Kinetic Energy Conservation in an Explosive System

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the conservation of kinetic energy and momentum in an explosive system where a body of mass 8.0 kg splits into two 4.0 kg chunks after an internal explosion. The explosion imparts an additional 16 joules of kinetic energy to the system, leading to a total kinetic energy of 32 joules. Participants clarify that while momentum is conserved, kinetic energy may not be due to the nature of the explosion. The center of mass remains at 2 m/s, confirming that overall momentum conservation holds true despite the energy increase. This highlights the distinction between internal forces from the explosion and external forces affecting momentum conservation.
walker
Messages
28
Reaction score
0
Having some problems with this question, was wondering if anyone could lend some hints/explanation.

Q.
A body of mass 8.0kg is traveling at 2.0m/s under the influence of no external agency. At a certain instant an internal explosion occurs, splitting the body into two chunks of 4.0kg mass each; 16 joules of translational kinetic energy are imparted to the two-chunk system by the explosion. Neither chunk leaves the line of the original motion. Determined the speed and direction of motion of each of the chunks after the explosion.

Are they saying the system imparts an additional 16 joules of energy from the explosion. Because the initial kinetic energy is equal to 16 joules, they could have just said kinetic energy is conserved.

I've tried using just conservation of kinetic energy and momentum and the results show that the two pieces continue on in the same direction with the same speed of 2.0 m/s, it doesn't seem like much of an explosion.

Any help with this would be great.

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think they are trying to say that 16 J is added to the system by the explosion (converted from potential energy (maybe chemical? not important, though)). So the kinetic energies are related by:

.5*m1*v1^2 + .5*m2*v2^2 = Ko + 16J = 32 J

and the conservation of momentum still holds:

m1*v1 + m2*v2 = M*vo = 16 Ns

That should be solvable, right?
 
Last edited:
oops, I forgot my 1/2's in the energy equation. If that's right, I get 4 m/s for one piece and the other piece stays at the explosion site.

__________

OK; fixed above too.
 
Last edited:
That's what I came up with as well, but do you think that momentum is still conserved if the explosion imparts additional kinetic energy into the system?
 
Yes. I think it's pretty common for momentum to be conserved while kinetic energy isn't (any collsions that are not completely elastic (read any real collision) comes to mind). Conservation of momentum should apply as long as there are no non-negligible external forces to deal with, which seems to be the case here.

(Oh, and I edited my last post, so you may want to reload the page).
 
If you consider the centre of mass of the two particles, it is still moving at 2m/s and therefore overall momentum is conserved.
Think of it like this; the momentum of a particle will only be conserved when no external force acts on it, the explosion is an internal force, therefore overall, momentum is conserved.
 
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top