta \theta'## in ##\theta_y## by the relation ##\sec^2{(\theta_y)} \delta \theta' = \xi / x = (s \omega_x \cos{(\theta_x)} \mathrm{d}t)/x = (-y\omega_x \mathrm{d}t)/x##.

Thus the second infinitesimal rotation about the ##x##-axis actually contributes a further ##\delta \theta' = (-y \cos^2{(\theta_y)} \omega_x \mathrm{d}t)/x## of rotation about the ##y##-axis. Defining the angle of tilt of the disk relative to the ##xz## plane as ##\alpha##, we have ##y = -x\tan{\alpha}## and thus the total increment in the polar angle ##\theta_y## after both infinitesimal rotations is\begin{align*}
\frac{\mathrm{d}\theta_y}{\mathrm{d}t} = \omega_y + \omega_x \tan{(\alpha)} \cos^2{(\theta_y)}

\implies \int_0^{\pi / 2} \frac{d\theta_y}{\omega_y + \omega_x \tan{(\alpha)} \cos^2{(\theta_y)}} &= \int_0^{T/4} \mathrm{d} t \\

\frac{\pi}{2} \frac{1}{\sqrt{\omega_y^2 + \omega_x \omega_y \tan{(\alpha)}}} = T/4

\end{align*}but since ##\omega_x = \omega_y \tan{(\alpha)}## and further since ##\omega^2 = \omega_x^2 + \omega_y^2##, this gives simply ##T = 2\pi / \omega##, as expected. The main thing to notice is that the actual rate of rotation about the ##y##-axis is greater than ##\omega_y##, precisely because the infinitesimal rotation about the ##x##-axis also constitutes a little bit of rotation about the ##y##-axis.

Hope I didn't make any mistakes, I've only briefly checked it over :nb). Anyway hope it's useful to someone!
 
  • Like
Likes Dale
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
etotheipi said:
Someone that I tutor asked a simple but pretty good question today which I thought I'd share the answer to. In a tidied up form: a disc with centre at the origin and central axis parallel to a unit vector ##\mathbf{n}## in the ##xy## plane rotates with a constant angular velocity ##\boldsymbol{\omega} = (\omega_x, \omega_y, 0) = \omega \mathbf{n}## about this axis. A point ##P## on the disc revolves around this axis in a time ##T = 2\pi / \omega##. However, the time it takes for ##P## to revolve once around the ##y## axis is also clearly ##T = 2\pi / \omega##, and not ##2\pi / \omega_y## so what actually is ##\omega_y## and why does a point on the disk rotate about the ##y##-axis faster than ##\omega_y##?
It might add clarity to strictly distinguish between two types of angular velocity:
- spin, changing orientation of a rigid body
- tangential motion of a point

The tangential motion of ##P## about the ##x## & ##y## axes is not even constant, so it's obviously not what ##\omega_y## & ##\omega_y## are supposed to represent.
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #3
A.T. said:
It might add clarity to strictly distinguish between two types of angular velocity:
- spin, changing orientation of a rigid body
- tangential motion of a point

The tangential motion of ##P## about the ##x## & ##y## axes is not even constant, so it's obviously not what ##\omega_y## & ##\omega_y## are supposed to represent.
Yeah, nicely put. Really everything becomes very clear once one has seen how the angular velocity vector arises from orthogonal rotation matrices, but it's not possible to cover such things with secondary-school students. So how to interpret this object ##\boldsymbol{\omega}## can be a little hard to explain :smile:
 
  • #4
A neat little demo of the oddity of angular velocity is to consider a wheel reflected in a mirror. Compare what happens to the axle's direction vector and the angular velocity "vector" under reflection in the cases where the rotation is in the plane of and perpendicular to the mirror. It isn't rigorous, but it's an easy-to-see way to see that there's some problems thinking of angular velocity as a vector (because it isn't one).
 
  • Like
Likes etotheipi
  • #5
Yeah, it is the pseudovector ## \tilde{\omega}_i := (\star \omega)_i = \frac{1}{2} \epsilon_{ijk} \omega_{jk}## dual to the anti-symmetric rank-2 tensor ##\omega## :smile:
 
Back
Top