Smooth rolling motion - conservation of energy?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the conservation of mechanical energy in the context of a ball or cylinder rolling smoothly along various paths. The original poster seeks to understand whether mechanical energy is conserved in such scenarios, particularly in the absence of dissipative forces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster formulates a proof for a cylinder rolling down an inclined plane and questions the general applicability of energy conservation in smooth rolling motion along any path. Some participants discuss the role of static friction and its implications for energy conservation, while others suggest examining the relative motion at the contact point.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different aspects of energy conservation and the role of static friction. Some guidance has been offered regarding the conditions under which mechanical energy may be considered conserved, but no consensus has been reached on the broader implications.

Contextual Notes

Participants are considering the effects of static friction and the conditions necessary for mechanical energy conservation, including the absence of dissipative forces. There is an emphasis on understanding the nuances of rolling motion and the definitions involved.

stfz
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
Member advised to use the homework template for posts in the homework sections of PF.
This isn't about a specific physics problem, but rather a question:
Given I have a ball or cylinder rolling smoothly along some path, is it generally true that mechanical energy is conserved?
I.e. if ##E_mech = K+U = K_{trans} + K_{rot} + U##, then ##\Delta E_mech = 0##?

I have been able to formulate a proof for a cylinder rolling down an inclined plane, with a change in height ##\Delta h##. I've been able to show that, at the bottom, ##K_{rot}+K_{trans} = mgh##.

But I just wanted to check that this is generally true along any path (e.g. curved paths), given that the rolling is always smooth? And also, are there any caveats here where this assertion doesn't work?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
stfz said:
But I just wanted to check that this is generally true along any path (e.g. curved paths), given that the rolling is always smooth? And also, are there any caveats here where this assertion doesn't work?

The total amount of mechanical energy, in a closed system in the absence of dissipative forces (e.g. friction, air resistance), remains constant.
so, if you have conditons of perfect rolling (without slipping) the energy should be conserved.
 
Hmm. I was under the impression that the static friction present was a friction force and hence the there are non-conservative forces at work.
However, now that you mention it, I realize that static friction, by definition, can do no work. Hence there are no non-conservative forces doing work per se (although there are non-conservative forces present!)

Is that why mechanical energy is conserved?
 
What is the relative motion between the smoothly rolling object and the surface along which it is rolling at the point / line of contact?

The answer to that plus an equation for energy dissipated by static friction between two surfaces should provide you the insight you are looking for.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
5K
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
13
Views
2K