Efficiency of Objects Pushed Up a Ramp

  • Thread starter Thread starter Emperor
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Efficiency
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the efficiency of three objects being pushed up a ramp, with specific weights and applied forces. The ramp's dimensions and the calculation of work and potential energy are central to the problem.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the interpretation of the ramp's dimensions, questioning whether the distance should include both the horizontal and vertical components. There is also discussion about the forces acting on the objects and whether they are accelerating.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the calculations, suggesting corrections to the original poster's approach regarding work output and potential energy. There is an acknowledgment of differing interpretations of the ramp's measurements, and some clarity has been offered on how to approach the problem.

Contextual Notes

The original poster expresses confusion about the problem and has indicated that this question is particularly challenging compared to others on their review sheet. There is mention of a formula sheet being available, but uncertainty remains about which equations to apply.

Emperor
Messages
11
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Objects A (2.0 kg), B (1.0 kg), and C (1.0 kg) are pushed up a ramp, which is 4.0 m and 1.2 m high. The applied forces are parallel to the ramp with magnitudes of 9.8 N on A, 4.9 N on B, and 3.1 N on C.


Homework Equations



Eff = W(output) ÷ E(Input) x 100%

W = F x d

E(potential) = mgh

The Attempt at a Solution



Efficiency of A:

W(output) = 9.8 N x (4 + 1.2) = 50.96 J

E(potential) = 2 x 9.8 x (4 + 1.2) = 101.92 J

Eff = 50.96 ÷ 101.92 x 100 = 20% Efficiency

I know I'm probably over-thinking this one tiny equation but the thing is, I've spent 1 and a half hours on this question alone. The answers I'm supposed to get are "A: 60%, B: 60%, C: 95%" but I can't get anywhere close to them no matter what I do. Maybe its because I forgot how to add the ramp components together, but I thought that was correct. I resorted to guessing as well, but literally no combination of numbers can get me to that answer; its inconceivable for me. I also have a formula sheet on me as well, but I don't know which one to use. This is also literally the only question on my review sheet that I cannot understand at all... Like I said, I think I'm definitely over-thinking it. May someone enlighten me on my mistakes?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What do you think the 4m distance is measuring? Why are you adding it to the 1.2m?
The question is not very clear... do you think the objects are accelerating up the ramp? If not, what do you think all the forces are on the objects as they move?
 
Your post is not clear on the dimensions of the ramp. Is the ramp supposed to be 4.0 m long measured horizontally or along the sloping surface?
 
Emperor said:
Efficiency of A:

W(output) = 9.8 N x (4 + 1.2) = 50.96 J

What you said is "work output" would actually be "work input" and the potential energy gained would be the "work output"

Also, the object is pushed up the ramp, and the force is parallel to the ramp. The displacement is only 4 meters (you wouldn't add the 1.2 like you did). Input work would just be 9.8*4=39.2 J

Emperor said:
E(potential) = 2 x 9.8 x (4 + 1.2) = 101.92 Joules

The change in potential energy is mgh. It would be 2*9.8*1.2=23.52 Joules (you don't add the the 4 meters, only the change in height matters)So you would get:

Efficiency = 23.52 / 39.2 = 0.6 = 60%
Try doing the other problems now and post if something went wrong.
 
The 4m is going up the ramp, while the height is 1.2 m. Its hard to describe because I can't draw the picture here.

Edit: Thanks Nathaneal for the quick response, and it was correct! You saved me, thank you very much.
 
Last edited:
Emperor said:
You saved me, thank you very much.

No problem :)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 56 ·
2
Replies
56
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
11K
Replies
3
Views
948
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K