Gravitational potential energy challenge

AI Thread Summary
The physics challenge involves transporting a 305-gram tomato soup can a distance of 4 meters using only gravitational potential energy, without any other energy sources. The can must fall from a maximum height of 20 cm onto a device that cannot exceed 30 cm in any dimension. Suggestions include using a ramp for the can to roll down or creating a platform that converts the can's potential energy into kinetic energy for forward motion. The device must remain intact and travel in a straight line, with strict guidelines on how the can interacts with it. The challenge emphasizes innovative mechanisms to effectively utilize the gravitational energy for propulsion.
p4physics
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
ok I am in high school and have a physics challenge, its a device that transports a mass of 305 grams (Tomato soup can), a distance of 4 meters. no chemical, elastic, spring, electrical or magnetic energy can be used - the only energy source for propelling the device will come from the gravitational potential energy of the soup can. the soup can can be located no higher than 20 cm above the device itself and it will fall down on the device and we are to come up with some form of mechanism to propel the device once the can falls on it. other restrictions are -
1. device has max dimensions of 30cm X 30cm X 30cm
2. nothing falls off the device. if a part detaches and falls on the ground the distance traveled will be measured from starting point to the part.
3. once the device starts to move, it will be self guided and must travel in a straight line. the course is 1 meter wide and if it goes off course, the distance traveled will be from the starting point to where it first went off course.
4. once the can falls, it must not go lower or into the device. so basically it falls and lands on top of device but doesn't go through it to the ground.
so... if you have any ideas, please post them. thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Make a ramp and let the can roll down the ramp and hope it goes as far as you need it too :D
 
if i didnt need ideas for this project this urgently, i would have found riogho's comment funny :(
 
Why, does it not work? I can't think of any other way, maybe it is as a trick question and you are just making it harder then it needs to be :D
 
I don't get the "falls down onto" part. That is too uncontrolled. Can you instead have a platform as part of your shuttle cart that the can sits on, which starts 20cm high, and moves smoothly down the 20cm as that potential energy is changed into KE for the cart moving forward?

If so, use a string wrapped around one of the axles to translate the downward can motion into rotational torque, and leave the end of the string loose, so it let's go of the axle when the can makes it to the bottom of its travel... from then on it's up to the friction in your wheels and axles as to weather you make the 4m distance goal.
 
Riogho said:
Why, does it not work? I can't think of any other way, maybe it is as a trick question and you are just making it harder then it needs to be :D

From my read of the OP, he needs to have the can "fall" onto a platform thing, and that platform thing has to carry the can the 4m distance.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

Question about gravitational potential energy
Replies
3
Views
2K
Two separate "gravitational potential energy" equations?
Replies
11
Views
3K
I Change of coordinates in a potential energy field
Replies
2
Views
1K
I How to interpret this definition of potential energy?
Replies
10
Views
2K
Conservative forces, Nonconservative forces and Potential Energy
Replies
9
Views
3K
Gravitational potential between two massive particles....
Replies
4
Views
2K
How does Potential Energy converted into Kinetic Energy? ?
Replies
2
Views
2K
Physics C: Mechanics - Negative Energy and Potential Energy Curves
Replies
5
Views
2K
Question About Potential Energy
Replies
3
Views
2K
What Does Negative Potential Energy Indicate in Colliding Iron Balls in Space?
Replies
7
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top