Pivot doing work on the rotating rod

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the mechanics of a rod pivoting at one end, focusing on the conservation of mechanical energy. It highlights a confusion regarding the work done by the pivot point, which exerts a force perpendicular to the rod, leading to questions about energy conservation. Clarification is provided that if the hinge is frictionless, no work is done since the displacement at the pivot point is zero. The conversation also explores the implications of frictional torque, suggesting that work can be calculated using the formula W=Frθ if the frictional force is constant. Overall, the thread emphasizes the importance of understanding the role of forces and displacements in rotational dynamics.
LiftHeavy13
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
http://dev.physicslab.org/Document....taryMotion_RotationalDynamicsPivotingRods.xmlin this example, the rod is swinging with one end pivoted. conservation of energy was used in this example. the change in potential energy was converted to kinetic energy, and mechanical energy thus was supposedly conserved. However, I have a problem with this: the net work done on a body F(dot)d where at least a component of a force acts on a body in the same direction as the direction of the center of mass' movement. the pivot point exerts a force perpendicular to the rod (and therefore parallel to its center of mass' velocity vector), thus doing work on it... so how can mechanical energy be conserved? this makes no sense
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The work done by a force is F*d, where d is the displacement of the point of application. The force from the hinge acts on the end of the rod, whose displacement is zero. As long as the hinge is free of friction, no work is done by it.
 
Doc Al said:
The work done by a force is F*d, where d is the displacement of the point of application. The force from the hinge acts on the end of the rod, whose displacement is zero. As long as the hinge is free of friction, no work is done by it.

Damn man, thanks. I wasn't sure b/c every time I asked my physics teacher, he kept coming up with weird explanations for it. It's funny how a little detail like that will completely throw you off.


Just as a follow up, for a frictional torque about the pivot, would the work be that force (the frictional force) times d=θ(displaced)r(radius of the pivot)

so W=Frθ?

Because the frictional forces would act all around the pivot, not just in one place, right?
 
LiftHeavy13 said:
Just as a follow up, for a frictional torque about the pivot, would the work be that force (the frictional force) times d=θ(displaced)r(radius of the pivot)

so W=Frθ?
Yes, assuming that the friction force is constant.

Because the frictional forces would act all around the pivot, not just in one place, right?
I'd say because the surface that the hinge exerts a frictional force against undergoes a displacement as the hinge turns.
 
Doc Al said:
Yes, assuming that the friction force is constant.


I'd say because the surface that the hinge exerts a frictional force against undergoes a displacement as the hinge turns.

Okay, so you're treating the surface as an entire entity/point, correct?
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top