Motion Questions: Newton's 2nd Law, Pile Driver GPE

  • Thread starter Thread starter blaziken's_charizard
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Motion
AI Thread Summary
The discussion covers several physics questions related to Newton's laws of motion and gravitational potential energy (GPE). It explains that a person's weight changes from the equator to the poles due to variations in gravitational force. For a 75 kg man in an elevator, when ascending at a constant velocity, he exerts a force equal to his weight (750 N), while during a downward acceleration of 4.0 m/s², he exerts a reduced force of 450 N. The gravitational potential energy of a 100 kg pile driver is calculated to be 12,000 J before release and 6,000 J halfway down, reflecting the height-dependent nature of GPE. The discussion emphasizes the importance of understanding forces and energy changes in motion scenarios.
blaziken's_charizard
Messages
33
Reaction score
0
1. Explain why the weight of a body changes if it is taken form the equator to one of the poles
2. With Reference to Newton’s Laws of Motion, determine the force that a man of mass 75.0kg exerts on the bottom of an elevator when it is
a. Ascending with a constant velocity of 2.5m/s
b. Descending with an acceleration of 4.0m/s2
3. A 100kg pile driver is suspended 12.0m above the ground where it is eventually released and falls, driving a pile into the ground
a. What is the gravitational potential energy before it is released and ½ way of its fall
b. Why the difference in gravitational potential energy above




[bThe attempt at a solution:[/b]
1. I will have to research question one, but any help would be appreciated.
2. Newton's second law of motion pertains to the behavior of objects for which all existing forces are not balanced. The second law states that the acceleration of an object is dependent upon two variables - the net force acting upon the object and the mass of the object. Newton's second law can be summarized by the formula:

f=ma
a) When ascending: f=75kg*2.5m/s^2 = 187.5 N
b) When descending: f=75kg*4m/s^2 = 300 N

I have a feeling that I am wrong because I didn't consider the motion of the elevator...

G.P.E=mgh= 100kg*10m/s^2*12m = 12000 J
G.P.E at half the distance= 1/2*12000J= 6000 J

There is a difference of the two G.P.E's above because G.P.E is defined by the formula: mass(m)*gravitational acceleration(g)*height(h). At half-way during the fall, the distance is also half so as a result the value of mgh would now be mgh/2 as opposed to the GPE just before the fall (mgh), and hence the difference in the two.

I think I have done a fair effort and it would be even better if I am corrected and guided, thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
blaziken's_charizard said:
[bThe attempt at a solution:[/b]
1. I will have to research question one, but any help would be appreciated.

Hint: consider Newton's Law of Gravitation
blaziken's_charizard said:
2.
f=ma
a) When ascending: f=75kg*2.5m/s^2 = 187.5 N
b) When descending: f=75kg*4m/s^2 = 300 N

Part (a) is wrong. You mistook the 2.5 m/s velocity for a 2.5 m/s^2 acceleration. There is no acceleration. The elevator is moving up at a constant velocity. As a result, the net force on the system (elevator + man) = 0. Does this help you to answer the question? Look at it another way...when you are in an elevator that is not accelerating, you don't feel any heavier or lighter than normal, do you?

Part (b) doesn't look quite right either. I'd recommend drawing a free body diagram for the elevator + man. There are only two forces:

1. The weight of the (elevator + man) downward
2. The force pulling the elevator upward (e.g. from a cable).

Clearly, since the elevator is accelerating downward, the second force is slightly smaller than the first by an amount equal to (total mass)*a. To put it another way, there is a net downward force on the (elevator + man).

blaziken's_charizard said:
G.P.E=mgh= 100kg*10m/s^2*12m = 12000 J
G.P.E at half the distance= 1/2*12000J= 6000 J

There is a difference of the two G.P.E's above because G.P.E is defined by the formula: mass(m)*gravitational acceleration(g)*height(h). At half-way during the fall, the distance is also half so as a result the value of mgh would now be mgh/2 as opposed to the GPE just before the fall (mgh), and hence the difference in the two.

I haven't checked your math, but it's pretty trivial (just mgh) so I'm sure you got it right. As for the explanation, you're right. Appealing to the mathematical definition of potential energy is the most succint and therefore minimalist answer. However, to round out your explanation, I think it would be a good idea to explain what happened to the initial potential energy after having fallen halfway, i.e. where did it go? That way, you'd also be explaining why the potential energy changes with height and is given by mgh.



blaziken's_charizard said:
I think I have done a fair effort

Agreed
 
So could it be:

a) Weight of man (assuming g=10m/s^2)= 75*10=750N

Net force= force * acceleration
However, since there is a constant velocity, there would be no acceleration. Therefore: Net force= 750*0= 0N

Since there is no unbalanced force resulting in an acceleration, the force that the man exerts on the elevator is: 750 Newtons.

b) Net downward force= 75*4 = 300 N
Weight of man= 75*10= 750 N
Therefore, actual force exerted by man= 750 - 300 = 450 N

Am I correct? I have a gut feeling that the accleration downwards is a negative one...
 
Although your result may be right, I'm not 100% sure about how you arrived at it. This is the method that makes sense to me personally. Since you know the acceleration of the elevator, you know the acceleration of the man. So you can draw a FBD for the man only. There are two forces acting on him:

1. weight downward (call this w)

2. force pushing up on his feet (call this N).

We get for the net force F:

F = N + w

We know that F is negative (the accelerating of the elevator is downward), which suggests that N < w (the floor is not pushing up on the dude as much as his weight...as a result, he feels lighter. If the elevator were accelerating downward at g, the floor wouldn't push up on him at all. He'd be in free fall and would feel weightless). In this case, he just feels lighter.

plug the numbers in (using a "downward is negative" convention):

75*(-4) = N + 75*(-10)

N = 75*(-4) - 75*(-10) = -300 N - (-750 N) = 450 N

The floor pushes up on the man with this force (*less* than his weight).
 
Last edited:
Thank you very much.
 
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...

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
33
Views
10K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
7K
Back
Top