Angle Between Accel & Velocity: Solving Circular Motion Problems

  • Thread starter Thread starter negation
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Ice
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on determining the angle between the acceleration vector and the initial velocity vector of a skater gliding on ice. The skater accelerates from 2.4 m/s to 5.7 m/s over 3 seconds with an acceleration of 1.1 m/s². Participants clarify that the motion is not circular and emphasize the importance of resolving the acceleration into its x and y components, specifically using the equations ax = 1.1 m/s² cos(θ) and ay = 1.1 m/s² sin(θ). The conversation highlights the necessity of a geometrical model to visualize the problem and derive the angle θ accurately.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of vector components in Cartesian coordinates
  • Knowledge of kinematic equations and their applications
  • Familiarity with acceleration as the derivative of velocity
  • Ability to resolve vectors into their components
NEXT STEPS
  • Study vector resolution techniques in physics
  • Learn about kinematic equations for motion in two dimensions
  • Explore graphical methods for visualizing vector relationships
  • Investigate the implications of constant acceleration on trajectory
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics and kinematics, as well as educators seeking to enhance their teaching methods for vector analysis in motion problems.

  • #31
Simon Bridge said:
Aside:


It occurs to me that there is a judgement call here ... the question does not say that the acceleration maintains a constant angle to anything - though we cannot do it unless it maintains a constant angle to something.

So we take the acceleration vector as a constant magnitude and direction.
The fact the question says "angle to the initial velocity" suggests that the angle to the velocity will change as the velocity changes.

Basically this says that there is a constant force on the object.

We could treat it as an average acceleration - so we only need the difference between the final and initial velocities to come to the acceleration (times change in time). Could be - negation has had recent questions about average acceleration.

If the coursework has been around the ideas of circular motion - then we may infer that the acceleration maintains a constant angle to the velocity. But then why not say so hmmm?

negation has had a number of questions like this: similarly loosely worded.

I'm going to leave you guys to it though ... see how it goes.
I can come back to this after if it turns out to be needed.

I copied the question word for word from the book. There are many times I have no idea what is expected.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #32
chestermiller said:
in your equation for vx, you left out the initial velocity of the skater. Otherwise, your first two equations are correct. Your second two equations (taking derivatives of the velocities) were not done correctly, and were not even necessary for solving this problem. Once you make the correction to the equation for vx, take the sum of the squares of the x and y components of velocity and set them equal to the magnitude of the final velocity you are seeking. This will give you an equation for solving for the angle θ (or sinθ or cosθ).

Chet
Capture.JPG


EDIT: Sub 5.7 into |v|
 
  • #33
negation said:
Sorry for that slip.
I'm attempting the method where I square vx and vy. I'll finish that first and once I get the answer, I'll do it via integral.
I get an intuition the angle is zero but we shall see.
There is no need for doing any more integration. You have your two components of the velocity. All you need to do now is solve for θ under the condition that:

\sqrt{(v_x(3))^2+(v_y(3))^2}=5.7
 
  • #34
Chestermiller said:
There is no need for doing any more integration. You have your two components of the velocity. All you need to do now is solve for θ under the condition that:

\sqrt{(v_x(3))^2+(v_y(3))^2}=5.7


x is undefined so x is either π/2 or 3π/2. But since (i,j), therefore, x = π/2
 
  • #35
negation said:
Sorry for that slip.
I'm attempting the method where I square vx and vy. I'll finish that first and once I get the answer, I'll do it via integral.
I get an intuition the angle is zero but we shall see.
Your intuition was correct. 2.4 + 3.3 = 5.7
The angle is zero.
 
  • #36
Chestermiller said:
Your intuition was correct. 2.4 + 3.3 = 5.7
The angle is zero.

check post#34, something could be wrong
 
  • #37
negation said:
check post#34, something could be wrong
No way. It's definitely zero.

(2.4 + 3.3 cosθ)2+(3.3sinθ)2=5.72

(5.76+ 10.89cos2θ+15.84cosθ)+10.89sin2θ)=32.49

5.76+10.89(cos2θ+sin2θ)+15.84cosθ=32.49

5.76+10.89 +15.84 cosθ = 32.49

15.84 cosθ = 15.84

cosθ = 1

θ = 0
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #38
Chestermiller said:
No way. It's definitely zero.

(2.4 + 3.3 cosθ)2+(3.3sinθ)2=5.72

(5.76+ 10.89cos2θ+15.84cosθ)+10.89sin2θ)=32.49

5.76+10.89(cos2θ+sin2θ)+15.84cosθ=32.49

5.76+10.89 +15.84 cosθ = 32.49

15.84 cosθ = 15.84

cosθ = 1

θ = 0

I had an arithmetic error.
Θ = 0 is correct.
Thanks and I shall now review the question again and try to sketch a mental model so as to better cement my understanding.
 
  • #39
Chestermiller said:
No way. It's definitely zero.

(2.4 + 3.3 cosθ)2+(3.3sinθ)2=5.72

(5.76+ 10.89cos2θ+15.84cosθ)+10.89sin2θ)=32.49

5.76+10.89(cos2θ+sin2θ)+15.84cosθ=32.49

5.76+10.89 +15.84 cosθ = 32.49

15.84 cosθ = 15.84

cosθ = 1

θ = 0


Would I be right in sketching
On the x-axis Vx=3.3cos(theta) +2.4
And
On the y-axis Vy=3.3sin(theta)
With the hypothenus being 5.7?
 
  • #40
negation said:
Would I be right in sketching
On the x-axis Vx=3.3cos(theta) +2.4
And
On the y-axis Vy=3.3sin(theta)
With the hypothenus being 5.7?
Yes, as long as it's considered schematic. But, in the actual case with θ=0, the triangle is going to be degenerate.
 
  • #41
Chestermiller said:
The above is not done correctly. Sorry. θ is not a function of t, so sinθ and cosθ factor out of the integral.

If you integrate those equations, it goes like this:
v_x(3)-v_x(0)=\int_0^3{1.1\cosθdt}=1.1\cosθ\int_0^3{dt}=3.3\cosθ
or
v_x(3)=2.4+3.3\cosθ
Similarly,
v_y(3)=3.3\sinθ


Strange.
If one integrates 1.1cos(x) shouldn't one obtain 1.1sin(x)? The antiderivative of cos is sin.
 
  • #42
negation said:
Strange.
If one integrates 1.1cos(x) shouldn't one obtain 1.1sin(x)?
Only if you integrate with respect to x. If you integrate with respect to something unrelated to x, x staying constant, then cos(x) is a constant. Why should it change to sin(x)?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
809
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
13
Views
2K