Understanding Centre of Mass for High School Graduates

  • Thread starter Thread starter tomz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mechanics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the concept of the center of mass (CM) and its calculation using different formulas. The original poster is confused about the relationship between the CM formula and the moment of inertia, seeking clarity on the physical interpretation of the formulas provided. A response clarifies the distinction between the center of mass, the second moment of area, and moment of inertia, emphasizing the need to apply these formulas to basic shapes for better understanding. The importance of recognizing the definitions and applications of each formula is highlighted for clearer comprehension. The conversation concludes with the original poster expressing gratitude for the clarification.
tomz
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
I have just finished high school. When I read Paul's note (an online math book), in the section of centre of mass, it says the coordinate of the centre of mass in any axis can be found by divide the moment of that axis by the mass..Then it gives this weird formula for calculating y coordinate of the CM.

y=Mx/M=(1/2)∫(f(x)^2)dx from a to b, where f(x) is a curve, the region of uniform density is bound by f(x) from a to b, x axis, x=a and x=b. I used to see a very standard formula that I can understand, that is y=∫(g(x)^2)dy from c to d, where g(x) is the inverse function of f(x) and c,d are ends of y value.

I know moment of inertia, but i don't know why the formula given by the book will work as well, in a mathematical way, i try to associate this with the equivalence of the 2 ways of integration, shell's method and disk method, that may work, But I cannot understand this in a physical way...

Can anyone help me out?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think that you have confused some formulas:

centre of mass: x_c=\frac{\int \int x dxdy}{\int \int dxdy}=\frac{\int \int x dxdy}{Area}

second moment of area: I_{xx}=\int \int y^2 dxdy

moment of inertia: I=\int r^2 dm

Try each of them in basic shapes where you already know the answer and then you can convince yourself of why they work. Keep in mind that by definition the moment of inertia is I=r^2 m
 
meldraft said:
I think that you have confused some formulas:

centre of mass: x_c=\frac{\int \int x dxdy}{\int \int dxdy}=\frac{\int \int x dxdy}{Area}

second moment of area: I_{xx}=\int \int y^2 dxdy

moment of inertia: I=\int r^2 dm

Try each of them in basic shapes where you already know the answer and then you can convince yourself of why they work. Keep in mind that by definition the moment of inertia is I=r^2 m

Got it, thanks~
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top