Can Work-Energy Be Used to Determine Maximum Projectile Height?

AI Thread Summary
Work-Energy principles can effectively determine the maximum height of a projectile launched at an angle, assuming no air resistance and that initial height equals final height. At maximum height, potential energy (PE) is at its peak while kinetic energy (KE) is not zero, as the projectile maintains horizontal velocity. The vertical component of velocity becomes zero at this point, allowing for the application of energy conservation laws. By knowing the initial speed and launch angle, one can calculate the initial horizontal and vertical components, leading to the maximum height using energy conservation. This approach provides an intuitive alternative to traditional kinematics equations for analyzing projectile motion.
whiskeySierra
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Please forgive me if the answer to this question is obvious, I studied Political Science for three years in undergrad before I realized 'real' science was far more rewarding.

My question (not homework):

I understand that Work-Energy can be used for projectile motion, if what you're after is not time dependent. I also find that working with W.E. is more intuitive for me than the kinematics equations.

Say I have a projectile that is launched at some angle < 90°, at some velocity and I want to know what the maximum height the projectile reaches in its flight. We will assume no air resistance and that height initial = height final.

So figuring out the maximum height of the projectile with kinematics is easy enough, but with W.E. it's not so straight forward.

I know that maximum height along the path would occur where PE has the highest value along the entire path. KE would never be zero because the projectile never stops moving, only slows a little at maximum height.

So how (if possible) can I use W.E. to look at a problem like this?

Thank you.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
welcome to pf!

hi whiskeySierra! welcome to pf! :smile:
whiskeySierra said:
I know that maximum height along the path would occur where PE has the highest value along the entire path. KE would never be zero because the projectile never stops moving, only slows a little at maximum height.

So how (if possible) can I use W.E. to look at a problem like this?

ah, but you do know the value of KE at maximum PE …

because you know that the horizontal component of velocity is constant, and that will be the minimum KE (instead of 0) :wink:
 
Could we not say this occurs when the vertical component of velocity is zero?
 
whiskeySierra said:
Could we not say this occurs when the vertical component of velocity is zero?

Yes. Energy and momentum conservation laws apply individually and collectively to the vertical and horizontal components of the motion. If you have the initial speed and the launch angle you can immediately determine the initial horizontal and vertical components of the motion including velocity, momentum, and energy. Energy conservation (KE and PE) readily yields the maximum height of the projectile.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top