Kinetic energy of the compound pendulum
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Question:
A rigid, uniform rod of length $L$ and mass $M$ is pivoted to the origin $O$ at one end, and is then left to swing freely in a vertical plane.
If the angle the rod makes with the vertical is $theta$, show that the kinetic energy of the rod is $$T = frac 16 ML^2{dot theta} ^2$$
Attempt:
In terms of $theta$, the position of the center of mass is
$$(x,y) = bigg(frac L2 sin theta, -frac L2 cos theta bigg)$$
In a previous part of the question, I have shown that the moment of inertia of the rod about one of its endpoints is $$I = frac 13 ML^2$$
Thus, the total kinetic energy of the rod should be
begin{align}
T & = frac 12 M(dot x^2 + dot y^2) + frac 12 I omega ^2 \
& = frac 12 Mbigg[bigg(frac L2 dot thetacos theta bigg)^2 + bigg(frac L2 dot theta sin thetabigg)^2 bigg] + frac 12bigg(frac 13 ML^2 bigg) dot theta ^2 \
& = frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2 \
& neq frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2
end{align}
Is this perhaps not the right way to do this question?
classical-mechanics
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Question:
A rigid, uniform rod of length $L$ and mass $M$ is pivoted to the origin $O$ at one end, and is then left to swing freely in a vertical plane.
If the angle the rod makes with the vertical is $theta$, show that the kinetic energy of the rod is $$T = frac 16 ML^2{dot theta} ^2$$
Attempt:
In terms of $theta$, the position of the center of mass is
$$(x,y) = bigg(frac L2 sin theta, -frac L2 cos theta bigg)$$
In a previous part of the question, I have shown that the moment of inertia of the rod about one of its endpoints is $$I = frac 13 ML^2$$
Thus, the total kinetic energy of the rod should be
begin{align}
T & = frac 12 M(dot x^2 + dot y^2) + frac 12 I omega ^2 \
& = frac 12 Mbigg[bigg(frac L2 dot thetacos theta bigg)^2 + bigg(frac L2 dot theta sin thetabigg)^2 bigg] + frac 12bigg(frac 13 ML^2 bigg) dot theta ^2 \
& = frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2 \
& neq frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2
end{align}
Is this perhaps not the right way to do this question?
classical-mechanics
add a comment |
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
up vote
0
down vote
favorite
Question:
A rigid, uniform rod of length $L$ and mass $M$ is pivoted to the origin $O$ at one end, and is then left to swing freely in a vertical plane.
If the angle the rod makes with the vertical is $theta$, show that the kinetic energy of the rod is $$T = frac 16 ML^2{dot theta} ^2$$
Attempt:
In terms of $theta$, the position of the center of mass is
$$(x,y) = bigg(frac L2 sin theta, -frac L2 cos theta bigg)$$
In a previous part of the question, I have shown that the moment of inertia of the rod about one of its endpoints is $$I = frac 13 ML^2$$
Thus, the total kinetic energy of the rod should be
begin{align}
T & = frac 12 M(dot x^2 + dot y^2) + frac 12 I omega ^2 \
& = frac 12 Mbigg[bigg(frac L2 dot thetacos theta bigg)^2 + bigg(frac L2 dot theta sin thetabigg)^2 bigg] + frac 12bigg(frac 13 ML^2 bigg) dot theta ^2 \
& = frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2 \
& neq frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2
end{align}
Is this perhaps not the right way to do this question?
classical-mechanics
Question:
A rigid, uniform rod of length $L$ and mass $M$ is pivoted to the origin $O$ at one end, and is then left to swing freely in a vertical plane.
If the angle the rod makes with the vertical is $theta$, show that the kinetic energy of the rod is $$T = frac 16 ML^2{dot theta} ^2$$
Attempt:
In terms of $theta$, the position of the center of mass is
$$(x,y) = bigg(frac L2 sin theta, -frac L2 cos theta bigg)$$
In a previous part of the question, I have shown that the moment of inertia of the rod about one of its endpoints is $$I = frac 13 ML^2$$
Thus, the total kinetic energy of the rod should be
begin{align}
T & = frac 12 M(dot x^2 + dot y^2) + frac 12 I omega ^2 \
& = frac 12 Mbigg[bigg(frac L2 dot thetacos theta bigg)^2 + bigg(frac L2 dot theta sin thetabigg)^2 bigg] + frac 12bigg(frac 13 ML^2 bigg) dot theta ^2 \
& = frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2 \
& neq frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2
end{align}
Is this perhaps not the right way to do this question?
classical-mechanics
classical-mechanics
asked Nov 15 at 20:21
glowstonetrees
1,902315
1,902315
add a comment |
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
If you are including the motion of the CM is because you are considering the motion of each part of the rod as composition of two motions: the motion of each part around the CM and the motion of the CM with respect to our frame (in wich $O$ is at rest). In this case, the moment of inertia has to be around the CM: $I = dfrac 1{12} ML^2$ leading to
$$T=frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 1{24} ML^2 dot theta ^2=frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$$
We have two contributions: kinetic energy of rotation around the CM and kinetic energy of translation of the CM.
If we choose to consider the parts of the rod as simply moving around $O$ we have to use the moment of inertia around $ O$ because there are no composition of motions for any part and there is only energy of rotation: $T=dfrac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$
Sorry, can you explain what you mean by "composition of movement"?
– glowstonetrees
Nov 16 at 18:16
Sorry, english is not my native language and I fell victim of a "false friend". I meant "composition of motions", so is, the motion is the vectorial sum of motions, in our case, the motion of the CM and the motion around the CM.
– Rafa Budría
Nov 16 at 19:33
add a comment |
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
1 Answer
1
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
active
oldest
votes
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
If you are including the motion of the CM is because you are considering the motion of each part of the rod as composition of two motions: the motion of each part around the CM and the motion of the CM with respect to our frame (in wich $O$ is at rest). In this case, the moment of inertia has to be around the CM: $I = dfrac 1{12} ML^2$ leading to
$$T=frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 1{24} ML^2 dot theta ^2=frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$$
We have two contributions: kinetic energy of rotation around the CM and kinetic energy of translation of the CM.
If we choose to consider the parts of the rod as simply moving around $O$ we have to use the moment of inertia around $ O$ because there are no composition of motions for any part and there is only energy of rotation: $T=dfrac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$
Sorry, can you explain what you mean by "composition of movement"?
– glowstonetrees
Nov 16 at 18:16
Sorry, english is not my native language and I fell victim of a "false friend". I meant "composition of motions", so is, the motion is the vectorial sum of motions, in our case, the motion of the CM and the motion around the CM.
– Rafa Budría
Nov 16 at 19:33
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
If you are including the motion of the CM is because you are considering the motion of each part of the rod as composition of two motions: the motion of each part around the CM and the motion of the CM with respect to our frame (in wich $O$ is at rest). In this case, the moment of inertia has to be around the CM: $I = dfrac 1{12} ML^2$ leading to
$$T=frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 1{24} ML^2 dot theta ^2=frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$$
We have two contributions: kinetic energy of rotation around the CM and kinetic energy of translation of the CM.
If we choose to consider the parts of the rod as simply moving around $O$ we have to use the moment of inertia around $ O$ because there are no composition of motions for any part and there is only energy of rotation: $T=dfrac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$
Sorry, can you explain what you mean by "composition of movement"?
– glowstonetrees
Nov 16 at 18:16
Sorry, english is not my native language and I fell victim of a "false friend". I meant "composition of motions", so is, the motion is the vectorial sum of motions, in our case, the motion of the CM and the motion around the CM.
– Rafa Budría
Nov 16 at 19:33
add a comment |
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
up vote
1
down vote
accepted
If you are including the motion of the CM is because you are considering the motion of each part of the rod as composition of two motions: the motion of each part around the CM and the motion of the CM with respect to our frame (in wich $O$ is at rest). In this case, the moment of inertia has to be around the CM: $I = dfrac 1{12} ML^2$ leading to
$$T=frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 1{24} ML^2 dot theta ^2=frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$$
We have two contributions: kinetic energy of rotation around the CM and kinetic energy of translation of the CM.
If we choose to consider the parts of the rod as simply moving around $O$ we have to use the moment of inertia around $ O$ because there are no composition of motions for any part and there is only energy of rotation: $T=dfrac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$
If you are including the motion of the CM is because you are considering the motion of each part of the rod as composition of two motions: the motion of each part around the CM and the motion of the CM with respect to our frame (in wich $O$ is at rest). In this case, the moment of inertia has to be around the CM: $I = dfrac 1{12} ML^2$ leading to
$$T=frac 18 ML^2 dot theta ^2 + frac 1{24} ML^2 dot theta ^2=frac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$$
We have two contributions: kinetic energy of rotation around the CM and kinetic energy of translation of the CM.
If we choose to consider the parts of the rod as simply moving around $O$ we have to use the moment of inertia around $ O$ because there are no composition of motions for any part and there is only energy of rotation: $T=dfrac 16 ML^2 dot theta ^2$
edited Nov 16 at 19:36
answered Nov 16 at 17:12
Rafa Budría
5,4001825
5,4001825
Sorry, can you explain what you mean by "composition of movement"?
– glowstonetrees
Nov 16 at 18:16
Sorry, english is not my native language and I fell victim of a "false friend". I meant "composition of motions", so is, the motion is the vectorial sum of motions, in our case, the motion of the CM and the motion around the CM.
– Rafa Budría
Nov 16 at 19:33
add a comment |
Sorry, can you explain what you mean by "composition of movement"?
– glowstonetrees
Nov 16 at 18:16
Sorry, english is not my native language and I fell victim of a "false friend". I meant "composition of motions", so is, the motion is the vectorial sum of motions, in our case, the motion of the CM and the motion around the CM.
– Rafa Budría
Nov 16 at 19:33
Sorry, can you explain what you mean by "composition of movement"?
– glowstonetrees
Nov 16 at 18:16
Sorry, can you explain what you mean by "composition of movement"?
– glowstonetrees
Nov 16 at 18:16
Sorry, english is not my native language and I fell victim of a "false friend". I meant "composition of motions", so is, the motion is the vectorial sum of motions, in our case, the motion of the CM and the motion around the CM.
– Rafa Budría
Nov 16 at 19:33
Sorry, english is not my native language and I fell victim of a "false friend". I meant "composition of motions", so is, the motion is the vectorial sum of motions, in our case, the motion of the CM and the motion around the CM.
– Rafa Budría
Nov 16 at 19:33
add a comment |
Thanks for contributing an answer to Mathematics Stack Exchange!
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Some of your past answers have not been well-received, and you're in danger of being blocked from answering.
Please pay close attention to the following guidance:
- Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!
But avoid …
- Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.
- Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.
To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
StackExchange.ready(
function () {
StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fmath.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f3000264%2fkinetic-energy-of-the-compound-pendulum%23new-answer', 'question_page');
}
);
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Sign up or log in
StackExchange.ready(function () {
StackExchange.helpers.onClickDraftSave('#login-link');
});
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Sign up using Google
Sign up using Facebook
Sign up using Email and Password
Post as a guest
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown
Required, but never shown