A Couple of Basic Questions about Mechanics

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter syberraith
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Couple Mechanics
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around basic mechanics concepts, specifically focusing on the relationship between force, work, and kinetic energy. Participants explore the implications of applying a force over time and the resulting displacement and energy changes, as well as seeking information on propulsion device performance metrics.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested
  • Homework-related

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the discrepancy between kinetic energy calculated using the formula \( \frac{1}{2} m v^2 \) and the work done calculated from force and distance.
  • Another participant suggests that the misunderstanding arises from the assumption that a 1 N force applied for one second results in a displacement of 1 meter, proposing that the actual displacement is 0.5 meters due to constant acceleration.
  • Some participants mention the integration of acceleration to derive displacement and work, with varying degrees of clarity and correctness.
  • One participant expresses confusion and requests resources for further reading, indicating that existing materials have not clarified the topic.
  • There are conflicting views on the correctness of previous posts, with some participants asserting that certain explanations are incorrect while others defend them.
  • A later reply acknowledges the error in assuming a 1 N force results in 1 meter of displacement, confirming the correct displacement as 0.5 meters and the work done as 0.5 joules.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the explanations provided, with multiple competing views on the correct interpretation of the mechanics involved. Some participants agree on the correct displacement and work done, while others challenge the clarity and correctness of earlier responses.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved aspects regarding the integration of acceleration and the definitions of terms like "jerk." Some participants reference external resources, but the effectiveness of these resources is questioned.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in basic mechanics, particularly those studying physics or engineering concepts related to force, work, and energy. It may also benefit those looking for clarification on propulsion device performance metrics.

syberraith
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
I'm writing a paper on a propulsion device and I could use some F/P ratio comparisons, like typical values for Newtons per Watt for propeller driven, jet driven, and rocket driven craft.

Also I ran into a confusing point involving work and kinetic energy. if kinetic energy is 1/2 m v^2, then say a 1kg mass that is traveling at 1m/s, then according to the formula the mass has a kinetic energy of 0.5 joules.

Now let say the mass was accelerated from a velocity of zero to the velocity of 1m/s, by a force of 1 Newton applied for one second. The definition of work state that the work applied to a mass increases the kinetic energy of that mass. So the 1 Newton force applied for one second, resulted mass moving one 1 meter. The formula for work states that force times distance equals the energy added to the system, Thus 1 Newton times 1 meter should equal one joule of energy added to the mass.

This is how I get two different answers for the kinetic energy of a 1kg mass that is moving at 1m/s.

Could someone point out my mistake in this please.



FredB
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your mistake is that a 1 N force applied for one second means that the body travels one meter. Your "jerk" (rate of change of acceleration) for 0 < t < 1, is 1. So integrating that 3 times you get:
s(t) = \frac{x^3}{3} for 0 < t < 1

So the displacement is s(1) = \frac{1}{3}
Now an easier way to get work from this:
Work = \delta E_k

where your speed function is:
v(t) = \frac{x^2}{2}

this should clear things up.
 
Last edited:
I'm still confused.

Maybe could you point me to a good article on the subject. Wikipedia is what has confused me.

Then again maybe I can just ignore the N*m approach and use the delta Ek method instead.

I could still use some ball park figures for F/P ratios for propeller planes. jets, and rockets...
 
Last edited:
All you need to know is that a(t) = v&#039;(t) = s&#039;&#039;(t) and that s(t) = \int v(t) dt = \int \int a(t) dt^2.

And for work, there are a couple of formulas you can use.

W = \int F \cdot dx = \int F \cdot v dt
W = \Delta E_{k}

In terms of a good article, I know of none but i'll look. Best description I've ever seen of work is in the Feynman Lectures - Volume 1. (Maybe because I'm a huge sucker for Feynman :P)

EDIT: Maybe try this page: http://physics.info/work/
 
Last edited:
gordonj005 said:
Your mistake is that a 1 N force applied for one second means that the body travels one meter. Your "jerk" (rate of change of velocity) for 0 < t < 1, is 1. So integrating that 3 times you get:
The rate of change of velocity is called "acceleration". Jerk is the rate of change of acceleration.
In the example described in the OP there is a constant acceleration 1m/s^2.
The distance traveled in 1 s is 0.5 m and the work is 0.5 J, equal to the change in kinetic energy.

To the OP: just look up uniform accelerated motion.
 
IF you are still confused, igmore posts #2 and #4, which are also confused and/or wrong.

To repeat what #5 said, in slightly different words:

The velocity increases linearly from 0 to 1 m/s over 1 second.
So the average velocity over the second is (0 + 1)/2 = 0.5 m/s
Distance traveled = average speed x time = 0.5 meters.
The work done = force x distance = 0.5 joules.
And that is the same as the kinetic energy = mv^2/2.
 
I see.

So I erred in presuming that 1N applied to 1kg for one second would result in a displacement of 1m. It actually results in a displacement of 0.5m, and 1N acting through a distance of 1m would increase the kinetic energy by 1 joule it would just take longer than 1 second if the origninal velocity was zero.

Thanks, that's a relief. At least I know where to look now.

the calculus text I have on hand is rather poor. Barely a paragraph about the dot product of N*m. It's single variable calculus for non-science/engineering majors.

Feyman, I'm a fan. I'll see if I can find any of his basic physics lectures that were taped.
 
AlephZero said:
IF you are still confused, igmore posts #2 and #4, which are also confused and/or wrong.

#4 is correct. Some of #2 is incorrect.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 138 ·
5
Replies
138
Views
9K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
4K
  • · Replies 77 ·
3
Replies
77
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 48 ·
2
Replies
48
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K