Conservation of energy flywheel experiment

AI Thread Summary
An experiment was conducted to analyze the conservation of energy using a flywheel and different masses dropped from the same height. The potential energy of the masses was calculated and plotted against the angular velocity of the flywheel, revealing that the graph does not pass through the origin. This indicates that not all potential energy is converted into rotational energy, as some energy is lost to kinetic energy of the falling mass and other forms like sound. The discussion suggests that the energy used to increase the kinetic energy of the falling mass reduces the energy available for the flywheel. A recommendation was made to modify the experiment to minimize the kinetic energy of the mass just before impact for more accurate results.
jamie3009
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi

Ive recently carried out an experiment where different masses are hung from a string and then dropped from the same height. The other end of the string is wrapped around the axle of a flywheel and when the mass hits the ground, the time for ten revolutions of the flywheel is calculated to give angular velocity. The potential energy of each of the masses is calculated using mgh and a graph of Ep vs ω2 is then plotted with the gradient = 1/2I. I am a bit stuck as to how to explain the graph and explain why the graph doesn't go through 0,0. My thoughts are that as the potential energy of the masses is increased, the kinetic energy of the flywheel also increases, as the angular velocity increases. I think the graph doesn't go through 0,0 to show that the flywheel still has some potential energy in the system when the kinetic energy is 0. Am i correct? Sorry for writing loads :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF.

Ep is the potential energy of the mass and it is on the Y-axis, right? And the graph is crossing above 0 on the Y-axis? Then you are getting an output energy that is below your input energy. This would be because the weight hits the ground with kinetic energy: you aren't converting all of the potential energy to rotational energy in the flywheel.
 
russ_watters said:
Welcome to PF.

Ep is the potential energy of the mass and it is on the Y-axis, right? And the graph is crossing above 0 on the Y-axis? Then you are getting an output energy that is below your input energy. This would be because the weight hits the ground with kinetic energy: you aren't converting all of the potential energy to rotational energy in the flywheel.

Thats correct. So does that mean that because the mass still has kinetic energy when it hits the floor, some is converted into sound etc and not all into rotational energy of the flywheel?
 
jamie3009 said:
Thats correct. So does that mean that because the mass still has kinetic energy when it hits the floor, some is converted into sound etc and not all into rotational energy of the flywheel?
It's simpler than that. The change in potential energy of the falling mass increases both the kinetic energy of the flywheel and the falling mass. (They are connected by a string.) The energy used to increase the KE of the falling mass is energy not available to increase the KE of the flywheel. Doesn't matter what happens when the falling mass hits the ground.

See if you can derive the equation connecting the Δh of the falling mass with the resultant ω2.
 
Another thing to do would be to alter the experiment. Replace your current axle with a conically shaped axle, that will release the weights at ~zero velocity immediately before they touch the ground. This eliminates the dropping mass kinetic energy variable.

cone.jpg

I'm sure there's a mathematical model for this, but my math skills are pretty much gone.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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