Rolling without slipping force diagram

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving a solid disc rolling down an incline. The first part of the problem required drawing a force diagram and writing equations for motion, while the second part focuses on calculating time, velocity, and angular speed as the disc rolls from a height.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of energy conservation and kinematic equations to find the velocity and time of descent. There are attempts to connect the results from part one to part two of the problem.

Discussion Status

Some participants are sharing their calculations and questioning the correctness of their approaches. There is a recognition of the need to use the acceleration from part one, and suggestions are made to consider the distance along the slope for time calculations. Multiple interpretations of the kinematic equations are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the initial conditions of the problem, including the height from which the disc rolls and the absence of initial velocity. There is also mention of the specific radius of the disc being relevant to the calculations.

BrianSauce
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
This is the second part of a 2 part problem. The first part is:
A solid disc is rolling down a 30 degree incline from rest.
a. draw the force diagram for the disk.
b. write the equations for both translation and rotational motion
c. Find the linear acceleration of the center of mass.
d. If the radius of the disk is r, find the angular acceleration of the disk.
e. If the mass of the disc is m, what is the expression for the friction force?

I solved b. as: Translation {mgsin[itex]\varphi[/itex]-fs = ma , N=mgcos[itex]\varphi[/itex]} Rotation: fr=I[itex]\alpha[/itex]

For c my answer was a=g/3

For d I got [itex]\alpha[/itex]=2f/mr

And for e I got f= mg/6

Now part 2 says, "In the previous problem the disk started to roll from a height of h=2m with no initial velocity. Use the answers from part 1 to find:
a. The time to reach the bottom of the incline.
b. The velocity of its c.m. at the bottom of the incline.
c. The angular speed of the disk at the bottom of the incline if the radius of the disc is 25cm.

This is where I am stumped. I tried solving for the velocity by using Kinetic Energy, mgh = 1/2 I[itex]\omega[/itex]^2 + 1/2mv^2

But I didn't get the correct answer. So I'm really lost, I tried Kinematic but just got lost not sure which equations to use.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi BrianSauce! Welcome to PF! :smile:

(try using the X2 button just above the Reply box :wink:)
BrianSauce said:
Now part 2 says, "In the previous problem the disk started to roll from a height of h=2m with no initial velocity. Use the answers from part 1 …

I tried solving for the velocity by using Kinetic Energy, mgh = 1/2 I[itex]\omega[/itex]^2 + 1/2mv^2

That should work … show us your calculations. :smile:

However, why didn't you just use the acceleration from part 1, as the question tells you? :confused:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
My calculations are mgh=1/2(1/2mr^2)(v^2/r^2) + 1/2mv^2
gh=1/4v^2 + 1/2v^2
gh=3/4v^2
4gh/3 all under square root = v
However, that was not the correct velocity. And I'm not sure what to do with the acceleration because to find time I need vf which I don't have.
 
HiBrianSauce! :smile:

(just got up :zzz:)
BrianSauce said:
4gh/3 all under square root = v

that's what i get also (with h = 2) :confused:
And I'm not sure what to do with the acceleration because to find time I need vf which I don't have.

but you can find the distance (along the slope), and use one of the other standard constant acceleration equations :wink:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
My lab partner had helped me, he used the kinematic equation Vf = 1/2at^2

It completely slipped my mind. Thank you very much for the replies. :)
 
BrianSauce said:
My lab partner had helped me, he used the kinematic equation Vf = 1/2at^2

that doesn't look right :redface:

there's s = vit + 1/2 at2 and vf2 = vi2 + 2as​
 
Whoops, I meant delta x = 1/2at^2, no vi because it starts from rest.
 
Last edited:
yup! :biggrin:
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Thanks again!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
4K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 60 ·
3
Replies
60
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 97 ·
4
Replies
97
Views
6K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
Replies
26
Views
2K