Finding Initial Block Position and Maximum Speed of Oscillation

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a block attached to a spring on a horizontal table, focusing on determining the initial position of the block and its maximum speed of oscillation. The context includes concepts from mechanics and oscillatory motion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss using conservation of energy principles, questioning how to account for negative displacement and the relationship between kinetic and potential energy. There is an exploration of the formulas involved, particularly regarding the energy components and their implications for the problem.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, sharing attempts and reasoning. Some guidance has been provided regarding the total energy of the system and how to approach the calculations. There is an acknowledgment of the need to clarify the potential energy formula and its application.

Contextual Notes

There are constraints related to the number of attempts allowed for the problem, and participants are navigating the implications of their calculations and assumptions about energy conservation.

NY152
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
1. The problem statement, all variables and given/known
On a very smooth horizontal table, a block of mass m=0.75 kg is attached to an ideal spring with a spring constant k= 242 N/m. The origin of the horizontal coordinate (x=0) is set at the equilibrium position of the block. The block is initially held at a negative position where it keeps the spring compressed. Then the block is released, and moves through position x1=0.105m with a speed v1=1.42 m/s.

a) What was the initial position of the block, x0?

b)What is the maximum speed of oscillation, vmax?


Homework Equations


omega = sqrt(k/m
F=-kx
Vmax=A*omega
x=Acos(2pi*f*t)

The Attempt at a Solution


I thought about using conservation of energy by doing KE+PE=W
W=Fs and KE=1/2mv^2 but I don't think this would give me displacement in terms of a negative/before equilibrium position
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi NY152,

Welcome to Physics Forums.

NY152 said:
I thought about using conservation of energy by doing KE+PE=W
W=Fs and KE=1/2mv^2 but I don't think this would give me displacement in terms of a negative/before equilibrium position

If you take a close look at the formulas for the components of the energy, both involve the squaring of a term. A negative value squared yields the same amount as a positive value of the same magnitude.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: NY152
gneill said:
Hi NY152,

Welcome to Physics Forums.
If you take a close look at the formulas for the components of the energy, both involve the squaring of a term. A negative value squared yields the same amount as a positive value of the same magnitude.
Thanks for the input! Do you think I'm on the right track then in terms of those formulas or am I missing something??
 
You're on the right track. You're just missing stating the formula for the PE of a spring.
 
gneill said:
You're on the right track. You're just missing stating the formula for the PE of a spring.
I only have one attempt left, so I'm just going to post my work here in the hopes that someone might see if I'm doing it right or wrong.

So I did: KE+PE=W W=Fs
1/2mv^2+1/2kx^2=(-kx)(s)
and found s to be =-0.0822
 
NY152 said:
I only have one attempt left, so I'm just going to post my work here in the hopes that someone might see if I'm doing it right or wrong.

So I did: KE+PE=W W=Fs
1/2mv^2+1/2kx^2=(-kx)(s)
and found s to be =-0.0822
No, the sum of the KE and PE is a constant, the total energy of the system. Better to write:

E = KE + PE

In an isolated system the KE and PE can trade energy back and forth, but their sum is always a constant.

You are given a particular data point with both displacement and velocity. So you can find the value of E which will hold for every point throughout the cycles.
 
gneill said:
No, the sum of the KE and PE is a constant, the total energy of the system. Better to write:

E = KE + PE

In an isolated system the KE and PE can trade energy back and forth, but their sum is always a constant.

You are given a particular data point with both displacement and velocity. So you can find the value of E which will hold for every point throughout the cycles.
gneill said:
No, the sum of the KE and PE is a constant, the total energy of the system. Better to write:

E = KE + PE

In an isolated system the KE and PE can trade energy back and forth, but their sum is always a constant.

You are given a particular data point with both displacement and velocity. So you can find the value of E which will hold for every point throughout the cycles.
Sorry for the late reply, so I solved for E and got 2.09, now do I just set that equal to PE + KE when the spring is retracted? In which case would velocity be zero? If so I get x=-0.131
 
NY152 said:
Sorry for the late reply, so I solved for E and got 2.09, now do I just set that equal to PE + KE when the spring is retracted? In which case would velocity be zero? If so I get x=-0.131
Yup. Good.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: NY152
NY152 said:
Sorry for the late reply, so I solved for E and got 2.09, now do I just set that equal to PE + KE when the spring is retracted? In which case would velocity be zero? If so I get x=-0.131
Alright well it wasn't -0.131, but I got the max velocity right by setting x=0 so I'm not sure where I went wrong but thanks for the help!
 
  • #10
NY152 said:
Alright well it wasn't -0.131, but I got the max velocity right by setting x=0 so I'm not sure where I went wrong but thanks for the help!

Your initial position should be correct. Did you remember to include the units?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K