1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Solid disk rolling up a hill problem

  1. May 6, 2006 #1
    I'm somewhat clueless on how to solve the following problem, since a solid disk is rolling up a hill rather than downhill.

    I tried using KEi + PEi = KEf + PEf, including both KEt and KEr in KEf, and I calculated that KEi = 135J (45J are KEr, and 90J are KEt). I'm not sure if I'm plugging in my values correctly, since I got a translational speed of 3.847, and my answer was wrong.
     
  2. jcsd
  3. May 6, 2006 #2

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    You included gravitational potential energy and translational kinetic energy, but what are you forgetting?
     
  4. May 6, 2006 #3
    Rotational kinetic energy? I thought I included that too...KEr.
     
  5. May 6, 2006 #4

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Oh well then you should be getting the right answer. You probably have a mistake in your arithmetic.

    I also got 135J for the total initial kinetic energy but I got a different answer for the final speed.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2006
  6. May 6, 2006 #5
    Okay...can you check my work?

    I used KEi + PEi = KEr + KEt + PEf, which I used 135 + 0 = 45 + (0.5)(5)(v^2) + (5)(9.8)(2), and solved from there. Am I using these values incorrectly?
     
  7. May 6, 2006 #6

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    You have the wrong final rotational kinetic energy. The disk is still rolling when it's at the top of the hill but the angular velocity is not the same as it was before. (If the translational speed is now v, what's the angular speed?)
     
  8. May 6, 2006 #7
    How would I go about correcting my KEr, and what would the fact that it's still rolling at the top of the hill change in my equation?
     
  9. May 6, 2006 #8

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    You would write your final translational kinetic energy in the same manner you wrote your final translational kinetic energy.

    If the object has a translational speed of v then what is it's rotational kinetic energy? You already said that the translational kinetic energy would be [itex]\frac{1}{2}(5)(v^2)[/itex] so now write the final rotational kinetic energy in terms of v.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2006
  10. May 6, 2006 #9
    Do you mean I should write my final rotational kinetic energy in the same way? Sorry, I am getting lost, since your previous 2 posts seem to be about 2 different things wrong with the problem. Would you be able to clarify what you are referring to?
     
  11. May 6, 2006 #10

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    You said 135 + 0 = 45 + (0.5)(5)(v^2) + (5)(9.8)(2).

    Here you are assuming that the final kinetic rotational energy is the same as the initial kinetic rotational energy (45J).

    I'm saying that that's not the case because the object is now traveling at at a speed v.

    You wrote conservation of energy:

    KEroti+KEtransi+PEi=KErotf+KEtransf+PEf

    You then calculated the initial energies to be 135J:

    135J=KErotf+KEtransf+PEf

    Now you just need to write the kinetic energies in terms of an unknown speed "v" and then solve for v
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2006
  12. May 6, 2006 #11
    Oh, okay. So I would ahve 2 unknowns in this problem? How would I solve each one?
     
  13. May 6, 2006 #12

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Well you would have angular velocity and translational velocity. What is the relationship between the two?
     
  14. May 6, 2006 #13
    v=rw? How would I incorporate that into the problem? I just simpliefied my equation and got 37 = 1.25w^2 + 2v^2
     
  15. May 6, 2006 #14

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Well I don't know if you simplified your equation right or not but you know what w is in terms of v from the equation you just posted...
     
  16. May 6, 2006 #15
    LOL I just figured that out...so w = 4.148, and then I plug that into v=rw to get v, which is 2.4888? Eek...these answers are wrong! Did I do something wrong?
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2006
  17. May 6, 2006 #16

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    Well since youre solving for v it would just be easier to substitute v/.6 for w in your final rotational energy.

    I think you're just coming across arithmetic errors at this point.
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2006
  18. May 6, 2006 #17
    I got the same answer...can you check if my work is wrong? I'm using:

    37 = 1.25(v/0.6)^2 + 2.5v^2, which becomes 37 = 3.472v^2 + 2.5v^2, then 37 = 5.972v^2, 6.195 = v^2, then v = 2.489.
     
  19. May 6, 2006 #18

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    I think you divided by .62 before you plugged in v/.6 for w because I am getting [itex]37 = 1.25(v)^2 + 2.5v^2[/itex]
     
    Last edited: May 6, 2006
  20. May 6, 2006 #19
    I had that 1.25 before I even divided by 0.6. I'm really confused now. Would you be able to show me your work for this problem?
     
  21. May 6, 2006 #20

    dav2008

    User Avatar
    Gold Member

    [tex]135=\frac{1}{2}(9.8)(2)+\frac{1}{2}(5)v^2+.5(.9)(\omega)^2[/tex]
    [tex]37=\frac{1}{2}(5)v^2+.5(.9)(\frac{v}{.6})^2[/tex]
    [tex]37=2.5v^2+1.25v^2[/tex]
     
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?



Similar Discussions: Solid disk rolling up a hill problem
  1. Rolling solid disk (Replies: 5)

  2. A Ball rolls up a Hill (Replies: 3)

  3. Solid disk rolling (Replies: 4)

Loading...