Work of Rope on Skier on 12° Incline: 900 J or 2,000 J?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the work done by a towrope on a skier moving up a 12° incline at constant speeds. Initially, the rope does 900 J of work as the skier ascends 8m, raising questions about the work-energy theorem's application in systems with both kinetic and potential energy. Participants clarify that work done by non-conservative forces, like the rope, must account for changes in both kinetic and potential energy. The conversation emphasizes that maintaining constant velocity does not require additional work, as per Newton's First Law. Ultimately, understanding the relationship between work, kinetic energy, and potential energy is crucial for solving such physics problems.
MIA6
Messages
231
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A skier is pulled up by a towrope up a frictionless ski slope that makes an angle of 12 degrees with the horizontal. The rope moves parallel to the slope with a constant speed of 1.0 m/s. The force of the rope does 900 J of work on the skier as the skier moves a distance of 8m up the incline. If the rope moved with a constant speed of 2 m/s, how much work would the force of the rope do on the skier as the skier moved a distance of 8m up the incline?

Homework Equations


W=KE or W=KE+PE


The Attempt at a Solution



This is a rather conceptual problem in my opinion. So I know the work-kinetic energy theorem. change in K=W. However, my question is: Does it only apply to a system where there is only kinetic energy present or it can be applied to a system where both Kinetic energy and potential energy present. I didn't use K=W, I had W=KE+PE. KE is 0, so W=PE. Because in this case, clearly, there are both Kinetic energy and Potential energy (8m) on the skier. But my teacher still used change in K=W=0, and since the work includes the work from the rope and gravity, they must be same in magnitude and opposite in direction. I hope someone can clarify things for me. thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
If you're carrying something up a hill, working against a force like gravity, your work is equal to the potential energy you have to overcome to move against the field. If you pushed something up a hill so hard that you increased the velocity of it, you'd have a kinetic term to add, because changing the velocity of something requires an acceleration (note that when you referenced your teacher you spoke of a change in velocity).

Remember Newton's First Law. It implies that keeping and object at a constant velocity does not require extra work theoretically (in the real world, we're constantly battling friction, so we have to put extra energy into things to keep them going).
 
Please be careful with your subscripts when takling about "Work". The Work-Energy theorem is W_{total} = W_{net} = \Delta KE, where
W_{total} = W_c + W_{nc}, and where W_c is the work done by conservative forces (like gravity), and W_{nc} is the work done by non-conservative forces (like friction or applied forces).
Now the general conservation of total energy principle can be written W_{nc} = \Delta KE + \Delta PE. You can use either formula, just be careful how you define your variables. The latter is a bit easier to work with in this case.
 
Hi, Jay. So change in KE is the same as NET WORK. and the conservation of energy equation: W=change in KE+ change in PE that we often use is for W for non-conservative force like applied forces? Never realized this before. When I learned energy, I first learned change in KE equals to work, but then I learned W=KE+PE. So if there is PE in a problem, we can't just write W=change in KE, we have to include PE. According to you, if we don't have gravity, then W total=Wnc=change in KE? But if there is no gravitation, then there is no PE either?
 
Last edited:
Thread 'Collision of a bullet on a rod-string system: query'
In this question, I have a question. I am NOT trying to solve it, but it is just a conceptual question. Consider the point on the rod, which connects the string and the rod. My question: just before and after the collision, is ANGULAR momentum CONSERVED about this point? Lets call the point which connects the string and rod as P. Why am I asking this? : it is clear from the scenario that the point of concern, which connects the string and the rod, moves in a circular path due to the string...
Back
Top