When is the work on a spring negative and when is it positive?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on understanding the signs of work related to springs in the context of the work-energy theorem. When a glider attached to a spring moves away from the spring, the work done by the spring on the glider is negative because the force exerted by the spring opposes the glider's displacement. Conversely, if the glider moves towards the spring, the work done is positive, as both the spring force and the glider's displacement are in the same direction. The confusion often arises from the application of Newton's third law, which indicates that both work done by the spring and work done on the spring must be considered. Overall, using conservation of energy can simplify the analysis of these situations.
PhyIsOhSoHard
Messages
157
Reaction score
0
I have a problem understanding whether a sign should be positive or negative when it comes to a spring.

In my book, there is an example with a glider attached to a spring, and the glider is moving away from the spring so it expands.
It says that in order to use the work-energy theorem, it has to be the work done by the spring on the glider, which is the negative of the following equation:

W=\frac{1}{2}mv_2^2-\frac{1}{2}mv_1^2

Can somebody explain the "work done by the spring" and "work done on the spring"? How do I know which situation I have?
Why is the work negative in this situation?
And if the glider went the opposite direction, towards the spring, would that mean the work-energy theorem is positive?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Direction of spring force is always against its extension . Since F = - kx if the this is opposite to instantaneous displacement of body then negative work is done or if it is along the displacement positive work is done
 
PhyIsOhSoHard said:
I have a problem understanding whether a sign should be positive or negative when it comes to a spring.
you are not alone.
In my book, there is an example with a glider attached to a spring, and the glider is moving away from the spring so it expands.
It says that in order to use the work-energy theorem, it has to be the work done by the spring on the glider, which is the negative of the following equation:

W=\frac{1}{2}mv_2^2-\frac{1}{2}mv_1^2
Yes, but that is confusing, isn't it?
Can somebody explain the "work done by the spring" and "work done on the spring"? How do I know which situation I have?
By Newton's 3rd law, you always have both situations, but usually you are looking at work done on the object by the spring.
Why is the work negative in this situation?
Work done on an object by a spring is negative when the displacement and force on the object are in opposite directions. When the glider is moving away from the spring, it is pulling on the spring, so by Newton 3, the the spring is pulling back on the glider. Since the force on the glider is back, but the displacement of the glider is forward, work done by the spring on the glider is negative.
And if the glider went the opposite direction, towards the spring, would that mean the work-energy theorem is positive?
Yes, the direction of the spring force on the object is back (it is pulling it back), and the glider is moving back, same direction, work is plus. It is often better to use conservation of energy equation rather than work-energy, since the plus/minus signs can be handled easier. But nonetheless, it is a good exercise using work-energy.
 
  • Like
Likes 1 person
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Struggling to make relation between elastic force and height'
Hello guys this is what I tried so far. I used the UTS to calculate the force it needs when the rope tears. My idea was to make a relationship/ function that would give me the force depending on height. Yeah i couldnt find a way to solve it. I also thought about how I could use hooks law (how it was given to me in my script) with the thought of instead of having two part of a rope id have one singular rope from the middle to the top where I could find the difference in height. But the...
Back
Top