Kinetic/Potential Energy - What am I doing wrong?

  • Thread starter Thread starter andyg007
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of kinetic energy (KE) and potential energy (PE) in the context of a 10 kg weight lifted 10 meters. The original poster calculates the potential energy using the formula PE = mgh and questions the kinetic energy calculation when the weight is dropped, noting a discrepancy between the two energy values.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the calculations for potential and kinetic energy, questioning the assumptions made about the final velocity of the falling object. Some suggest using kinematic equations to clarify the relationship between displacement, acceleration, and velocity.

Discussion Status

Participants have provided guidance on using kinematic equations to analyze the motion of the falling object. There is exploration of different interpretations regarding the time it takes to fall and the corresponding velocities. The discussion reflects a productive exchange of ideas without reaching a consensus on the original poster's calculations.

Contextual Notes

There are indications that the original poster may have misunderstood the relationship between time, velocity, and displacement in free fall, leading to potential miscalculations in kinetic energy. The discussion also highlights the importance of using algebraic methods to generalize the results rather than relying solely on numerical examples.

andyg007
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


What am I doing wrong here?

Given the following two formulas for Kinectic Energy (KE) and Potential Energy (PE):

PE = mgh
KE = 1/2mv2

If a 10KG weight was lifted 10 meters above sea level - I calculate its PE as:

PE = 10kg x 9.81m/s x 10meters = 981 Joules

If I let the ball drop I calculate its kinetic energy as (assuming nothing lost due to friction etc):

KE = 1/2 x 10KG x 9.81m/s x 9.81m/s = 481 Joules

However, in this case, I understood the KE should equal the PE?

Which calculation have I got wrong?

Homework Equations


PE = mgh
KE = 1/2mv2

The Attempt at a Solution



PE = 10kg x 9.81m/s x 10meters = 981 Joules

KE = 1/2 x 10KG x 9.81m/s x 9.81m/s = 481 Joules
 
Physics news on Phys.org
andyg007 said:
PE = 10kg x 9.81m/s x 10meters
I presume you mean 9.81 m/s2.
andyg007 said:
KE = 1/2 x 10KG x 9.81m/s x 9.81m/s
What makes you think the final velocity is 9.81m/s?
 
I'm thinking this is the amount of time it takes to falls in 1 second and therefore the speed.
 
Take a look at the equations of motion..eg...

V^2=U^2 + 2aS
 
andyg007 said:
I'm thinking this is the amount of time it takes to fall in 1 second and therefore the speed.
You just said that 9.8m/s is the amount of time it takes to fall in 1 second.
Surely the amount of time it takes to fall in 1 second is... 1 second?

Perhaps you mean that it falls 9.8m in the first second, so the average speed over that time is 9.8m/s ... but that is not the case either.
It actually falls 4.9m in the first second.

Have you heard of the kinematic equations (sometimes called suvat equations) and velocity-time diagrams?
Once you have those, you can use the correct one (CWatters tells you which one above) and then do the kinetic energy calculation symbolically.
 
Thanks so much Cwatters/Simon - a great help :-)

-- SUVAT Equations --

I know the following:

(s) displacement = 10 meters
(g) gravity = 9.81 m/s
(t) time = 1 second
(u) initial velocity = 0

I can therefore use:

v2 = u2 + 2as
v2 = 0x2 + 2 x 9.81m/s x 10 meters = 196.2
v2 = 196.2
v = 14.007
----

Back to my original question:

KE = 1/2mv2

KE = 1/2 x 10KG x 14.007 x 14.007 = 981 Joules

This ties up with the PE

:-)
 
andyg007 said:
I know the following:

(s) displacement = 10 meters
(g) gravity = 9.81 m/s
(t) time = 1 second
(u) initial velocity = 0

In the end you didn't use "time = 1 second" to get the right answer but you might like to check if it really does take 1 second to fall 10m.

Perhaps by using another SUVAT equation... v = u+at and solving for t.
 
You did it numerically and showed that it was consistent for one example. maybe that was just a coincidence and you'd get a different result from chosing different numbers? This is why it is better to do the algebra using symbols ...

potential energy lost falling h is ##U=mgh## (close to the surface of a spherical mass with gravitational acceleration at the surface of g)
kinetic energy gained is ##K = \frac{1}{2}mv^2##

from suvat equations, ##v^2=2as## ... in this case, ##a=g## and ##s=h## so:
##K=\frac{1}{2}m(2gh) = mgh = U##

... the advantage of doing it this way is that it now does not matter which numbers you pick, the two equations (related by the laws of motion) are always going to be consistent in this way. notice that it does not even have to be the Earth causing the gravity.
 

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K