Box slides down incline, air resistance does work. Find Velocity.

AI Thread Summary
A 38.7g box sliding down a 12.5m incline experiences -3.71J of work due to air resistance. The initial approach to calculate the final speed incorrectly accounted for the negative work twice, leading to an erroneous result of 20.9m/s instead of the correct 7.30m/s. The correct formula should consider the potential energy at the top and the work done, expressed as E kinetic at bottom = E potential at top + Work. This adjustment clarifies that the negative work reduces the kinetic energy, resulting in a lower final speed. The problem was resolved by correctly applying the work done by air resistance in the calculations.
EroAlchemist
Messages
10
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A 38.7g box slides down an incline of height 12.5m. As it slides, air resistance does -3.71J of work. Find the speed at which it reaches the bottom of the incline.

Homework Equations



E kinetic at bottom = E potential at top - Work air resistance
1/2 mv2 - 1/2 mvorig2 = mgh - (-3.71J)


The Attempt at a Solution



1/2(.0387kg)(v2) = (.0387kg)(9.8m/s2)(12.5m) - (-3.71J)

v= sqrt 8.45J / .01935kg = 20.9m/s

Book gives the correct answer as being 7.30m/s.
Can anybody tell where I went wrong here? Thanks much!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You've basically accounted for the negative nature of the work TWICE. First in your set up for the formula:

E kinetic at bottom = E potential at top - Work air resistance

and then again a second time when you actually plugged in the number (-3.71 J). Only one of these negative signs should be there. A more general way to do it would be to set up the formula without assuming anything about the sign of the work:

E kinetic at bottom = E potential at top + Work

This is a general formula since TWO things contribute (or "add") to the KE at the bottom 1. All of the PE is converted into KE and 2. Any work done on the object during its journey also results in a change in KE.

Now, when you plug a negative number into the equation, it takes into account that the contribution to the KE described by 2 happens to be negative in this example

Intuitively this should make sense as well, since the final KE is smaller than it would have been without the air resistance (whereas in your example, the final KE was larger than it would have been w/o the air resistance, which makes no sense).
 
Thanks for the help! I added the work this time and got the correct answer.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top