Question about gravitational potential energy

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concepts of gravitational potential energy and its conversion to kinetic energy, particularly in the context of a weight free-falling and then being stopped by a mechanical device. The scope includes theoretical considerations of energy conservation, power, and unit consistency in calculations.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant calculates the potential energy of a 1000 lb weight free-falling from 660 ft and questions the conversion of that energy when the weight is stopped by a mechanical device.
  • Another participant corrects the terminology used, emphasizing that potential energy is measured in joules, while power is measured in watts, and highlights the importance of distinguishing between energy and power.
  • Some participants propose that most of the energy can be recovered by the mechanical device, but acknowledge that inefficiencies will result in some energy being lost as heat.
  • There is a suggestion to maintain consistency in units, specifically using foot-pounds when dealing with pounds and feet in calculations.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the importance of correct terminology and unit consistency, but there is disagreement regarding the implications of energy transfer and the effects of inefficiencies in the mechanical device.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved issues regarding the assumptions made in the calculations, particularly concerning the efficiency of the mechanical device and the interpretation of energy versus power.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for individuals interested in the principles of energy conservation, mechanical systems, and the importance of unit consistency in physics calculations.

scott22
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
I am wondering how this all works and am hoping to get some guidance. If a 1000 lb weight freefalls vertically from 660 ft the energy is 894,289 joules. If the fall is down a 30 degree slope that is 1300 ft long, then it takes 17 seconds and the potential energy can be said to be 53 KW. If, and I really mean if, I did that math right then my question has to do with converting that 53KW into kinetic energy. If the 1000 lb. weight is brought to a stop by a mechanical device, rather than impacting the earth, does the 53KW transfer to the mechanical device? If so does all or most of it transfer? Secondly, if the mechanical device takes longer than the 17 seconds of freefall to bring the weight to a stop is the 53KW of potential energy still available? My guess is that no matter how long the mechanical device takes to bring the weight to a stop the potential energy, of 53KW, would remain the same.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Be careful with terminology: "potential energy can be said to be 53 KW" makes no sense. You mean, the average power is 53 kW. Energy is measured in joules. Energy is conserved and power is not. If you take the same energy and spread it over a longer time, the power will decrease. So your last sentence is totally wrong.

Depending on how efficient the mechanism is, almost all of the 894289 joules can be recovered by the machine. Of course there's always some inefficiency, but there's no hard limit on efficiency like there is in a heat engine.
 
You are talking about a potential energy of 53 KW, energy is measured in Joules, not in Joules per second, which is W.
And if I understand your question correct, yes most of the energy gets converted into mechanical energy but there will also be a not neglible amount of heat after the collision.

Does that answer your question a little bit?
 
If a problem is stated in pounds and feet, please stick with those units when calculating potential energy in foot-pounds.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
11K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K