Work done by a variable force question

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the total work done on a 3.0 kg object moving along the x-axis, based on a force versus displacement graph. The user integrated the function and found the total work to be -0.5 J, raising concerns about a potential violation of the work-energy theorem. The work-energy theorem states that net work equals the change in kinetic energy, leading to confusion when considering the negative work value. Clarifications indicate that if the object starts at rest, the equation should reflect the final kinetic energy, which can still be positive despite negative work done. The conversation emphasizes the importance of correctly interpreting the signs in the context of work and energy.
Catalytical
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



246kgu9.jpg


That's a graph of Force in Newtons (y axis) vs displacement in meters (x axis) for an object of mass 3.0kg that is moving along the x-axis and initially starts at rest. I am being asked to find the total work done on the object as it moves from x = 0 to x = 7.


Homework Equations



Net Work = ∫F dx = ΔK
K = 1/2mv^2

The Attempt at a Solution



So, I integrated the function and ended up with a total work of -.5J. What I want to know is if this violates the work-energy theorem or not. If the net work is equal to change in kinetic energy, and the object starts at rest, this would mean that -.5 = 1/2mv^2. Is there something really obvious that I'm missing here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
work done (energy) = area under F against x graph (this is another way of seeing ΔK = ∫F.dx
There are 2 clear areas to calculate... when F is +ve and when F is -ve
 
By calculating the areas I got total work = -0.5J
 
So, I integrated the function and ended up with a total work of -.5J. What I want to know is if this violates the work-energy theorem or not. If the net work is equal to change in kinetic energy, and the object starts at rest, this would mean that -.5 = 1/2mv^2. Is there something really obvious that I'm missing here?

Can you explain why you think the work-energy theorem is violated?

0.5=\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}_{f}-\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}_{i}

If the object started at rest, the last term is 0 and you get

0.5=\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}_{f}

which just says that the object has some final velocity.
 
CanIExplore said:
Can you explain why you think the work-energy theorem is violated?

0.5=\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}_{f}-\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}_{i}

If the object started at rest, the last term is 0 and you get

0.5=\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}_{f}

which just says that the object has some final velocity.

Right, but if the total work done is -.5, wouldn't that mean that
-0.5=\frac{1}{2}mv^{2}_{f}
I'm not sure why you ignored the sign on the work done.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top