I used to be good at phyics, but

  • Thread starter aviodont
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Phyics
In summary, the conversation discusses a problem involving a cannon firing a 1kg iron ball at a 45 degree angle and initial velocity of 500 m/sec. The homework question asks for the time in flight, maximum height, and total horizontal distance traveled. The conversation covers the use of kinematic equations and the knowledge of 9.8m/s^2 acceleration to solve the problem. The final vertical displacement of the cannon ball is known to be -2 meters.
  • #1
aviodont
16
0
I used to be good at phyics, but...

That was 1987! I was at the range the other day with some guys when the question of maximum cannon range came up. I knew it had to be 45 degrees but that was all I could remember.

Homework Statement



A cannon fires a 1kg iron ball at a 45 degree angle with an initial muzzle velocity of 500 m/sec and a muzzle height of 5 ft. Assume level terrain, no wind resistance, and no other complicating factors. Find the time in flight, maximum height, and total horizontal distance travelled.


Homework Equations



All I remember is that 9.8m/s^2 is part of this

The Attempt at a Solution



Hide in corner in fetal position remembering physics class again! :cry: Seriosuly, go to the pros when you want the right answer. Can you please tell me what is the formula for these answers? Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2


Welcome to Physics Forums.

The first step is to split the velocity into it's vertical and horizontal components. Can you do that?
 
  • #3


:grumpy: Arrrgh! You are going to make me think?

Oh, well! It is either the sin or cos of 45. Maybe it's pythagorean's theorem? Is it 353.56 for initial x and y?

(Honestly, I used to get 100% on my physics tests!)
 
  • #4


Seems ok so far. So you have your inital component velocities.

What do you think now?
 
  • #5


So we start off with an initial x and y velocity of ~353m/sec; the x component will stay that throughout the time in flight (since we will be ignoring wind resistance and other effects). The Y velocity will start to bleed off at a rate to be determined somewhow by that 9.8 m/s^2 thing, but I have no clue from this point.
 
  • #6


aviodont said:
So we start off with an initial x and y velocity of ~353m/sec; the x component will stay that throughout the time in flight (since we will be ignoring wind resistance and other effects). The Y velocity will start to bleed off at a rate to be determined somewhow by that 9.8 m/s^2 thing, but I have no clue from this point.
Good. So you know that the distance traveled in the x-direction,x, at time, t, is given by,

x = vxt

where vx is the component of the velocity in the x-direction. Agreed?

Now for the y-direction, the cannon ball undergoes uniformly accelerated motion (since it is being accelerated towards the Earth at g). Can you remember any kinematic (SUVAT) equations?
 
  • #7


Hootenanny said:
x = vxt

where vx is the component of the velocity in the x-direction. Agreed?
QUOTE]

Agreed. But no I do not remember any SUVAT equations (has physics changed in 20 years?!)
 
  • #9


The first four I understand.

The fifth,

x = x_0 + v_0 t + (1/2) a t^2

I believe says that the x-coordinate will be the original starting point (x=0 in this case) plus the original velocity multiplied by time plus 1/2 acceleration multiplied by the time squared.

In this case, I could tell you x only when I know t and that was the answer sought (in addition to distance).

The sixth equation I believe says that the new velocity will be the old velocity plus a factor of the acceleration that was possible over the change in distance in question. The fourth equation seems vaguely related to the 6th.

I need advil!
 
  • #10


aviodont said:
The first four I understand.

The fifth,

x = x_0 + v_0 t + (1/2) a t^2

I believe says that the x-coordinate will be the original starting point (x=0 in this case) plus the original velocity multiplied by time plus 1/2 acceleration multiplied by the time squared.

In this case, I could tell you x only when I know t and that was the answer sought (in addition to distance).

The sixth equation I believe says that the new velocity will be the old velocity plus a factor of the acceleration that was possible over the change in distance in question. The fourth equation seems vaguely related to the 6th.

I need advil!
Good.

So in the previous equation: x = vxt, you know the velocity and you want to find out the horizontal displacement (range), but you know know the time. So, which one of the equations that you just saw would be appropriate to use? Bear in mind that you know the acceleration and the initial and final displacements...
 
  • #11


Hootenanny said:
Good.

So in the previous equation: x = vxt, you know the velocity and you want to find out the horizontal displacement (range), but you know know the time. So, which one of the equations that you just saw would be appropriate to use? Bear in mind that you know the acceleration and the initial and final displacements...

I do not know the time. Or the initial and final displacments.
 
  • #12


aviodont said:
I do not know the time.
Indeed you do not, but you can work it out using one of these formulae.
aviodont said:
Or the initial and final displacments.
Yes you do, remember that you are trying to find the range of the projectile.
 
  • #13


Hootenanny said:
Yes you do, remember that you are trying to find the range of the projectile.

Yes, I am trying to find the range, which would be x. The original x=0 (the muzzle of the cannon), the original y=2 (height of muzzle... i used 5 feet, let's just call it 2 meters). The final x (the displacement) I do not know.
 
  • #14


aviodont said:
Yes, I am trying to find the range, which would be x. The original x=0 (the muzzle of the cannon), the original y=2 (height of muzzle... i used 5 feet, let's just call it 2 meters). The final x (the displacement) I do not know.
Yes, but you missed out one important bit of information that you do know: the final vertical displacement of the cannon ball.
 
  • #15


The final vertical displacement would be -2meters. Am I missing something? I have no idea ho high it went nor the time in flight (both of which would be related to 9.8m/s^2) nor the distance traveled (which would be dependent on the time in flight).

What am I mssing here?
 
  • #16


aviodont said:
The final vertical displacement would be -2meters. Am I missing something? I have no idea ho high it went nor the time in flight (both of which would be related to 9.8m/s^2) nor the distance traveled (which would be dependent on the time in flight).
You are indeed correct! Can you use the information you have, i.e. y0 = 0, y1 = -2, a=-9.81 and vy0 = 353.56, together with the formula that you quoted earlier,
aviodont said:
x = x_0 + v_0 t + (1/2) a t^2
to determine the flight time?
 
  • #17


Hootenanny said:
You are indeed correct! Can you use the information you have, i.e. y0 = 0, y1 = -2, a=-9.81 and vy0 = 353.56, together with the formula that you quoted earlier,

to determine the flight time?

No, I cannot, because, although I know Xo, Vo, and A, there are 2 unknowns in that equation: X and T.:cry:
 
  • #18


aviodont said:
No, I cannot, because, although I know Xo, Vo, and A, there are 2 unknowns in that equation: X and T.:cry:
Yes you can! t (the flight time) is the only unknown in the formula:

y1 = y0 + vy 0t + 1/2 ayt^2
 
  • #19


Hootenanny said:
Yes you can! t (the flight time) is the only unknown in the formula:

y1 = y0 + vy 0t + 1/2 ayt^2

-2=0+353.56+0.5(-9.8)T^2
-4.9T^2=-355.56
T^2=+72.56
T=8.52 sec

x = x_0 + v_0 t + (1/2) a t^2
x=0 + 353.56m/sec*8.52sec + 4.9m/sec^2*72.56sec^2
x=3012.33m+355.54m
x=3367.87m

The Ymax I thought I would figure by dividing the time in half, but being a perfectionist, how would I account for the milliseconds it would take to fall the last two meters below the cannon's muzzle height?

Also, does my X distance result take into account the distance to it contacts the ground or the distance until it crosses the 2m high mark?
 
  • #20


aviodont said:
-2=0+353.56+0.5(-9.8)T^2
-4.9T^2=-355.56
T^2=+72.56
T=8.52 sec
This is not correct. You seem to be missing another t
aviodont said:
The Ymax I thought I would figure by dividing the time in half, but being a perfectionist, how would I account for the milliseconds it would take to fall the last two meters below the cannon's muzzle height?

Also, does my X distance result take into account the distance to it contacts the ground or the distance until it crosses the 2m high mark?
You have already taken the distance between the cannon and the ground into account. The cannon is at y = 0. Therefore, the cannon ball's initial vertical position is y=0. When the cannon ball hits the ground it is 2 meters below it's initial position, in order words, y=-2. Do you see?
 
  • #21


Hootenanny said:
This is not correct. You seem to be missing another t

QUOTE]

-2=0+353.56*T+0.5(-9.8)T^2
-2=353.56T-4.9T^2
2=4.9T^2-353.56T
2=4.9(T^2-72.16T)
.408=T^2-72.16T
(looking like a quadratic equation... begin shutdown sequence...:frown:
 
  • #22


aviodont said:
-2=0+353.56*T+0.5(-9.8)T^2
-2=353.56T-4.9T^2
2=4.9T^2-353.56T
2=4.9(T^2-72.16T)
.408=T^2-72.16T
(looking like a quadratic equation... begin shutdown sequence...:frown:
Come on, you're not telling me that you can't solve a quadratic equation?!
 
  • #23


Not anymore! You need an emoticon for "my head is about to burst!"

Well, going online, I found the solutions to be:

-.005653 (disregard)
72.16

So T=72.16

x = x_0 + v_0 t + (1/2) a t^2
x=0 + 353.56m/sec*72.16sec+ 4.9m/sec^2*(72.16sec)^2
x=25512.89m+25514.62m=51027.51m=51.027km=no way!

can you help show me where am I going wrong?
 
  • #24


aviodont said:
Not anymore! You need an emoticon for "my head is about to burst!"

Well, going online, I found the solutions to be:

-.005653 (disregard)
72.16

So T=72.16
Be careful with your rounding, you're off by a couple of decimal places here. I have 72.09 seconds.
aviodont said:
x = x_0 + v_0 t + (1/2) a t^2
x=0 + 353.56m/sec*72.16sec+ 4.9m/sec^2*(72.16sec)^2
What is the acceleration in the x direction?
 
  • #25


Hootenanny said:
Be careful with your rounding, you're off by a couple of decimal places here. I have 72.09 seconds.

What is the acceleration in the x direction?
zero! :blushing:

x = x_0 + v_0 t + (1/2) a t^2
x=0 + 353.56m/sec*72.09sec+ zero*(72.16sec)^2
x=25488.14m+0=25.488km=seems a little far to me still
 
  • #26


aviodont said:
zero! :blushing:

x = x_0 + v_0 t + (1/2) a t^2
x=0 + 353.56m/sec*72.09sec+ zero*(72.16sec)^2
x=25488.14m+0=25.488km=seems a little far to me still
Looks fine to me. :approve:
 
  • #27


Hootenanny said:
Looks fine to me. :approve:

Thanks! I am going to try it with a different set of numbers (I might be back!)
 
  • #28


aviodont said:
Thanks! I am going to try it with a different set of numbers (I might be back!)
No problem :smile:
 
  • #29


Rifle muzzle at 5ft shoots up at 45 degrees at 3000ft/sec (no wind, etc.):

-5=0+2121ft/sec*T-15.16ft/sec^2*T^2
T=139 sec

X=0+2121ft/sec*139sec=294819ft

But, I never figured out how to get Ymax?

(and it's time for a lunch break... all this math is making me crazy!)
 
  • #30


You got to think, when does y max occur.

Whats its velocity in y when its at the highest point?

Ignore the x bit for now and imagine you shot straght up.
 
  • #31


xxChrisxx said:
You got to think, when does y max occur.

When Vy=0, Y is at its highest.

So,...
 
  • #32


so you know the

initial velocity
final velocity
acceleration

you can use
v^2=u^2+2as to find the max height (remember to +5ft)

v=u+at to find time
 

What causes someone to lose their proficiency in physics?

There are several potential reasons for someone to lose their proficiency in physics. These may include a lack of practice or exposure to the subject, a change in interests or priorities, or a shift in cognitive abilities. Additionally, external factors such as stress or distractions can also impact one's ability to perform well in physics.

Can someone regain their proficiency in physics after a period of decline?

Yes, it is possible for someone to regain their proficiency in physics after a period of decline. With dedication, consistent practice, and seeking help from resources such as tutors or study groups, one can improve their understanding and skills in physics.

Is it normal to struggle with physics even if I used to be good at it?

Yes, it is normal to struggle with physics even if you used to be good at it. Physics is a complex and constantly evolving subject, and it is common for individuals to face challenges and difficulties at different points in their learning journey. It is important to seek help and resources when needed and to not be discouraged by temporary setbacks.

What are some tips for maintaining proficiency in physics?

To maintain proficiency in physics, it is important to consistently practice and review concepts, stay up-to-date on new developments and research in the field, and seek help when needed. Additionally, finding ways to apply physics principles in real-life situations can also help to solidify understanding and skills.

How can I overcome a mental block or fear of physics?

Overcoming a mental block or fear of physics may require a combination of strategies. It can be helpful to identify the root cause of the fear or blockage, whether it be a specific concept or a general feeling of anxiety towards the subject. Seeking help from a tutor or mentor, breaking down complex concepts into smaller, more manageable parts, and practicing regularly can all aid in overcoming a fear of physics.

Similar threads

  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
20
Views
8K
Replies
8
Views
11K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
1
Views
6K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
11
Views
5K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
4
Views
6K
Back
Top