Solve Simple Velocity Problem: Understanding Integration and Momentum

  • Thread starter Thread starter teclo
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Velocity
AI Thread Summary
To solve the velocity problem involving a 10 kg object with a force of F = 10 + 2t, integration is necessary because the force changes over time. The correct approach involves using dp = F(net) * dt, leading to the integration of the force function to find the total momentum change over the two seconds. The initial incorrect method assumed a constant force, which does not accurately reflect the varying force applied. By integrating, the area under the force-time curve provides the total momentum change, allowing for the correct calculation of final velocity. Understanding this integration process is crucial for accurately determining the effects of changing forces on momentum.
teclo
Messages
117
Reaction score
0
hi, I'm wondering if anyone could explain to me why one uses the following technique to solve this problem.

Let's say we've a 10 kg object. The force exerted on it is

F = 10 + 2t

The force acts on it for two (2) seconds. If it starts at rest, what is the final velocity?

I used this technique to solve the problem, after first making a mistake

dp = F(net) * dt

breaking that down to

dp = (10 + 2t) * dt

integration giving

10t + t^2 from 0 to 2

giving

24 kg * m/s

so

dp = 24 kg * m/s
m(v(2)-v(1)) = 24 kg * m/s
10 kg (v(2)-0) = 24 kg * m/s
v(2) = 2.4 m/s

this is the correct answer, however, initially i tried

m(v(2)-v(1)) = (10 + 2t) * dt

10 kg (v(2)-0) = 14N * 2s

resulting in a velocity of 2.8 m/s

why do i use integration before involving momentum is my question. thanks for anyone who might be able to help!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
teclo said:
why do i use integration before involving momentum is my question. thanks for anyone who might be able to help!

Even though i haven't taken calculus yet, according to your equation of the Force applied

F = 10 + 2t

The force applied during those 2 seconds is changing. thus you can't just use the quation F*t = change in momentum since you're saying the force of 14 N is applied for 2 seconds even though that wasn't true.
 
i hadn't though of it in that manner. i suppose i should have since force is related to time. the only reason i thought to use integration is because i had the equation p = (10 + 2t) *dt. the area of the graph would be in units of momentum.

thanks!

(still would appreciate explanation of usage of integration other than realizing area of function is in units of momentum)
 
Integrating a function is a method of finding the area beneath it. There's an elegant proof found in most calculus books that connects Rieman's sums (which is really just adding a bunch of infinately small shapes together to find area) to integration. Thus, since integration is much simpler than using Rieman's sums, integration is the preferred technique for finding area beneath a curve.
 
thanks for the help. i actually realized what was going on while on the way to the grocery store. p = F(net) dt -- if f is changing every t the area beneath the curve at that point would be the net force acting at t -- therefor by integrating from 0 to 2 I'm getting the total amount of force from that duration. from the net force i can determine velocity based on the change in momentum.

duh, I'm retarded

thanks again for the help.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
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...
Back
Top