What is the Angular Speed of a Falling Rod?

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the angular speed of a falling rod pivoted at one end. The initial potential energy is incorrectly set as MgL, while it should be Mg(L/2) since the center of mass of the rod moves down by L/2 when it swings to a vertical position. The moment of inertia for the rod is correctly identified as I = 1/3 ML^2. The correct relationship between potential energy and kinetic energy leads to the conclusion that the angular speed w can be derived as √(6g/L). Clarification is provided on the importance of using the center of mass in energy calculations for accurate results.
j2013
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A rod of length L and mass M is pivoted about one end. The rod is released from rest in a horizontal position, and allowed to swing downward without friction or air resistance. When the rod is vertical, what is its angular speed w?

Homework Equations



Moment of Inertia, I = 1/3 ML^2

The Attempt at a Solution



I would like to apologize in advance if my notations are difficult to read.

Ki + Ui = Kf + Uf
0 + MgL = (1/2) Iw^2 + 0
MgL = (1/2)(1/3 ML^2)w^2
√6g/L = w

I think I'm supposed to use the rod's center of mass because my current answer is wrong and since the diagram in my book points out that the center of mass is at L/2 from the pivot point. I don't think they would point that out if it was unnecessary, but I don't understand why. Putting Ui as Mg(L/2) gives me the right answer though, according to the back of the book.

Any help clarifying this would be much appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
j2013 said:

Homework Equations



Moment of Inertia, I = 1/3 ML^2

The Attempt at a Solution



I would like to apologize in advance if my notations are difficult to read.

Ki + Ui = Kf + Uf
0 + MgL = (1/2) Iw^2 + 0
MgL = (1/2)(1/3 ML^2)w^2
√6g/L = w

I think I'm supposed to use the rod's center of mass because my current answer is wrong and since the diagram in my book points out that the center of mass is at L/2 from the pivot point. I don't think they would point that out if it was unnecessary, but I don't understand why. Putting Ui as Mg(L/2) gives me the right answer though, according to the back of the book.

Any help clarifying this would be much appreciated.


Your I value is correct.
Ui is not MgL. Ui is MgL/2 because height is distance between initial CM point and final CM point. Perpendicular distance between two CM is L/2. So calculate again to find angular velocity.
 
j2013 said:

I think I'm supposed to use the rod's center of mass because my current answer is wrong and since the diagram in my book points out that the center of mass is at L/2 from the pivot point. I don't think they would point that out if it was unnecessary, but I don't understand why. Putting Ui as Mg(L/2) gives me the right answer though, according to the back of the book.


Yes, the potential energy of a homogeneous rod of length L gets mgL/2 lower when it swings down from horizontal position into vertical.

Think of the road as a chain of N small pieces, each of mass Δm=M/N.

Initially, all pieces are at the same height. When the rod swings to vertical position the height of the piece at the pivot does not change, but the end moves down by L. The middle, which is the centre of mass for a homogeneous rod, moves down by L/2. If you take a piece at distance x from the CM, the piece above the CM has Δmxg higher PE than the CM, and the piece below the CM has PE Δmxg lower than the CM, the sum of the PE of both pieces is -2ΔmgL/2 with respect to the original horizontal position. Doing the same for all pair of pieces you get that the final PE= -NΔm*gL/2 = MgL/2 with respect to the horizontal position of the rod.

ehild
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 71 ·
3
Replies
71
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 62 ·
3
Replies
62
Views
13K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K