Understanding the Physics of a Cylinder Rolling Down a Slope

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the physics of a cylinder rolling down a slope, with a focus on understanding the forces and accelerations involved. The user expresses confusion regarding their free-body diagram, particularly the direction of gravitational forces and the role of friction. There is uncertainty about the expressions for linear and angular acceleration, as well as the implications of the friction force on the cylinder's motion. The conversation highlights the need to clarify the relationship between friction, angular acceleration, and the no-slip condition. Overall, the user seeks guidance to better grasp the underlying physics concepts.
TauMuon
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I would appreciate some help on this question involving a cylinder rolling down a slope; I'm far from comfortable with the physics involved.

Question here:
LjmIRSr.png


This is my free-body diagram of the forces acting on the cylinder:
tUNGtjV.jpg


Expressions for the acceleration in the x- and y-directions in terms of the forces acting on the cylinder:
ihHqL6q.jpg


Now I think the above is okay. The following is where I get a bit lost...

Expression for the angular acceleration:
rVkSqDe.jpg


Acceleration along x (didn't it already ask for this..?) :
Et8k6F9.png


I really have no clue if the above is even remotely correct. I'm very fuzzy on the physics at the moment, so if someone could take the time to explain it to me I would be immensely grateful.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
RE diagram: it's a bit strange that ##m\vec g\cos\theta## is pointing upwards. After all, the vectors ##m \vec g\cos\theta## and ##m \vec g\sin\theta## should add up to ##m\vec g##

An unexplained ( :) ) ##\mu## pops up in the diagram.

If I take the diagram seriously, the cylinder should take off from the ramp in the vertical y-direction: forces don't add up to 0 (see first comment re diagram)

so much for a) and b).

c) there's ##\mu## again. For the friction force we usually write ##|\vec F_{fric, max}| = \mu |\vec F_N|## where ##\vec F_N## is the normal force. Hence my "confusion": the friction force let's the thing rotate, but perhaps the maximum friction force is more than is needed to satisfy the no-slip condition... So you want to wonder about this non-slipping and what it means for ##\alpha## and thereby for the friction force..
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top