I think your first one is wrong since pounds are a unit of force. So esentially each foot is 3/4 a pound the work would be the integral from 0 to 10 of (3/4)x dx which is 37.5
#2 each meter is 8 kg’s. So the force required to lift one foot would be 8*9.8 = 78.4 newtons So I’m thinking the work would be the integral from 0 to 6 of 78.4x dx
[quote]stumpy wrote:
I think your first one is wrong since pounds are a unit of force. So esentially each foot is 3/4 a pound the work would be the integral from 0 to 10 of (3/4)x dx which is 37.5[/quote]
[quote]stumpy wrote: #2 each meter is 8 kg’s. So the force required to lift one foot would be 8*9.8 = 78.4 newtons So I’m thinking the work would be the integral from 0 to 6 of 78.4x dx[/quote]
hrmm fuck these KG’s and shit make it so confusing lol…
For the first one, our variable is the mass, however, as we pull the rope up over the edge we decrease it’s mass. This means we want to express the mass of the rope hanging over the edge in terms of the length we have pulled.
Let a = linear density of the rope (assumed to be uniform) = 30 lbs / 40 feet = 0.75 lbs/ft
Let x = length of rope we have pulled up over the edge.
Let m = the mass of the rope hanging over the edge = 40 lbs - 0.75x (since as we pull the rope up, the mass hanging over decreases).
Now, since W = Fx = mgx = (40 - 0.75x)g*x = 40gx-0.75gx^2
Therefore dW/dx = 40g-0.75gx and dW = (40g-0.75gx)dx and we can now integrate this expression from 0 to 10 and solve for W.
I’m sure I made some error as I’m just about to head to bed, but if nobody else has posted a solution for the second one I’ll give it a shot tomorrow morning.
EDIT: MAKE SURE YOU CONVERT YOUR UNITS. I was just too lazy and was only concerned with the process.
if by calculus u mean using differentiations and integrations?
in my own calculations no. but it can be inferred from the graphs no? find the equation of the line in the form y = mx + c, where m is the gradient and c = 0 since the line cuts the y axis at zero. integrate the equations with the relevant limits in either case and then mulitply that answer with the value of gravity.
Hey malty sorry earlyer i just wasnt paying attention lol :p. for the problem 2) im getting 1411.2 J any ideas as to why the discrepancies? Also talking to some people they are also saying it is 144J why did you change it?
for question 2, to get the value of 144, you would have multiplied the weight of the chain with the distance moved. so based on the graph, this value would be obtained with the equation: 0.5 * 6 metres * 48 kilograms.
however, this value would not be the value of work done.
work done = force * distance
also,
force = mass * acceleration
therefore: work done = mass * acceleration * distance
hence the reason we multiply 144 by the value of gravity, for which i used the value of 9.81. i suppose the difference between your answer and mine lies in the number of significant numbers used in calculations, in particular the value of gravity.
So the force at any instance is 8 (kg/m) * 9.81 (m/s/s) * h (m)
Work = int(89.81hdh)
Work = 0.589.81h^2|0-6
Work = 0.589.816^2-0
Work = 1412.64 (J) (Nm)
This is likely the way your teacher would want you to do the problem for class.
Of course there are other ways like malty’s, but that wouldn’t probably be accepted.
Also, work=change in potential energy
so it would also work to say potential energy = 6(m)*8(kg/m)*3(m)9.81(m/s/s) = 1412.64 J
Which is just (height)(force) applied at the center of gravity
My work is NOT 100% correct BTW. I fudged through the negative signs which are only important if your teacher incorporates dot products into the definition of work…
In that case, force is dotted with dh instead of multiplied, but the Force is negative because it is applied in the negative h direction. But the dot product also includes a cos(omega) term where omega is the angle between the h and Force. So it is cos(omega)=cos(pi)=-1, so the negatives just cancel out. So whether or not you have to include that depends on your teacher and how you were taught the subject. I think in my calc class I had to include all of that stuff.
Weight at any instance is going to be 30/40 (lbs/ft)* h (ft)
so work = int((30h/40)-dh) definite integral from 40-30 ft (dh is negative because it is in the negative h direction)
work = -30/40 * h^2 | 40-30ft
work = (30/40) * 40^2 - (30/40) * 30^2
work = 525 ft-lbs