Calculating Height from Work and Rotational Motion of a Rigid Body

  • Thread starter Thread starter GoldShadow
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Body Rigid body
AI Thread Summary
A 392-N wheel rolls off a truck and reaches a height h after rolling up a hill, with initial rotational speed of 25.0 rad/s and radius of 0.600 m. The moment of inertia is given as 0.800MR^2, and friction does 3500 J of work against the wheel. Initial calculations incorrectly excluded translational kinetic energy and mischaracterized the work done by friction. By including both rotational and translational kinetic energy in the energy equation, the correct height h is determined to be 11.7 m, aligning with the book's answer. The discussion highlights the importance of considering all forms of energy and the direction of friction in rotational motion problems.
GoldShadow
Messages
23
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A 392-N wheel comes off a moving truck and rolls without slipping along a highway. At the bottom of a hill it is rotating at 25.0 rad/s. The radius of the wheel is 0.600 m and its moment of inertia about its rotation axis is 0.800MR^2. Friction does work on the wheel as it rolls up the hill to a stop, a height h above the bottom of the hill; this work has absolute value 3500 J. Calculate h.

Mass "M" = w/g = 392/9.8, or 40 kg.

Homework Equations


I=cMR^{2}

W_{total}=\Delta K - W_{friction}= \frac{1}{2}I \omega^{2}_{final}-\frac{1}{2}I \omega^{2}_{initial}-W_{friction}

W_{total}=-\Delta U=Mgh_{initial}-Mgh_{final}

The Attempt at a Solution


I set the two equations for Work equal to get:

Mgh_{initial}-Mgh_{final}=\frac{1}{2}I \omega^{2}_{final}-\frac{1}{2}I \omega^{2}_{initial}-W_{friction}

Since initial height is 0 and final angular velocity is 0, this simplifies to:

-Mgh_{final}=-\frac{1}{2}I \omega^{2}_{initial}-W_{friction}

Multiplying this equation by -1 to make the negatives a little more friendly and writing out "I" (moment of inertia) yields:Mgh_{final}=\frac{1}{2}cMR^{2} \omega^{2}_{initial}+W_{friction}

Isolating to solve for "h":

\frac{(\frac{1}{2}cMR^{2} \omega^{2}_{initial}+W_{friction})}{Mg}=h_{final}

Plugging in numbers:

\frac{(\frac{1}{2}(0.800)(40)(0.600)^{2} (25.0)^{2}+3500)}{(40)(9.80)}=h_{final}

For h I get 18.1 m, but the answer according to the book is 11.7 m.

I tried several approaches and couldn't get the right answer, so I would appreciate help.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You have an equation where energy is not conserved, which is good, but it's missing two major things. You take the rotational kinetic energy of the wheel into account, but you leave out the wheel's translational kinetic energy. Additionally, you're assuming that the friction does negative work on the wheel. Think about which way the friction points along the hill.
 
Ah, okay, I get it now. Since there is both rotational and translational motion, \Delta K should include both types of kinetic energy. And work due to friction is positive because it acts in such a direction that makes angular velocity positive? So my new equation would be:

-Mgh_{final}=-\frac{1}{2}I \omega^{2}_{initial}-\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}_{initial}+W_{friction}.

And knowing that v=\omega R, plug in numbers to get h=11.7 m.

Thank you very much hotcommodity, this problem was really frustrating me.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top