Using Orbital Energy to Calculate Velocity

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating velocity using orbital energy principles, specifically focusing on potential and kinetic energy changes in a gravitational context. Participants are analyzing the relationships between these energies and questioning the validity of their calculations and assumptions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants describe their calculations of initial and final potential energies, changes in kinetic energy, and the resulting velocity. Questions are raised about potential errors in calculations and the possibility of non-conservative work affecting the results.

Discussion Status

Some participants have pointed out potential issues with unit consistency and the magnitude of the calculated change in potential energy. Others are questioning the validity of the problem based on inconsistencies observed in angular momentum conservation. There is an ongoing exploration of these discrepancies without a clear consensus on the resolution.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the importance of using consistent units throughout calculations and express concerns about the parameters provided in the problem, particularly regarding the perigee speed and angular momentum relationships.

JoeyBob
Messages
256
Reaction score
29
Homework Statement
See attached picture
Relevant Equations
change Ek + change Ep =0, Ek=1/2mv^2, Ep=-GMm/r
So what I did first was calculate the initial and final potential energies with Epi=-9.433*10^11 m and Epf = -1.503*10^12 m.

Then I found change in potential energy, -5.597*10^11 m.

Using this I determined the change in kinetic energy, 5.597*10^11. I then added this change to the initial kinetic energy I calculated (103.68 m) to get a final Ek of 5.597*10^11 m.

Then I calculated the final velocity, Ekm=v^2*0.5, finding that v=1058017, which is obviously way higher than the right answer.

Where am I going wrong here? Is there some non conservative work or something?
 

Attachments

  • Question.PNG
    Question.PNG
    10.7 KB · Views: 204
Physics news on Phys.org
JoeyBob said:
Homework Statement:: See attached picture
Relevant Equations:: change Ek + change Ep =0, Ek=1/2mv^2, Ep=-GMm/r

So what I did first was calculate the initial and final potential energies with Epi=-9.433*10^11 m and Epf = -1.503*10^12 m.

Then I found change in potential energy, -5.597*10^11 m.

Using this I determined the change in kinetic energy, 5.597*10^11. I then added this change to the initial kinetic energy I calculated (103.68 m) to get a final Ek of 5.597*10^11 m.

Then I calculated the final velocity, Ekm=v^2*0.5, finding that v=1058017, which is obviously way higher than the right answer.

Where am I going wrong here? Is there some non conservative work or something?
Please post all your working, just as algebra, no plugged in values. This will make it much easier to see where the mistake is, unless it is purely arithmetic, which is unlikely.
 
Your units are all over the place. Plugging in r in km and v in km/s means you get ΔEp = -5.597*1011m mJ and Eki = 103.68m MJ. (I haven't checked the calculations, but the numbers look in the right ballpark.) It is much better to convert everything to SI units (and back at the end if necessary), and INCLUDE THE UNITS AT EACH STAGE OF THE CALCULATION. Can never stress too much the importance of units.
 
JoeyBob said:
Homework Statement:: See attached picture
Relevant Equations:: change Ek + change Ep =0, Ek=1/2mv^2, Ep=-GMm/r

Where am I going wrong here? Is there some non conservative work or something?
Your change in potential energy is 103 times too high. What does this suggest to you?

On edit: I am questioning the validity of this problem. The perigee speed ##v_p##, obtained from the given parameters using energy conservation, is inconsistent with conservation of angular momentum. Angular momentum conservation (per unit mass) requires that ##v_1 r_1\sin\theta=v_p r_p##. Solving for ##\sin\theta## returns a value greater than 1 which is impossible if my calculation is correct.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: pai535

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K