PHYS 101 | Circular Motion 4 - Tangential and Radial Acceleration
Вставка
- Опубліковано 30 сер 2017
- This material was produced by Rice Online (online.rice.edu) for PHYS101x Introduction to Mechanics at edX (edX.org)
If you enroll in the full course (for free!), you will also have access to homework problems, solutions, an active discussion forum, an exam, and a certificate if you complete the course. The courses are self-paced, so you can start at any time. Sign up here:
PHYS101x Introduction to Mechanics, part 1
www.edx.org/course/introducti...
excellent expression I definitely understand what are both of this, thank you sir.
Interesting sir I wish I had a teacher like you.
Amazing video I totally understood this video in once time thank u so much sir.....
Great one..thanks alot sir
Thank you so much Sir!!
great explanation
So, curious it was sir with visualization☺☺
Congrats Papa
Thank sir for good explanation
Great telling
Thanks so much!!❤
Nice example sir love from India
Very nice sir
Thanks
please make a video with out stopping the ball i want to how ball reaches 2root gr vilocity from root 5gr
That setup is too wobbly and has too much friction to experimentally show the correct result. I think when it was new there was a ball that worked well, but now I just use what I can find. There's a reason I didn't show it in detail! :)
You are totally awesome.My friend Apoorv Saxena told me about you,Now i should give him some treat for his suggestion.
It would be much better if you could also solve doubts....Thanks!!
﷽ ﷺ ﷺ
Thanks sir
You're welcome!
Is there any motivation behind keeping radial acceleration positive outwards. Although radial acceleration points towards center .
Then Why to not define inward as positive . What is the reason to define radial acceleration positive outwards?
I dont know If you found out or not but, I think it is maybe about using radial in terms of polar coordinate system.
Yes, as Emir says, it is to match the mathematical convention that out is positive in a polar coordinate system. If you change conventions like that, definitions of derivatives in vector calc start to change so it is good to be consistent.
Dear it is just because of polar coordinate system,
In polar coordinates we take radial direction as positive (outwards) that's a convention,
I am big fan
how radial acceleration and centripetal acceleration be negative of each other. it should be equal by both in magnitude and direction. and thats i also see from the demonstration both are pointing towards the center
Yes, there is only once acceleration vector, and for circular motion it points to the center. The difference between "centripetal" and "radial" is just that they are two different coordinate systems. For centripetal, the positive direction points to the center, for radial, the positive direction points away from the center.
@@Prof-Hafner Is there any motivation behind keeping radial acceleration positive outwards. Although radial acceleration points towards center .
Then Why to not define inward as positive . What is the reason to define radial acceleration positive outwards?
Mst h re baba mja aa gya👌
👌
@@Prof-Hafner tnks sir m from India ,but 😅 I said it's amazing , enjoyed much 😊🙏
Nice explanation sir, but may you explain, what is transverse velocity and acceleration, and how to visualise it?
Also explain axial direction, if there any*
If I said "transverse" I probably meant tangential as I wrote on the board. Here that just means the component along the path. Imagine a line parallel to the circle's edge at the position of the mass. That is the tangential direction. You can have velocity and acceleration components along that direction.
@@Prof-Hafner yes sir
at 3:55 you said that radial acceleration points away from the center, while in the last visualization, you placed the radial acceleration towards the centre of the circle. Why is this?
The convention is that radial is always out. Tell me which video/moment you mean by the last visualization and maybe I misspoke.
Now that I look at 3:55, I see that I did screw up in another sense. The magnitude of a_r and a_c both have to be positive, of course! So when I put that negative sign in, I was writing the a_r vector component.
@@Prof-Hafner i'm referring to the visualization at about 5:00
@@ryankrikunetz6649 Ahh... now I see. Yes, that is confusing, but does actually illustrate the point. Whether you call it "radial" or "centripetal" is actually irrelevant. It just tells you which direction you would write positive if you were to express it mathematically. If the acceleration points inward, you can label it as a "radial acceleration" vector and draw it that way. BUT, if you wrote the expression, it would have to be something like -5 m/s^2 r-hat.
In that visualization I went with radial (rather than centripetal) because it makes more sense to think of "radial" and "tangential" as perpendicular coordinates because a proper radial unit vector points outward. If we really wanted to be formal, the tangential direction would be "polar".
@@Prof-Hafner oh I see. Thank you very much for the clarification. Wonderful demonstration!
Can you say way use arrow on acceleration symbol @?
That is just a way to indicate that it is a vector.
How can tangential acceleration be zero if the object is changing the tangential velocity (direction) every moment?
The centripetal acceleration is non-zero and changes the tangential velocity direction. Draw two tang velocity vectors and then their difference to see it graphically. Tang accel changes the magnitude of the tang velocity.
It means tangential acceleration only increases or decreases speed of the particle circulating and radial acceleration is the one which changes its direction?
Thank you so much 😊
Tang acceleration is due to the change in speed, not velocity.
Change in speed is change in velocity so, how come tangential acceleration be zero
@@nagag4739 in uniform circular motion when an object travels at constant speed there is no change in speed so zero tangential Acceleration.
what occurs when an inverted twist is introduced into the central region like with a variable flip
In the real world there would be a mechanism to hold the object on the track (constrained motion). To make it work here with a free object that is simple to calculate, I think the answer would be you would have to be going at exactly sqrt(gR) (rather than faster than sqrt(gR)) to maintain contact both on the under side and top side when it flips. Since the speed through the loop varies, its not really something you could analyze with such simple models.
@@Prof-Hafner i appreciate the response, i was just curious as to if a differing rig would allow, would the introduction of sufficient torsion from a gyroidal motion of the wheel would the introduction of the additional spin skew the total inertia, or would it just be a null point due to the additional friction the total area required for such a feat.
❤
5:01 I thought radial accelerations was in the opposite direction of the centripetal acceleration
Here we are just drawing the vector. If you were to write it mathematically, it would be a negative number times r-hat.
which class or grade is this??
is it 12 grade??
undergrad course physics 101
look how fast and aggressive he writes with the chalk
Sk wonder kids explained better but ur best
I should get that kid to come teach my class!
@@Prof-Hafner u can't as he is trained by his father and only for his father
Which country u belong
USA
@@Prof-Hafner ok
I finally managed to do a video on circular motion for my students during lockdown - ua-cam.com/video/Ts2vApzXZhw/v-deo.html - comments very much appreciated!
Le Indian. Experiment hota hi nhi sirf theory 😢 kuch smj nhi ata Indian education 🤬