Using energy methods in a moment of inertia problem?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving a pulley system with a block and its moment of inertia. The original poster seeks to calculate the speed of a falling block using energy methods, considering both gravitational potential energy and kinetic energy.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of energy conservation principles, questioning the inclusion of the pulley’s kinetic energy in the calculations. The original poster initially neglects this aspect, leading to incorrect results.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the problem, with participants providing insights into the energy conservation of the entire system, including both the block and the pulley. Some participants express uncertainty about the correctness of their calculations and the assumptions made regarding the system's setup.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of clarifying the problem setup, particularly regarding the presence of additional blocks that may affect energy conservation. The original poster acknowledges missing information that could influence the analysis.

erik-the-red
Messages
88
Reaction score
1
Question

The pulley in the attachment has radius 0.160 [tex]m[/tex] and a moment of inertia 0.480 [tex]{\rm kg} \cdot {\rm m}^{2}[/tex]. The rope does not slip on the pulley rim.

1. Use energy methods to calculate the speed of the 4.00-kg block just before it strikes the floor.

I'm thinking: [tex]K_1 + U_1 = K_2 + U_2[/tex].

I'm also thinking that [tex]K_1=U_2=0[/tex], which implies [tex]U_1=K_2[/tex].

Then, [tex]mgh=(1/2)(m)(v^2)[/tex]. Solving for v, I get [tex]v=\sqrt(2*9.80*5)=9.90[/tex] m/s.

But, this isn't correct.

What did I do wrong?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
And where have you included the kinetic energy the pulley itself has?
The energy of the block itself is not conserved, but the energy of the system block+pulley is.
 
arildno said:
And where have you included the kinetic energy the pulley itself has?
The energy of the block itself is not conserved, but the energy of the system block+pulley is.

[tex]K_p=(1/2)(I)(\omega)^2[/tex].
[tex]K_p=(1/2)(I)(v/r)^2[/tex]

Energy system of the block and pulley?

[tex]K_1 + U_1 + K_(p_1) = K_2 + U_2 + K_(p_2)[/tex]

[tex]U_1 = K_2 + K_(p_2)[/tex]

[tex]mgh = (1/2)(m)(v_2)^2 + (1/2)(I)(v_2/r)^2[/tex]
[tex](4.00)(9.80)(5.00) = (1/2)(4.00)(v_2)^2 + (1/2)(.480)((v_2)^2/(.160^2))[/tex]
[tex]v_2 = 4.15[/tex] m/s.

Is my reasoning correct?
 
Last edited:
It should be, given the information you've given me.
 
:(

4.15 m/s is not correct.

I didn't think about the rotational kinetic energy, so obviously my initial answer was not correct.

I guess I must have figured it in incorrectly, but I don't know why I am wrong.
 
But state the problem PRECISELY!
For example, is there a lighter block in the picture that travels upwards as the 4.0 kg block travel downwards?
You didn't inform me on this.
In that case, energy is conserved for the ENTIRE system consisting of the two blocks plus the pulley.
 
How do you know 4.15 m/s is not correct?
books sometimes have wrong answers in them.
Your procedure is now correct, and if the block falls 5 m, your answer is, too.

On the other hand, if this pulley is "attached" to something that might move, that MUST be taken into account!
 
Thanks to everyone who replied. You made me realize that I forgot to attach a picture, but more importantly, that I forgot to take into account an object that indeed might move!

I will reconsider this problem now.
 

Attachments

  • figure.jpg
    figure.jpg
    4.6 KB · Views: 758
I think the possibility that the other block might move can be made into a certainty..:wink:
Good luck!
Hint:
Be careful about the gravitational potential energy terms, get them right!
 
  • #10
Thanks, I got this question right.

The general form was [tex]K_1 + U_1 + K_1 + U_1 + K_R = K_2+ U_2 + K_2 + U_2 + K_R[/tex].

Note that the equation I listed isn't the one I used, it's because I'm still a newb to LaTeX that I couldn't differentiate between object A of mass 4.00kg and object B of mass 2.00kg.

A bunch of terms canceled out and I got the answer.
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
28
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
5K
Replies
6
Views
5K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
11K
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K