Rotational Motion Find g - Inclined Plane

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem related to rotational motion and the calculation of gravitational acceleration using an inclined plane. The original poster describes an experiment inspired by Galileo, where a sphere rolls down a 20-degree incline, and attempts to deduce the value of g based on the time taken and distance rolled.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the use of torque and rotational inertia to derive the acceleration of the sphere down the incline. There are discussions about the correct application of the parallel-axis theorem and the implications of friction for rolling motion. Some participants question the assumptions made regarding the acceleration and the methods used, such as whether to apply torque or conservation of energy.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing guidance on the correct application of formulas and concepts. There is an acknowledgment of confusion regarding the methods, but some participants indicate they are on the right track after receiving feedback. Multiple interpretations of the problem and approaches are being explored.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of friction for the sphere to roll and discuss the implications of assuming uniform acceleration. There is also a mention of historical context regarding the formulation of work and energy concepts, indicating a broader inquiry into the subject matter.

Wellesley
Messages
274
Reaction score
3
Rotational Motion Find g - Galileo Inclined Plane

Homework Statement


Galileo measured the acceleration of gravity by rolling a sphere down an inclined plane. Suppose that, starting from rest, a sphere takes 1.6s to roll a distance distance of 3.00 m down a 20 degree inclined plane. What value of g can you deduce from this?

Homework Equations


PE=KE(trans.)+KE (rot.)
I=2/5Mr^2
torque=force*distance
Torque=I*angular acceleration

The Attempt at a Solution


-I've tried to use torque to solve for the acceleration down the plane, and this yielded a=5/7 * g *sin (theta)
I used:
distance=1/2at^2 to solve for a.
a=2.34375m/s^2

When this is plugged back in, I get:
2.34375=5/7 * g *sin (theta)
(2.34375*7)/5=3.28125
3.28125/sin(20)=9.59373
g= 9.59373 m/s2

[STRIKE]This is not close to the answer of 9.6, or the accepted value (9.81). I know I'm doing something significantly wrong, but I can't figure out exactly what the problem is. If anyone could point me in the right direction, I'd really appreciate it. Thanks.[/STRIKE]

The original problem had to do with an incorrect interpretation of the parallel-axis theorem. It should have been I=ICM+md2.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Wellesley said:
-I've tried to use torque to solve for the acceleration down the plane, and this yielded a=5/4 * g *sin (theta)
Show how you arrived at this result. (Note that the acceleration of something sliding down a frictionless plane would be only a = g*sinθ.)
 
Doc Al said:
Show how you arrived at this result. (Note that the acceleration of something sliding down a frictionless plane would be only a = g*sinθ.)
In order for the sphere to roll (as stated in the problem), the plane has to have friction, right?
Anyway, I modeled the derivation from an example in my book:
[tex]\tau[/tex]weight=mgrsin([tex]\theta[/tex])

I=mr2+2/5mr2 --> I=7/5mr2

7/5mr2*[tex]\alpha[/tex]=mgrsin([tex]\theta[/tex])

[tex]\alpha[/tex]=5/7*1/r*g*sin([tex]\theta[/tex])

a=[tex]\alpha[/tex]*r

a=(5/7*1/r*g*sin([tex]\theta[/tex]))*r

a= 5/7 * g * sin([tex]\theta[/tex])
[STRIKE]
Am I on the right track with this approach? I guess I'm confused whether to use torque (like the calculations above), or the conservation of energy.[/STRIKE]
 
Last edited:
Wellesley said:
I=ICM+2/5mr2 --> I=4/5mr2

That's supposed to be I=ICM+md2, from the parallel-axis theorem.
 
ideasrule said:
That's supposed to be I=ICM+md2, from the parallel-axis theorem.

You're right...I=7/5mr2. When I edited my original post...I got the right answer!

How could I have missed that?! :cry:

Thanks for the help!
And Happy Holidays!
 
Last edited:
Wellesley said:
In order for the sphere to roll (as stated in the problem), the plane has to have friction, right?
True.
Anyway, I modeled the derivation from an example in my book:
[tex]\tau[/tex]weight=mgrsin([tex]\theta[/tex])
OK, you're finding torque with respect to the contact point of the sphere on the plane.
I=ICM+2/5mr2 --> I=4/5mr2
As ideasrule stated, you need the rotational inertia about that contact point, which is found via the parallel axis theorem. Once you have the correct I, your approach will work fine.
Am I on the right track with this approach? I guess I'm confused whether to use torque (like the calculations above), or the conservation of energy.
Either method will work fine. (Use both, then compare!)

Edit: Looks like you figured it out while I was typing this in.
 
Doc Al said:
Edit: Looks like you figured it out while I was typing this in.

Thanks for the help Doc Al!
 
Last edited:
As an aside I would humbly ask the following of the board:

If we did not know this problem involved rotation, we would have found that the velocity at the bottom of the incline to be much less than expected. If we assumed that the acceleration, whatever it might be, was uniform, could we not find a number for the final velocity at the bottom of the incline? And then using the conservation of energy, we would find a much smaller number for g than 9.6, or whatever, using the posters method.

Which brings me to one more question. I have not found how the idea of work was formulated. I know Joule and others were working with steam engines and such, and were thinking along these lines, but who or what people actually came up with the idea that force applied over a distance was a very meaningful concept. I can't find history on this? Did Newton think about this at all? Any guidance would be appreciated.

Sorry to hijack the post. I just would like to read up on the history of the formulation of certain ideas.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
Replies
30
Views
4K
Replies
46
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
3K