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

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the angular acceleration of a car tire given its initial and final rotational speeds and the distance traveled. The subject area pertains to rotational motion and angular kinematics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the relationship between linear distance and angular displacement, questioning the absence of the tire's radius. Some suggest leaving the angular displacement in terms of distance over radius, while others express confusion over the conversion of revolutions to radians.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants exploring different interpretations of the problem. Some have offered guidance on how to approach the relationship between linear and angular quantities, while others highlight the lack of necessary information regarding the tire's radius.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted absence of the tire's radius, which is critical for solving the problem. Participants are navigating the constraints imposed by this missing information.

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.
 

Similar threads

Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
10K