Work Energy Theorem with Kinetic Friction and External Work

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a crate being pulled up a rough incline, incorporating concepts from the work-energy theorem, kinetic friction, and external work. The scenario includes calculating the final speed of the crate after being pulled a certain distance while considering forces acting on it.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the work-energy theorem and the signs associated with the work done by friction. There are questions about the correct use of trigonometric functions in the equations and the interpretation of forces acting on the crate.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, questioning the signs of terms in the equations, and clarifying the role of friction as an opposing force. Some have noted corrections to earlier statements and are exploring how these adjustments affect the final calculations.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted confusion regarding the signs of the work done by friction and how it relates to the overall energy balance in the problem. The original poster references an equation provided by their teacher, which may have influenced their understanding of the problem setup.

kc0ldeah
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A crate of mass 10.0 kg is pulled up a rough incline with an initial speed of 1.5 m/s. The pulling force is 100 N parallel to the incline which makes an angle of 20.0° with the horizontal. The coefficient of kinetic friction is .4 and the cart is pulled 5.00 m.

e) What is the speed of the crate after being pulled 5.00m?

Homework Equations


Delta Energy Mechanical = -Force_friction(d) + Work_external

K_f + U_f = K_i + U_i - Force_friction(d) + Work_external

For constant Force and parallel force and displacement: W = F(d)

The Attempt at a Solution



K_f + U_f = K_i + U_i - Force_friction(d) + Work_external

.5mvf2 + mgh = .5mvi2 + 0 - Force_friction(d) + Work_external

h = 5sin(20°)
Force_friction = -μ Fn
= -μ 98cos(20°)
Work External = F(d) = 100N * 5m = 500J

.5mvf2 + mgh = .5mvi2 +μ 98cos(20°)(5) + 500

vf2 = (.5mvi2 +μ 98cos(20°)(5) + 500 - mgh) / (.5m)

v = 10.27 m/s

The answer is given as 5.65 m/s.
Any help is appreciated!
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
kc0ldeah said:
vf2 = (.5mvi2 +μ 98sin(20°)(5) + 500 - mgh) / (.5m)
Is that a typo, or did you change cosine into sine?
 
Sorry that was a typo I will fix it.
 
kc0ldeah said:
.5mvf2 + mgh = .5mvi2 +μ 98cos(20°)(5) + 500
Check the sign of the work done by friction.
 
Doc Al said:
Check the sign of the work done by friction.

K_f + U_f = K_i + U_i - Force_friction(d) + Work_external

If you plug -μ98cos(20°) into that it should be +μ98cos(20°) right?
It is -μ98cos(20°) to begin with because Force_friction acts in the opposite direction of the crate's movement.

EDIT: But fixing it the way you said gives me 5.65 which is the answer. Why is that term supposed to be negative?
 
kc0ldeah said:
K_f + U_f = K_i + U_i - Force_friction(d) + Work_external

If you plug -μ98cos(20°) into that it should be +μ98cos(20°) right?
It is -μ98cos(20°) to begin with because Force_friction acts in the opposite direction of the crate's movement.

EDIT: But fixing it the way you said gives me 5.65 which is the answer. Why is that term supposed to be negative?
It depends on how you define the terms. That friction term represents the work done by friction, which is negative (since friction opposes the displacement). When you wrote "-Force_friction(d)", I assume you meant for Force_friction to be the magnitude of that force.

More generally: Work done by friction (or any force) = Force*distance = (-μmgcosθ)(d)

Final Energy = Initial Energy + Work done by friction + Work done by applied force
 
Final Energy = Initial Energy + Work done by friction + Work done by applied force

Thank you this is what I really needed to see.

I guess the equation my teacher gave me already factored in the fact that friction is an opposing force. That has really been messing me up.
 
kc0ldeah said:
I guess the equation my teacher gave me already factored in the fact that friction is an opposing force.
Exactly.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
1K
Replies
18
Views
2K