A community for students.
Here's the question you clicked on:
 0 viewing
ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Consider a straight stick standing on end on (frictionless) ice. What would be the path of its center of mass if it falls?
I think that it will be a vertical line, but can't convince myself. Can anybody explain me this phenomenon?
ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Consider a straight stick standing on end on (frictionless) ice. What would be the path of its center of mass if it falls? I think that it will be a vertical line, but can't convince myself. Can anybody explain me this phenomenon?

This Question is Closed

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@experimentX @UnkleRhaukus @apoorvk @shivam_bhalla

UnkleRhaukus
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337866475805:dw

UnkleRhaukus
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337866517642:dw

UnkleRhaukus
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337866548908:dw

UnkleRhaukus
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337866575280:dw

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Yes I know that. But why it falls like this?

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@ArchiePhysics , totally depends on where you apply the external force to displace the rod

UnkleRhaukus
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0well assuming the stick was just tipped over, not pushed , the center of mass of the stick will obey conservation of momentum in forwardbackward direction,

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@shivam_bhalla There is no any external force except the force of gravity

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@ArchiePhysics , Why would it fall without external force ??

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0It doesn't matter. May b some tinywiny fluctuation occurs in the field of gravity, which you can neglect.

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@ArchiePhysics , It matters. We are assuming ideal conditions to solve problems. So without applying external force, the rod can't fall. 2nd, the rod won't fall if the external force is acting perpendicular to the rod on its centre of mass

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@UnkleRhaukus Ok if it so, why the center of rotation of stick is the center of mass?

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@shivam_bhalla OK, assume that there was initial velocity perpendicular to the stick the force was applied to the top what does it change?

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@experimentX I don't think so. Because there is no friction which will hold the stick at the tip.

experimentX
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Oh ... i didn't see that

UnkleRhaukus
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0assuming the stick is of uniform density , the center of mass will be in the center of the symmetrical stick

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@ArchiePhysics , the centre of mass will not shift along the horizontal direction and only shift down vertically. So @UnkleRhaukus is right in this case

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@UnkleRhaukus I agree, what next? Why it should the center of rotation?

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Force is applied to the center of stick and the arm of the force is halfway between the tip and the center.

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337867447774:dw

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@ArchiePhysics , what makes you say that. On the contrary, the rod will not slip and continue to move along without falling

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@shivam_bhalla Because it rotates, so there must be some point of rotation

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@Avva , one question to you. Will your door turn if you apply force at the hinge of the door perpendicularly ??

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0But the stick is rotating, isn't it?

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0How do you know the point of rotation of a stick @ArchiePhysics ?

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0I don't know where is it, I'm just guessing.

experimentX
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0I think we need to find the axis of rotation first!!

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@experimentX , exactly !

experimentX
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Consider a straight stick in space ... if we apply a force ... at any point on stick perpendicular to it's length ... then what would be it's axis of rotation??

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0It will begin to rotate and may be to move forward.

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Torque T about cm of rod \[t= r * F = i _{cm} (\alpha)\]

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0where r= L/2 i i_cm = Ml^2/12 alpha> angular rotaion

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Why about center of mass? It should be about center of rotation.

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Second, you need to apply conservation of angular momentum to find point of rotation

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@ArchiePhysics , I specified the formula specifically for torque about CM

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0I don't need formulas I know them I want to know the only thing where is the center of rotation and why is it there.

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Sorry I recognised that later.

experimentX
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0lol ... try rotating things here http://mrdoob.com/projects/chromeexperiments/google_gravity/

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@experimentX Great stuff, but anyway, let's go on)))

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Sorry for the statement "Second, you need to apply conservation of angular momentum to find point of rotation" because if no net external torque acts on a system, the total angular momentum of the system remains constant.

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0It's ok, although external torque is there, the force of gravity is applied to the center of mass, isn't it?

shivam_bhalla
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Found the solution here to your problem @ArchiePhysics > http://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=281440

ArchiePhysics
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Great let's see that!

X32
 3 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0if a straight stick falls in a frictionless ice, does it make a sound? if the still simply topples over, there is some angular momentum created, some external force was applied, where was it applied affects the answer. If you assume the stick was given a torque about the center of mass, which becomes the center of rotation, then your answer is correct. State this assumption and answer as you thought.

VincentLyon.Fr
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Ok, this problem was discussed earlier here. The actual question was: find the point of the rod whose path is circular. It is a simple geometry problem once you get rid of some easy dynamics. Once pushed out of (unstable) equilibrium by infinitesimal action, the only two external forces acting on the rod are its weight and the normal force of the plane. Both forces are vertical, hence by N's second law, no horizontal acceleration of centre of mass. As it starts its motion form rest, the centre of mass will move vertically, that's all. Now, the second part (finding P with a circular path) is trickier although pure geometry. I have this on rough paper by two methods, but I like to post clean things onto OS, with clear handwriting ;) , which needs some more time.

VincentLyon.Fr
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Link to similar problem: http://openstudy.com/users/vincentlyon.fr#/updates/4facbd35e4b059b524f86008

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0The thing that I'll show you may seem to you ridiculous but that was what I needed. I wanted somebody to prove me, or explain me that the center of mass would be the center of rotation in the given case. @VincentLyon.Fr you are absolutely right saying that "Both forces are vertical, hence by N's second law, no horizontal acceleration of centre of mass." But that was not that obvious to me until I convinced myself using geometry). dw:1337945093637:dw I got rid of the force of reaction and the remnant forces are shown. The force F2 that pulls the center of mass to the left is equal in magnitude and opposite to the horizontal component of F1, so there is no any motion there, relative to the horizontal axis, so it gives us the axis of rotation not the point because the center of mass moves relative to the vertical axis of coordinates. To calculate the rotational motion alone we must use P as a central point of rotation because if there were strong enough force of friction the stick would have rotated about it. Thanks everybody, for the help you gave me, I really appreciate it!

VincentLyon.Fr
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0These forces F1 and F2 do not exist. Centre of mass is not the centre of rotation of the rod. The centre of rotation of the rod can be found, but lies outside the rod itself. dw:1337946684651:dw C (centre of mass) is moving down, A is moving horizontally to the right. Centre of rotation I lies at the intersect of the 2 dotted lines, each of them perpendicular to velocity at points C and A.

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Ok, I agree that the vertical path of the CM is not the axis of rotation(that was what I stated above), it was not the best usage of the definition of rotational axis. But you are saying that forces F1 and F2 don't exist, how is that so? Let me show you how I found them step by step, and if there is any mistake...? dw:1337948096230:dw

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337948217639:dw

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337948311337:dw

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337948407433:dw

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337948479988:dw

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337948548698:dw

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337948672639:dw

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337948692091:dw

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0dw:1337948809422:dw @VincentLyon.Fr

VincentLyon.Fr
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0@ArchiePhysics You can always resolve a force into components or even many subforces: that will have no consequence on N's 2nd law of motion BUT if you change the point of action of a force by moving it up or down the rod, then you are changing the torque exerted by this force about a certain point, so you end up with a system of forces that is not equivalent to the one you started with in the first place. Actually, I do not understand what you are trying to do! The initial question is solved, so what is the 'new' question you are dealing with now? Then I could help.

ArchiePhysics
 2 years ago
Best ResponseYou've already chosen the best response.0Oh, I see now. The thing I'm trying to do is to prove somehow that the center of mass doesn't move horizontally through the fall of the stick(initially, i tried to call it the center of rotation but you've said it's wrong). Because when you say that there are only two vertical forces acting on it and the net force acting on the CM is zero, and thus it does not move horizontally, it isn't that obvious to me))) I'm going to suspect that it isn't right, because my imagination gives me quite complex picture of motion of it, and I'm going crazy on that))) Now the idea of rotational motion through the fall became a bit clearer in my mind, it is thanks to your help guys, and especially thanks to @VincentLyon.Fr thank you very much for the remarks you have made. I really appreciate that! Cok tesekkur ediyorum, abi!
Ask your own question
Sign UpFind more explanations on OpenStudy
Your question is ready. Sign up for free to start getting answers.
spraguer
(Moderator)
5
→ View Detailed Profile
is replying to Can someone tell me what button the professor is hitting...
23
 Teamwork 19 Teammate
 Problem Solving 19 Hero
 Engagement 19 Mad Hatter
 You have blocked this person.
 ✔ You're a fan Checking fan status...
Thanks for being so helpful in mathematics. If you are getting quality help, make sure you spread the word about OpenStudy.