Spring with constant k cut in two

AI Thread Summary
Cutting a spring with a constant k value alters the spring constant of the resulting pieces. When a spring is cut, the k value of each new spring is inversely proportional to its length, meaning shorter springs have a higher k value. The relationship can be understood through the formula for springs in series, where the overall spring constant is affected by the individual constants of the smaller springs. Young's modulus is not necessary for this analysis, as the fundamental relationship between length and spring constant suffices. Ultimately, cutting a spring changes its k value based on the new lengths of the pieces.
vancoland
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Been thinking for a long time and can't come up with a conclusion!

If you have a spring with a constant k value and you cut the spring in two(not exactly in half), does the k value change in the springs or stay the same?

I'm thinking that the K value does not change because the length of the new springs doesn't have anything to do with the k value. I have been asked to come up with mathematical answer to this question but can't seem to find one but F = -kx
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Is this homework ? Because if it is, I can't give you an explicit answer.

But I can give you a hint. Think of two springs that are put in series (one connected to the end of the other). What is the spring constant of the combined spring in terms of the spring constants of both smaller springs ? The same force acts through both but the total extension is the sum of the extensions of each smaller spring. The situation obtained by cutting a spring in two is the reverse of this.
 
ok...i think i come up with a conclusion...but I'm not sure of how I did it exactly...was reading up on Young's modulus and "found" out that k is inversely affected by length...So if you cut the spring in 2, the k constant will change from k to k(initial length/final length) for one spring. I'm not sure if i am right...can anyone confirm?
 
yep u r rite
 
vancoland said:
ok...i think i come up with a conclusion...but I'm not sure of how I did it exactly...was reading up on Young's modulus and "found" out that k is inversely affected by length...So if you cut the spring in 2, the k constant will change from k to k(initial length/final length) for one spring. I'm not sure if i am right...can anyone confirm?

Well, you don't have to bring the Young Modulus into the picture at all. The formula for the final spring constant k of two springs with constants k_1 and k_2 which are in series is like the formula for adding resistances in parallel.

\frac{1}{k} = \frac{1}{k_1} + \frac{1}{k_2}

Using either this, or considering the contribution of each part-spring to the total extension, you should be able to figure it out.
 
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