What is Work Done? Definition, Equations, & Explanation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Greg Bernhardt
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Work Work done
AI Thread Summary
Work is defined as a measure of energy change, specifically the change in kinetic energy as described by the Work-Energy Theorem. It is calculated as the integral of the dot product of force and displacement, with the SI unit being the joule (J). For conservative forces, the work done depends solely on the initial and final positions, not the path taken, and potential energy is associated with this work. Non-conservative forces, like friction, result in energy loss, often converted to heat. The discussion also touches on the relationship between work, force, and displacement in mechanical systems, emphasizing the concept of gearing in machines.
Messages
19,790
Reaction score
10,746
Definition/Summary

Work is a measure of change of energy.

The net work done equals the change in Kinetic Energy (this is the Work-Energy Theorem).

Work is the integral of the scalar product (dot-product) of two vectors: Force and Displacement. "Displacement" means the change in position of the point at which the force is applied.

So Work is a scalar (an ordinary number), with dimensions of mass times distance-squared over time-squared.

The SI unit is the amount of Work done by a Force of one Newton acting over a displacement of one metre, and is called the joule (J), or Newton-metre (N-m).

The SI unit of Power, which is the rate of Work done, is one joule per second, and is called the watt (W).

Equations

Work is the integral of the dot product of force and displacement.

W\,=\,\int_{\mathbf{a}}^{\mathbf{a}+\mathbf{d}} \mathbf{F} \cdot d\mathbf{r}

For a constant force, work is the dot product of the force with the total displacement.

W\,=\,\mathbf{F}\cdot\mathbf{d}\;.

The above work equals the magnitude of the force times the magnitude of the displacement times the cosine of the angle between the force and displacement:

W\,=\,Fd\cos(\theta)\;.


In a uniform gravitational field, Work done by gravity on a body moving along any path C starting at a height h_1 and ending at a height h_2 is:

W\,=\,\int_{(x,y,h_1)}^{(x',y',h_2)} (-mg\hat z)\cdot d\mathbf{r}\,=\,mg(h_1 - h_2)

In an inverse-square gravitational field, Work done by gravity on a body moving along any path C starting at a height r_1 and ending at a height r_2 is:

W\,=\,\int_{r_1}^{r_2} -GmM\frac{\mathbf{r}}{r^3}\cdot d\mathbf{r}\,=\,GmM\left(\frac{1}{r_2} - \frac{1}{r_1}\right)

which, if r_1 is very close to r_2, is approximately the same as the previous formula, with g\,=\,\frac{GM}{r_1^2}

Extended explanation

Conservative Force:

If the work done after a total displacement of zero is zero (so the change in Kinetic Energy is zero), then the force is said to be conservative (for example, friction is not conservative, because a body moving in a full circle under friction loses Kinetic Energy, but gravity is conservative).

For a completely non-conservative force, work equals loss of mechanical energy (the energy lost generally becomes radiation or heat).

Potential energy:

For a conservative force, work done depends only on position and not on the path taken.

Potential energy is another name for work done by a conservative force.

Potential energy depends only on position, and is the work done relative to some arbitrarily-chosen position (the position of zero potential energy, chosen so as to make calculations easy).

For example, in a uniform gravitational field of strength g, when a mass m is moved by any path through a height h, the work done is mgh.

Gearing:

A machine has gearing G if the force out is G times the force in: F_1\,=\,G F_0

If no energy is lost, then the work out equals the work in.

Since work equals force times displacement (strictly, the inner product of force and displacement), that means that the displacement of the point of application of the force out is 1/G times the displacement of the point of application of the force in: d_1\,=\,\frac{d_0}{G}

Conversely, if a system has d_1\,\neq\,d_0, then F_1\,=\,\frac{d_0}{d_1} F_0

For example, the gearing of a lever is the ratio of the lengths of its two "lever arms".

So a lever, or a pulley system, in which the displacement out is less than the displacement in, can lift a heavy object with a force less than its weight. :biggrin:

Derivation of Work-Energy Theorem:

\Delta\,W\ =\ \int d\mathbf{x} \cdot \mathbf{F}_{\rm net}\ =\ \int (\mathbf{v}\,dt) \cdot \left( \frac{d(m\mathbf{v})}{dt} \right)\ =\ \int d \left( \frac{1}{2} m\mathbf{v}^2 \right) \ =\ \Delta\,KE

Relativistic version:

\Delta\,W\ =\ \int d\mathbf{x} \cdot \mathbf{F}_{\rm net}\ =\ \int (\mathbf{v}\,dt)\cdot\left(\frac{d(m\mathbf{v}/\sqrt{1<br /> -<br /> \mathbf{v}^2/c^2})}{dt}\right)

=\ \int d\left(mc^2\sqrt{1<br /> -<br /> \mathbf{v}^2/c^2}\right)\ \ +\ \int d\left(\frac{m\mathbf{v}^2}{\sqrt{1<br /> -<br /> \mathbf{v}^2/c^2}}\right)\ =\ \int d\left(\frac{mc^2}{\sqrt{1<br /> -<br /> \mathbf{v}^2/c^2}}\right)\ =\ \Delta\,E

* This entry is from our old Library feature. If you know who wrote it, please let us know so we can attribute a writer. Thanks!
 
  • Like
Likes Jared Edington
Physics news on Phys.org
Greg Bernhardt said:
Potential energy is another name for work done by a conservative force.
I disagree with this because it implies that the two are one and the same. The definition is that potential energy is the negative of the work done by a conservative force.
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes vanhees71 and Greg Bernhardt
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top