Rotating frames (non-homework)

So a' = a = v02j/b.In summary, the conversation discusses a problem involving a bicycle traveling at a constant speed around a track of radius ρ. The question posed is what is the acceleration of the highest point on one of its wheels. The conversation then delves into the confusion surrounding the choice of coordinate systems in similar examples, specifically in regards to the use of a rotating frame in the circular case. The summary concludes by mentioning the variables and their corresponding directions in both the stationary and moving frames, as well as the relationship between the two frames in regards to acceleration.
  • #1
Void123
141
0

Homework Statement



This is an example problem from the book. However, I have absolutely no clue how they solved it. I cannot follow their logic. If someone can just solve it and explain it for me lucidly step by step, I would really appreciate it. Here it is:

"A bicycle travels with constant speed around a track of radius [tex]\rho[/tex]. What is the acceleration of the highest point on one of its wheels? Let [tex]V_{0}[/tex] denote the speed of the bicycle and [tex]b[/tex] the radius of the wheel."

What is confusing me is that in a very similar example preceding this one (the only difference being the wheel following a straight path, rather than curved one) they picked a different coordinate system in which a' and v' turned out to be zero, where as in the example I just posted above, this is not the case. I cannot see the logical leap they make.

So, it seems I'm having difficulty understanding how to establish the coordinate systems and how I would derive the important variables which proceed from it.

Thanks for your help.



Homework Equations



...



The Attempt at a Solution



...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Void123 said:
"A bicycle travels with constant speed around a track of radius [tex]\rho[/tex]. What is the acceleration of the highest point on one of its wheels? Let [tex]V_{0}[/tex] denote the speed of the bicycle and [tex]b[/tex] the radius of the wheel."

What is confusing me is that in a very similar example preceding this one (the only difference being the wheel following a straight path, rather than curved one) they picked a different coordinate system in which a' and v' turned out to be zero, where as in the example I just posted above, this is not the case. I cannot see the logical leap they make.

So, it seems I'm having difficulty understanding how to establish the coordinate systems and how I would derive the important variables which proceed from it.

Hi Void123! :smile:

(have a rho: ρ :wink:)

Any frame of reference (coordinate system) will do …

just choose whichever is more convenient.

I suspect that, in the straight case, they decided that a linearly moving frame was easy, and so used it, but in the circular case, a rotating frame is more complicated (you need to introduce a fictional "centrifugal force"), so they stayed with the simpler stationary frame. :wink:
 
  • #3
tiny-tim said:
Hi Void123! :smile:

(have a rho: ρ :wink:)

Any frame of reference (coordinate system) will do …

just choose whichever is more convenient.

I suspect that, in the straight case, they decided that a linearly moving frame was easy, and so used it, but in the circular case, a rotating frame is more complicated (you need to introduce a fictional "centrifugal force"), so they stayed with the simpler stationary frame. :wink:

Thanks for your advice. But my problem is more in depth than that.

For instance, for an observer in a frame translating along with the wheel, located at the axle, the x'y'z' frame is described as this:

r' = b (in the jth direction)
v' = [tex]v_{0}[/tex] (in the ith direction)
a' = -b * (omega)^2 (in the jth direction)

(b = radius)

r = [tex]v_{0}[/tex]t (ith direction) + 2b(jth direction)
v = 2[tex]v_{0}[/tex](ith direction)
a = -([tex]v_{0}[/tex]/b)^2 (jth direction)

How did they derive a', v, and a? I'm missing something here.

Also, why did they decide that r' is going to be in the jth direction, rather than the ith?
 
  • #4
Hi Void123!± :smile:

(just got up :zzz: …)
Void123 said:
Thanks for your advice. But my problem is more in depth than that.

For instance, for an observer in a frame translating along with the wheel, located at the axle, the x'y'z' frame is described as this:

r' = b (in the jth direction)
v' = [tex]v_{0}[/tex] (in the ith direction)
a' = -b * (omega)^2 (in the jth direction)

(b = radius)

r = [tex]v_{0}[/tex]t (ith direction) + 2b(jth direction)
v = 2[tex]v_{0}[/tex](ith direction)
a = -([tex]v_{0}[/tex]/b)^2 (jth direction)

How did they derive a', v, and a? I'm missing something here.

Also, why did they decide that r' is going to be in the jth direction, rather than the ith?

(try using the X2 tag just above the Reply box :wink:)

r' v' and a' are the position velocity and acceleration of the top of the wheel, relative to a frame whose (moving) origin is always at the centre of the wheel,

while r v and a are the position velocity and acceleration of the top of the wheel, relative to a frame whose (stationary) origin is the position of the bottom of the wheel at time t = 0.

The centre is b higher than the bottom, so r' = bj while r = 2bj + v0ti.

The top is going twice as fast as the centre (and incidentally the bottom is stationary), so v' = 2v = 2v0i.

And the top's acceleration is the same in both frames: it equals the acceleration of the centre plus the relative acceleration, which is 0 - bω2j, = v02j/b (your formula for a is wrong).
 

Related to Rotating frames (non-homework)

1. What are rotating frames?

Rotating frames, also known as non-inertial frames, are frames of reference that are constantly in motion or rotating. In contrast, inertial frames are frames that are not accelerating and follow Newton's laws of motion.

2. How do rotating frames affect the laws of physics?

Rotating frames can cause apparent forces, such as the Coriolis force, to appear in the equations of motion. This is because objects in a rotating frame are subject to both the actual forces acting on them and the apparent forces caused by the rotation of the frame.

3. What are some real-world examples of rotating frames?

Examples of rotating frames include the Earth's surface, which is rotating around its axis, and a merry-go-round, which is constantly in circular motion. The rotation of these frames can be observed through the apparent forces acting on objects within them.

4. How do we account for rotating frames in our experiments and calculations?

In order to accurately account for the effects of rotating frames in our experiments and calculations, we must use appropriate mathematical transformations, such as the Coriolis transformation, to convert between the rotating frame and an inertial frame of reference.

5. What are the advantages of using rotating frames in scientific research?

Rotating frames can be useful in studying the effects of rotation and can provide insights into the behavior of objects in a non-inertial environment. They also allow for the development of new theories and models to explain physical phenomena that cannot be fully explained using only inertial frames.

Similar threads

  • Electromagnetism
Replies
1
Views
942
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
18
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
928
Replies
2
Views
762
  • Advanced Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Special and General Relativity
Replies
23
Views
1K
Back
Top