Conservation of energy in a circle arc.

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a problem related to the conservation of energy in a circular arc, specifically focusing on the effects of different reference points for potential energy calculations. The original poster presents a scenario involving a radius of 2.0 m, an angle of 60°, and a friction force of 10 N, which leads to conflicting results in energy calculations due to the choice of the y = 0 reference line.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss two different approaches to defining the y = 0 line for potential energy calculations, leading to different interpretations of energy conservation. Questions arise regarding the specific expressions used for initial and final y-values, and the implications of using a constant friction force.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights and questioning the validity of the approaches taken. Some guidance has been offered regarding the need for consistent values in calculations, and there is an acknowledgment of potential errors in the use of trigonometric functions. The conversation remains open as participants seek to reconcile the differences in their calculations.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the assumption of a constant friction force may not be realistic, and there are indications of missing information regarding the mass used in calculations. The original poster acknowledges discrepancies in their approach and is seeking clarification on the correct methodology.

tomkoolen
Messages
39
Reaction score
1
http://www.natuurkunde.nl/servlet/supportBinaryFiles?referenceId=1&supportId=606217

Hello everyone,

I was wondering if anyone could shed some light on the following problem:

While composing a practise test for a chapter about conservation of energy, I made a problem like the one in the image, but because I was too fast I used physically impossible values: radius = 2.0 m, α = 60° and the friction force equals 10 N. This obviously meant that v^2 gave a negative value.

However that's a problem easily solved by fixing the values. The problem I came across is that I got a different solution than someone else, while the only difference in our calculations was where we put the y = 0 line.

I considered the bottom B of the circle to be y = 0, which means that you get potential energy on the left and the right side of the balance.

The other person put the y = 0 at the horizontal line through C which means that he only gets mgΔy at the left side.

Has anyone got a clue as to why we get different values?

Thanks in advance,
Tom Koolen
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Either approach will work. Can you state the specific expressions for the initial and final values of y that were used for the two approaches? The difference Δy = yf-yi should of course come out the same for the two approaches.

[Note: the assumption of a constant friction force is somewhat unrealistic in this problem since the normal force will vary during the motion. But, as a practice exercise I think it's ok.]
 
Thanks for your response, here are the y-values:

Approach 1: yA = 2.0 meters, yC = 2-2*tan(30) = 0.8 meters
Approach 2: deltay = 1.2 meters and that potential energy is fully converted into friction heat and kinetic energy.
 
I don't think the tangent is the correct trig function to use here.

To see why the two approaches are not yielding the same answers, it would probably be best to post the details of each calculation.
 
Alright, here's the work:

Approach 1: see attachment.
Approach 2:
mgΔy = F*s + 1/2mv^2
35 = 52 + 1.5v^2
v^2 = -11.3

The difference is only 1, but still.
I believe the tangent is correct, but apart from that, it should still give the same answer because both approaches have used the tangent.

Hopefully you can find something in the work!
 

Attachments

  • 1376422_441040949340473_2024294355_n.jpg
    1376422_441040949340473_2024294355_n.jpg
    40.3 KB · Views: 439
I stand by that last sentence, but I agree that the tangent was incorrect, that was a quick thinking mistake.
 
I have snipped a bit of your picture and attached it here. Note that the red horizontal line is not equal to 2.0 m.

It also appears to me that you have not used the same value of the mass in various parts of your equations. What is the value of the mass?
 

Attachments

  • slide problem.png
    slide problem.png
    11.3 KB · Views: 424
True I see that now, thanks :)
The mass equals 3 kg.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
25
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K