Physics Stack Exchange is a question and answer site for active researchers, academics and students of physics. It's 100% free.

Sign up
Here's how it works:
  1. Anybody can ask a question
  2. Anybody can answer
  3. The best answers are voted up and rise to the top

How could you derive an equation for the torque on a rotating (but not translating) rigid body from the Euler-Lagrange equation? As far as I know from my first class in Classical Mechanics, there is no potential defined for a rotating body, so the only term I see in the Lagrangian is the $\frac{1}{2}I\omega^2$. Since there is no $\theta$, I'm just getting that torque always equals $0$.

share|cite|improve this question
It depends how the body is fixed in space. If it is floating, there's no torque and the angular momentum is conserved. But if the body is supported by a pedestal or something like that, the potential energy $mgh$ where $h$ is the height of the center of mass effectively does depend on the angle $\phi$ and the derivative of this potential energy with respect to the angle gives you torque. – Luboš Motl Mar 27 '13 at 15:26
Comment to the question (v1): It is still possible to define the potential energy $V$ of a torsion spring, so that angular system has a Lagrangian formulation. – Qmechanic Mar 27 '13 at 15:30
How does height depend on theta (The angle between the applied force and the radius)? Knowing torque should equal |F||R|sin(theta), the potential should then equal |F||R|cos(theta). If |F||R|cos(theta) = mgh = |F|*h, that would imply that the height is less than the radius. -- What am I missing here? – JLA Mar 27 '13 at 16:16
You know you need to refine the rotation with generalized coordinates (like Euler angles) which will yield generalized forces (torques). – ja72 Aug 20 '13 at 14:32

The question isn't clear to me, the torque is zero if there's not an applied torque, and it's nonzero if it's not zero, but that's just a tautology. Do you mean that you just want to derive something/anything torque-esque given an applied force? If so, here's one way.

This isn't a job for a potential, it's the job for a generalized force. Consider the 2d case, with a particle at some position $s=(x,y)$, with mass $m$ and a force vector $F$ applied to it.

The first form of the Euler-Lagrange equations I learned was the form:

$$\frac{d}{dt} \frac{\partial T}{\partial \dot q_i}-\frac{\partial T}{\partial q_i}=Q_i$$ where $T$ is the kinetic energy (NOT the lagrangian), $q_i$ are the parameters describing the system, and $Q_i$ is defined as the generalized force $Q_i=\sum_j F_j \frac{\partial s_j}{\partial q_i}$. (Goldstein classical mechanics ch 1)

Then, parameterizing in terms of polar coordinates, we can define $s=(q_1 \cos(q_2),q_1 \sin(q_2))$.

Going through the motions of finding the kinetic energy, generalized forces, and partial derivatives:

$\dot{s}=(\dot{q_1}\cos(q_2)-q_1\sin(q_2) \dot{q_2},\dot{q_1}\sin(q_2)+q_1\cos(q_2) \dot{q_2})$



$Q_1=F\cdot(\cos(q_2),\sin(q_2))\equiv F_r$ (define $F_r$ this way)

$Q_2=F\cdot(-q_1\sin(q_2),q_1\cos(q_2))\equiv \tau$ (define $\tau$ this way)

Euler-Lagrange equation for $q_1$:

$\ddot{q_1}m-m\dot{q_2}^2 q_1=F_r$

for $q_2$:

$\frac{d}{dt}(m q_1^2 \dot{q_2})-0=\tau =m q_1^2 \ddot{q_2}+2 m q_1 \dot{q_1} \dot{q_2}$

Denoting $q_1=r$, $q_2=\theta$ for clarity's sake, we wind up with the equations: $$m\ddot{r}-m r \dot{\theta}^2=F_r$$ $$m r^2 \ddot{\theta}+2 m r \dot{r} \dot{\theta}=\tau$$

From which we can identify the torque and whatever we want. If $r$ is constant, we have $F_r=-m v^2/r$, and identifying $m r^2 \dot{\theta}=L$ with the angular momentum, we see $\dot{L}=\tau$.

share|cite|improve this answer

Your Answer


By posting your answer, you agree to the privacy policy and terms of service.

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.