Calculate velocity with initial height, range and angle

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the optimal angle for firing a Nerf gun to achieve maximum distance, while also determining the initial velocity and range of the projectile. The participants outline the equations of motion used in their calculations, noting the challenge of incorporating initial height (Y0) into their formulas. They successfully calculate the velocity at zero degrees but struggle with non-zero angles, particularly when adjusting for height differences. The conversation highlights the need to derive equations from fundamental principles rather than using them directly from textbooks. Ultimately, the group seeks guidance on properly integrating initial height into their projectile motion equations.
spiderdan
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


My lab partner and I were to find the optimum angle a nerf gun could be fired at to provide the longest distance from the starting point. We also need to calculate the initial velocity of the projectile and the range and height the projectile should have reached for each angle. Air resistance is ignored. The data my partner and I collected in the lab was as follows

data.jpg

Homework Equations



v = v0 + at

x = x0 + v0t + 1/2at2

v2 = v02[/sub] + 2a(x - x0)

note: apparently, these are the four equations which are given on the AP exam. I am allowed to use other projectile motion equations, but I must show how they were derived from these three.

The Attempt at a Solution


I was able to solve at zero degrees quite easily.
y = v0yt + 1/2gt2 + y0 (from second equation)
y = (v0ysinθ)t + 1/2gt2 + y0
0 = (v0ysin0)t + 1/2*-9.8m/s2*t2 + .84m
0 = -4.9m/s2*t2 + .84m (sin0 = 0)
t = .414

x = x0 + v0t + 1/2at2
x = v0xt + 1/2at2
x = (v0cosθ)t
6.24m = (v0cos0)*.414s
v0 = 15.07m/s

When the angle becomes nonzero is where I run into trouble. I can't solve for time and then plug into the other equation for velocity. There is an equation in my physics book which seems to be for this very purpose.

R = (v20/g)sin2θ0

The problem is that I can't use an equation straight out of the book, I have to derive it. That, and that it doesn't have Y0

Using the book equation for 15°

10.17m = (v20/9.8m/s2)sin2(15)
v20 = 14.12

I had the thought that I might be able to solve one equation in terms of v0 and then plug this into the other equation. I tried this leaving Y0 at 0 to see if it matched up with the books equation

0 = (v0sin15)t - 4.9t2
4.9t2 = (v0sin15)t
4.9t = v0sin15
18.93t = v0
t = v0/18.93

10.17m = (v0cos15)(v0/18.93)
192.53 = (v0cos15)v0
v20 = 199.32
v0 = 14.12

This works, but if I bring Y0 into the picture, the equation becomes much more difficult to solve. Here is my attempt.

y = y0 + V0y + 1/2gt2
0 = .89m + (v0sin15°)t - 4.9 m/s2t2
0 = -4.9 m/s2t2 + (v0sin15°) + .89m

I then plugged this into the quadratic formula and got t = .00140v02 - .182

10.17m = (v0cos15°)(.00140v0]2 - .182)
0 = .0013524v03 - .175812v0 - 10.17
v0 = 21.1795 m/s

this velovity is faster than the one with a Y0 of 0, which can't be right. Where am I going wrong?

As a side note, I believe it was assumed the gun would be held on the floor, making the slight y0 irrelevent. My group fired the gun from a table, which obviosly makes y0 more important. Is there some way we can add y0 into the equation, or do we just need to account for this in our error analysis? Thanks ahead of time!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Although the image is lost, I deduce from your working that the target height is 0.84m (or is it 0.89?) below the launch height. That means the range equation R = (v20/g)sin2θ0 is not valid anyway.

spiderdan said:
plugged this into the quadratic formula and got t = .00140v02 - .182
There should be a square root in there somewhere.
To avoid that, just write out the horizontal and vertical displacement equations as functions of t and v0. Since you want the max horizontal displacement, ##\frac{dx}{d\theta}=0##. Differentiate both displacement equations wrt ##\theta##.
See if you can take it from there.
 
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