When given the angular velocity, why not multiply by time to find the # of revs?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of angular velocity in calculating the number of revolutions a disk makes over a specified time period, particularly when the disk starts from rest and accelerates uniformly. Participants explore the relationship between angular velocity, angular acceleration, and the appropriate formulas to use in such scenarios.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests converting revolutions per minute to radians per second and multiplying by time as a straightforward approach to find the number of revolutions.
  • Another participant agrees that this method is valid.
  • A different participant points out that the formula for angular displacement (analogous to x=vt) cannot be used because angular velocity is not constant in this scenario, as the disk accelerates from rest.
  • One participant expresses confusion about whether angular acceleration is always present in rotating systems and questions the applicability of the formula x=wt for angular motion.
  • Another participant clarifies that it is possible to have constant angular speed, indicating that not all rotating objects experience angular acceleration.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the applicability of certain formulas in the context of angular motion, particularly regarding the use of x=wt when angular acceleration is involved. There is no consensus on the best approach to solve the problem presented.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of understanding the conditions under which specific kinematic equations apply, particularly in the context of rotational motion. The assumptions regarding constant versus variable angular velocity are central to the debate.

man_in_motion
Messages
11
Reaction score
0
In an example question the revolutions per minute where 500rev/min. The question asked how many revolutions the disk makes in 5.5s. The solution started with the formula w=w_o+\alpha t I'm wondering why one can't just convert rev/min into raidans/sec and multiply that number by 5.5s? kind of like x=vt

oh you and it says the disk starts from rest
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
you definitely can.
 
that formula is equivalent to v = v_o + at
 
Let me get this straight.. the question is as follows:
A disk starts from rest and accelerates uniformly to 500rev/min in 5.5s. How many revolutions does it make in this time?

If I'm understanding that correctly, then you cannot use your naive solution formula because angular velocity is not constant. Surely you know that x=vt only applies for constant velocity, and the situation is completely analogous for angular motion. Now, knowing what I just told you, how would you solve the problem if it were posed in terms of translation, and then you should be able to easily transfer to rotation (or just think purely in rotation, if you can do that).
 
got it now...I miss understood the question and thought that there was no acceleration:rolleyes:
so let me get this straight:
whenever something is rotating there's going to be angular acceleration right? so that means I will NEVER use a formula like x=wt where w is the angular velocity and x is the distance travelled?
 
man_in_motion said:
so let me get this straight:
whenever something is rotating there's going to be angular acceleration right? so that means I will NEVER use a formula like x=wt where w is the angular velocity and x is the distance travelled?
No. Of course you can have something rotating with constant angular speed.

Just like with translational motion, you can have constant velocity or accelerated motion. It depends on the problem.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
  • · Replies 43 ·
2
Replies
43
Views
6K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K