What is the minimum height required for an object to make it around a loop?

  • Thread starter Thread starter dominus96
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves an object sliding down a slope and then navigating around a loop, with the goal of determining the minimum height required for the object to successfully complete the loop. The context includes concepts from energy conservation, specifically potential and kinetic energy, and the dynamics of motion in a circular path.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relationship between potential energy at the starting height and the energies involved at the loop, questioning whether the potential energy of the slope equals the sum of the potential energy at the loop and the kinetic energy. There are inquiries about the conditions necessary at the top of the loop for the object to maintain its path and the assumptions of a frictionless environment.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring the energy relationships and conditions necessary for the object to complete the loop. Some guidance has been offered regarding the energy equations, but there is no explicit consensus on the final expression for the minimum height.

Contextual Notes

Participants are operating under the assumption of a frictionless scenario and starting from rest, which influences their considerations of energy conservation and the dynamics at the top of the loop.

dominus96
Messages
51
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



An object slides down a slope (from rest) and then immediately around a loop (like a roller coaster). The object has mass m, and the height of the loop is 2r. What is the minimum height required for the object to make it around the loop? Express answer in terms of m, r, g, and v.

Homework Equations



K=mv^2/2
U=mgh

The Attempt at a Solution



Would the potential energy of the slope (U1) be equal to the potential energy of the loop (U2) + the kinetic energy, so h=mv^2/2 + mg2r? That's what I think so far, but not sure if it is right.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
dominus96 said:

The Attempt at a Solution



Would the potential energy of the slope (U1) be equal to the potential energy of the loop (U2) + the kinetic energy? That's what I think so far, but not sure if it is right.
Correct. Assuming that the mass starts from rest and fall a height h to the bottom of the loop, then rises to the top of the loop, the difference is the kinetic energy.

What is the condition at the top of the loop that results in a minimum h?

I presume one is assuming a frictionless interaction between mass and path (slope and loop), and no air resistance.
 
Last edited:
[tex]\frac{v^2}{r}=g[/tex]
 
Astronuc said:
Correct. Assuming that the mass starts from rest and fall a height h to the bottom of the loop, then rises to the top of the loop, the difference is the kinetic energy.

What is the condition at the top of the loop that results in a minimum h?

I presume one is assuming a frictionless interaction between mass and path (slope and loop), and no air resistance.

Yes it is frictionless and starts at rest. But what do you mean condition at the loop?
 
At the top of the loop, what is the condition or requirement with respect to mass to keep it traveling in the loop, and which satisfies a minimum energy (min height) condition with respect to the initial elevation, h?
 
I have mgh = .5mv^2 + mg(2r). So do I just solve for h? Because that would be h = (.5mv^2 + mg(2r))/mg
 
dominus96 said:
I have mgh = .5mv^2 + mg(2r). So do I just solve for h? Because that would be h = (.5mv^2 + mg(2r))/mg
See post #3.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
13K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K