Non conservative energies on a Loop

  • Thread starter Thread starter pulcroman
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energies Loop
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves determining the minimum height required for an amusement park car to complete a loop with radius r, considering the effects of friction. The original poster describes their initial success with a frictionless scenario but encounters difficulties when friction is introduced, particularly in the loop section of the motion.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss energy conservation principles and the work-energy theorem, questioning how to account for friction in the loop. There are attempts to express relationships between velocities at different points and the forces acting on the car, including normal and gravitational forces.

Discussion Status

Participants are exploring various interpretations of the forces involved and the energy changes throughout the motion. Some suggest using differential equations to relate the velocities at different angles, while others question the treatment of the normal force and its implications on the calculations. No explicit consensus has been reached, but multiple approaches are being considered.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of the initial slope's shape and the coefficient of friction, which are essential for determining the work done by friction. The discussion includes the need for clarity on the changing velocity during the loop and the implications of integrating forces over the circular path.

pulcroman
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Hello, i appreciate your help!

Homework Statement


In this website the drawing of the situation in the first exercise can be seen, for better understanding.
http://wwwprof.uniandes.edu.co/~gtellez/fisica1/ejercicios-semana10.pdf

The problem asks me to determine the minimum height h to allow an amousement park car to complete a loop with radius r without falling. The inicial velocity is 0. In the beginning, i had to do it without friction, with no problem. The horribleness started when i tried to do it with friction, more specifically in the loop part.
I use v1 for the speed after it falls the height h, v2 for the time it continues by the flat, and v3 for the speed in the tallest part of the loop. (Question in the last sentencie, for the impatient readers :) )

Homework Equations



E2-E1=-W; W=Fk dx; Fk=µk N. E(1,2)= Ek+Ep

The Attempt at a Solution



For the beginning of the movement, the fall from the height h to the floor, assuming is a straight plane is given by:
m g h - 1/2 m v1^2 = -µk m g cosø (h/senø)<---that last is the distance from h.
v1=√(2 g h-g h µk cotø) <---- i'll go fast, in he first steps. I just simplified v1.

for the second part, when the car moved a small part on a flat, i had
1/2 m v2^2 - 1/2 mv1^2=-µk m g cos ø x <--- x=dx, distance.
v2=√(2gh - g h µk cotø -2 g x µk)

Now, in the loop.
I've tried everything, and can't come up with a reliable solution. I know i can use
1/2 m v3^2+ mg(2r) - 1/2 m v2^2=-Fk x2

well, x2 is πr because it'll just half the circle, but I am having a real bad time finding the normal force for the Fk=µk N. Because, for a circular movement i got:
N= (m v^2)/r + m g cos ø
is v changing? if i integrate for ø from 0 to π it'll give 0! if i want to find the tangential acceleration i'll complicate myself even more. So, in a summary, the big question i want to ask is

How do you estimate the work made by friction on a loop with given inicial velocity, so the car won't fall? Thank you very much!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
N= (m v^2)/r + m g cos ø - why did you place gravitational force projection to the right side instead of left?

ma = N + mg_r
(mg_r - radial component of gravitational force)

yes, v during the loop is changing according with the energy-work theorem

are you given mu in this problem? You have to know the shape of the initial slope then to determine work done during the slope...
 
hi, thanks for your help!
well, according to the free body diagram, from 0 to π/2 gravitacional force is negative and normal force is positive.
N-mgcosø=mv^2/r <--- and that negative sign will change after π/2 because normal and gravitational will have the same sign!

i have to give the height h in all the parameters i want, and µ is effectively there.
about the tangential acceleration:
will -Fk - mgsenø =m dv/dt (ecuación for the other cordinate in the circle) help in something? i can get Fk from here, but that dv/dt is a real headache.

Fk (kinetic fricción force)
 
Well, i gave it a bit more thought and came up with this:
for the loop:
Ek(final)^2+Ep(final)-Ek(inicial)=-Fk dx
Fk=µk N; dx=pi R
N ?=mv^2/R+mgcosø (the + doesn't matter, after quarter the circle it'll change from - to +)

Ek(final)^2+Ep(final)-Ek(initial)=-µk (mv^2/R + ∫mgcosø 0->pi*) pi R
Ek(final)^2+Ep(final)-Ek(initial)=-µk mv^2 pi

is it ok what i did with the normal force in the right?


*because of the change in angle, if this is ok, the integral equals 0, so this factor disappears
 
I don't think that you want to have t in your system of equations

If you use

1) second Newton's law for position with arbitrary angle theta (which you already have)
2) relationship between Fk and N
3) energy-work theorem in differential form (how much kinetic and potential energy change once your car moves over angle dø)

if you plug-in (1) and (2) into (3), you will get linear differential equation for v^2 of the first order which is possible to solve. If you solv it, you will have relashionship between v(ø=0) (velocity at the bottom) and v(ø=pi) (velocity at the top)

I've never solved this problem before. Maybe, there is an easier way to do that exists, I don't know
 
pulcroman said:
Ek(final)^2+Ep(final)-Ek(inicial)=-Fk dx
Ek(final)^2+Ep(final)-Ek(initial)=-µk (mv^2/R + ∫mgcosø 0->pi*) pi R

I think that

Ek(final)+Ep(final)-Ek(inicial)=-∫Fk dx=-µk ∫(mv^2/R + mgcosø)dx=-µk ∫(mv^2/R + mgcosø)rdø

your v under integral depends on theta, it is not a constant over the loop

that is why I think you need a differential equation

yes, now I see that you choose ø=0 at the bottom and ø=pi, so sign near mg projection has sense to me
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
40
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K