Where Did I Go Wrong? Solving a Block and Pulley Problem with Friction

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lord Anoobis
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Energy Work
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on solving a physics problem involving a block on a table connected to a hanging block via a pulley, with friction taken into account. The initial attempt at deriving the speed of the hanging block before it hits the ground resulted in an incorrect expression due to mismanagement of the work done by tension. The error was identified as having accounted for the work done on the system twice, leading to confusion over the signs in the equations. Clarification was sought on the correct formulation of energy conservation and the work-energy principle. Ultimately, the discussion highlights the importance of careful consideration of energy terms in physics problems.
Lord Anoobis
Messages
131
Reaction score
22
μ

Homework Statement


A simple diagram shows a block of mass M on a horizontal table with a light cord running from it to the right over a pulley at the edge of the table. At the other end of the cord hangs a block of mass m, which is a height h above the ground. The problem is to derive an expression for the speed of the block m just before it hits the floor if the coefficient of friction for the block on the table is μk.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Firstly, let me say that my second attempt at this problem led to the correct answer. However, this is of little consolation, because the reason behind the error in the first effort and its subsequent rectification is not clear.

I used the tension in the cord ##T = \frac{mMg(μ_k + 1)}{m + M}## to determine the work done by that force, the friction the already incorporated. This work, ##W_T## is a negative quantity, so

##W_T = -\frac{mMgh(μ_k + 1)}{m + M}##

Then followed ##K + W_T = U_g## leading to

##\frac{1}{2}mv^2 - \frac{mMgh(μ_k + 1)}{m + M} = mgh##

And some manipulation leads to the incorrect expression. Changing the negative sign to positive in the above equation gives the correct answer. What is the error here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Lord Anoobis said:
##W_T = -\frac{mMgh(μ_k + 1)}{m + M}##
This being an expression for the work done by tension on the hanging mass m, correct?

Then followed ##K + W_T = U_g##
Can you flesh out how you obtained this equation?

Ordinarily, one would start with Total Initial Energy + Work Done on System = Total Final Energy.
 
jbriggs444 said:
This being an expression for the work done by tension on the hanging mass m, correct?Can you flesh out how you obtained this equation?

Ordinarily, one would start with Total Initial Energy + Work Done on System = Total Final Energy.
Yes, that expression is the work done by tension. For the other, I added the kinetic energy of the block at ground level to the work done by tension and set it equal to the initial gravitational potential energy.
 
Lord Anoobis said:
Yes, that expression is the work done by tension. For the other, I added the kinetic energy of the block at ground level to the work done by tension and set it equal to the initial gravitational potential energy.

So that would be:

Final Total Energy + Work Done on System = Initial Total Energy.

Can you see the difference between that and the starting point that I suggested?
 
jbriggs444 said:
So that would be:

Final Total Energy + Work Done on System = Initial Total Energy.

Can you see the difference between that and the starting point that I suggested?

Sorry for the delay, I rushed back as quickly as possible. What I see now is that with ##K + W_T = U_g##, I basically accounted for work done on the system twice, correct?
 
Lord Anoobis said:
Sorry for the delay, I rushed back as quickly as possible. What I see now is that with ##K + W_T = U_g##, I basically accounted for work done on the system twice, correct?
Lots of ways to look at it.

Work went on the wrong side of the equal sign. Or...
The work had the wrong sign. Or...
The work was evaluated on the forward path but the equation applied to the reversed path. Or...
The work was added when it should have been subtracted.

But yes, the net effect is to have an error equal to twice the magnitude of the work.
 
jbriggs444 said:
Lots of ways to look at it.

Work went on the wrong side of the equal sign. Or...
The work had the wrong sign. Or...
The work was evaluated on the forward path but the equation applied to the reversed path. Or...
The work was added when it should have been subtracted.

But yes, the net effect is to have an error equal to twice the magnitude of the work.
A valuable lesson learned. Thanks a bunch.
 
Back
Top