Physics 8 Work, Energy, and Power (25 of 37) Crate slides down a rough incline

Поділитися
Вставка
  • Опубліковано 16 січ 2025

КОМЕНТАРІ • 112

  • @horayforjoe
    @horayforjoe 4 роки тому +54

    My left ear loved this.

  • @karinemw
    @karinemw 9 років тому +10

    Studying for a physics exam right now and your videos are perfect! I learn so much by working along with the video! Thanks for doing what you do!

  • @josephinalotho2570
    @josephinalotho2570 4 роки тому +3

    the best lecture for physics on UA-cam I've ever seen.

  • @JR23HARDSTYLE
    @JR23HARDSTYLE 7 років тому +2

    You are really good at explaining in all your videos , with that you're helping me pass my physics class !

  • @leylasolmaz3978
    @leylasolmaz3978 10 років тому +21

    you are the best physics lecture i have ever seen

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  10 років тому +1

      Leyla,
      Thanks for the feedback. Much appreciated.

  • @MichelvanBiezen
    @MichelvanBiezen  8 років тому

    Alex Eul I don't like to make such "absolute" statements. However most of these types of problems can be solved with that equation.

  • @johndingo4633
    @johndingo4633 8 років тому +6

    I solved the problem using only kinematics equations.
    Fnet = ma = mgsin30° - Nμ
    a = g*sin30° - g*cos30°*μ
    V^2 = 2*a*d = 2*(g*sin30° - g*cos30°*μ)*(h/sin30°)
    v = 12,74 m/sec

  • @koh8614
    @koh8614 4 роки тому +1

    Thanks for your lectures. I like the excitement you show on the geometry related parts.

  • @sulemanyusuf4208
    @sulemanyusuf4208 7 років тому +3

    best lecture ever, highly recommend

  • @chengarces5074
    @chengarces5074 9 років тому +2

    isn't there work done by the Weight vector component that goes along the slope?

  • @yamaha69x
    @yamaha69x 2 роки тому +2

    Thank you so much. This problem was driving me crazy

  • @thomashu6970
    @thomashu6970 10 років тому +1

    Your vids are the best!

  • @vinceallansalgado9728
    @vinceallansalgado9728 4 роки тому +2

    thank you so much sir you're a great help! I like how you teach it was so handy to learn. learner here from Philippines

  • @XoIoRouge
    @XoIoRouge 3 роки тому +1

    Very help full, thanks!

  • @Ronald-rn3yz
    @Ronald-rn3yz 4 роки тому

    Good work...your tutorials are of good help indeed......I didn't know we exclude work done by gravity on sliding motion...Thank you

  • @cesardepaz6533
    @cesardepaz6533 6 років тому +2

    how did you get the formula at the beginning of the video??

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  6 років тому +2

      This is the energy conservation equation. The energy you have initially + any work put into the system must equal the final energy + any energy lost

    • @cesardepaz6533
      @cesardepaz6533 6 років тому +2

      @@MichelvanBiezen ah that makes a lot of sense, may I also ask where you got the 1 in the 1-costheta/sintheta?

  • @timesjames7486
    @timesjames7486 6 років тому +2

    Because of you Sir I am starting to love physics 👌 Thank you Sir☺

  • @NewToneProducer
    @NewToneProducer 2 роки тому +1

    Why not account for friction by saying that friction does work on the system (which would be negative) rather than saying it's a change in energy due to heat lost?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  2 роки тому +2

      That is a perfectly fine method as well.

    • @NewToneProducer
      @NewToneProducer 2 роки тому +1

      @@MichelvanBiezen wasn't sure if it was conceptually incorrect while yours was correct. Thanks!

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  2 роки тому +1

      It is fine, but then you make it a negative value, you must place that term on the left side of the energy equation (instead of the right side).

  • @RMA9270
    @RMA9270 7 років тому +2

    Why is it that sometimes the work done by the friction force is at the initial side of the equation and other such as this is at the final side of the equation???????

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  7 років тому +1

      Without knowing which "other" example you are referring to, the general answer is that it probably depends on what you are trying to determine. Here in this example we are using the equation that is used for most energy conservation problems. The energy put into the system + energy already in the system must equal the energy remaining in the system + energy removed from the system by the friction force.

  • @sniderlw7613
    @sniderlw7613 7 років тому +1

    why did you canceled the work in the equation when there is mgsin0 acting on the crate

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  7 років тому +2

      The work done by gravity is already accounted for in the initial and final potential and kinetic energy (using this equation).

  • @biggiebigs8071
    @biggiebigs8071 4 роки тому +1

    Why doesn't gravity acting on the crate count as work?

  • @samyuen8234
    @samyuen8234 8 років тому +1

    actually that cosine/sine can simplify to cot or 1/tan

  • @sinthusri4476
    @sinthusri4476 3 роки тому +1

    Iam a srilankan Actually i don't know what are you saying but I can understand that idea.... You explain it very well sir thanks for it

  • @ahmedal-ebrashy3691
    @ahmedal-ebrashy3691 5 років тому

    Marvelous. Hiwever, I am surprised why mgsin(theta) wasnot used at all especially as an initial work on the system?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  5 років тому

      mg sin(theta) is accounted for in the PE term mgh. You cannot count it twice.

  • @enriquesoler3150
    @enriquesoler3150 9 місяців тому +1

    This equation: W+ PEo+KEo= PEf+KEf + Heat lost, is this the formula for work done on a system by an external force, with friction? It's just that PEo+KEo=PEf+KEf is reminding me of something?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  9 місяців тому +1

      That equation works for any situation. W = work done on the system adding energy and E lost is energy lost by the system, typically due to friction.

  • @saintseer8214
    @saintseer8214 2 роки тому +1

    can we substitute width or length of ramp for H?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  2 роки тому +1

      d represents the length of the ramp, but since we were not given the length of the ramp we had to find the length d in terms of h d = h / sin(theta)

    • @saintseer8214
      @saintseer8214 2 роки тому

      @@MichelvanBiezen oh, so for height i could Dsin30 to get H

  • @BRONSON422
    @BRONSON422 8 років тому +1

    I agree with all his method, however notice that all his questions give the coefficient of friction, and unfortunately it is never stated if we're given static or kinetic coefficient of friction.

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  8 років тому +1

      Since the objects are moving, it must be kinetic friction.

    • @BRONSON422
      @BRONSON422 8 років тому

      Regarding a scenario where the kinetic coefficient of friction is unknown, I'm assuming we'd consider forces and constant acceleration eqns to find the coefficient?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  8 років тому

      That is correct.

    • @BRONSON422
      @BRONSON422 8 років тому

      Thank you. You're quite prompt with your replies.

  • @Ved3sten
    @Ved3sten 6 років тому +1

    Is the force of friction supposed to be negative in the heat lost equation since it opposes the motion of the block's acceleration down the incline? Or does direction of forces not matter in energy questions?

    • @ricardofaloppa8587
      @ricardofaloppa8587 6 років тому

      Dear Gannu,
      Despite force being a vector quantity, work is scalar quantity. Therefore the measurement is scalar. The same difference between speed and velocity; speed refers to the magnitude of speed measure, velocity takes into account the direction of the movement. I hope this helps.

  • @Mishajayfeather
    @Mishajayfeather 7 років тому +1

    Why does the parallel component of weight not contribute to the equation?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  7 років тому

      Its contribution is already accounted for by the change in KE and PE.

    • @nicewisestudio9356
      @nicewisestudio9356 7 років тому

      I got the same question. Could you please explain more details in this issue. Why we are no need to consider the work done by the parallel component of weight? Thanks!

  • @vamshikrishna1326
    @vamshikrishna1326 7 років тому +1

    sir , won't there be initial work due to force (mg sin tetha)..

  • @massielherrerastendal4539
    @massielherrerastendal4539 9 років тому

    I love your videos...the best in the web....... But, in this example you added work made for the friction force positive...It was not supposed to be negative since the force of friction is going opposite to the motion????

  • @marnelloyd5448
    @marnelloyd5448 7 років тому +1

    I have a similar problem where the height of the ramp as well as the distance traveled is unknown. I have the Friction Coef, the mass and the initial velocity. I assume the final velocity should be 0, because the question is 'what is the length of the ramp?' How do I solve for d without h?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  7 років тому

      h = d * sin(theta). If the angle is known then you only have one unknown

  • @ProAiming1337
    @ProAiming1337 9 років тому +1

    I don't get the part with the factorization. Why does it say [1 - blablubb] ???? The 1 - confuses me. Can somebody explain that please.

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  9 років тому +1

      +ProAiming1337
      When you factor out 2gh from each of the last 2 terms what remains is ( 1 - (cos (theta) mu / sin(theta))

  • @joshgarza7491
    @joshgarza7491 7 років тому +1

    Is the equation applicable to all problems involving work, energy, and power?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  7 років тому +1

      Yes. But there are some problems for which you'll need additional equation(s).

  • @fahadomar7401
    @fahadomar7401 Рік тому +1

    thanl you so much sir great work

  • @aouni91
    @aouni91 5 років тому +1

    Why can't we equate the friction force with mgsin(theta) instead of using the friction force formula?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  5 років тому +1

      To determine the friction force we must use the strict definition: Friction force = normal force x coefficient of friction

  • @MahfuzAlam-cg7lk
    @MahfuzAlam-cg7lk 7 років тому +1

    why not work done by friction is negative in this case ??????

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  7 років тому +1

      It depends on your reference. Strictly speaking W = F x d x cos(theta) and thus you will get a negative answer.

  • @フアン-f6e
    @フアン-f6e 2 роки тому +1

    left ear enjoyed well....
    all jokes aside, thank you sir for the help

  • @gharibgamegg
    @gharibgamegg 5 років тому +2

    there is an easyer way . you can figure out d useing sin 30 which is 0.5 . d is 20m

  • @vamshikrishna1326
    @vamshikrishna1326 7 років тому +1

    thanks sir..!!

  • @DanielMichel-r1w
    @DanielMichel-r1w 8 місяців тому +1

    Why work is zero??

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  8 місяців тому +2

      Work is due to an outside force (not including gravity) that works on the system during the process. (Gravity is taken into account by the potential energy)

  • @phanishsahu9802
    @phanishsahu9802 3 роки тому

    Sir why we didn't consider work done by mgsin(theta) here

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  3 роки тому +1

      That is accounted for with the change in potential energy.

    • @phanishsahu9802
      @phanishsahu9802 3 роки тому

      @@MichelvanBiezen sir! Why we cant consider its psuedo force and put the work done by it in that equation

  • @jacksparrowization
    @jacksparrowization 7 років тому +1

    thank you so much for the videos, im very grateful, i have a doubt sir, since the friction force is at a 180 degree angle to the displacement shouldnt heat loss be Force(friction)*d*cos 180 = -fd

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  7 років тому +3

      No, it is positive. The left side of the equation represents the energy you started with. The right side of the equation includes the energy you have left. If the energy you have left is less than the amount you started with (because you lost energy due to friction), then you must ADD the amount lost on the right side for the two sides of the equation to be equal.

  • @tedthereviewguy
    @tedthereviewguy 8 років тому

    what if the box was pushed from the top ? what can i do then? and they want the final velocity to = 0 m/s ....

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  8 років тому

      It is worked the exact same way, and uses the exact same equation. If the box is pushed (is it continuous or a momentary impulse?) then you add the energy imparted on the object because of the work done by the force. (W = F * d)

  • @rashidbulbulia5359
    @rashidbulbulia5359 9 років тому

    Why is the cos(thetre) =30 degrees? Shouldn't it be 180 because it's the normal force

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  9 років тому +1

      Sheedo Bulbulia
      The angle theta is the angle between the normal to the plane and the vertical

  • @breezemabvutophiri7983
    @breezemabvutophiri7983 Рік тому +1

    This is interesting

  • @living4destiny
    @living4destiny 8 років тому

    AGAIN NEED A RESPONSE ASAP! Work done by Friction has to be negative because displacement and force of friction are in the opposite direction. F of k * d * cos (180)?? Am i right? I need a response. I got AN EXAM on Tuesday!!!

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  8 років тому +1

      +Sai Thu See my response on your previous question.

  • @brandonhill7844
    @brandonhill7844 10 років тому

    what if i add a force F to the object how can i find it's F work

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  10 років тому

      Brandon,
      There are other videos with that example.

  • @mulangamphagi151
    @mulangamphagi151 8 років тому

    why didn't you use mgSin(theta)

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  8 років тому +1

      +Mulanga Mphagi It was not needed here, since we didn't have to calculate the acceleration and it doesn't contribute to the friction force.

    • @phanishsahu9802
      @phanishsahu9802 3 роки тому

      @@MichelvanBiezen ok sir! Then it is just contributing in potential energy but no need to write in equation maybe!

  • @fizixx
    @fizixx 2 роки тому +1

    Great! :)

  • @Skittix447
    @Skittix447 5 років тому +1

    You just dropped the W?

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  5 років тому +2

      That is because no work was done on the system while the block was sliding down. (The work done by the friction force is accounted for by the energy lost term)

    • @Skittix447
      @Skittix447 5 років тому +1

      Michel van Biezen Oh okay. Thanks for the clear up, and all your videos. They are extremely helpful!

  • @thailandfutsal5508
    @thailandfutsal5508 3 роки тому

    How about mgsin seta

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  3 роки тому

      That is accounted for by the change in potential energy

  • @Cruzeiro5x02008e2009
    @Cruzeiro5x02008e2009 6 років тому +1

    Does anyone in here get when i say that just memorizing a freaking equation won't actually make you understand the problem as a whole?! That's why i love chess, because i can actually learn the deep reason why i'm making such move, otherwise than physics taught in schools (at least in mine).

  • @lunardust201
    @lunardust201 9 років тому +1

    the only part I didn't get was where 1/2 mv squared came from

    • @MichelvanBiezen
      @MichelvanBiezen  9 років тому +1

      +nikotwenty (1/2) m v^2 is the kinetic energy gained by the block sliding down the incline

    • @lunardust201
      @lunardust201 9 років тому +1

      +Michel van Biezen OK I get it, I looked up formula for kinetic energy and that was the base formula. I didn't know that before

    • @tombskater3000
      @tombskater3000 9 років тому

      +nikotwenty Isn't this guy THE bae???

  • @chengarces5074
    @chengarces5074 9 років тому

    nvm im wrong

  • @Lucerozeus
    @Lucerozeus 10 років тому

    i'm subscribing... definitely