Work - Area under curve of F vs. d graph

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating work done as represented by the area under a force versus distance graph. The original poster notes that the force is not constant, which complicates the calculation of work between two points on the graph.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the need to find the force required to move an object over a specific distance and explore different methods, including integration and trapezoidal area calculations. Some participants express confusion about the appropriate techniques to use given their current curriculum constraints.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of various methods to calculate the area under the curve, with some participants suggesting integration while others emphasize using geometric methods. The original poster is seeking clarification on the correct approach due to limitations in their coursework.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention that integrals are not covered in their current studies, and they are expected to use geometric methods such as finding the area of trapezoids. There is uncertainty about the correctness of the proposed answers based on the methods discussed.

jtw2e
Messages
27
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



5487469616_5c78cee779_z.jpg


Homework Equations



W=FD
Area under curve = Work

The Attempt at a Solution



Note, although the problem doesn't say this, and the given graph and description are deceptive, Force is NOT constant.

I need to somehow find the Force required to move the cart from 2.5 to 4.2 ft so that I can find the area under the two sections... at least I think that's how to do it. But I have no idea how in the world to find the Force. I've tried work-energy theorem but don't have enough info (don't know v1 or v2 or accel).

Please help me understand this. They did not cover it or even address it in lecture and it was assigned today and is due tonight.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
As I understand, You must take the integral from 2.5-a to 4.2=b of the equation 28/2.5x and find the anti-derivative of 28/2.5x(11.2x), since for every 11.2 pounds a foot is increased and vice-versa, kind of like the spring constant in a spring if you are familiar with that.
you end up with 1/2 times 11.2 times (4.2 squared minus 2.5 squared) which is about 63.784lb-ft. is that the answer for a?
as far as for b, I think its just 11.2 times (4.2 squared minus 2.5 squared) since the anti-derivative of the 11.2x equation respresnts s(x) aka position and 11.2x itself respresents v(x) velocity. So, the answer for b is probably 127.568m/s. that the answer for b?
 
and when they mean force is not constant, it means that it changes as displacement does, there for you would acquire an equation of the increase of force as displacement increases. so the formula would be 28lb/2.5meters, which is 11.2lb/m or 11.2x.
 
Rayquesto said:
and when they mean force is not constant, it means that it changes as displacement does, there for you would acquire an equation of the increase of force as displacement increases. so the formula would be 28lb/2.5meters, which is 11.2lb/m or 11.2x.

Rayquesto said:
As I understand, You must take the integral from 2.5-a to 4.2=b of the equation 28/2.5x and find the anti-derivative of 28/2.5x(11.2x), since for every 11.2 pounds a foot is increased and vice-versa, kind of like the spring constant in a spring if you are familiar with that.
you end up with 1/2 times 11.2 times (4.2 squared minus 2.5 squared) which is about 63.784lb-ft. is that the answer for a?
as far as for b, I think its just 11.2 times (4.2 squared minus 2.5 squared) since the anti-derivative of the 11.2x equation respresnts s(x) aka position and 11.2x itself respresents v(x) velocity. So, the answer for b is probably 127.568m/s. that the answer for b?


Thanks very much for your detailed reply, but we are not covering integrals until next semester; the only concept we're supposed to use is dealing with finding the Area of trapezoids under the curve with regular geometry. And also k = 1/2mv^2, and possibly Wtot=K2 - K1. So I don't know the technique to take the integral or find an anti-derivative, and am expected to solve this by a different method. :( I'm sorry, I do not know whether our value for a) and b) are correct.
 
Last edited:
AH darn! That makes things too complicated. riemann sums are really tough. so what you should do instead is just find the area under the curve. so A(x)= the limit as n approaches infinity of the sigma series (i/n)(11.2x) where i is n(nplus 1)/2 and n is the amount of squares ...so A(x)=(11.2x/n)(n^2plusn)/2=11.2xnplus 11.2x/2 and suppose we have 100 squares. at x=2.5 which would be 1414 oh crap I am sorry this isn't right but i got to go. be back in a few minutes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
5K
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
18K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K