Conservation of energy with springs

In summary: If it is more than two points, things can get a bit more complex. Usually when there are more than two points, we need to use calculus (and/or physics) in order to solve for the velocity. If it is just two points such as in the example with the baseball, finding the velocity will create be a...simple matter. If it is more than two points, things can get a bit more complex.
  • #1
henry3369
194
0

Homework Statement


A spring of negligible mass has force constant k = 1800N/m .

You place the spring vertically with one end on the floor. You then drop a book of mass 1.20kg onto it from a height of 0.500m above the top of the spring. Find the maximum distance the spring will be compressed.

Homework Equations


Ki + Ui = Kf + Uf

The Attempt at a Solution


First I calculated the velocity of the block when it makes contact with the spring and I got v = 3.96 m/s.

Then I used conservation of energy to find the spring compression distance by setting the point where the block makes contact with the spring to be zero (y=0).
So:
Ki = Uf
(1/2)mvi2 = (1/2)kx2 - mgx
Then I substituted the values in and had to use the quadratic formula to find x which I got x = 0.10898m or x = -0.0959.
I used the negative x value because the spring is being compressed downward, but my answer is still incorrect somehow.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
henry3369 said:
(1/2)mvi2 = (1/2)kx2 - mgx
Need to be careful how you're defining the positive direction there.
henry3369 said:
I used the negative x value because the spring is being compressed downward
OK, so you are defining up as positive. What sign are you using for the value of g? Check if that agrees with the above equation.
 
  • #3
henry3369 said:
First I calculated the velocity of the block when it makes contact with the spring and I got v = 3.96 m/s.

I find 3.13m/s for v
 
  • #4
haruspex said:
Need to be careful how you're defining the positive direction there.

OK, so you are defining up as positive. What sign are you using for the value of g? Check if that agrees with the above equation.
Since g is pointing down, I'm assuming I should make g negative as well as x. Why is it that when I usually do problems I'm able to keep g positive and get the right answers? Such as when throwing a ball in the air, I use Ki + Ui = Kf + Uf and I always keep g positive and still get the correct answer.
 
  • #5
geoffrey159 said:
I find 3.13m/s for v
Oh the velocity is 3.13 m/s. Does everything else seem correct?
 
  • #6
henry3369 said:
Why is it that when I usually do problems I'm able to keep g positive and get the right answers? Such as when throwing a ball in the air, I use Ki + Ui = Kf + Uf and I always keep g positive and still get the correct answer.

Usually you have two points you are interested in, and in each point there is only one energy term. For example only potential energy at the top and only kinetic energy at the bottom. In that case you can equate them and the sign doesn't really give much problems. Now you have two energy terms at the bottom, so you have to equate the kinetic energy at the impact with the spring to the sum of the two energy terms when the spring is maximally stretched. In this case you have to wacht whether you add them or subtract them.

Btw, the problem is the calculation of v. Not to mention that you didn't even needed that per se as you could have used the potential energy at the time of dropping the book as well.
 
Last edited:
  • #7
henry3369 said:
Since g is pointing down, I'm assuming I should make g negative as well as x.
There are two ways people handle this. You can think of 'g' as representing a magnitude, so you write g in the equation as an acceleration of -g (up being positive), or you can treat g as representing the acceleration due to gravity in the upward positive model. In the second (which I prefer), g appears in the equation as though it is upwards, but its numerical value will be negative.
By the way, you didn't need to work out the velocity. Just consider total change in PE.
 
  • #8
barefeet said:
Usually you have two points you are interested in, and in each point there is only one energy term. For example only potential energy at the top and only kinetic energy at the bottom. In that case you can equate them and the sign doesn't really give much problems. Now you have two energy terms at the bottom, so you have to equate the kinetic energy at the impact with the spring to the sum of the two energy terms when the spring is maximally stretched. In this case you have to wacht wether you add them or subtract them.

Btw, the problem is the calculation of v. Not to mention that you didn't even needed that per se as you could have used the potential energy at the time of dropping the book as well.
If it is just two points such as in the example with the baseball, finding the velocity will create be a problem if you make g negative though. Because at the top it will be -mgh which will equal the initial kinetic energy, (1/2)mv^2 and if you had to solve for velocity, you would have to take the square root of a negative value.
 
  • #9
Yes, but I was responding on why keeping g positive wasn't giving a lot of problems. By the way the inability to take a square root of a negative value helps as well, because most people will recognize that you can't do that and adjust accordingly
 
  • #10
I'm still very confused. How is it possible that I can randomly change the sign of gravity just because it isn't working in my equation. By changing gravity from negative to positive, I changed the direction of gravity to up instead of down. If I am able to do this then I should be able to keep it positive for my original problem. Originally I always kept acceleration due to gravity negative when I'm defining up as positive, but once I got to conservation of energy I wasn't able to anymore which is why I started using g as positive.
 
  • #11
henry3369 said:
How is it possible that I can randomly change the sign of gravity just because it isn't working in my equation.
You can't. Did you read my post #7? Can you post a specific example of the sign of g not mattering?
 
  • #12
haruspex said:
You can't. Did you read my post #7? Can you post a specific example of the sign of g not mattering?
If a baseball is thrown straight up and reaches the maximum height, what is the initial velocity.
Ui + Ki = Uf + Kf
Ui = Kf = 0.
Then Ki = Uf.
And if you set g to be negative in Uf, you have to take a square root of a negative.
 
  • #13
henry3369 said:
How is it possible that I can randomly change the sign of gravity just because it isn't working in my equation.

You can't change randomly the sign of gravity. You can however define upwards to be positive or downwards to be positive. g is ALWAYS downwards, so in the first case the acceleration is negative, in the second the acceleration is positive. As soon as you define something and you are consistent in your approach throughout the entire problem it shouldn't give problems

henry3369 said:
By changing gravity from negative to positive, I changed the direction of gravity to up instead of down.

No you have defined downwards as the positive direction.

henry3369 said:
If a baseball is thrown straight up and reaches the maximum height, what is the initial velocity.
Ui + Ki = Uf + Kf
Ui = Kf = 0.
Then Ki = Uf.
And if you set g to be negative in Uf, you have to take a square root of a negative.

I missed to mention a part of your problem with the signs.
The potential energy is actually the weight times the height and the weight of something is the mass times the magnitude of g and is always positive. So when looking at potential energies, they can be negative only if your height is negative. And this of course depends on what height you take to be 0.
If you look at forces for example then that is different because you are looking at g not the magnitude of g

You do have to watch out if x is positive or negative
 
Last edited:
  • #14
barefeet said:
You can't change randomly the sign of gravity. You can however define upwards to be positive or downwards to be positive. g is ALWAYS downwards, so in the first case the acceleration is negative, in the second the acceleration is positive. As soon as you define something and you are consistent in your approach throughout the entire problem it shouldn't give problems
No you have defined downwards as the positive direction.
I missed to mention a part of your problem with the signs.
The potential energy is actually the weight times the height and the weight of something is the mass times the magnitude of g and is always positive. So when looking at potential energies, they can be negative only if your height is negative. And this of course depends on what direction you call positive.
If you look at forces for example then that is different because you are looking at g not the magnitude of g

You do have to watch out if x is positive or negative
That makes much more sense now. Thank you so much for the explanation!
 
  • #15
henry3369 said:
Then Ki = Uf.
And if you set g to be negative in Uf, you have to take a square root of a negative.
U(r) = -mMG/r.
ΔU(x) = U(R+x)-U(R) = mMG(1/R - 1/(R+x)) ~= mMGx/R2 > 0.
g = -MG/R2
ΔU(x) = -mgx.
x > 0 & g < 0 gives ΔU > 0.
 
  • #16
haruspex said:
U(r) = -mMG/r.
ΔU(x) = U(R+x)-U(R) = mMG(1/R - 1/(R+x)) ~= mMGx/R2 > 0.
g = -MG/R2
ΔU(x) = -mgx.
x > 0 & g < 0 gives ΔU > 0.
After reading over everything again I'm still confused as to why the sign of gravity is negative in my original problems simply because it is now under the reference point. I feel as though only the height will be negative now because it is below zero. Why would I need gravity specifically to be negative in this equation and not in the baseball example?
 
  • #17
Also, now that I'm under the reference point, it seems as though gravitational potential energy should be negative as it is in my equation in the first post, but I only got the correct answer if I made it positive.
 
  • #18
henry3369 said:
Why would I need gravity specifically to be negative in this equation and not in the baseball example?
It is negative in the baseball example:
haruspex said:
x > 0 & g < 0 gives ΔU > 0.
henry3369 said:
Also, now that I'm under the reference point, it seems as though gravitational potential energy should be negative as it is in my equation in the first post, but I only got the correct answer if I made it positive.
The change in PE, in the question at start of thread, is negative. I can't see any post where you show all your working and get the right answer.
 
  • #19
haruspex said:
It is negative in the baseball example:The change in PE, in the question at start of thread, is negative. I can't see any post where you show all your working and get the right answer.
So I found the way to get the correct answer is by using (1/2)mvi2 = (1/2)kx2 - mgx.
After solving for x using the quadratic equation, there is a negative and positive x value. The correct answer is the positive x value which is 0.088 m. Is there a reason the positive answer is the correct one? Because if the spring is being compressed below the reference point, shouldn't I take the negative x value?
 
  • #20
henry3369 said:
So I found the way to get the correct answer is by using (1/2)mvi2 = (1/2)kx2 - mgx.
After solving for x using the quadratic equation, there is a negative and positive x value. The correct answer is the positive x value which is 0.088 m. Is there a reason the positive answer is the correct one? Because if the spring is being compressed below the reference point, shouldn't I take the negative x value?
There are two solutions for x because the system will oscillate. At both extremes, the KE will be zero, and all the energy will be as a combo of gravitational PE and spring PE. Your equation encompasses both cases.
Which one is the solution required depends on the value you are putting in for g. If g = -9.8 m/s2, then your equation has x as positive up, and you should take the negative value of x.
 

1. What is the concept of conservation of energy with springs?

The conservation of energy with springs is a fundamental principle in physics that states that energy cannot be created or destroyed, but can only be transferred or transformed from one form to another. In the case of springs, it means that the total amount of energy within a closed system remains constant, even as the spring undergoes various changes in its position and motion.

2. How does a spring store and release energy?

A spring stores energy through elastic potential energy, which is the energy stored in an object when it is stretched or compressed. When a spring is stretched or compressed, it gains potential energy, and when released, it converts this potential energy back into kinetic energy, causing the spring to move or vibrate.

3. What factors affect the conservation of energy in a spring?

There are several factors that can affect the conservation of energy in a spring, including the stiffness of the spring (measured by its spring constant), the displacement of the spring from its equilibrium position, and the mass attached to the spring. These factors can affect the amount of potential and kinetic energy that the spring can store and release.

4. How is the conservation of energy with springs related to Hooke's Law?

Hooke's Law states that the force required to stretch or compress a spring is directly proportional to the displacement of the spring from its equilibrium position. This means that the more a spring is stretched or compressed, the more potential energy it gains. Therefore, the conservation of energy with springs is closely related to Hooke's Law, as it explains how the energy is stored and released in a spring.

5. Can the conservation of energy be violated in a spring system?

No, the conservation of energy cannot be violated in a spring system. This principle is a fundamental law of physics and has been observed to hold true in all physical systems, including those involving springs. Even when accounting for factors such as friction and air resistance, the total amount of energy in a closed spring system will remain constant.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
24
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
442
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
362
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
14
Views
338
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
29
Views
910
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
22
Views
471
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
5
Views
345
Back
Top