The rotationnal velocity on a support

  • Thread starter Thread starter Cri85
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Support Velocity
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the rotational velocity of a wheel (ω') in a support frame that is rotating clockwise at Ω. The formula presented, ω' = ω * R1/R2, is confirmed as correct, with the condition that it holds true when R1 equals R2. The conversation also delves into the implications of centrifugal forces on the belt and the need to consider multiple axes of rotation when analyzing torque and forces acting on the support. Key concepts include the integration of forces along the belt and the distinction between angular velocity and centrifugal force.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of angular velocity and its calculation
  • Familiarity with centrifugal forces in rotating systems
  • Knowledge of torque and its relation to rotational dynamics
  • Concept of rotating reference frames and their effects
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of rotating reference frames and the Coriolis effect
  • Learn about the integration of forces in dynamic systems
  • Explore the relationship between torque and angular momentum in mechanical systems
  • Investigate the effects of varying pulley radii on rotational dynamics
USEFUL FOR

Mechanical engineers, physics students, and anyone involved in the analysis of rotational systems and dynamics will benefit from this discussion.

Cri85
Messages
68
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A support is turning clockwise at Ω around the red axis. A motor on the support is turning at ω, ω is a frame support reference rotationnal velocity. Find the rotationnal velocity of the wheel ω' in the frame support reference.

http://imageshack.com/a/img673/7631/wZhklo.png

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



For me, the rotationnal velocity of the wheel relative to the support is ω'=ω*R1/R2, is it correct ? ω' don't depend of Ω.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I think you have it right. (if R1 = R2 one expects the omegas to be equal, right ?)

Oh, and it's rotational (or better: angular)
 
  • Like
Likes Cri85
I don't understand, could you explain please ?
 
Cri85 said:
I don't understand, could you explain please ?
BvU is correcting your spelling of rotational (not rotationnal) and suggesting that 'angular velocity' is the more usual term.
 
Ok, sorry. But I don't understand his message my calculation is correct only if R1=R2 ?
 
Cri85 said:
Ok, sorry. But I don't understand his message my calculation is correct only if R1=R2 ?
No, he is saying your answer is correct. The R1=R2 case is just a sanity check. He is saying that if R1=R2 then you would expect ω'=ω, and that agrees with your answer.
(However, it's not a very strong check since you might have made the error of getting R1 and R2 crossed over. BvU's check doesn't catch that.)
 
  • Like
Likes Cri85
Ok, thanks :)
 
I asked myself about the consequence of the mass of the belt. The Pulley2 is braking on the support. All angular velocities are constant. The sum of torque on the support is 0 if the mass of the belt is 0. But if I take in account the mass of the belt, like radius of pulleys are differents and like Ω is different of 0, the centrifugal force seems to be different.
http://imageshack.com/a/img913/5508/sQ3uiA.png

The bigger pulley can be like that:

http://imageshack.com/a/img540/6098/AI8pLJ.png

The small pulley is far away the center, so the centrifugal force on the belt depends of Ω and of the position in the support ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yes. But is this still the same exercise ? Because as long as the omegas are constant it has nothing to do with ω'=ω*R1/R2 .

Don't make this too complicated... unless necessary

Where do the brakes come from ? What's the full story ?
 
  • #10
BvU said:
Yes. But is this still the same exercise ?
Sorry, no, it's only a question I asked to myself. Maybe I need to ask another question ?

Forget the brake, just the motor, a belt and a disk.

If Fc1 is not equal to Fc2, this could say there is a torque on the support and the support can gives an energy, so it is more difficult for the motor to turn the disk ?
 
  • #11
The ΔFc would cause torques on both wheels. With opposite signs, so more or less cancelling (by the belt itself). I don't think the motor would 'notice'.
 
  • #12
The support can't receive a torque from the sum of centrifugal forces of the belt ?
 
  • #13
Centrifugal forces tend to have a line of action that passes through the axis of rotation, so I would say: no.

(Didn't realize you referred to the central support, the ##\Omega## axis)
 
  • #14
Like there is 2 axes of rotation, Ω and the center of each pulley, the velocity of a small part of the belt come from the rotation around Ω and around the center of each pulley, I thought there was a torque on the support. Even the part of the belt in the "line" has 2 velocities.
 
  • #15
You've lost me. On several occasions:
2 axes (I see 3 axes)
velocity of a small part of the belt
the part of the belt in the "line" has 2 velocities.
 
  • #16
Sorry.

BvU said:
2 axes (I see 3 axes)
yes, there are 3 axes, I spoke about a particular point of the belt that is turning around a pulley and around the Ω axis .

BvU said:
velocity of a small part of the belt
I think for calulate the torque on the support from the centrifugal forces from the belt I need to integrate all the belt ?

BvU said:
the part of the belt in the "line" has 2 velocities.
If I take a point of the belt that is turning around the Pulley1, this point rotates around the pulley but like all the device is turning around Ω axis the velocity is composed of 2 terms, one from the rotation of the pulley: Vp, and other from the rotation around Ω: VΩ. For each point the velocity is composed of 2 terms, no ? I drawn an image:

http://imageshack.com/a/img661/3523/LSAYFE.png
The sum of the velocity is Vs but for calculate the centrifugal force I need to take in account the trajectory. Maybe this sort of exercice has been study somewhere ? Or there is a method ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #17
You could check out rotating reference frames (and find there's not only a ficititous centrifugal force, but also a coriolis force, dependent on velocity).
But doing such a transformation twice makes life pretty difficult.
 
  • #18
Thanks for the link. I will try to calculate the sum of centrifugal force in my last case.

It's easier to draw centrifugal forces in this case :

http://imageshack.com/a/img661/1657/bM8gZu.png

The Pulley1 is in the center of rotation, it rotates the belt, it is a crossed belt. I added a Pulley3 and a static belt on it for have the same mass than the Pulley2+belt.

With Ω = 0, the sum of centrifugal forces cancel themselves. But with Ω different of 0, the support seems to have a net force to the left. So why I can't draw my forces like that: red forces are centrifugal forces on the belt on the Pulley2 ?
 
Last edited by a moderator:
  • #19
Cri85 said:
Sorry.

yes, there are 3 axes, I spoke about a particular point of the belt that is turning around a pulley and around the Ω axis .

I think for calulate the torque on the support from the centrifugal forces from the belt I need to integrate all the belt ?

If I take a point of the belt that is turning around the Pulley1, this point rotates around the pulley but like all the device is turning around Ω axis the velocity is composed of 2 terms, one from the rotation of the pulley: Vp, and other from the rotation around Ω: VΩ. For each point the velocity is composed of 2 terms, no ? I drawn an image:

http://imageshack.com/a/img661/3523/LSAYFE.png
The sum of the velocity is Vs but for calculate the centrifugal force I need to take in account the trajectory. Maybe this sort of exercice has been study somewhere ? Or there is a method ?
The acceleration of the belt provided by each wheel is along the line of centres joining the wheels. Moreover, they are equal and opposite. Hence, no net torque.
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K