High School How Is the Coefficient of Restitution Linked to Conservation of Energy?

Click For Summary
The Coefficient of Restitution (COR) is linked to the Conservation of Energy through the relationship between kinetic and gravitational potential energy, specifically the equation 1/2mv^2 = mgh. It represents the ratio of velocities before and after a collision, serving as an engineering approximation under specific conditions. The discussion highlights that COR is often used in idealized scenarios, such as steel balls colliding with steel plates, but may not apply well to real-world situations. It is suggested that educational materials should emphasize the limitations of COR to prevent confusion in collision-related problems. Understanding COR requires careful consideration of the context in which it is applied.
Generally Confused
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
Where does the Coefficient of Restitution equation come from, in terms of the Conservation of Energy?

The measure of efficiency is the velocity after the collision divided by the velocity before the collision, but how does it get to that point? I'm trying to view this focused on an object that is dropped from a specific height.

I believe it has something to do with 1/2mv^2=mgh (kinetic energy and gravitation potential energy put into Ei=Ef+Wnc) but I'm not sure how the transformation occurs.

Let me know if I'm being too vague, as I'm not exactly sure how much information is necessary.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It comes from the same place that the coefficient of friction does. It is an engineering approximation that holds over a useful range of conditions.
 
The Coefficient of Restitution Is actually defined as such. It is actually the ratio of impact after and before collision. Since most of the times, we don't consider loss of mass of the colliding bodies we have only velocity as the parameter which will measure the impact of the collision. Hence, Coefficient of Restitution comes into scene.
 
jbriggs444 said:
It comes from the same place that the coefficient of friction does.
Actually, I would say that it is even more of an abstraction than the coefficient of friction. Most situations where people seem to want to use it are so far from 'ideal' that I would say its only use is for answering A level Mechanics questions. I wish that School Maths courses would introduce COR with a massive caveat from the start. It would help reduce the number of unanswerable questions on PF that we get about collisions. Steel balls and steel plates - OK. Anything else, treat it with care.
 
I do not have a good working knowledge of physics yet. I tried to piece this together but after researching this, I couldn’t figure out the correct laws of physics to combine to develop a formula to answer this question. Ex. 1 - A moving object impacts a static object at a constant velocity. Ex. 2 - A moving object impacts a static object at the same velocity but is accelerating at the moment of impact. Assuming the mass of the objects is the same and the velocity at the moment of impact...

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
107K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
Replies
55
Views
5K