Conservation of Energy, PE & KE, block on incline with KE & friction?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving conservation of energy, specifically focusing on kinetic energy (KE), potential energy (PE), and the effects of friction on a block sliding up an incline. The scenario includes a 4 kg bundle starting with 128 J of kinetic energy on a 30° incline, with a coefficient of friction of 0.30.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between kinetic energy, potential energy, and work done against friction. Questions arise regarding the correct formulation of energy equations and the interpretation of forces acting on the block. Some participants attempt to clarify the definitions of normal force and friction in the context of the problem.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and questioning each other's reasoning. There is an ongoing examination of the equations used to describe the energy transformations and the forces involved. Some guidance has been offered regarding the need to consider the components of forces acting on the block and how they relate to the work done.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential misunderstandings regarding the definitions of forces and the relationships between distance traveled along the incline and height gained. There is also mention of unit consistency in the equations being discussed.

nchin
Messages
172
Reaction score
0
A 4 kg bundle starts up a 30° incline with 128 J of kinetic energy. How far will it slide up the plane if the coefficient of friction is 0.30?

So the solution to the problem is 128 = 4(9.8)(x)(sin30) + 0.30 (4)(9.8)(x)(cos30)...x = 4.29m

I don't understand the solution.

so 128 = 4(9.8)(x)(sin30) + 0.30 (4)(9.8)(x)(cos30) is

KE = mgh (sin theta) + Friction (mgh)(cos theta)

I thought it would be KE = PE + Friction, why is mgh added twice?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
KE=PE-W where W is work done by friction.
KE=mgh-Friction*distance
Friction=normal force*coefficient of friction, now normal force is mgh*cos30
 
The coefficient of friction is just a unitless factor that tells you how much the (maximum) force of friction compared to the normal force. What is the normal force?
 
It really is KE = PE + Losses to friction

have a closer look at the connection between the height above the starting point and how far along the slope the block travels
 
lep11 said:
KE=PE-W where W is work done by friction.
KE=mgh-Friction*distance
Friction=normal force*coefficient of friction, now normal force is mgh*cos30

Isn't friction just

Coefficient x mg

Without height?
 
For friction, F=μFn. Fn isn't mg. Second, x isn't h. It's the distance the block slides along the surface. x sin(theta) is h. Third, x cos(theta) is also not h.
What you are calculating is not the force, but the work, which is force times distance. The force has an mg term in it, but the work has an mgh term.
 
nchin said:
Isn't friction just

Coefficient x mg

Without height?
Yes, it was a typo.
 
frogjg2003 said:
For friction, F=μFn. Fn isn't mg. Second, x isn't h. It's the distance the block slides along the surface. x sin(theta) is h. Third, x cos(theta) is also not h.
What you are calculating is not the force, but the work, which is force times distance. The force has an mg term in it, but the work has an mgh term.
By the way you have a little typo too. Fμ=μFn, now in y-direction ƩF=0⇔Gy=Fn →Fn=mg*cos30 So Fμ=μ*mg*cos30 Do you agree with me now?
 
lep11 said:
By the way you have a little typo too. Fμ=μFn, now in y-direction ƩF=0⇔Gy=Fn →Fn=mg*cos30 So Fμ=μ*mg*cos30 Do you agree with me now?

Ok that makes sense but why is the solution to the problem is:

128 = 4(9.8)(x)(sin30) + 0.30 (4)(9.8)(x)(cos30)

Which is
KE = mgh (sin theta) + Friction (mgh)(cos theta)

Shouldn't it just be
KE = (mgh) sin theta + coefficient of friction(mg) (cos theta)?

But that gives the wrong answer

But it would make more sense because friction = mu x mg
 
  • #10
lep11 said:
By the way you have a little typo too. Fμ=μFn, now in y-direction ƩF=0⇔Gy=Fn →Fn=mg*cos30 So Fμ=μ*mg*cos30 Do you agree with me now?
Were you talking about the part that looks like Fn*Fn? That's not a typo, it's two separate sentences.
 
  • #11
frogjg2003 said:
Were you talking about the part that looks like Fn*Fn? That's not a typo, it's two separate sentences.
I am sorry, it really seemed to me Fn*Fn
 
  • #12
nchin said:
[KE] = (mgh) sin theta + coefficient of friction(mg) (cos theta)
Look at the units.

[KE]=J=kg*m2/s2

[m]=kg
[g]=m/s2
[h]=m
[sin(θ)]=unitless
[mgh sin(θ)]=kg*m2/s2

[μ]=unitless
[m]=kg
[g]=m/s/s
[cos(θ)]=unitless
[μmg cos(θ)]= kg*m/s2

Without going into any physics, your answer is wrong because the units don't agree.


Let's start from the top.
  1. What are the FORCES acting on the bundle? Write these in terms of their components parallel and perpendicular with the slope.
  2. What is the net force? It should be parallel to and down the slope.
  3. Use W=\int\vec{F}\cdot d\vec{x} to calculate the WORKas a function of the distance the bundle travels. Remember, d\vec{x} is in the direction parallel to and up the slope, so your answer should be negative.
  4. Solve KE+W=0 for x, the distance up the slope. This is NOT the distance in the horizontal direction, nor is it the height.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
791
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K