Hooke's Law and Work Energy THeorem

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around applying Hooke's Law and the Work Energy Theorem to a problem involving a sled propelled by a compressed spring. The participants analyze the sled's speed at two points: when the spring is uncompressed and when it is compressed by 0.200 m. A key point of contention is the correct application of energy conservation principles, particularly how potential energy (PE) transforms into kinetic energy (KE) in the absence of friction. Clarifications emphasize that while the initial case correctly used PE to find KE, the second scenario requires careful consideration of the work done by the spring as it moves through different compression states. Ultimately, the conversation highlights the importance of accurately applying energy conservation principles in varying conditions.
ehabmozart
Messages
212
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



At a waterpark, sleds with riders are sent along a slippery,
horizontal surface by the release of a large compressed spring. The
spring with force constant and negligible mass
rests on the frictionless horizontal surface. One end is in contact
with a stationary wall. A sled and rider with total mass 70.0 kg are
pushed against the other end, compressing the spring 0.375 m. The
sled is then released with zero initial velocity. What is the sled’s
speed when the spring (a) returns to its uncompressed length and
(b) is still compressed 0.200 m?

Homework Equations



Using Work Energy THeorem


The Attempt at a Solution



For part b) I attemted the equation ... .5 K (x)^2 = 0.5 m (v^2) and i got an answer of 1.5 but the book attempt was different... they used it with the x of A and got the answer of 2.4 m/s ... What my problem?? Kindly Clarify... THANKS A LOT!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ehabmozart said:
For part b) I attemted the equation ... .5 K (x)^2 = 0.5 m (v^2)
Use conservation of energy. What's the total energy at any point?

(Setting PE = KE only works in certain cases--such as when all the PE is converted to KE.)
 
But i applied it in the first case, and i got the correct answer?.. I mean what's wrong with the approach as long as there isn't any friction or resistance??
 
ehabmozart said:
But i applied it in the first case, and i got the correct answer?.. I mean what's wrong with the approach as long as there isn't any friction or resistance??
It applied in the first case because all the PE was transformed to KE.

Conservation of energy will apply in all cases.

Starting point: Spring fully compressed. What's the spring PE? What's the KE? What's the total energy?

Ending point: Spring compressed by some amount. What's the spring PE? What's the KE? What's the total energy?
 
Allright, can u clarify it using work energy thorem without reffering to potential energy...
 
ehabmozart said:
Allright, can u clarify it using work energy thorem without reffering to potential energy...
Work done by the spring = ΔKE of the mass.
 
Great... So work done by force spring to move to the 0.2 is integral of fx dx from 0 to 0.2 which must equalise the difference in kinetic energy where k initial is zero?
 
ehabmozart said:
Great... So work done by force spring to move to the 0.2 is integral of fx dx from 0 to 0.2 which must equalise the difference in kinetic energy where k initial is zero?
Almost. The spring moves from x = 0.375 to 0.2 .
 
Back
Top