Speed of objects rolling down slopes

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter iluvc
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rolling Speed
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the speed of objects rolling down slopes, specifically addressing the influence of mass, size, and rotational inertia on their velocities. Participants explore the implications of conservation of energy and the moment of inertia for different shapes of rolling objects.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion regarding the claim that mass and size do not affect the speed of rolling objects, questioning how larger solid balls could have a larger rotational inertia yet still roll down at the same speed as smaller ones.
  • Another participant presents the conservation of energy equation to illustrate that the velocity of rolling objects depends on height and the ratio of moment of inertia to mass and radius squared, suggesting that for bodies of the same shape, this expression remains constant.
  • A subsequent participant seeks clarification on why the expression is invariant for bodies of the same shape.
  • Another participant challenges the generality of the statement regarding symmetry, noting that while it holds for objects with cylindrical symmetry, it may not apply to ellipsoids, which require further examination of their properties.
  • There is a suggestion that the equal shape theorem may not apply universally, particularly for rolling ellipsoids, and a call for further clarification on which classes of objects might reach the end of the slope simultaneously.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the implications of rotational inertia and the conditions under which different shapes of objects roll down slopes at the same speed. Multiple competing views and uncertainties remain regarding the generality of the statements made.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the invariance of the expression for rolling objects may depend on specific conditions such as symmetry and shape, and that further investigation is needed for objects like ellipsoids.

iluvc
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I'm a bit confused about the speed of objects rolling down slopes.

In my textbook, it says
"Neither the mass nor the size of the object will affect its speed when rolling downhill." And that solid balls of different masses/sizes will all reach the bottom of the slope together.

And then it goes on to say that because a hollow cylinder has mass far from the centre, it has a large rotational intertia, so gains a larger proportion of rotational Ek, so a smaller proportion of linear Ek, so it will have a slower speed when rolling downhill. Hence a solid ball (smaller I) will reach the bottom of the slope before the hollow cylinder.

My ques is - if rotational inertia is what determines the speed of objects rolling down slopes, won't a larger solid ball have a larger rotational inertia than a smaller solid ball? So a larger solid ball should (by the reasoning above) have a slower speed, so will reach the bottom of the slope AFTER (not at the same time as) a smaller solid ball?

Yet my textbook says "Large or small, light or heavy, all of these solid balls will reach the bottom of the slope together".

Can someone help me clear up my confusion?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Let's just do the equation and see what we get
Conservation of energy states
\frac12 J\omega^2+\frac12 mv^2+mgh=\text{const}
where the energies are rotational energy, kinetic linear energy and potential energy. J is the moment of inertia around the rolling axis. With v=\omega r this simplifies to
\frac12\left(\frac{J}{mr^2}+1\right)v^2+gh=\text{const}
So the velocity only depends on height and \frac{J}{mr^2}. For bodies with the same shape this expression is the same.
 
Thanks Gerenuk!

But do you mind explaining this:

Gerenuk said:
So the velocity only depends on height and \frac{J}{mr^2}. For bodies with the same shape this expression is the same.

Why's it the same for bodies of the same shape?
 
iluvc said:
Why's it the same for bodies of the same shape?
That's actually not quite a general statement.
At least for object with some degree of symmetry (maybe cylindrical; like spheres or cylinders) it turns out that
J=amr^2 where a is a constant (consider a scaling argument for J=\int r^2\mathrm{d}m). This case is easy.
Basically if an object with cylindrical symmetry (and constant radius) is scaled up or its mass density is changed, the expression J/(mr^2) is invariant.

I'm not sure how much one can generalize this statement.

For rolling ellipsoids one actually has to check all preconditions again. I think all equations are valid again, however r would be the distance from ground to the center of mass which changes as the ellipsoid rotates and also the velocity in v=\omega r is not the velocity of the center of mass projected along the inclination of the ground. And I guess J=amr_\text{avg}^2. So I could image that this equal shape theorem doesn't apply for ellipsoids, but I haven't checked all details.

Maybe someone else can clarify which class of objects reaches the end of the track at the same time.
I wouldn't be surprised if someone is able to prove that a general upscaling of the physical situation gives same time for rolling. But that would also mean that for comparing rolling at one type of slope only, on needs a self-similar slope, i.e. a flat slope.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
6K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
11K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K