Velocity of a 1-kg block after it has dropped 0.54 m

  • Thread starter Thread starter volcore
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Block Velocity
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the velocity of a 1-kg block after it has dropped 0.54 m in a coupled system with a 3.5-kg block. The gravitational potential energy (GPE) change was calculated using the formula k = mgh, resulting in values of -18.522 J for the 3.5-kg block and 5.292 J for the 1-kg block. The participants clarified that the blocks cannot be treated independently due to their coupling, which affects their kinetic energy calculations. The correct approach involves considering the system's total potential energy change and how it translates into kinetic energy for both blocks.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of gravitational potential energy (GPE) and its calculation using k = mgh.
  • Knowledge of kinetic energy (KE) and the formula KE = 0.5mv².
  • Familiarity with coupled systems in physics, particularly in the context of pulleys.
  • Basic principles of Newtonian mechanics, including forces and acceleration.
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the principles of coupled systems in mechanics, focusing on how they affect motion and energy transfer.
  • Learn about the conservation of energy in mechanical systems, particularly in the context of gravitational potential and kinetic energy.
  • Explore practical experiments involving pulleys and coupled masses to visualize the concepts discussed.
  • Review the relationship between mass, velocity, and kinetic energy to understand how energy is distributed in a coupled system.
USEFUL FOR

Students and educators in physics, particularly those studying mechanics, as well as anyone interested in understanding energy transfer in coupled systems.

volcore
Messages
39
Reaction score
2
Homework Statement
Two blocks are hung by a string draped over a pulley, a 1.0-kg block on the left and a 3.5-kg block on the right. The two blocks start out at rest and at the same height.

What is the change in the gravitational potential energy of the system of blocks and Earth when the 3.5-kg block has dropped 0.54 m ?

What is the velocity of the 1.0-kg block at this instant?
Express your answer with the appropriate units.
Relevant Equations
k=mgh
k=0.5mv^2
I calculated the system's change in gravitational potential energy through the equation k=mgh. I used this equation twice, once for the 3.5 kg block with k =(3.5)(9.8)(-0.54) and once for the 1.0kg block, k = (9.8)(1.0). I got -18.522J & 5.292. Is the change just -18.522 - 5.292 J?

Furthermore, to calculate the velocity, I tried using k = 0.5mv^2 with k = 5.292 & m = 1.0, getting a velocity of 3.3m/s, which is apparently wrong. What am I missing?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
volcore said:
I calculated the system's change in gravitational potential energy through the equation k=mgh. I used this equation twice, once for the 3.5 kg block with k =(3.5)(9.8)(-0.54) and once for the 1.0kg block, k = (9.8)(1.0). I got -18.522J & 5.292. Is the change just -18.522 - 5.292 J?

Furthermore, to calculate the velocity, I tried using k = 0.5mv^2 with k = 5.292 & m = 1.0, getting a velocity of 3.3m/s, which is apparently wrong. What am I missing?

The blocks form a coupled system. Are you you sure you can calculate their KE independently?

In what direction is the 1kg block moving? Up or down? Is it losing or gaining GPE? Do objects normally accelerate upwards under gravity?

Hint: imagine what would happen if the blocks were almost the same mass. How quickly would the system accelerate? How would that affect the velocity after they had moved a certain distance?
 
PeroK said:
The blocks form a coupled system. Are you you sure you can calculate their KE independently?
I'm not too sure, my professor never mentioned anything about coupled systems yet, let alone if calculating their kinetic energy would be different or not.

PeroK said:
In what direction is the 1kg block moving? Up or down? Is it losing or gaining GPE? Do objects normally accelerate upwards under gravity?
I'd assume the 1kg block is moving up. While it wouldn't be accelerating under gravity, won't it have the same acceleration as the 3.5kg block?

PeroK said:
Hint: imagine what would happen if the blocks were almost the same mass. How quickly would the system accelerate? How would that affect the velocity after they had moved a certain distance?
Wouldn't the system accelerate slower, thus the velocity would be less in general?
 
volcore said:
I'd assume the 1kg block is moving up. While it wouldn't be accelerating under gravity, won't it have the same acceleration as the 3.5kg block?Wouldn't the system accelerate slower, thus the velocity would be less in general?

Yes and yes. But you didn't take either of those factors into account.

The fact that they have the same acceleration is what it means to be coupled!
 
PeroK said:
Yes and yes. But you didn't take either of those factors into account.
Sorry, I'm confused, in the equations I used to find the individual kinetic energies, I used the same acceleration and height, except I inverted it for the 3.5kg block to -0.54. since it's going down. Looking up, it looks like I missed writing that fact for the second equation, apologies. Should I have inverted the acceleration of the 3.5kg block since it's accelerating downwards, making it -9.8?

PeroK said:
The fact that they have the same acceleration is what it means to be coupled!
Would that have any affect on finding the kinetic energy?
 
volcore said:
Sorry, I'm confused, in the equations I used to find the individual kinetic energies, I used the same acceleration and height, except I inverted it for the 3.5kg block to -0.54. since it's going down. Looking up, it looks like I missed writing that fact for the second equation, apologies. Should I have inverted the acceleration of the 3.5kg block since it's accelerating downwards, making it -9.8?Would that have any affect on finding the kinetic energy?
Yes, because the lighter block is actually retarding the system.
 
If you stick with your energy approach - which is a good idea - the lighter block is gaining GPE!
 
So should I still calculate the 2 individual kinetic energies separately?
 
volcore said:
So should I still calculate the 2 individual kinetic energies separately?
The blocks move together. The light block is moving up. Which is impossible unless you consider it linked to the heavier block.

Things don't accelerate upwards under gravity.

It's a pity you can't set up an experiment to see what happens when two masses are linked around a pulley. If you don't get the idea from thinking about it, then you perhaps need to see a physical system like this in action.

Your solution is only valid if someone cuts the rope joining them. Then they both fall independently. But that's not what's happening here.
 
  • #10
PeroK said:
The blocks move together. The light block is moving up. Which is impossible unless you consider it linked to the heavier block.

Things don't accelerate upwards under gravity.

It's a pity you can't set up an experiment to see what happens when two masses are linked around a pulley. If you don't get the idea from thinking about it, then you perhaps need to see a physical system like this in action.

Your solution is only valid if someone cuts the rope joining them. Then they both fall independently. But that's not what's happening here.
So I'd need to calculate their kinetic energy together? would I just use the equation k=mgh with m = their combined mass of 4.5, g = 9.8 and the height = 0.54?
 
  • #11
volcore said:
So I'd need to calculate their kinetic energy together? would I just use the equation k=mgh with m = their combined mass of 4.5, g = 9.8 and the height = 0.54?
The lighter weight is going up, not down. It's gaining GPE. You need to calculate how much GPE the system loses.
 
  • #12
PeroK said:
The lighter weight is going up, not down. It's gaining GPE. You need to calculate how much GPE the system loses.
Isn't the equation for gravitational potential energy essentially still the same, Ug = mg h?
 
  • #13
volcore said:
Isn't the equation for gravitational potential energy essentially still the same, Ug = mg h?

So, what's your calculation for this problem?
 
  • #14
PeroK said:
Suppose you release a ball from a height of ##1m##. When it reaches the height of ##1.5m##, how fast is it travelling?
I'm not sure, since the ball is gaining height, wouldn't it decelerate?
 
  • #15
volcore said:
I'm not sure, since the ball is gaining height, wouldn't it decelerate?

It's starts from rest. It can't decelerate.
 
  • #16
PeroK said:
It's starts from rest. It can't decelerate.
Ah, I had my positives and negatives mixed up, it would accelerate due to gravity, right?
 
  • #17
volcore said:
Ah, I had my positives and negatives mixed up, it would accelerate due to gravity, right?
I'm reluctant to move from your energy-based approach to a force-based approach, because I think the energy-based approach is better. But, to answer this question:

No. Gravity is pulling the block downwards. It's being pulled upwards by tension in the string.
 
  • #18
Wait, is your 0 at the top or bottom?
 
  • #19
Given the lack of progress, I better give you more than hints.

The large block is losing GPE and the smaller block is gaining GPE. The change in GPE of the system is:

##\Delta PE = -Mgh + mgh = -(M-m)gh = -(2.5kg)g(0.54m)##

From a force perspective, the larger block pulls the smaller block up via tension in the string; and the smaller block exerts a retarding force on the larger block by the same tension in the string.

Either way, you do not have the full gravitational acceleration in this system, because one mass is moving up.
 
  • #20
PeroK said:
Given the lack of progress, I better give you more than hints.

The large block is losing GPE and the smaller block is gaining GPE. The change in GPE of the system is:

##\Delta PE = -Mgh + mgh = -(M-m)gh = -(2.5kg)g(0.54m)##

From a force perspective, the larger block pulls the smaller block up via tension in the string; and the smaller block exerts a retarding force on the larger block by the same tension in the string.

Either way, you do not have the full gravitational acceleration in this system, because one mass is moving up.
That equation makes sense, but where do I go from there?
 
  • #21
What does that tell you about the KE of your system?
 
  • #22
volcore said:
That equation makes sense, but where do I go from there?

Here's the alternative force-based approach. Let ##T## be the tension in the string. The force on the large mass is downwards of magnitude:

##F_M = Mg - T##

And, the force on the smaller mass is upwards of magnitude:

##F_m = T - mg##

This shows you the acceleration more explicity. But, this way you have to figure out the value of ##T##.
 
  • #23
PeroK said:
What does that tell you about the KE of your system?
That the system is gaining kinetic energy since its losing potential energy
 
  • #24
volcore said:
That the system is gaining kinetic energy since its losing potential energy
Yes. But, we knew that already. It's how much KE is gained that's important.
 
  • #25
PeroK said:
Yes. But, we knew that already. It's how much KE is gained that's important.
Wouldn't the system gain kinetic energy of around (2.5kg)g(0.54m) since that's how much potential energy its losing?
 
  • #26
volcore said:
I calculated the system's change in gravitational potential energy through the equation k=mgh. I used this equation twice, once for the 3.5 kg block with k =(3.5)(9.8)(-0.54) and once for the 1.0kg block, k = (9.8)(1.0). I got -18.522J & 5.292. Is the change just -18.522 - 5.292 J?
For the 3.5 kg block you multiplied (3.5)(9.8)(-0.54). That's good.
For the 1.0 kg block you multiplied (9.8)(1.0). You forgot to include the change in height (+0.54) m. When one block goes down by 0.54 m, the other goes up by the same amount because the connecting string does not stretch or shrink.
 
  • #27
kuruman said:
For the 3.5 kg block you multiplied (3.5)(9.8)(-0.54). That's good.
For the 1.0 kg block you multiplied (9.8)(1.0). You forgot to include the change in height (+0.54) m. When one block goes down by 0.54 m, the other goes up by the same amount because the connecting string does not stretch or shrink.
Yeah, I remembered to multiply by +0.54 in my actual calculation, but accidentally omitted it when posting the thread, my mistake.
 
  • #28
volcore said:
Wouldn't the system gain kinetic energy of around (2.5kg)g(0.54m) since that's how much potential energy its losing?
Yes it's got to be the same. So, how is that KE allocated between the blocks?
 
  • #29
PeroK said:
Yes it's got to be the same. So, how is that KE allocated between the blocks?
I'm not sure. Since I can't calculate their individual kinetic energies, I'm kind of lost. Would the heavier block gain more since it's presumably moving faster?
 
  • #30
volcore said:
I'm not sure. Since I can't calculate their individual kinetic energies, I'm kind of lost. Would the heavier block gain more since it's presumably moving faster?
Faster than what?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
6K
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
Replies
18
Views
3K