Acceleration of an object given forces

AI Thread Summary
An 85 kg toboggan initially accelerating at 3.0 m/s² on frictionless snow encounters a friction force of 180 N on concrete. The net force is calculated as 255 N (applied force) minus 180 N (friction), resulting in 75 N. The new acceleration is determined using F=ma, yielding 0.88 m/s², while the answer key states 0.94 m/s², suggesting a possible typo. Participants emphasize the importance of quoting the original question accurately to avoid misinterpretation. The discussion concludes with acknowledgment of a calculation error regarding the initial force value.
Zack K
Messages
166
Reaction score
6

Homework Statement


An 85 kg tobbogan that was originally accelerating at 3.0 m/s2 on frictionless snow hits a bare patch of concrete that exerts a force of friction on the sled of 180 N, what will the new acceleration be?

Homework Equations


F=ma

The Attempt at a Solution


Ok so this was originally a 2 part question but I merged it into one. I already calculated the applied force of the tobbogan on frictionless snow which is 255 N east. Now I have to find its acceleration when it hits the concrete. So I got the Fnet by subtracting the applied force by the force of friction. 255-180= 75 N east. So now I do a=F/m. So the acceleration by my understanding should be 75/85 which is 0.88 m/s2. But the answer sheet says that it is 0.94 m/s2.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your method and aithmetic seem correct. This may be a typo in the answer key.

In the future, please quote the question exactly as stated without making any changes. Many times we get questions from students that have misinterpreted the question.
 
  • Like
Likes Zack K
Zack K said:
225-180= 75 N
=45N not that it helps.

I suggest you post the question word for word in case there is something you missed when you merged it into one question.
 
CWatters asked for the original unmerged question. You seem to have just reposted your merged version.
In particular, if any of the input numbers you quote in the merged version are actually results calculated for the first part of the question, they may contain rounding errors that become significant in the second stage.
 
CWatters said:
=45N not that it helps.

I suggest you post the question word for word in case there is something you missed when you merged it into one question.
225
haruspex said:
CWatters asked for the original unmerged question. You seem to have just reposted your merged version.
In particular, if any of the input numbers you quote in the merged version are actually results calculated for the first part of the question, they may contain rounding errors that become significant in the second stage.
Sorry I accidentally posted that and am trying to delete it. I don't know how to delete. Also the answer I got was a whole number. No rounding was required
 
No problem. I didn't notice that 3*85 is 255 not 225.
 
Thanks guys for the help. I'm assuming that the answer key had a typo.
 
Zack K said:
Sorry I accidentally posted that and am trying to delete it.
You cannot. Please use the report feature if this happens and a mentor can delete the post for you as I have done.
 
Back
Top