Work from the bottom of Unit circle to its top in Polar Coordinates

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the work done by a force as a particle moves along the unit circle in polar coordinates. Participants are exploring the definitions of kinetic and potential energy in this context, particularly focusing on the implications of using polar coordinates versus Cartesian coordinates.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relationship between kinetic energy and potential energy in polar coordinates, questioning how to express these concepts accurately. There are attempts to derive work done using integrals of force components in polar coordinates.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided insights into the formulation of work in polar coordinates and the definitions of kinetic energy. There are ongoing questions regarding the integration process and the interpretation of forces, with no clear consensus reached on the definitions and relationships between the various quantities involved.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of a conservative force and its implications for potential energy, as well as the need to clarify the relationship between work and energy in the context of the problem. Some participants express confusion over the integration limits and the coordinate transformations involved.

soopo
Messages
222
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Calculate the work [tex]W_{A B}[/tex] done by the force [tex]F[/tex] using Newton's laws ([tex]F=ma[/tex], etc), when a particle moves from the point [tex]A[/tex] to the point [tex]B[/tex] along the unit circle. The angle is [tex]\theta[/tex]. No friction. How do you define kinetic energy in polar coordinates?

Homework Equations



Acceleration in polar coordinates is:

[tex]\bar{a} = ( \ddot{r} - r ( \dot{ \theta } )^2 ) \hat{r} + ( r \ddot{ \theta } + 2 \dot{ r } \dot{ \theta } ) \hat{ e_{\theta} }[/tex]

The Attempt at a Solution



I know from cartesian coordinates that [tex]PE=KE <=> 1/2 * mv^2 = mg*h[/tex]. I should verify it in polar coordinates. So integrating [tex]\bar{a}*m[/tex], with respect to the radius [tex]r[/tex] and the angle [tex]\theta[/tex], probably give me the energy, like [tex]W=F*distance[/tex] in carteesian coordinates.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The kinetic energy is given by [tex]T=\frac{1}{2}mv^2[/tex] and in polar coordinates, the velocity is given by

[tex] v(r,\theta)=\frac{dr}{dt}\hat{\mathbf{r}}+r\frac{d\theta}{dt}\hat{\boldsymbol{\theta}}[/tex]

(you can check that taking the time-derivative of this does give the acceleration you have) so that takes care of the first part.

For the second part, you will need to integrate [tex]m\mathbf{a}[/tex] over [tex]r,\,\theta[/tex] to get the work:

[tex] \begin{array}{ll}W&=\int \mathbf{F}\cdot d\mathbf{r}<br /> \\ &=\int F_r\,dr+\int F_\theta\,rd\theta<br /> \\ &=\int ma_r\,dr+\int ma_\theta\,rd\theta<br /> \end{array}[/tex]
 
jdwood983 said:
[tex] \begin{array}{ll}W&=\int \mathbf{F}\cdot d\mathbf{r}<br /> \\ &=\int F_r\,dr+\int F_\theta\,rd\theta[/tex]

Why do you have [tex]r[/tex] in the last integral?

It seems that you have used the relation
[tex]dr = r d\theta[/tex]
 
soopo said:
Why do you have [tex]r[/tex] in the last integral?

It seems that you have used the relation
[tex]dr = r d\theta[/tex]

It comes from the change of coordinate systems. If anything, the relation should be

[tex] d\mathbf{r}=dr\hat{\mathbf{r}}+rd\theta\hat{\mathbf{\theta}}[/tex]

And when taking the dot-product with [tex]\mathbf{F}(r,\theta)[/tex], you get the integral relation I gave.
 
jdwood983 said:
The kinetic energy is given by [tex]T=\frac{1}{2}mv^2[/tex] and in polar coordinates, the velocity is given by
[tex] \begin{array}{ll}W&=\int \mathbf{F}\cdot d\mathbf{r}<br /> \\ &=\int F_r\,dr+\int F_\theta\,rd\theta<br /> \\ &=\int ma_r\,dr+\int ma_\theta\,rd\theta<br /> \end{array}[/tex]
How do you define [tex]KE[/tex] and [tex]PE[/tex] with respect to a conservative force [tex]\bar{D} = - m g \hat{k}[/tex] ?

Is it just a dot product? So I get the work, and then I can calculate the [tex]PE[/tex] with the new work:

[tex] \begin{array}{ll}W_{ n e w }&=\int \mathbf{D}\cdot d\mathbf{r}<br /> \\ &=0<br /> \end{array}[/tex]

Zero? I assumed [tex]\hat{k}[/tex] is perdendicular to the plane by [tex]\theta[/tex] and [tex]r[/tex]. So [tex]PE[/tex] is zero with respect to the force [tex]\bar{D}[/tex].
 
Last edited:
soopo said:
How do you define [tex]KE[/tex] and [tex]PE[/tex] with respect to a conservative force [tex]\bar{D} = - m g \hat{k}[/tex] ?

Is it just a dot product? So I get the work, and then I can calculate the [tex]PE[/tex] with the new work:

[tex] \begin{array}{ll}W_{ n e w }&=\int \mathbf{D}\cdot d\mathbf{r}<br /> \\ &=0<br /> \end{array}[/tex]

Zero? I assumed [tex]\hat{k}[/tex] is perdendicular to the plane by [tex]\theta[/tex] and [tex]r[/tex]. So [tex]PE[/tex] is zero with respect to the force [tex]\bar{D}[/tex].

I think you are combining two separate problems into one.

Work is defined as the force over a distance, and neither kinetic energy nor potential energy is a force, so you can't say that W=0 as you did above.

Kinetic energy is defined as the mass times the square of the velocity (really the square of the time derivative of the position). And potential energy is defined as the mass times the relative height times the acceleration due to gravity. Neither of these is work.
 
Your problem asks two questions:
(1) What is the work done by a force moving from point [tex]A[/tex] to [tex]B[/tex] in polar coordinates?
(2) What is the kinetic energy in polar coordinates?

For the first problem,

[tex] W=\int\mathbf{F}\cdot d\mathbf{r}=\int_A^BF_r\,dr+\int_0^{\phi}F_\theta\,rdr[/tex]

where [tex]\phi[/tex] is the final angle, sweeping from [tex]A[/tex] to [tex]B[/tex]. For the second problem,

[tex] KE=\frac{1}{2}mv^2=\frac{1}{2}m\left(\frac{dr}{dt}\hat{e}_r+r\frac{d\theta}{dt}\hat{e}_\theta}\right)[/tex]
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
14K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K