Ratio of angular speed with conservation of energy

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a ball rolling down an inclined plane without slipping, specifically asking for the ratio of its angular velocity at two different heights, h/3 and 2h/3. The context includes considerations of conservation of energy, incorporating both translational and rotational motion.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of conservation of energy principles to relate potential energy and kinetic energy at different heights. There is an exploration of the meaning of "at h/3" and whether it refers to height from the top or bottom of the incline.

Discussion Status

Some participants are attempting to clarify the problem's wording and the assumptions regarding height measurement. There is acknowledgment of the ambiguity in the question, and some participants express frustration over the lack of clarity and the implications for their upcoming exams.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted absence of diagrams or additional information that could clarify the problem setup. Participants are questioning the assumptions made about the height measurements and the implications for the solution.

RoboNerd
Messages
410
Reaction score
11

Homework Statement


  1. A ball rolls down an incline plane without slipping. What is the ratio of its angular velocity at h/3 to its angular velocity at 2h/3?
    1) 1:2
  2. 2) 1:sqrt(2)
  3. 3) 1:1
  4. 4) sqrt(2):1
  5. 5) 2:1

Homework Equations


Conservation of energy with provisions for rotational and translational motion.

The Attempt at a Solution


Hi everyone!

I got this funky problem today. Here's what I tried to do:

at h/3 I have potential energy resulting from lowering the ball a height of 2*h/3 that is converted to kinetic energy.

Thus, I did the following
m * g * (2h/3) = [(1 / 2) * m * v^2] + [(1 / 2 ) * I * omega^2]
m * g * (2h/3) = [(1 / 2) * m * v^2] + [(1 / 2 ) * (2 / 5) * m * r^2 * (v^2 / r^2)]

Rearrange to get an expression with v, and then substitute v = r * omega to get
(20 * h * g)/ (21 * r^2) = omega^2 for the h/3 height

OK. then I said that at height 2h/3 I have potential energy from descending h/3 converted to kinetic energy
m * g * (h/3) = [(1 / 2) * m * v^2] + [(1 / 2 ) * I * omega^2]
m * g * (h/3) = [(1 / 2) * m * v^2] + [(1 / 2 ) * (2 / 5) * m * r^2 * (v^2 / r^2)]

Rearrange to get an expression with v and then substitute v = r * omega to get
(10 * g * h) / (21 * r^2 ) = omega squared.

Thus, my ratio would have been for the two omega squared terms to be:
(20 * h * g)/ (21 * r^2) = omega^2 for the h/3 height : (10 * g * h) / (21 * r^2 ) = omega squared. for the 2h/3 height

Simplifying the ratio for the omega squared gives 20 : 10 -----> 2:1.
Taking the square root to compare just for the omegas gives sqrt(2) : 1.

Thus, I got 4. The answer according to the writers is 2.

Why is this the case?

Thanks a lot for the help in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's not entirely clear what "at h/3" means. Is that h/3 from the bottom or from the top? Is there any further information that clarifies this?
 
They did not provide any information. I believe that 'h' corresponds to the height at which the ball is initially launched on the ramp.
 
RoboNerd said:
They did not provide any information. I believe that 'h' corresponds to the height at which the ball is initially launched on the ramp.
Sure, but that still doesn't nail down the meaning of "at h/3". It could still be measured from top or from bottom. Measured from bottom, your answer is correct.
 
I have no idea... these authors write really crummy questions, which does not help as I have a final on monday. :-(
 
RoboNerd said:
I have no idea... these authors write really crummy questions, which does not help as I have a final on monday. :-(
So you quoted the question exactly as given to you, word for word, and there is no diagram?
 
Yes, sir!
 
Yes, sir! I just assumed they had a ramp at an arbitrary angle, with it vertically ascending "h".
 
RoboNerd said:
Yes, sir! I just assumed they had a ramp at an arbitrary angle, with it vertically ascending "h".
Well, either they were thinking of h/3 etc. as descent, i.e. measured from the top, or they messed up and gave the wrong answer.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RoboNerd
  • #10
OK, thanks so much for helping and confirming what I did. Really appreciated!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
335
Views
17K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K