Pendulum velocity using energy forumula

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the velocity of a pendulum at its lowest point after being released from an angle theta. The user initially applied the conservation of energy principle incorrectly, leading to a different formula for velocity than their professor's. The professor's method involved recognizing the change in gravitational potential energy, which decreases as the pendulum descends. The key takeaway is understanding how to account for the gain or loss of kinetic energy relative to potential energy changes. This clarification helps resolve the confusion about the correct application of energy conservation in this scenario.
Garrit
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



This problem deals with a pendulum. Imagine you're just letting it dangle (so perpendicular to ground) and you lift it to the side by some angle theta. This point your holding it at will be Point A. You release the pendulum from your grip and want to find out at Point B (where it was originally at, just dangling in a straight line) what the velocity is there.
upload_2017-3-7_22-42-36.png


Homework Equations


[/B]
Since only the work of gravity is being done, I am using Ea = Eb. So the kinetic energy at Point A plus the potential energy at point A equals the kinetic energy at Point B plus the potential energy at point B.
Kinetic = (0.5)(m)v^2 Potential = mgl

The Attempt at a Solution


[/B]
I did (0.5)(m)(0) + mglcos(theta) = (0.5)m(Vb)^2 + mgl
Vb = sqrt(2gl(cos(theta)-1)))

The problem is, I don't think this is right. My professor did this in class and got a different answer.
He did this 0 - mglcos(theta) = (0.5)m(Vb)^2 - mgl -------> Vb = sqrt(2gl(1-cos(theta)))

Why did he subtract? I thought Eb= Ea was kinetic PLUS potential
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
I don't know why my picture doesn't show. I drew it (its real simple) and uploaded it. If my wording doesn't make enough sense here it is https://imgur.com/YqxEwFH
 
Garrit said:
I don't know why my picture doesn't show. I drew it (its real simple) and uploaded it. If my wording doesn't make enough sense here it is https://imgur.com/YqxEwFH
Instead of posting a url to some offsite-stored image which can sometimes be "fragile", it's better to upload your image to the PF server. Use the UPLOAD feature (button at the bottom right of the edit window).

This time I'll insert a copy of your image for you.
 
Garrit said:
Why did he subtract? I thought Eb= Ea was kinetic PLUS potential
The gravitational potential energy decreases with height above the Earth's surface. You've chosen coordinates such that the distance increases downwards, so that you should have ΔPE ∝ -Δh.

It's often worthwhile to look at the change in elevation that occurs and ask yourself whether you should be gaining KE from the change in PE or losing KE to PE. Then make sure that your equation reflects this gain or loss for the given change in elevation.
 
Ohh ok. That makes sense. Thanks!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top