Verify Coriolis Acceleration Derivation on Merry Go Round

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter somebodyelse5
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Acceleration Coriolis
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the derivation of Coriolis acceleration in the context of a rotating merry-go-round. Participants explore the mathematical formulation of the acceleration from a rotating reference frame, addressing potential errors and clarifications in the equation presented by the original poster.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • The original poster presents a derivation of Coriolis acceleration but expresses concern about its correctness and formatting.
  • One participant suggests that the equation lacks proper units of acceleration, indicating a possible transcription error.
  • Another participant provides the standard form of the Coriolis acceleration equation, but notes uncertainty due to the lack of clarity on variable definitions and setup.
  • A later reply identifies missing components in the original equation, including a time variable and corrections to unit vectors, while also suggesting assumptions about the direction of velocity.
  • Participants discuss the possibility of posting a corrected equation in the future.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

There is no consensus on the correctness of the original derivation, as multiple participants point out different potential errors and uncertainties in the formulation. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the final correct equation.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include unclear definitions of variables and the specific setup of the problem, as well as unresolved mathematical steps in the derivation.

somebodyelse5
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
I have a derivation for the coriolis acceleration on a "merry go round" that my instructor gave in class, i was wondering if someone could tell me if this is correct or offer the correct final equation.
Additional information: this is from the rotating point of view on the merry go round.

[\omega V_{}ocos(\theta-\omegat)+\omega^2V_{}otsin(\theta-\omegat)]j-2[\omegaV_{}osin(\theta-\omegat)-\omega^2V_{}ocos(\theta-\omegat)]j

Note: this is not HW, just something i need to study for my exam and I am concerned it is incorrect.
V_{}o is Initial velocity

Please forgive the poor formatting of that equation, i did my best to make it clear. For some reason, some of the omegas are off set up, and shouldn't be, could figure out why.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is what you wrote I think,

<br /> [\omega v_0\cos(\theta-\omega t)+\omega^2v_0t\sin(\theta-\omega t)]\mathbf{j}-2[\omega v_0\sin(\theta-\omega t)-\omega^2 v_0\cos(\theta-\omega t)]\mathbf{j}<br />

You can just use the tex environment from now on instead of switching between them. Well the way it's written it can't be right since the last term (the one with cosine) doesn't have the units of acceleration. I imagine there should be a t multiplied at the end there.

Did you mis-transcribe it?
 
The coriolis force produces acceleration:

\bold{a_c}=-2(\bold{\omega} \times \bold{v})

So, without knowing how exactly you defined your variables, and the exact set up of your problem, I'm not entirely sure I can help you all that much.
 
appreciate the responses guys. In my frantic searches and calls to fellow students it turns out i simply "forgot" a 2 in front of the first term, and mixed up the unit vector for the second term.

If you guys are at all interested, I can post the correct equation tomorrow? got to keep studying now!
 
You are missing a time variable in the second centrifugal acceleration term. You need a v*t to equal radius for someone walking radially. The 2 should only be part of the Coriolis acceleration and not the centrifugal acceleration. Your second unit vector j should be an i. Other than that you're fine. Also I'm assuming that a positive v means the person is walking radially outward, and a negative v means they are walking radially inward.

Have you tried solving for the trajectory and not just the acceleration?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K