Mastering Intermediate Dynamics: Tips and Tricks for Success

  • Thread starter Thread starter jazzyfizzle
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Dynamics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving dynamics problems involving acceleration and kinematics without specific numerical values. Participants emphasize expressing answers in terms of given variables like F0, t0, and m. They discuss breaking the motion into segments, calculating distances and velocities for each segment, and using appropriate kinematic equations. A key point is the importance of correctly applying the definitions of acceleration and ensuring time intervals are consistent across segments. The conversation highlights the need for careful algebraic manipulation and verification of results to arrive at the correct final expression.
jazzyfizzle
Messages
9
Reaction score
0
1. A
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Find the acceleration, then use a bit of kinematics.
 
jazzyfizzle said:
But that's the thing.. I don't know the force. How are you supposed to even do this when there's no numbers involved ?
Since you don't have numbers, you'll express your answer in terms of the given data--F0, t0, and m.

I just tried it and got :

x=2[(1/2)(F0/m)t^2]
You're on the right track. Hint: Treat each segment of the motion separately. In the first segment (from t = 0 to t0), the initial speed is zero--but that's not the case for the second half of the motion.

Hint2: Consider the average speed during each segment.
 
jazzyfizzle said:
Should I maybe use vf^2=vi^2+2ax to find the final velocity of the first segment?
then go from there ?
There's a much easier way to find the final velocity of the first segment. What's the definition of acceleration?
 
For a final answer I got

x=((2F0*t0^2)/m)) + (4F0t0)/m

But... I don't think that's right at all...
 
jazzyfizzle said:
For a final answer I got

x=((2F0*t0^2)/m)) + (4F0t0)/m

But... I don't think that's right at all...
No, it's not.

Do it step by step, one segment at a time.
 
Ok what I did was :

First I used x=v0t+1/2at^2 to find the distance traveled for the first segment before the force doubled

I plugged in a=(F/m) for the acceleration and v0=0 for the initial velocity
Then i got
x=1/2(F0/m)t^2
for the first segment

Then,
i used vf^2=vi^2+2ax to find the final velocity of the first segment
(plugging in the x i found from above and a=F/m and v0=0)
which i got to be
vf= (F0t)/mthen I used that final velocity as the initial velocity for the 2nd segment
and plugged in a=2F0/m
into x=v0t+1/2at^2and somehow came out with the answer
x=((2F0*t0^2)/m)) + (4F0t0)/mWhere did I go wrong ?
 
The definition of acceleration is the change in velocity over the change in time
 
jazzyfizzle said:
Ok what I did was :

First I used x=v0t+1/2at^2 to find the distance traveled for the first segment before the force doubled

I plugged in a=(F/m) for the acceleration and v0=0 for the initial velocity
Then i got
x=1/2(F0/m)t^2
for the first segment
Good! You have the first segment done.

Then,
i used vf^2=vi^2+2ax to find the final velocity of the first segment
(plugging in the x i found from above and a=F/m and v0=0)
which i got to be
vf= (F0t)/m
Good. An easier way would be to use vf = vi + at, but your way is perfectly fine.


then I used that final velocity as the initial velocity for the 2nd segment
and plugged in a=2F0/m
into x=v0t+1/2at^2
That will give you the distance for the second segment. (Then you'll add that to what you already found for the first segment.)


and somehow came out with the answer
x=((2F0*t0^2)/m)) + (4F0t0)/m
I don't see how you got this. Show me what you plugged in where.
 
  • #10
Ooh, well I never went back and added the first segment.. maybe that's where I went wrong ? .. and my algebra could be a little off too. I'll probably need to go back and double check that also.
 
  • #11
Redo and then simplify your results for the second segment.
 
  • #12
For the second segment I'm getting the distance as

[F0(3t0 + t0^2)]/m
 
  • #13
jazzyfizzle said:
For the second segment I'm getting the distance as

[F0(3t0 + t0^2)]/m
That's not dimensionally correct. Show me what you plugged in for each term in the following:
x=v0t+1/2at^2
x = (v0)(t) + 1/2(a)(t)^2
 
  • #14
v0 ---> (F0t0)/m
t ----> 2
a -----> (2F0)/m
 
  • #15
jazzyfizzle said:
v0 ---> (F0t0)/m
t ----> 2
a -----> (2F0)/m
v0 and a are correct, but the time for the second segment is the same as the first: t0. (From t0 to 2t0.)
 
  • #16
Oooh. That makes sense. Duh.
 
Back
Top