Sliding vs Rolling: Homework Analysis

  • Thread starter Thread starter gigglin_horse
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rolling Sliding
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the comparison of sliding versus rolling motion of a can on a sloping surface, specifically focusing on the effects of these motions on the time taken to reach the bottom of the slope. The problem includes details about the slope's dimensions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between gravitational potential energy and kinetic energy in both sliding and rolling scenarios. Questions arise regarding the implications of translational kinetic energy and the conversion of energy types in each motion.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing thoughts and clarifications about the energy dynamics involved in sliding versus rolling. Some guidance has been offered regarding the energy equations, but no consensus has been reached on the overall outcome.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the specific conditions of the slope, including its dimensions, and question how these factors influence the motion of the can. There is an acknowledgment of confusion regarding the energy distribution in both scenarios.

gigglin_horse
Messages
32
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


"Suppose the sloping surface was very slippery so no rolling occurs (the can slides). Would the can reach the bottom sooner or later compared with the rolling motion? Explain the difference"



I don't know if its relevant, but the slope was 4cm at the high end, and 1.5 meter long.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you think?
 
I read somewhere that rolling has less translational KE, and that sliding makes it to the bottom first...
This makes me even more confused
 
ya your right.

basically gravitational energy is converted into translational KE and rolling energy (for the rolling one)
so
[tex]mgh=\frac{1}{2}mv^2+\frac{1}{2}I \omega^2[/tex]

what are you confused about?
 
Ohhhh ok.
Thats brilliant, thanks for your help
 

Similar threads

Replies
24
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 49 ·
2
Replies
49
Views
10K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
5K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
14K