Translational and Rotational energy in rigid bodies

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the kinetic energy of a rigid body, specifically a flat disk, moving with constant velocity and rotating about its center of mass. The total kinetic energy is expressed as Etotal = Erotational + Etranslational + ∑miv'i ⋅ v, where the additional term ∑miv'i ⋅ v initially caused confusion regarding its contribution to total energy. However, it was clarified that this term equals zero when integrated over the appropriate limits, confirming that the total kinetic energy is indeed the sum of the translational and rotational components. The use of integrals is emphasized for accurate calculations in continuous systems.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of rigid body dynamics
  • Familiarity with kinetic energy equations
  • Knowledge of Galilean transformations
  • Basic calculus, specifically integration techniques
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of rigid body dynamics in depth
  • Learn about the derivation and application of kinetic energy equations
  • Explore Galilean transformations and their implications in physics
  • Practice integration techniques for continuous systems in mechanics
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, mechanical engineering, and applied mathematics who are interested in understanding the dynamics of rotating bodies and kinetic energy calculations.

Zamorak
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Suppose I have some sort of rigid body, a solid sphere let's say. For simplicity's sake let's assume that the sphere can only rotate about a single arbitrary axis through the center of mass. If the center of mass of the sphere is traveling with a constant velocity (with respect to some arbitrary reference frame) and the sphere also has a non-zero constant angular velocity about a single axis, will the total kinetic energy of the sphere be equal to the sum of the Rotational and Translational kinetic energy? Intuitively, I feel like the answer should be yes, but when I try to verify my intuition, the math seems to suggest otherwise.

Etotal =1/2 ∑miv2i

In the reference frame of the center of mass, the velocity of any particle is defined by its angular velocity and the distance from center of mass.

v'i = rw(cosΘ)ey - rw(sinΘ)ex

If the center of mass if moving with velocity v with respect to the reference frame we are observing the sphere at then we can apply a simple Galilean transformation to find an expression for vi

v = aey + bex

vi = (rw(cosΘ) + a)ey + (b - rw(sinΘ))ex
v2i = (v'i)2 + v2 +2v'i ⋅v

If I plug this back into the expression for the total kinetic energy, I get something odd.

Etotal = 1/2∑mi(v'i)2 + 1/2∑miv2 + ∑miv'i ⋅v

Etotal = Erotational + Etranslational + ∑miv'i ⋅v

I'm not sure if I didn't properly define translational and rotational energy in this case, but the above equation seems to imply that the total kinetic energy is more than the sum of the translational and rotational kinetic energy. I'm a little confused about mechanics concerned rotation right now, so any guidance would be greatly appreciated.

EDIT: Change "sphere" to flat disk, I wanted to work in 2 dimensions for simplicity's sake
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
At first, you should not that(using standard spherical coordinates and taking the centre of mass to be at the centre of the sphere) for a particle at (r,\theta,\varphi), v_i'=r\omega \sin\theta(\cos\varphi \hat x+\sin\varphi \hat y).
The next point is, those sums should be replaced by integrals for actual calculations because we're dealing with a continuum here. But as you can see, you have, in v_i', sine and cosine of \varphi which gives zero when integrated from 0 \ to \ 2\pi. So that extra term is actually zero.
 
Ah, my bad, I should have specified a flat disk instead of a sphere, but I get your point. The reason I didn't start with integral in the first place was to show that there was that I didn't intend to calculate the energies, but now that you mention it if I consider the extra term as an integral it does work out.

∑miv'i⋅v
= ∑r(w)(acosΘ - bsinΘ)mi

dm = krdΘdr
∑miv'i⋅v

Integrate from 0 to R and 0 to 2π
=wk∫∫r2(acosθ - bsinΘ)dΘdr
=wk∫r2(b - b)dr
=0

I'm honestly not too familiar with using integrals in these situations, but if that's right then everything makes sense, thanks for the reply.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K