Angular Acceleration of a Cyclist's Wheels: 54 Rev in 10.0 s

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the angular acceleration of a cyclist's wheels, which have completed 54 revolutions in 10 seconds. To find the angular acceleration in rad/s², the formula w = w_o + at is suggested, with w_o being zero since the cyclist starts from rest. Participants emphasize the importance of showing initial thoughts and attempts to solve the problem for effective assistance. Additionally, the radius of the wheel is mentioned, which is necessary for calculating the distance traveled by the cyclist. Engaging with the material and demonstrating effort is encouraged for better support.
melissa_y
Messages
17
Reaction score
0
A cyclist starts from rest and pedals such that the wheels of his bike have a constant angular acceleration. After 10.0 s, the wheels have made 54 rev. What is the angular acceleration of the wheels? Use units of "rad/s\^{}2".

If the radius of the wheel is 36.0 cm, and the wheel rolls without slipping, how far has the cyclist traveled in 10.0 s?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Melissa, I'm not being rude, but if you want help then you're going to have to post your thoughts on how to answer the questions you've been set. People here will be more than willing to help you out if you show us your working, and explain where you've got stuck. Copying out nine homework questions and expecting people to answer them for you isn't the way things work here.

Tell us your thoughts (as well as the questions!) and if you're genuinely stuck (rather than lazy) then you'll get all the help you need. For more information, read the post which says "read this before posting".

https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=4825
 
Last edited:
1) w=w_o + at

where w_o = 0

The wheel has made 54 rev in 10 seconds , that means wheel rotates with w= 2 pie F
Calculate w from here and put it in above expressions.


You should first refer to your textbook with thorough reading of the basics before posting direct questions based on formulae.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top