Rotational Inertia of Disk2: 16I or 8I?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the rotational inertia of Disk 2, which has a radius of 2R and is compared to Disk 1 with a radius of R and rotational inertia I. The calculations show that the mass of Disk 2 is four times that of Disk 1, leading to a derived rotational inertia of 16I for Disk 2. Despite initial doubts about the result being too high, it is confirmed as correct. The consensus is that doubling the radius indeed results in a significant increase in rotational inertia, which can seem surprising.
The_Journey
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


There are two uniform disks. Disk 1 has radius of R, a rotational inertia of I. Disk 2 has radius of 2R, what is the rotational inertia of Disk2 in term of I? The disks are rotating about their center axis.


Homework Equations


I = m * r ^ 2
Density = Mass / Area


The Attempt at a Solution



I tried using density because the two disks are uniform so their densities must equal. But I don't have the mass for both of the disks so I just call mass of Disk1 to be M. So Disk1 density is:
M / (pi * R^2). Setting it equal to xM / (4 * pi * R ^ 2) and solve for x.

So mass of Disk2 is 4M, which is 4 times the mass of Disk1. I is the rotational inertia of Disk1 so it must be this:

I = (1/2) * M * R ^ 2.

Then the rotational inertia of Disk2, which has Radius of 2R and mass of 4M is:

I2 = (1/2) * (4M) * (2R)^2 = 8 * M * R ^ 2.

Dividing I2 by I gets me 16.

So the answer I think is 16I, the rotational inertia of Disk2 is 16 times the rotational inertia of Disk1, but this seems too high and my friend got 8I, so can anyone show me the correct way?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your result is correct. Why do you think it is high?

ehild
 
I guess doubling the radius gets you 16 times the rotational inertia seems kinda crazy. Anyway thank you for verifying
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top