Tangential and radial coordinate problem. Confused about the FBD.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the confusion regarding the free body diagram (FBD) in a polar coordinate problem involving tangential and radial forces. It clarifies that the force exerted by the rod on the particle is normal to the rod's surface, not in the tangential direction as initially thought. The unit vectors in polar coordinates are defined as er for the radial direction and eθ for the tangential direction, emphasizing that a_theta is not equal to a_t. The conversation highlights the distinction between the tangential vector related to the particle's motion and the one related to the rod's rotation. Understanding these concepts is crucial for accurately interpreting the forces involved in the problem.
theBEAST
Messages
361
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Here is a picture of the problem with the free body diagram:
http://dl.dropbox.com/u/64325990/HW%20Pictures/problem101.PNG

I am confused about why the free body diagram has the force vector in the direction of the aθ. When I did it I thought the force that the rod would exert on the particle would be in the tangential direction? In other words in the direction of at.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't see a_t in your pic.

But anyway, I am pretty sure that the tangential direction is the theta direction as well.
So a_theta = a_t

In polar coordinates the radial direction is out from the origin, and the theta direction is perpendicular to that, which would be the tangential direction.
 
spacelike said:
I don't see a_t in your pic.

But anyway, I am pretty sure that the tangential direction is the theta direction as well.
So a_theta = a_t

In polar coordinates the radial direction is out from the origin, and the theta direction is perpendicular to that, which would be the tangential direction.

No the unit vector in the tangential direction (u_t) is perpendicular to the normal direction. a_theta != a_t..

I edited the picture slightly to show the direction of a_t which is in the direction of it's unit vector u_t.
 
i'll just add this to what spacelike :smile: says …

in polar coordinates, the actual coordinates are r,θ,

and so the unit vectors for increasing r (with fixed θ), and for increasing θ (with fixed r) are called er and eθ, respectively

(or \boldsymbol{\hat{r}} and \boldsymbol{\hat{θ}})

and their velocity or acceleration components therefore have the same subscripts

(and of course, t isn't a coordinate :wink:)
 
I think I understand your confusion. There are two tangential vectors you could define. One would be the vector that is tangential to the motion of the particle and the other is tangential to any point on the rod which is rotating (but at a constant distance from the origin). The second one must be in the theta direction which is perp. to the rod. The force from the rod MUST be that force which is normal to the surface of the rod. Unless there are strange things going on, the only interaction between the rod and particle must be normal to the rod. The force that you are thinking about that would be in the u_t direction is the net force on the particle. If that were asked, you would be correct.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top