Ye Olde Acceleration: Angular Speed, Deceleration, & More

  • Thread starter Thread starter a.mlw.walker
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Acceleration
AI Thread Summary
When a motor spins a ball on a string at a constant speed, there is centripetal acceleration but no angular acceleration. Once the motor is turned off, the ball experiences negative angular acceleration and begins to decelerate due to friction. The ball will start to fall when the centripetal force is less than the gravitational force acting on it, which occurs as it loses speed. To calculate the time until this happens, one must consider the relationship between angular acceleration and the forces involved. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding the dynamics of motion and forces in both terrestrial and microgravity environments.
a.mlw.walker
Messages
144
Reaction score
0
hi,

if a motor spins a ball on a string round and round and a constant speed, there is an acceleration towards the centre, but no angular acceleration, just angular speed right?

but if you now turn the motor off, the balls angular acceleration will now go negative, and the ball will decelerate. at what point does the ball fall. how do you calculate how long it will take and at what speed the ball will fall at? because this is separate from its centrepetal acc yes?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi a.mlw.walker! :smile:
a.mlw.walker said:
if a motor spins a ball on a string round and round and a constant speed, there is an acceleration towards the centre, but no angular acceleration, just angular speed right?

Yes!
but if you now turn the motor off, the balls angular acceleration will now go negative, and the ball will decelerate. at what point does the ball fall. how do you calculate how long it will take and at what speed the ball will fall at? because this is separate from its centrepetal acc yes?

Friction will gradually reduce the speed of the ball, and therefore its angular velocity (as you say, the angular acceleration will now go negative), and this will start immediately.

What is supporting the ball (apart from the string)? If nothing is, then the ball will immediately start to go lower (on the surface of an imaginary sphere). But it won't actually "fall". :smile:
 
If this were to be done in space, though, with no air and microgravity, the effect would be different. In that case, stopping the motor would just cause the tether line to wind up around the shaft and draw the ball in until it hit centre. Then, depending upon the properties of the ball, it would possibly rebound and unwind just to wind up again in the opposite direction. Eventually, the losses due to collision with the centre would overcome the ability to unwind again.
At least, I think that's how it would go.
 
well, yeah ok fine i didnt mention it for the example but if you want, the shaft has an arm on it and the string is attached to that so it can't "wind up"...

are you sure that effect is happening immediately, because with centrepetal force f=mv*v)/r

when this force gets below the force gravity has on the ball then the ball will begin to spiral down - but its only spiraling down because of a forward momentum, until the point where centreptal force is lower than the gravitational force, it will continue to spin on the same radius.

my question is how to work out how long after you turn the motor off, to when centreptal force is lower than gravitational force... it must be to do with the angular accelration but can't work out how to do it...
 
a.mlw.walker said:
… are you sure that effect is happening immediately, because with centrepetal force f=mv²)/r ...

Hi a.mlw.walker! :smile:

(copy the ², and anything else you want, for future use)

This is exactly the same as a ball rolling round the inside of a hemisphere.

Its height depends precisely on its speed.

Reduce the speed slightly, and that must reduce the height slightly … it does happen immediately.

So … on a sphere … what do you think is the formula connecting the speed with the height? :smile:
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top