How is the minimum work needed to push a car up an inclined plane calculated?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the minimum work required to push a car up an inclined plane, specifically a 1000-kg car on a 17.5-degree incline, considering two scenarios: one without friction and one with a coefficient of friction of 0.25.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relationship between work, force, and distance, with some questioning the use of acceleration in the calculations. There is exploration of the forces acting on the car, including gravitational components along the incline. The original poster seeks clarification on why a specific equation for minimum work is used and whether lifting the car straight up relates to pushing it up the incline.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, with some providing insights into the forces involved and the concept of minimum work. There is a recognition that different approaches may yield different results based on the inclusion of friction. The discussion reflects a mix of interpretations and attempts to clarify the underlying physics without reaching a definitive consensus.

Contextual Notes

There is mention of the complexity introduced by rolling motion versus sliding motion, particularly in the context of the second part of the problem. Participants also note the implications of ignoring friction and air resistance in the first part of the question.

Abu

Homework Statement


What is the minimum work needed to push a 1000-kg car 300 m up a 17.5 degree incline?
A. Ignore friction
B. Assume the coefficient of friction is 0.25

Homework Equations


W = F*d
Net force = ma

The Attempt at a Solution


At first I did:
Work = F*300*cos17.6
but I later realized that the force and distance are both in the same direction, thus the angle would be 0
So that means that the new formula is Work = ma*300... but what is a? Acceleration is equal to force applied minus force of friction divided by mass, but the force applied is not known, and for part A friction is not included.

So I've already looked at other solutions and I found the answer, but I don't understand why it is done this way. Basically the minimum work is equal to mg*300sin17.5.

My question is how come this equation is used instead? Is the work that it takes to lift the car straight upwards the height of the incline equal to the work that it takes to push the car all the way up the inclined, and if so, how come?

Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Abu said:
So that means that the new formula is Work = ma*300... but what is a?
It's better to forget about acceleration and just use the forces. The car experiences a downward force equal to its weight, which is mg. Then we need to draw a vector diagram and split that vertical downwards force into two components, one parallel to the slope and one perpendicular (normal) to it. The normal component is canceled out by the slope pushing back against the car, leaving the parallel force, which is the one you need to multiply by the distance traveled along the slope.

Abu said:
Is the work that it takes to lift the car straight upwards the height of the incline equal to the work that it takes to push the car all the way up the inclined, and if so, how come?
In part A the answer is Yes, because we ignore friction and air resistance and those are the only differences between the work in the two approaches. In part (b) the answer will be No. But I don't know what they expect for part B since rolling motion - which is what the car is doing - is much more complex than sliding motion, so more is needed than just a coefficient of friction. They should have made it a sled rather than a car.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Abu
Abu said:
Work = ma*300
That equation is wrong.
The work done by a given force Fapp is Fapp*d cos(θ), while the acceleration a satisfies Fnet=ΣF=ma. The applied force Fapp is only one of the contributors to ΣF.
In this problem, you do not need the vehicle to have any residual velocity at the top, so the acceleration can be made arbitrarily small. It becomes, almost, a statics problem, ΣF=0. So what does Fapp equal? (Different answers for parts A and B.)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Abu
haruspex said:
That equation is wrong.
The work done by a given force Fapp is Fapp*d cos(θ), while the acceleration a satisfies Fnet=ΣF=ma. The applied force Fapp is only one of the contributors to ΣF.
In this problem, you do not need the vehicle to have any residual velocity at the top, so the acceleration can be made arbitrarily small. It becomes, almost, a statics problem, ΣF=0. So what does Fapp equal? (Different answers for parts A and B.)

Oh okay, so let me see if I got this right . Since it is asking for the minimum work, thus the minimum force needed, the net force is zero because any extra force will only contribute to making the car move faster.

So for net force to be zero, the force applied must be equal to the resistant force, which is the component of gravity acting along the incline, which is mgsintheta. so that means force applied equals mgsintheta, and when multiplied by the distance, the formula is Work = mgsin17.5*300.

Am I correct? Thank you.
 
Abu said:
Oh okay, so let me see if I got this right . Since it is asking for the minimum work, thus the minimum force needed, the net force is zero because any extra force will only contribute to making the car move faster.

So for net force to be zero, the force applied must be equal to the resistant force, which is the component of gravity acting along the incline, which is mgsintheta. so that means force applied equals mgsintheta, and when multiplied by the distance, the formula is Work = mgsin17.5*300.

Am I correct? Thank you.
Yes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
4K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K