Rolling Cylinder on Inclined Plane: Friction & Rotational Acceleration

  • Thread starter Thread starter nkehagias
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Cylinder Rolling
AI Thread Summary
A cylinder rolling down an inclined plane experiences static friction, which does not perform work at the point of contact due to no displacement. Instead, gravity is responsible for the work done, converting potential energy into translational and rotational kinetic energy. The static friction allows the cylinder to rotate by providing the necessary torque, as described by the relationship between torque and angular displacement. While friction facilitates rotation, it does not dissipate energy in this context, as there is no energy loss associated with static friction. The overall energy conservation principle holds, with gravitational potential energy transforming into kinetic energy during the motion.
nkehagias
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
A cylinder is rolling on an inclined plane. We now that friction force does no work. But when we consider the pure rotational motion, friction force is responsible for the rotational acceleration, and 1/2Iù^2 = FRè ( FRè = work )
What does really happen here;
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The friction force does no work because it is normal to the displacement. On a frictionless plane the cilinder would 'slide' down. Because of the conservation of angular momentum, the angular momentum of the cilinder stays zero when there is no torque present.

\frac{dL}{dt}=\Gamma

So I guess the friction force acts as a torque which causes the angular momentum to change, according to the equation above. And so the friction force is responsible for the rotational acceleration.
 
The friction force does work. As you (nkehagias) say correctly, it causes the cylinder to rotate. Friction ("sticky friction"; sorry, I don't know the correct word) is in this case simply the way how potential energy is transformed into rot. en., it permits the gravitation to do work an the cylinder.

What confuses you is probably simply that if we talk about "friction doing work", we usually mean that there is dissipation, "loss of energy".
 
Originally posted by nkehagias
A cylinder is rolling on an inclined plane. We now that friction force does no work. But when we consider the pure rotational motion, friction force is responsible for the rotational acceleration, and 1/2Iù^2 = FRè ( FRè = work )
What does really happen here;
For rolling without slipping, the (static) friction force does no work since there is no displacement at the point of contact. It is actually gravity doing the work and providing the energy for rotation and translation.

Newton's laws still hold, and it is true that it is the static friction which allows the cylinder to rotate. And it is also true that Τθ = FfRθ = 1/2Iω2, where torque is calculated about the center of mass and θ is the angular displacement of the cylinder. But this should not be interpreted as a real "work-energy" relationship: it is just an integration of Newton's 2nd law.

You can show that the loss of gravitational PE as the cylinder falls will exactly equal the gain in translational plus rotational KE.
 
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top