Rolling cylinder or slipping cylinder reaches bottom first?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem comparing two identical cylinders released from the top of inclined planes, one rolling without slipping and the other slipping without rolling. Participants explore the implications of energy conservation and the effects of friction on the motion of the cylinders.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants analyze the energy transformations for both rolling and slipping scenarios, questioning how energy is allocated between translational and rotational forms. They also consider the role of friction in the motion of the slipping cylinder.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the energy dynamics involved, particularly regarding angular momentum and the effects of friction. There is ongoing exploration of the implications of these factors on the velocities of the cylinders at the bottom of the incline.

Contextual Notes

There is a mention of the original poster's uncertainty about their initial analysis, as well as the constraints of the problem being a test question. The discussion also highlights the need for clarification on the definitions of speed in the context of rolling versus slipping cylinders.

vcsharp2003
Messages
915
Reaction score
179

Homework Statement


Two identical cylinders are released from the top of two identical inclined planes. If one rolls without slipping and the other slips without rolling then which one will reach the bottom first? How will their speeds compare when they reach bottom of incline?

I am not sure if my attempt is correct, since this is a test question and I cannot verify my answer.

Homework Equations


Apply Work Energy Theorem to both situations
ΔKE + ΔPE = Worknet

The Attempt at a Solution


Let θ be the angle of incline with horizontal and h it's height. Let v be the velocity at bottom of incline.

for rolling, since force of friction does no work on rolling cylinder, ∴ Worknet = 0
∴ (0.5 x m x v2 - 0 ) + (0 - mgh) = 0
0.5 x m x v2 = mgh

for sliding, force of friction does work, ∴ Worknet ≠ 0
∴(0.5 x m x v2 - 0 ) + (0 - mgh) = - f x hsinθ
0.5 x m x v2 = mgh - fhsinθ

From above analysis, the velocity at bottom for rolling disk will be greater, which also means the rolling disk will reach bottom first.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For the rolling cylinder, where has the energy come from (or gone to) in order to make it spin? Think about the energy of rotation.

For the sliding cylinder that does not roll, can there be any friction at all?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vcsharp2003
The one that is rolling gains angular momentum, and thus energy of angular motion. You need to include this in your analysis..
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vcsharp2003
gneill said:
For the rolling cylinder, where has the energy come from (or gone to) in order to make it spin? Think about the energy of rotation.

For the sliding cylinder that does not roll, can there be any friction at all?

That is a very nice point. Since cylinder slips, then friction should not be there. Friction is what causes cylinder to roll by supplying the necessary torque. Right?

In that case, the problem becomes simpler. The initial PE of cylinder in rolling case gets divided into final linear KE + final rotational KE, whereas, in sliding case the same PE goes wholly into it's final linear KE, and therefore the sliding case will have a higher velocity at bottom and also reach the bottom first.

Does above reasoning sound right to you?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: gneill and TomHart
vcsharp2003 said:
Does above reasoning sound right to you?
Yes, that's it.
 
Perhaps a clarification is needed for OP's benefit that by "the speed of the cylinder" is tacitly meant "the speed of the center of mass". In the case of slipping, all points on the cylinder move at the same speed; in the case of rolling without slipping, some points on the cylinder move faster and some slower than the center of mass while the point of contact moves not at all (otherwise there would be slipping). Nevertheless, the argument in post #4 is valid when one considers that ##PE=\frac{1}{2}m V^2_{CM}## when there is only slipping and ##PE=\frac{1}{2}m V^2_{CM}+ K_{rot.}## when there is rolling without slipping.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vcsharp2003 and gneill

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
5K