I What is the purpose of radius of gyration

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion regarding the use of radius 'r' and radius of gyration 'Rg' in calculating the moment of inertia for a mass rolling down an incline. It clarifies that the moment of inertia can be expressed as I = mRg^2, where Rg represents the distribution of mass, while I = 1/2 * mr^2 applies specifically to a solid cylinder. Participants question whether the problem specifies the shape of the object, as this affects the appropriate formula to use. The relationship between Rg and r is also discussed, with a suggestion that Rg could be equal to r/√2, depending on the object's characteristics. Understanding the object's geometry is crucial for correctly applying the moment of inertia formula.
TheBlueDot
Messages
16
Reaction score
2
Hello,

I'm given a problem of a mass rolling down an incline with mass 'm', radius 'r', and radius of gyration Rg, and I need to write the Lagrangian for the motion. I'm confused on why both r and Rg are given. Don't I just need one of the two for the moment of inertia?
Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The radius of gyration gives the moment of inertia via the equivalence of the given object and an object with all its mass concentrated at a distance of the radius of gyration from the center of mass. So I = m R_g^2.

You can treat the object as a massless cylinder of the given physical radius with a hollow cylinder of mass m and radius R_g embedded within it.
 
Hi jambaugh,

Thank you for your response. The part I'm confused on is if I use Rg the moment of inertia (assume a cylinder) would be I= mRg^2, but if I use 'r', then I=1/2 *mr^2. I guess I don't understand where the question is leading...
 
Why would I = \frac{m}{2} r^2? Is R_g given to be equal to r/\sqrt{2}? Did the problem specifically say the object was a solid disk or cylinder? Maybe the object is not what you are assuming with the \frac{m}{2}r^2 formula.
 
Hello, I'm joining this forum to ask two questions which have nagged me for some time. I am in no way trolling. They both are presumed obvious, yet don't make sense to me. Nobody will explain their positions, which is...uh...aka science. I also have a thread for the other question. Yes, I'm questioning the most elementary physics question we're given in this world. The classic elevator in motion question: A person is standing on a scale in an elevator that is in constant motion...
Thread ''splain this hydrostatic paradox in tiny words'
This is (ostensibly) not a trick shot or video*. The scale was balanced before any blue water was added. 550mL of blue water was added to the left side. only 60mL of water needed to be added to the right side to re-balance the scale. Apparently, the scale will balance when the height of the two columns is equal. The left side of the scale only feels the weight of the column above the lower "tail" of the funnel (i.e. 60mL). So where does the weight of the remaining (550-60=) 490mL go...
Let us take the Ampere-Maxwell law $$\nabla \times \mathbf{B} = \mu_0\,\mathbf{J}+\frac{1}{c^2}\frac{\partial \mathbf{E}}{\partial t}.\tag{1}$$ Assume we produce a spark that is so fast that the ##\partial \mathbf{E}/\partial t## term in eqn.##(1)## has not yet been produced by Faraday’s law of induction $$\nabla \times \mathbf{E}=-\frac{\partial \mathbf{B}}{\partial t}\tag{2}$$ since the current density ##\mathbf{J}## has not yet had time to generate the magnetic field ##\mathbf{B}##. By...