Time From Slipping to Rolling Motion

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around determining the time it takes for a solid homogeneous cylinder to transition from slipping to pure rolling motion on a surface with kinetic friction. Two attempts at solving the problem are presented: the first using energy equations and the second employing kinematics. The first attempt raises concerns about energy loss due to friction, while the second approach suggests that if rolling resistance is negligible, it can be a valid method. Participants clarify that energy is not conserved due to slipping, leading to heat generation, and emphasize the importance of considering both translational and rotational kinetic energy in the calculations. The consensus leans towards using the second method for a solution.
Mr. Heretic
Messages
16
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


EDIT: A solid homegeneous cylinder of mass M and radius R is moving on a surface with a coefficient of kinetic friction μ(k).
At t=0 the motion of the cylinder is purely translational with a velocity v(0) that is parallel to the surface and perpendicular to the central axis of the cylinder.
Determine the time t after which the cylinder performs pure rolling motion.

I've tried with energy equations to determine this and got a solution with the right units, but it seems fundamentally wrong in that for friction to do the work in converting translational to angular velocity there must be a loss of energy, right?
Will detail as "Attempt 1"

Also tried with simple kinematics and got another solution with the right units, but after doing it I realized that kinematics make all sorts of assumptions too, if mapping the trajectory of a projectile as a parabola ignores frction, then is this really any more valid?
will detail as "Attempt 2"

All thoughts and comments welcomed.

Homework Equations


E(kt) = 1/2 mv^2
E(ka) = 1/2 Iω^2

I = 1/2 MR^2

3. The attempts at a solution

Attempt 1:
E(kr i) + E(kt i) = E(kt f) + E(kr f)
0 + (1/2)mv(o)^2 = (1/2)mv(f)^2 + (1/2)Iω(f)^2
mv(o)^2 = mv(f)^2 + Iω(f)^2

No slipping at t (by definition) so v(f) = Rω(f)
mv(o)^2 = m(R^2)ω(f)^2 + Iω(f)^2

I = (1/2)mR^2
mv(o)^2 = m(R^2)ω(f)^2 + (1/2)m(R^2)ω(f)^2
v(o)^2 = (R^2)ω(f)^2 + (1/2)(R^2)ω(f)^2
v(o)^2 = (3/2)(R^2)ω(f)^2
ω(f) = √(2/3)v(o)/R

And ω(f) = ω(i) + αt
√(2/3)v(o)/R = ω(i) + αt

ω(i) = 0
t = √(2/3)v(o)/(Rα)

τ = Iα, α = τ/I
t = √(2/3)v(o)I/(Rτ)

τ = F(friction)R
F(friction) = μ(k)F(normal)
F(normal) = mg
τ = μ(k)mgR
t = √(2/3)v(o)I/(μ(k)mgR^2)

Again, I = (1/2)mR^2
t = (1/2)√(2/3)v(o)/(μ(k)g)
(1/2)√(2/3) = √(1/4)√(2/3) = √(1/6)

t = √(1/6)v(o)/(μ(k)g)Attempt 2:

v = v(i) + at
ω = ω(i) + αt

Determining variables:
v(i) = v(0)

a = F(f)/M = F(n)μ(k)/M = μ(k)g
But it's acting in the negative direction as velocity must be decreasing, so -μ(k)g

ω(i) = 0

α = τ/I
τ = F(f)R = μ(k)MgR
I = (1/2)MR^2
So α = (μ(k)MgR)/((1/2)MR^2) = 2μ(k)g/R

Plugging them in:
v = v(o) - μ(k)gt
ω = 2μ(k)gt/R

Condition of rolling: v = ωR -> v/R = ω
Equating and solving:
(v(o) - μ(k)gt)/R = 2μ(k)gt/R
v(o) - μ(k)gt = 2μ(k)gt
v(o) = 3μ(k)gt

t = v(o) / ( 3 μ(k) g )
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Mr. Heretic said:

Homework Statement


... friction to do the work in converting translational to angular velocity there must be a loss of energy, right?

Hi, I am not sure I understand your problem statement exactly but this is not necessarily the case. For example a drum pure rolling down an incline. The translational energy loss from friction is exactly made up by the rotational kinetic energy gained from the torque, so that the system is not dissipative.
 
Thanks for responding.
And sorry, I didn't have enough time to word it perfectly on account of needing to attend a lecture, I'll find the original wording and edit the first post.

As for energy loss, I'd treat that as a special case.
With this there is definitely slipping, and non-zero relative velocity between the surfaces + friction --> heat generation.
 
If you want to solve the problem with work-energy theorem, then the work done by friction equals the change of KE: both translational and rotational. The energy is not conserved. You get a relation between final speed and distance travelled, but you need the time.

The second approach is correct if the rolling resistance can be ignored.

ehild
 
From a quick wiki, rolling resistance would rely on deformation of the cylinder or the surface.
Based on the low level at which we've studied friction so far, I'll venture it can be ignored in this problem.
Will go with the second method, cheers. :]
 
Last edited:
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
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