Angular acceleration of a tire....not sure how to find radius

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the angular acceleration of a tire given its initial and final rotation speeds and the distance traveled. Participants express confusion over the absence of the tire's radius, which is crucial for solving the problem. The book's solution suggests a radius of 32 cm without explanation, leading to frustration among users. There is a consensus that the problem lacks sufficient information, particularly regarding the radius, which complicates the calculations. Overall, the thread highlights the importance of having all necessary parameters for accurate physics problem-solving.
Breadsticks
Messages
16
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement

:[/B]
Your car tire is rotating at 3.5 rev/s when suddenly you press down hard on the accelerator. After traveling 200 m, the tire’s rotation has increased to 6.0 rev/s. What was the tire’s angular acceleration? Give your answer in rad/s2.

Homework Equations

:[/B]
2αΔΘ=ωf2i2

The Attempt at a Solution

:[/B]
2α(uhh)=(37.7 rad/s)2-(22.0 rad/s)2
We have 200m as a distance. With the absence of a tire's diameter, I tried (200 m)/(2πr rads) but again I don't know the radius. The book's solution manual uses ΔΘ=Δx/r and then simply states that the tire's radius is 32cm. I have no idea where this number came from.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
leave delta phi as x / r. Also, don't translate rev / second into rad /s. Instead, translate rev into 2 pi r, and you'll find the r's cancel.
 
tony873004 said:
Instead, translate rev into 2 pi r, and you'll find the r's cancel.

I don't understand. Isn't the definition that rev=2π?
 
tony873004 said:
leave delta phi as x / r. Also, don't translate rev / second into rad /s. Instead, translate rev into 2 pi r, and you'll find the r's cancel.
There is only one variable which involves the dimension of distance. That makes it useless. There is simply not enough information.
Breadsticks, it looks like they forgot to tell you the radius.
 
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