Solving 2 Blocks on a Spring: Ma = Kx

  • Thread starter Thread starter eri139
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Blocks Spring
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on solving a physics problem involving two blocks on a spring, specifically using the formula Ma = Kx. The user initially miscalculated the mass by incorrectly summing the weights of the blocks, leading to an incorrect answer of 0.06. Upon reevaluation, the user realized that only the mass of the top block (3 kg) should be considered for the calculation, not the combined mass of both blocks. The discussion highlights the importance of precision in calculations and suggests using the elastic potential energy equation PE = (1/2)kx² for further analysis.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newton's laws of motion
  • Familiarity with Hooke's Law (F = kx)
  • Knowledge of elastic potential energy equations
  • Basic skills in algebra for solving equations
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of Hooke's Law in different spring systems
  • Learn about elastic potential energy and its derivation from work done on springs
  • Explore the concept of precision in scientific calculations
  • Investigate the effects of varying mass on spring compression
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, educators teaching mechanics, and anyone interested in understanding spring dynamics and energy conservation principles.

eri139
Messages
15
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
A 5 kilogram block is fastened to a vertical spring that has a spring constant of 1300 newtons per meter. A 3 kilogram block rests motionless on top of the 5 kilogram block.

a. When the blocks are at rest, how much is the spring compressed from its original length?
Relevant Equations
F = ma, F = kx
I honestly have no idea why I'm getting this question wrong, because it seems fairly straightforward.

I thought that treating the two blocks as one object would work, so 5 + 3 = 8. With Fg = Fs, ma = kx. Then, 8 x 9.8/1300 = x. x would be 0.06. That's been marked as an incorrect answer, though.

Thank you for any help!

edit: I got it! the issue was with preciseness, I didn't enter enough digits
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
well for (a), please forgive me if I am wrong, but I am visualizing the problem as if you placed the 3kg block on top of the 5kg spring system. Therefore, the original length was when the 5kg spring system had no extra weight and the compressed length was when you placed the 3kg block on top i.e. m = 3 not m = 5 + 3
 
I have a Dream said:
well for (a), please forgive me if I am wrong, but I am visualizing the problem as if you placed the 3kg block on top of the 5kg spring system. Therefore, the original length was when the 5kg spring system had no extra weight and the compressed length was when you placed the 3kg block on top i.e. m = 3 not m = 5 + 3
I thought you had it for a moment! That would make a lot of sense. But unfortunately I just tried it and it's still incorrect :(
 
eri139 said:
I thought you had it for a moment! That would make a lot of sense. But unfortunately I just tried it and it's still incorrect :(
So sorry! As my last comment I feel as if working with the elastic potential energy equation
For springs: PE = (1/2)kx^(2) is worth a shot. Since PE Is also equal to mgh or mgx in this case. Keep on working hard! You got this!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
6K
Replies
24
Views
4K
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K