How balls roll off tables

M. E. Bacon

Citation: Am. J. Phys. 73, 722 (2005); doi: 10.1119/1.1947198

View online: http://dx.doi.org/10.1119/1.1947198
View Table of Contents: http://ajp.aapt.org/resource/1/AJPIAS/v73/i8
Published by the American Association of Physics Teachers

Related Articles
MicroReviews by the Book Review Editor: Beyond the Black Box: The Forensics of Airplane Crashes: George
Bibel
Phys. Teach. 50, 511 (2012)
MicroReviews by the Book Review Editor: Particle or Wave: The Evolution of the Concept of Matter in Modern
Physics: Charis Anastopoulos
Phys. Teach. 50, 511 (2012)
MicroReviews by the Book Review Editor: The Rise of Nuclear Fear: Spencer R. Weart
Phys. Teach. 50, 511 (2012)
Everyday Engineering: Putting the E in STEM Teaching and Learning: Richard H. Moyer and Susan A. Everett
Phys. Teach. 50, 511 (2012)
MicroReviews by the Book Review Editor: The Little Brown Book
Phys. Teach. 50, 511 (2012)

Additional information on Am. J. Phys.

Journal Homepage: http://ajp.aapt.org/
Journal Information: http://ajp.aapt.org/about/about_the_journal
Top downloads: http://ajp.aapt.org/most_downloaded
Information for Authors: http://ajp.dickinson.edu/Contributors/contGenInfo.html

Downloaded 26 Oct 2012 to 128.248.155.225. Redistribution subject to AAPT license or copyright; see http://ajp.aapt.org/authors/copyright_permission
How balls roll off tables
M. E. Bacon
Department of Physics, Thiel College, 75 College Avenue, Greenville, Pennsylvania 16125
共Received 7 February 2005; accepted 13 May 2005兲
The motion of a ball rolling off the edge of a table is studied theoretically and experimentally. A
detailed analysis of the motion requires consideration of an initial no-slip phase followed by a brief
slipping phase. To obtain quantitative predictions for comparison with experiment, the equations
were solved numerically. Data are obtained using video recordings, and the experimentally
determined angular velocity before and after the ball leaves the table is compared with the
theoretical calculations. The inadequacy of a previous analysis is demonstrated. Suggestions for
other experiments are made. © 2005 American Association of Physics Teachers.
关DOI: 10.1119/1.1947198兴

I. INTRODUCTION
1 the ball’s center of mass overhangs the edge of the table, it
Beeken recently presented an elementary discussion of
the behavior of a ball rolling off the edge of a table. In
particular, it was found that a ball, rolling without slipping,
landed on the floor farther from the foot of the table than
would be expected if its speed in the horizontal direction
remained constant. This behavior was observed for relatively
small velocities and was correctly ascribed to a “kick” given
to the ball as it rolled off the edge of the table. At higher
velocities, no “kick” was observed.
In Ref. 1 共also see Ref. 2兲 the kick in the horizontal direc-
tion was attributed to the horizontal component of the normal
force exerted by the edge of the table on the ball. However,
this explanation ignores the horizontal component of the fric-
tional force, which was not included in the free body dia-
grams given in Refs. 1 and 2 and is essential for a quantita-
tive description of the behavior.
Investigations of this kind, which involve a more detailed
look at a well-studied problem, provide an opportunity for
undergraduates to observe and investigate the behavior of a
simple real world system using inexpensive and easily avail-
able equipment. At first sight this system seems to have little
to offer apart from being a problem usually given in an in-
troductory physics course. Although apparently simple, this
system only becomes accessible to detailed study by under-
graduates as a result of the data handling and analysis capa-
bility of the personal computer and the availability of inex-
pensive video cameras.
Section II presents a theoretical analysis of the motion. To
obtain quantitative predictions for comparison with experi-
ment, the theoretical calculations must be done numerically.
The numerical solution involves an initial no-slipping phase
共static friction兲, followed by a necessary, albeit brief, slip-
ping phase 共kinetic friction兲. Section III describes the experi-
mental setup used to investigate the behavior of a ball rolling
off the edge of a table, and compares the experimentally
edge of a table 关see Figs. 1共a兲 and 1共b兲兴. At the instant that
will begin to fall. If the horizontal velocity of the center of
mass, R ␪˙ i, is sufficiently small, the ball will initially rotate
about the edge without slipping and the appropriate free
body diagram is as shown in Fig. 1共a兲.
Based on the no-slip condition, Beeken1 gave an analysis
of the ball’s behavior using energy conservation 共consistent
with the no-slip condition兲. Unfortunately, as is apparent
from a related problem, that is, toast falling from the edge of
a table,3 the no-slip condition is incompatible with the con-
dition that the normal force goes to zero, which is used to
define when the ball leaves the table. In short, as with toast,3
the ball must slip before it loses contact with the edge, and
this slip must be taken into account in a quantitative expla-
nation of its behavior.
We apply Newton’s second law to the center of mass mo-
tion in the initial no-slip phase of the ball 关see Fig. 1共a兲兴. If
we use polar coordinates 共r , ␪兲 with unit vectors r̂ and ␪ˆ , the
acceleration is equal to 共r̈ − r␪˙ 2兲r̂ + 共r␪¨ + 2ṙ␪˙ 兲␪ˆ .4 Note that r is
constant and equal to the radius of the ball R as long as the
ball is in contact with the edge of the table. Then the equa-
tions of motion are
FN
= − R␪˙ 2 + g sin ␪ 共r̂ direction兲 共1兲
m
Ff
= R␪¨ + g cos ␪ 共␪ˆ direction兲. 共2兲
m
In addition, we apply 兺cm␶ = Icm␪¨ , and obtain
Ff 2
= − R␪¨ . 共3兲
m 5
From Eqs. 共2兲 and 共3兲 we obtain,

冉 冊冉 冊
measured angular velocity before and after the ball leaves the
table with the theoretical predictions of the simple model 5 g
␪¨ = − cos ␪ . 共4兲
introduced in Ref. 1 and the more detailed calculations based 7 R
on the theory developed in Sec. II. Suggestions for further
investigations also are presented. Equations 共1兲–共4兲 are valid until the ratio F f / FN equals ␮s,
where ␮s is the coefficient of static friction. This equality
must occur before FN goes to zero; otherwise,␮s goes to
II. THEORY infinity, which is unphysical, and therefore the ball must slip
before it leaves the edge of the table.
Consider a ball of radius R with initial angle ␪i = ␲ / 2 rela- Now consider the motion as the ball begins to slip 关see the
tive to the horizontal and initial angular velocity ␪˙ i at the free body diagram in Fig. 1共b兲兴. Because the ball is slipping,

722 Am. J. Phys. 73 共8兲, August 2005 http://aapt.org/ajp © 2005 American Association of Physics Teachers 722

Downloaded 26 Oct 2012 to 128.248.155.225. Redistribution subject to AAPT license or copyright; see http://ajp.aapt.org/authors/copyright_permission
 Fig. 2. 共a兲 Video frame showing a steel ball on the edge of the table; 共b兲 a
schematic showing the ramp, ball, and table.

The procedure for numerically solving Eqs. 共1兲–共9兲 for the

Fig. 1. 共a兲 No-slip free body diagram; 共b兲 slipping free body diagram. angular velocity of the ball after it leaves the edge of the
table 共␪˙ f 兲, given the initial angle ␪i = ␲ / 2 and initial angular
velocity ␪˙ i, is as follows. We solve Eq. 共4兲 numerically for ␪
the angle ␣ that the center of mass makes relative to an and ␪˙ as a function of time, and then use Eqs. 共1兲 and 共2兲 to
origin fixed at the edge of the table is no longer the same as calculate FN / m, F f / m, and the ratio F f / FN as a function of
the angle ␪ that defines the angle of rotation of the ball. time. Then we determine when F f / FN = ␮s and note the cor-
However, they are the same at the instant that slipping be- responding values of ␪ and ␪˙ . These are used as the initial
gins. That is, the values of ␣ and ␣˙ at the start of slipping are values for ␣ and ␣˙ in Eq. 共9兲, which is solved numerically.
equal to the values of ␪ and ␪˙ at the end of the no-slip The result for ␣ and ␣˙ is substituted in Eq. 共5兲 to determine
motion. FN / m. When FN / m = 0, the ball leaves the table. To calculate
The application of Newton’s second law to the center of the corresponding final rotational velocity of the ball about
mass in polar coordinates with its origin at the edge of the the center of mass, F f / m must be calculated from Eq. 共6兲 and
table yields 关see Fig. 1共b兲兴: then substituted into Eq. 共7兲, which must also be solved nu-
FN merically.
= − R␣˙ 2 + g sin ␣ . 共r̂ direction兲 共5兲
m
III. EXPERIMENTS
Ff One half of a steel ball of diameter 2.5 cm was painted
= R␣¨ + g cos ␣ . 共␣ˆ direction兲. 共6兲 white 关see Fig. 2共a兲兴 to provide a reference line that was used
m
to determine the angle of rotation of the ball as it rolls on the
If we apply 兺cm␶ = Icm␪¨ 共always valid兲, we find table and undergoes free fall while continuing to rotate. The

冉 冊冉 冊
launching ramp, ball, and table are shown schematically in
5 Ff Fig. 2共b兲. To avoid the effect of wood grain on the motion of
␪¨ = − . 共7兲
2 Rm the ball, a slab of plastic was used as a table top.
The ball was initially positioned on the ramp with the
In addition, because the ball is now slipping relative to the white boundary line cross wise to the length of the ramp. The
edge, ball was then released and the subsequent motion was re-
Ff FN corded using a digital video camera. The video was then
= ␮k , 共8兲 transferred to a personal computer and captured using
m m 5
DVVCAP. The angle of rotation as a function of time was
where ␮k is the coefficient of kinetic friction. If we substitute measured using the video analysis software VIDEOPOINT.5
Eqs. 共5兲 and 共6兲 into Eq. 共8兲, we obtain Figure 3 shows a typical plot of the rotation angle ␪ before

冉冊
and after the ball leaves the table, as a function of time, for a
g relatively slow angular velocity. The data clearly shows the
␣¨ = − 共cos ␣ − ␮k sin ␣兲 − ␮k␣˙ 2 . 共9兲
R increase of the rotation after the ball has left the table. Figure

723 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 73, No. 8, August 2005 M. E. Bacon 723

Downloaded 26 Oct 2012 to 128.248.155.225. Redistribution subject to AAPT license or copyright; see http://ajp.aapt.org/authors/copyright_permission

Fig. 3. Data for a relatively slow initial angular velocity 共8.65 rad/ s兲.
4 shows the angle ␪ as a function of time for fast rotation. In
this case no increase is observed. As can be seen from the
numerical results shown in Fig. 4, the predicted upper limit
on the angular velocity for which a “kick” occurs is
⬇28 rad/ s. This limit can be established using Eq. 共1兲 with
FN / m = 0 for ␪ = ␲ / 2. The discrepancy between the situation
shown in Fig. 4 and the theoretical prediction 共24 vs
28 rad/ s兲 indicates the uncertainty in the measurement of the
angular velocity.
The initial and final angular velocities, together with their
standard deviations, can be found by fitting the data points
before and after the ball leaves the table to straight lines. The
data points together with the error bars equal to the standard
deviation are shown in Fig. 5.
The theoretical curve assuming no slipping and the condi-
tion FN = 0 to determine when the ball leaves the table 共the
model used in Ref. 1兲 is shown by the upper dashed line in
Fig. 5 共no-slip theory兲. As can be seen, the theoretical curve
for no slip is at odds with the experimental data.
Several attempts were made to determine the coefficient of
static friction independent of the motion under study, includ-
ing attaching a thread to the ball using superglue and dan-
Fig. 4. Data for a relatively fast initial angular velocity 共24.2 rad/ s兲.
724 Am. J. Phys., Vol. 73, No. 8, August 2005
Downloaded 26 Oct 2012 to 128.248.155.225. Redistribution subject to AAPT license or copyright; see http://ajp.aapt.org/authors/copyright_permission
Fig. 5. Comparison between experiment 共solid dots with error bars兲 and
comprehensive theory 共solid lines兲. The upper dashed line is the result ob-
tained using the no-slip theory of Ref. 1.
gling it on the edge so that it slipped without rotating and
placing the ball on an electronic balance with the plastic
slab’s edge in contact with the top of the ball and inclined at
an angle. These attempts led to ambiguous results and were
abandoned in favor of finding a fit to the experimental data
by trial and error with the coefficients of friction as adjust-
able parameters. The solid curves 共Fig. 5兲 show the results
obtained using the numerical procedure detailed in Sec. II
with the corresponding values of the coefficients of static and
kinetic friction. The considerable scatter in the data points is
most likely due to variations in the initial alignment of the
ball and the possibility that the ball rolled off the table at
slightly different points from run to run. The results could be
improved by repeating the experiments using a shallow
groove to guide the ball to the same place each time. We also
need to find some independent means for determining the
coefficients of static and kinetic friction. In addition, it would
be interesting to repeat the theoretical calculations and the
experiments using a cylindrical object.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Thanks are due to the anonymous referees for their dili-
gence in highlighting some deficiencies in the initial version
of this paper. Thanks are also due to Do Dai Nguyen for
performing some preliminary experiments using golf balls.
These initial experiments were of invaluable assistance in
refining the experimental set up described in this paper.
1
Paul Beeken, “Ball on the edge,” Phys. Teach. 42, 366–368 共2004兲.
2
David Doucette, “Ball over the edge,” Letters to the Editor, Phys. Teach.
42, 516 共2004兲, and Paul Bekeen, “Authors response,” ibid. 42, 516–517
共2004兲.
3
M. E. Bacon, George Heald, and Matt James, “A closer look at tumbling
toast,” Am. J. Phys. 69, 38–43 共2001兲.
4
G. R. Fowles and G. Cassidy, Analytical Mechanics, 6th ed. 共Harcort
Brace, 1999兲.
5
Available from Pasco Scientific, www. pasco.com.
M. E. Bacon 724