Power for accelerating a ski lift

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the power required for a ski lift, focusing on both the steady-state operation and the acceleration phase. The ski lift has specific dimensions and operational parameters, including the length, vertical rise, and mass of the loaded chairs.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the calculation of power for steady operation and the challenges in determining the power needed for acceleration. There are attempts to apply energy principles, including kinetic and potential energy, and some participants question the use of trigonometric functions in the calculations.

Discussion Status

There is ongoing exploration of different methods to approach the acceleration calculation. Some participants suggest using integrals to account for changes in kinetic and potential energy over time, while others express uncertainty about the appropriateness of certain mathematical approaches. No consensus has been reached on a definitive method.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the problem and the potential for multiple interpretations of the physics involved, particularly regarding the acceleration phase and the assumptions made in the calculations.

Mqqses
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A ski-lift has a one-way length of 987 m and a vertical rise of 275 m. The chairs are spaced 21 m apart, and each chair can seat three people. The lift is operating at a steady speed of 14 km/hr. Neglecting friction and air drag and assuming the average mass of each loaded chair is 242 kg, determine the power required to operate this ski lift (a). Also estimate the power required to accelerate this ski lift in 6.4 s to its operating speed when it is first turned on (b).

Homework Equations


This is my most recent stab at the solution for part (b), is this the right idea? Can you poke a hole in it or two? I am not even sure that this makes sense. Please note part (a) is correct, but I am having a hard time arriving at a solution for part (b).

The Attempt at a Solution


(a) 987m / 21m =47 chairs * 242 kg= 11,374 kg total
11,374 kg * 9.81 m/s2 * 14 km/hr ((1 m/s) / (3.6 km/hr)) ((1 kJ/kg) / (1000 m2/s2))= 119,237 W / 1000 W/kW= 119.237 kW which is correct per my homework solution.

(b) This is the part I am struggling with, and I know there are a couple of ways to approach it.

1/2 m (V22-V12)*sin(θ) ; Where m=11374 kg, sin(θ)= 275/987, V = 3.8888 m/s

= 23963.5 J / 1000 J/kJ = 23.96 kJ

P= above answer/ the given time to accelerate, so P= 23.96 kJ/6.4 s = 3.74 kW
 
Physics news on Phys.org
For b...

During the acceleration both the KE and PE changes.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mqqses
Mqqses said:
(b) This is the part I am struggling with, and I know there are a couple of ways to approach it.
1/2 m (V22-V12)*sin(θ)
why the sin theta?
[/QUOTE]
Plus of course see post #2.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mqqses
I'm not sure how to approach post #2, but I think that would be some sort of ∂PE/∂t + ∂KE/∂t for total energy required to move the lift. The sin θ may be a wrong idea. Am I getting the gist that an integral might be used for this?
 
CWatters said:
For b...

During the acceleration both the KE and PE changes.
So would I use an integral from 0 to 6.4s?

06.4 ∂PE/∂t + ∂KE/∂t where PE= mgh and KE= 1/2mv2?
 
Mqqses said:
So would I use an integral from 0 to 6.4s?

06.4 ∂PE/∂t + ∂KE/∂t where PE= mgh and KE= 1/2mv2?
Kind of, but looks rough. You could go
Power P = d(KE)/dt + d(PE)/dt
= m d(v2/2)/dt + mg dh/dt
v = velocity along slope = v(t) i.e. not constant. We assume P is constant.
h = height
If you proceed that way you can come up with an equation expressing P in terms of v, dv/dt and the various known constants.
This is an ODE with v as the dependent and t as the independent variable.
You can integrate by parts to equate the time (6.4s) to an expression in vf and P plus the constants where
vf = final velocity of 14 km/hr. You can then solve for P.
Problem is the result is a transcendental equation in P. Might try wolfram alpha.
Probably is a better way but right now I don't know of one.
 
Thanks for your insight into this problem, I think I'll leave this alone for now.
 
Mqqses said:
Thanks for your insight into this problem, I think I'll leave this alone for now.
Considering the math I would too! :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
16K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
6K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
10K
Replies
3
Views
2K