Calculating Time to Complete 10,000 m Run in 30 Minutes

  • Thread starter Thread starter miscellaneous
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Complete Time
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a runner's attempt to complete a 10,000 m run in 30 minutes, with a specific focus on the remaining distance of 1,100 meters after 27 minutes. The problem involves concepts of acceleration and velocity to determine the necessary time to achieve the goal.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the calculations related to the runner's speed and acceleration, questioning the initial assumptions about constant velocity and the implications of acceleration on the final speed needed to complete the distance in the allotted time.

Discussion Status

There is a mix of agreement and disagreement regarding the calculations presented. Some participants provide insights into the complexity of the problem, suggesting that the original poster's approach may not adequately account for the necessary adjustments in speed due to acceleration. Guidance has been offered on how to set up the equations to find the unknowns.

Contextual Notes

The problem is time-sensitive, with a deadline for resolution, which adds urgency to the discussion. Participants are navigating through the implications of acceleration and the need for a final velocity to meet the time constraint.

miscellaneous
Messages
10
Reaction score
0
A runner hopes to complete the 10,000 m run in exactly 30 minutes. After exactly 27 minutes, there are still 1100 meters to go. The runner must accelerate at .20 m/s^2 for how many seconds in order to achieve the desired time? Assume the runner ran with constant velocity for the first 27 minutes.

Here's what I did:

8900 m/27 minutes

8900 m = .5(V0 + Vf)1620 s
Vo + Vf = 10.9 m/s
Vf= 5.5 m/s

1100 m = 5.5t + .5(.2 m/s^2)t^2
t= 80.9 seconds

Is this right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Looks good to me...
 
No, that's not right. You calculated how long it would take him to run the remaining 1100 meters if he accelerated .2 m/sec^2 for the entire 1100 meters. (That would be a pretty impressive final kick - he'd be running over 48 mph by time he hit the finish line).

He has to complete the final 1100 meters in 180 seconds. He's currently running too slow to do that. He has to accelerate from 5.5 m/s to a higher speed, but every second it takes for him to accelerate increases the final speed he has to achieve in order to complete the 1100 meters within 180 seconds.

He has to average a little over 6.1 m/s for the final 1100 meters. But the 3 seconds it takes to accelerate from 5.5 m/s to 6.1 m/s means he still falls short (now he has to average about 6.2 m/s over the final 1083 meters).

In other words, your problem's a little more complicated.
 
riiiighhttt...I understand why its wrong. But, now, I have NO CLUE how to fix it. This is due tomorrow, please help me ASAP.
 
Your position will change due to acceleration for awhile, then it changes due to a constant velocity for awhile. Both need to be taken into account.

So, how about this:

[tex]s_f=s_i+v_it+\frac{1}{2}at^2+v_f(180-t)[/tex]

final position is 10000 m
initial position is 8900 m (you have 1100 m to go)
initial velocity is 5.5 m/s
acceleration is .2 m/s^2
t is the time that you're accelerating (you have 180 sec total to reach your destination)

The big problem is that you don't know your final velocity. But you do know how to get it. It's equal to your initial velocity plus (acceleration times time).

[tex]v_f=v_i+at[/tex]

That way, you get your equation down to one unknown: time. Pretty ugly looking by time you're done. You must be going over related rates and, ideally, they would have a method that didn't look quite so ugly. Maybe. Some problems are just pretty ugly and you have to take a look at them from a few different angles, kind of like lining up a putt.
 
Is the anser 3.08 seconds?

I added all the areas and set it equal to 1100

.1t^2 -36t + 110 = 0
 
Yes, that's the right answer.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
45
Views
10K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K