Dynamics how to calculate maximum height on incline

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a dynamics problem involving a block moving up an incline with friction. Participants are analyzing the forces acting on the block, including gravitational components and frictional forces, to determine the maximum height the block can reach.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the calculation of acceleration and the direction of forces acting on the block. There are questions regarding the signs of the forces and the interpretation of the free body diagram. Some participants express confusion about the relationship between the direction of the weight component and the frictional force.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the forces involved and clarifying misconceptions about the direction of the weight component and friction. There is a focus on ensuring the correct interpretation of the free body diagram and the net forces acting on the block.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework problem, which may limit the information available for discussion. There is an emphasis on understanding the dynamics of motion on an incline, including the effects of friction.

jakeginobi

Homework Statement


A 5.0kg block initally traveling at 11m/s moves up a 30degrees incline. A frictional force of 9.4N acts on the block as it moves up the incline. What maximum vertical height, h, will the block reach?
m = 5.0kg, vi = 11m/s, vf = 0m/s, Fr = 9.4N,

Homework Equations


vf^2=vi^2+2ad, Fnet=ma

The Attempt at a Solution


I tried finding the acceleration by doing F|| - Fr = ma [(5.0kg)(9.8)(sin30)-9.4N=(5.0kg)a]
when I found the acceleration, I used the equation vf^2=vi^2+2ad to find d, by assuming vf = 0m/s, and vi = 11m/s, which d would be = 20.033 m. After that I did 20.033m x sin30 which is 10m. The answer is supposed to be 4.5m
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What direction is your x component of the weight?
 
TomHart said:
What direction is your x component of the weight?
http://imgur.com/a/ndFug here's the picture of the diagram
 
jakeginobi said:
here's the picture of the diagram
I was hoping for a free body diagram.
 
Anyway, just check your signs.
 
jakeginobi said:
[(5.0kg)(9.8)(sin30)-9.4N=(5.0kg)a]
According to the free body diagram that you just posted, isn't the x component of the weight in the same direction as the friction force?
 
I thought friction always acts opposite to where the object is moving?
 
Oh, I just now noticed the direction of your x component of the weight. You have it pointing in the positive x direction, but the weight vector is obviously to the left of the y axis. So the x component of the weight should be pointing in the negative x direction.
 
  • #10
TomHart said:
Oh, I just now noticed the direction of your x component of the weight. You have it pointing in the positive x direction, but the weight vector is obviously to the left of the y axis. So the x component of the weight should be pointing in the negative x direction.
http://imgur.com/a/ZRYhf so like this? I kinda understand it but I'm just confused about the Fnet. I thought the F net would be the applied force minus the friction instead of adding the frictional force since it is accelerating up the ramp
 
  • #11
It's like a car coasting up a hill. (Assume there is no friction.) The car does not have to apply the brakes to decrease the car's speed because the "x component" of the car's weight is in the opposite direction of the car's velocity. However, if the car applies the brakes also, the car will slow down more quickly because both of those forces are acting in the same direction - that is, in the opposite direction of the velocity. That is the exact situation you have in this problem.
 
  • #12
TomHart said:
It's like a car coasting up a hill. (Assume there is no friction.) The car does not have to apply the brakes to decrease the car's speed because the "x component" of the car's weight is in the opposite direction of the car's velocity. However, if the car applies the brakes also, the car will slow down more quickly because both of those forces are acting in the same direction - that is, in the opposite direction of the velocity. That is the exact situation you have in this problem.
oh, what if it's going down then you would minus the frictional force right?
 
  • #13
If the velocity of the block is down the slope (the negative x direction), in that case the friction force would be up the slope (the positive x direction) in the opposite direction of the velocity. But the x component of the weight would still be in the negative x direction. So, when the block is sliding up the slope, both forces are in the same direction (negative x direction), but when sliding down the slope, one force is in the negative x direction and one force is in the positive x direction.
 
  • #14
TomHart said:
If the velocity of the block is down the slope (the negative x direction), in that case the friction force would be up the slope (the positive x direction) in the opposite direction of the velocity. But the x component of the weight would still be in the negative x direction. So, when the block is sliding up the slope, both forces are in the same direction (negative x direction), but when sliding down the slope, one force is in the negative x direction and one force is in the positive x direction.
oh alright thanks :D, if possible could you sketch a free body diagram sorry to bother you :/ I think a degree would be easier for me to understand
 
  • #15
PhysicsForum block diagram 1.jpg
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
6K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
10K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K