Angular and tangential acceleration

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the tangential acceleration of a bug on the rim of a rotating record, specifically focusing on the conversion of units and the application of angular acceleration concepts.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the conversion of measurements from inches to meters and revolutions per minute to radians per second. There is an exploration of the relationship between angular acceleration and tangential acceleration, with some participants questioning the use of diameter versus radius in calculations.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively identifying and correcting minor errors in calculations. Guidance has been offered regarding the correct use of radius in the formula for tangential acceleration, and there is acknowledgment of the need for rounding significant figures.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of confusion regarding the proper application of formulas and unit conversions, as well as the significance of significant figures in the final answer.

Idividebyzero
Messages
64
Reaction score
0
1. What is the tangential acceleration of a bug
on the rim of a 78 rpm record of diameter
9.79 in. if the record moves from rest to its
final angular speed in 7 s? The conversion
between inches and meters is 0.0254 m/in.
Answer in units of m/s2.




2. angular acceleration



3. converted 9.79 inches to 0.248666 meters using 0.0254 m/in. converted 78 rev/min to 8.168 rad/s using 2pi rad / 60 sec. alpha = delta omega / delta time. getting alpha as 8.168 rad/s / 7s = 1.1668 rad/s/s. multiply 1.1668 rad/s/s * 0.24866 m to get 0.2901 m/s^2. this is incorrect
 
Physics news on Phys.org
a = alpha*r

you are multiplying by the diameter 'd' which is twice the radius 'r'.
 
It looks OK, but you should round it off to 1 significant figure. Edit: But first heed rockfreak's advice:smile:
 
haha yeah i was multiplying by the diameter that's probably the issue
 
that confirms it, yall found my tiny mistakes once again...gracias amegos
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K