Work Required to Stretch Spring 4-7 ft: 8.4 ft-lbs

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the work required to stretch a spring from 4 feet to 7 feet beyond its natural length of 2 feet. The initial work to stretch the spring 4 feet is given as 10 ft-lbs, leading to the spring constant k being determined as 4/5. The work for the stretch from 4 to 7 feet is calculated using the integral formula for work, resulting in 8.4 ft-lbs. There is clarification on the limits of integration, confirming that the spring is stretched from 0 to 4 feet, not from 2 to 6 feet. The final conclusion affirms the correctness of the calculated work based on the established principles.
blessedcurse
Messages
6
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The amount of WORK to stretch a spring 4 feet beyond its natural length of 2 feet is 10 ft-lbs. Find the work required to stretch the spring from 4 feet to 7 feet.

Homework Equations



W=\int^{b}_{a}Fdx=\int^{b}_{a}kxdx=[kx^{2}/2]^{b}_{a}

The Attempt at a Solution



10=[kx^{2}/2]^{4}_{0}
10=k(16)/2-k(0)/2
10=8k
k=4/5

W=[kx^{2}/2]^{b}_{a}
W=4/5[x^{2}/2]^{5}_{2}
W=4(25)/10-4(4)/10
W=42/5

W=8.4 ft*lb
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Could you explain your limits of integration? The spring is either being stretched from 0 to 6 ft or from 2 to 6 ft, I don't see where you got 0 to 4 from.
 
It's being stretched 4 feet beyond its natural length of 2 feet, so the natural length is the 0 and then 4 feet beyond that is 4.

At first I had 2 to 6, but then I realized that that meant stretching it from 2 feet beyond its natural length to 6 feet beyond it because the limits refer to change in distance... so the change in distance is 0 to 4.
 
Oh, I see. Sorry, that is a badly worded question (or more likely I read it badly). I thought it meant it's being stretched four feet beyond it's elestic limit! My bad.

Given that is true I think your answer is correct, at least in it's principle (Ihaven't checked the numerics).
 
Thread 'Help with Time-Independent Perturbation Theory "Good" States Proof'
(Disclaimer: this is not a HW question. I am self-studying, and this felt like the type of question I've seen in this forum. If there is somewhere better for me to share this doubt, please let me know and I'll transfer it right away.) I am currently reviewing Chapter 7 of Introduction to QM by Griffiths. I have been stuck for an hour or so trying to understand the last paragraph of this proof (pls check the attached file). It claims that we can express Ψ_{γ}(0) as a linear combination of...
Back
Top