SPECIAL FEATURE: FORCES

www.iop.org/journals/physed

The common forces: conservative or nonconservative?

David Keeports
Department of Chemistry and Physics, Mills College, Oakland, CA 94613, USA E-mail: dave@mills.edu

Abstract Of the forces commonly encountered when solving problems in Newtonian mechanics, introductory texts usually limit illustrations of the denitions of conservative and nonconservative forces to gravity, spring forces, kinetic friction and uid resistance. However, at the expense of very little class time, the question of whether each of the common forces is conservative or nonconservative can be settled once and for all. I provide here brief arguments for classroom use that establish the conservative or nonconservative nature of each force commonly encountered in mechanics problems, including forces whose conservative or nonconservative natures are seldom or never addressed by textbooks.

By the time the energy concept rst appears in most introductory physics courses, students have already gained considerable experience solving problems based upon Newtons laws of motion. Such problem solving requires familiarity with the nature of a set of common forces including gravity, normal forces, tensions, static and kinetic friction, spring forces, buoyant forces and uid resistance. A force is by denition conservative if the work that force does upon an object that moves from some point A to some point B is independent of the path connecting the two points. The generally of the use of the word path in this denition must be emphasized. For example, an object is said to follow two different paths from point A to point B if it moves along the same line at different speeds. I nd that most textbooks illustrate their denitions of conservative and nonconservative forces by considering the nature of only a few specic forces [1, 2]. Gravity provides the prime example of a force satisfying the denition of a conservative force, and the force exerted by a spring often provides a second example.
0031-9120/06/030219+04$30.00

Examples of forces qualifying as nonconservative are usually limited to at most kinetic friction and uid resistance. But what about the other common forces? Its an easy matter to spend just a few minutes of class time to categorize each of them once and for all. I present here short arguments for each of the common forces. I begin with arguments commonly found in textbooks and end with arguments seldom or never found in textbooks. For simplicity, I ignore air resistance in all arguments.

Gravity is a conservative force

Since gravitys direction is straight down, an objects horizontal motion contributes nothing to the work upon an object as it moves from A to B. Thus gravitys net work (+mgh if A is higher than B and mgh if B is higher than A) depends only upon the objects net vertical displacement and not upon its path from A to B (gure 1). (Work becomes GMm(1/rB 1/rA ) in a nonuniform gravitational eld.)
PHYSICS EDUCATION 41 (3)

2006 IOP Publishing Ltd

219

D Keeports

path 1

A h B
Figure 1. The work done by gravity is the same along any path from point A to point B. Horizontal motion does not contribute to work since gravity is vertical. Work of +mgh is a consequence of the net vertical displacement regardless of the path from A to B.

path 2

Figure 3. The value of the integral in equation (1) is independent of the path of the springs end between point A and point B.

Kinetic friction is a nonconservative force

Suppose that points A and B lie on the surface of a horizontal table. First apply a horizontal force to push the block directly from A to B. Then apply a horizontal force to push the block from A to B along a longer path (gure 2). Since kinetic friction does more negative work in the second case, the work of kinetic friction is path dependent.

a point beyond B and then return the end of the spring to B (gure 3). Nothing about the integral in equation (1) depends upon the path from A to B, providing that Hookes law is obeyed throughout the path.

Fluid resistance is nonconservative

Hold a ball and move it directly between two points A and B that are under water. Then move the ball again between the same two points at the same speed but along a longer path (gure 4). Water resistance does more negative work upon the ball when it moves along the second path. Even without lengthening the original path, you can make water resistance do more negative work just by moving the ball between the two points at a greater speed.

Spring forces are conservative

The work that a spring does upon an object attached to its end is given by W =
B

F (x) dx
A B

= k

x dx
A

Normal forces are nonconservative

(1) For simplicity, consider a frictionless horizontal surface. Push a block, initially at rest at point A, through point B twice so that the block passes through B at two different speeds (gure 5). Only the horizontal normal force N that you apply does

k = (B 2 A2 ). 2

There are countless ways to move the end of the spring from x = A to x = B. You can move the end of the spring slowly or quickly from A to B. You can move the end of the spring from A to

water

Figure 2. The work done by kinetic friction is more negative along the longer path from A to B.

Figure 4. Water resistance does more negative work upon the ball along the longer path if the ball is moved at the same speed along both paths.

220

PHYSICS EDUCATION

May 2006

The common forces: conservative or nonconservative?

B A

B A=0 B

=0 N A

Ffr, static B

Ffr, static A

Figure 5. You can make a block initially at rest pass through point B with two different speeds and thus with two different kinetic energies by pushing it with a horizontal normal force. By the workenergy theorem, different kinetic energy changes imply that the work done by the normal force N between the two points is path-dependent.

Figure 7. The static friction that a board exerts upon a block can cause the block to undergo two different kinetic energy changes between two points.

work upon the block. According to the work energy theorem, the total work upon the block equals its kinetic energy change. Here, different kinetic energy changes imply path-dependent work. A normal force exhibits an important fundamental difference from a conservative force such as a spring force. While the force a spring exerts is determined just by the displacement of the end of the spring from its equilibrium position, you are free to apply the normal force of your choice to the box while you push the box from A to B. Thus, you are free to choose how much work your normal force does upon the box between A and B.

where it does. Just place a block on top of a board and hold the board horizontally by its ends. Start with the block at rest at point A. Then move the board and the block horizontally twice through point B so that the block passes through B with different speeds (gure 7). Be careful that the block doesnt slide on the board! Static friction from the board is the only horizontal force that acts upon the block. Different kinetic energy changes for the block along the two paths imply that the static friction from the board does different amounts of work upon the block along the two paths.

Buoyant forces are conservative

The argument for buoyant forces is the argument for gravity turned upside-down. Because buoyant forces act in the upward direction, the work that a buoyant force does upon a given object depends only upon the objects net vertical displacement and not upon the path the object follows between two points (gure 8).

Tensions are nonconservative

Repeat the above argument for normal forces, except this time drag the block across the surface with a horizontal string instead of pushing it horizontally with your hand (gure 6).

Static friction is nonconservative

It may be surprising to students that static friction is capable of doing any work, but heres a case

B h

B A= 0 B

A
T B water

T A

Figure 6. Tension T can cause a block initially at rest at point A to pass through point B with two different kinetic energies.

Figure 8. Since a buoyant force is vertical, an objects horizontal motion makes no contribution to the work done upon the object by a buoyant force. Work of +FBh, where FB is the buoyant force, is a consequence of net vertical displacement regardless of the path from A to B.

May 2006

PHYSICS EDUCATION

221

D Keeports I discuss elsewhere the how conservative nature of a buoyant force leads to the conclusion that a helium-lled balloon loses potential energy as it rises [3]. In brief, if W is the work done upon an object by a conservative force, then the object undergoes a potential energy change given by U = W . In other words, you increase an objects potential energy when you make a conservative force do negative work, as is the case when you lift a box. When you push a helium-lled balloon down through air, the upward buoyant force upon the balloon acts in the direction opposite to the balloons displacement so the balloon gains potential energy related to the buoyant force. (Its true that at the same time the balloon loses gravitational potential energy. However, the net potential energy change of the balloon is positive since the buoyant force is stronger than gravity.) Now release the balloon. The balloons total potential energy decreases as the balloon rises. object. Its easy for an instructor to avoid the questions of whether the normal force upon an object sliding down an inclined plane or the tension in a pendulums string is conservative or nonconservative by telling the class that, conservative or not, these forces are incapable of doing work in these particular problems. After all, in these problems, these forces always act in directions perpendicular to the direction in which the object moves. But why avoid such questions when its simple to establish once and for all that these forces are nonconservative forces?
Received 8 September 2005, in nal form 10 November 2005 doi:10.1088/0031-9120/41/3/001

References
[1] Giancoli D C 2000 Physics for Scientists and Engineers 3rd edn (Upper Saddle River, NJ: Prentice Hall) pp 1778 [2] Serway R A 1992 Physics for Scientists and Engineers 3rd edn (Philadelphia, PA: Saunders) pp 1813 [3] Keeports D 2002 How does the potential energy of a rising helium-lled balloon change? Phys. Teacher 40 1645
David Keeports is a professor in the Department of Chemistry and Physics at Mills College, where he has taught physics and physical chemistry since 1982. He has published numerous articles in science education journals. He has served on the manuscript review panel of the Journal of College Science Teaching and currently is a member of the Editorial Board of The Physics Teacher .

Concluding remarks
As an alternative to explicitly presenting all of the less common arguments above in class, I nd it useful to present a few of the arguments and to leave the proof of the nature of one of the remaining forces as an examination question. A proof of the nonconservative nature of a normal force, a string tension or a static friction force is an especially appropriate examination exercise. Before applying mechanical energy conservation to an objects motion, it is necessary to check that no nonconservative forces do work upon the

222

PHYSICS EDUCATION

May 2006