Register to reply 
Gravity problem I need to solve 
Share this thread: 
#1
Jul3014, 04:47 AM

P: 11

Hi all, I'm not a Physicist, but, I had an idea I wanted to put to bed. If you drop a weight on a rope that turns a generator as it falls, the mgh calculation gives you the force that could be converted to electricity,subject to frictional losses etc. Ignoring getting it back up again, if you connected a pneumatic cylinder to the bottom of the weight so that it struck the ground at the end of the weights journey.My question therefore is, what happens)) as far as I can see, the weight will travel the same distance as before, the motor will turn the same amount, allbeit slowed by the cylinder, yet the cylinder will store force in its air pressure.Please help me get this one correct in my little brain!))



#2
Jul3014, 06:12 AM

HW Helper
Thanks
P: 5,496

Once the slowly falling weight starts to compress the pneumatic cylinder, the body slows even more, probably stopping short of ground level. So the energy stored in the compressed air subtracts from the energy available to turn the generator. What you gain on the swings you lose on the roundabout. 


#3
Jul3014, 06:20 AM

P: 11




#4
Jul3014, 06:32 AM

HW Helper
Thanks
P: 5,496

Gravity problem I need to solve
The weight will fall at a fast rate only if the generator is not powering anything. The more electricity it generates, the slower it must fall.
You won't get something for nothing. 


#5
Jul3014, 07:03 AM

P: 11




#6
Jul3014, 07:28 AM

Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 12,269

If there is more weight then the generator will tend to speed up (and the weight fall faster). The generator load will receive more Volts from the generator (if it is not a regulated generator). The amount of energy left at the bottom would be mgh  Pt, where the generator produces P Watts and the fall takes time t. 


#7
Jul3014, 04:39 PM

HW Helper
Thanks
P: 5,496

The more light bulbs you try to power with your generator, the more difficult it will be to spin that generator and the falling weight will tend to fall at a slower speed. So in practice you would need to increase that weight to try to restore the proper spin rate of the generator. A slowly turning generator is no use to anyone because it isn't generating the expected voltage and your light bulbs will glow only dimly. There is no such thing as a free lunch! 


#8
Jul3114, 02:44 AM

P: 11

That makes sense, thank you for your time! So increasing the light bulbs would slow the generator, meaning more weight needs adding.If you didn't add the weight, then more time is taken for the drop,meaning power is lower but energy conversion is the same. 


#9
Jul3114, 04:20 AM

HW Helper
Thanks
P: 5,496




#10
Jul3114, 04:45 AM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 13,135

The bottom line is that the energy that goes to compress the cylinder is not available to the generator.
The question seems to be about the mechanism ... how? After all, the generator still turns the same number of times. The amount of energy generated depends not just on how many times the generator turns but also how fast it turns when it is doing it  the cylinder will slow the falling mass down: you know this already right? 


#11
Jul3114, 04:49 AM

Sci Advisor
Thanks
PF Gold
P: 12,269

This wasted energy at the bottom is always a problem with water wheels etc, where the exiting water needs to be moving in order to get it out of the way  taking some KE with it. 


#12
Aug114, 08:56 AM

P: 11

Thank you, everyone!



#13
Aug114, 09:21 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 13,135

No worries.
The complete calculation is that gravitational PE turn into kinetic energy + electrical energy + energy in the cylinder. Starting from there will avoid a lot of confusion that can result from trying to use forceandmotion reasoning. Donald Simanek has a collection of examples of how people can get turned around by trying to think only in terms of forces. They make for good exercizes for good physics too: https://www.lhup.edu/~dsimanek/museum/unwork.htm 


#14
Aug214, 03:02 AM

P: 11

I think we've well covered this one and have an understanding, thank you all who helped me)) I've been to the museum of unworkable devices before, its fascinating)) The question that you've helped me with is a part of my invention, it was wether to include a rebound mechanism (e.g the cylinder) or not. Thanks again.



#15
Aug414, 03:21 PM

PF Gold
P: 82

...
It sounds as though the OP is saisfied with the conclusion of his post. But other questions are raised. Is there a condition where free lunch seems imminent? Where the rope need never be recovered? Just to add a complication and bit of fun, it might depend on where the weight is falling because of gravity. Suppose a rapidly orbiting generator lets out a weight which is allowed to fall into a black hole. In some ways we might propose the weight would fall forever, as I have seen proposed as a scenario for an astronaut falling in. The generator could safely remain in a delicately balanced orbit around the black hole. So then it seems we might get our "free lunch" anyway, if the rope is infinitely long, or continuously manufactured. "FREE LUNCH" NOTE BELOW: (my bold) More realistic, I believe the rope would likely be torn apart by tidal forces long before one could collect the free lunch. But OTOH the generator might burn up first. Food for thought I guess. Wes ... 


#16
Aug414, 09:55 PM

Homework
Sci Advisor
HW Helper
Thanks
P: 13,135

I'm going to treat this as an orbital mechanics and blackhole question rather than a pmm question, because pmm questions are not allowed. I take it you want to rig, by thought experiment, a situation where the mass falls forever  generating electricity? Presumably postulating ideal classical components like a massless nonstretchy rope and a frictionless motion generator? Off the top of my head: If it were just an ideal frictionless spindle unwinding the rope, then the spindle and mass would move apart (conservation of momentum)  the spindle climbing to higher orbits. Since the generator is adding some drag to the unwinding  the rope cannot unwind as fast as needed to keep this balance  so the mass ends up dragging the generator after it, or the orbiter ends up dragging the mass along behind it or some combination of the two (it will depend on the initial speed of separation). Either way the whole contraption ends up falling at the same speed after a finite time. Consider: What started the mass falling in the first place? You need to input some energy to start the separation... that is the maximum amount of energy you can usefully generate. Tidal forces would eventually pull such a contraption apart  but it looks like we can add infinite strength and length to the ideal classical rope and still not get energy generated in perpetuity. 


Register to reply 
Related Discussions  
How to solve a velocity problem as an initial condition problem  Introductory Physics Homework  4  
How do you solve problem you cannot solve?  Academic Guidance  16  
How to solve this integration problem problem...did but got wrong answer  Calculus & Beyond Homework  2  
Published paper in hepth claims to solve quantum gravity & other problems. Thoughts?  Beyond the Standard Model  4  
Gravity doughnut may solve time travel problem  Special & General Relativity  3 