Calculating Work Done by a Constant Force

  • Thread starter Thread starter milla7
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Work
AI Thread Summary
A 7.6 kg body is subjected to a constant horizontal force on a frictionless air track, and the task is to calculate the work done by this force between t = 0 and t = 0.5 seconds. The initial calculations yielded 0.152 Joules, but the expected answer is 0.0973 Joules, leading to confusion about the origin of the number 0.8 used in the equations. The inconsistency arises from using incorrect time intervals in the calculations, specifically mixing up 0.5 seconds with 2 seconds. After clarifying the time used, the calculations align correctly, although some participants noted that the problem itself seems flawed. Ultimately, the correct approach resolves the discrepancy in the work done calculation.
milla7
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Question
A 7.6 kg body is at rest on a frictionless horizontal air track when a constant horizontal force F with arrow acting in the positive direction of an x-axis along the track is applied to the body. A stroboscopic graph of the position of the body as it slides to the right is shown in the figure. The force F with arrow is applied to the body at t = 0, and the graph records the position of the body at 0.50 s intervals. How much work is done on the body by the applied force F with arrow between t = 0 and t = 0.5 s?

7-p-007.gif


Homework Equations


x=vot +1/2at^2
v=at
m/2(Vf^2-Vi^2)

The Attempt at a Solution


When I work the problem I get 0.152 Joules.
.8 = 1/2 a(2.0)^2
a=0.4
v=0.4(0.5)
v=0.2
1/2(7.6kg)(.2^2)= 0.152J.

I work it this way and I have no idea why it is wrong. The answer is supposed to be 0.0973.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
milla7 said:
.8 = 1/2 at^2
Where does .8 come from?
The problem statement is inconsistent - a constant force cannot produce this pattern. There are multiple ways to approach this problem and they will lead to different answers.
 
mfb said:
Where does .8 come from?
plug it into 1/2 at^2 = x along with t = 2.0 to get the acceleration. Then I use that to find the velocity at .5 seconds.
 
I know, but where does the number 0.8 come from? It is not the position of the object after 0.5 seconds.
Edit: wait, you used the 2 seconds. I guess that's the origin of the discrepancy.

Edit2: Do the same calculation with 0.5 seconds and you get half the other value. Weird.
 
mfb said:
I know, but where does the number 0.8 come from? It is not the position of the object after 0.5 seconds.
Edit: wait, you used the 2 seconds. I guess that's the origin of the discrepancy.

Edit2: Do the same calculation with 0.5 seconds and you get half the other value. Weird.
Ah... yea thanks... though something is off with that problem that doesn't make sense... got it to work now though.
 
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