Calculating Distance Traveled: Airplane Acceleration Equation Explained

  • Thread starter Thread starter Infinty
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves calculating the distance traveled by an airplane accelerating down a runway at a specified rate until takeoff. The subject area is kinematics, focusing on motion equations under constant acceleration.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the application of the equation for distance under constant acceleration, questioning the correct interpretation of terms and the squaring of time in calculations. There are attempts to clarify the initial conditions and the components of the equation.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on the correct interpretation of the equation and the importance of squaring the time variable. There is an ongoing exploration of the calculations, with some expressing confusion about the initial velocity and its impact on the distance calculation.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the original poster is new to physics and is grappling with basic concepts, including the implications of an initial velocity of zero in the context of the problem.

Infinty
Messages
5
Reaction score
2
Warning: Thread titles should be descriptive of the thread content, not a plea for help.

Homework Statement


An airplane accelerates down a runway at 3.20 m/s2 for 32.8 s until is finally lifts off the ground. Determine the distance traveled before takeoff.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



Okay, so i get how to write it, and I understand what the majority of the equation means. But when I do the actual math, the answer is totally effed up. Haha. How am I calculating wrong? Could someone please break down the calculations part for me so I can better understand this kind of question?

d = vi*t + 0.5*a*t2

d = (0 m/s)*(32.8 s)+ 0.5*(3.20 m/s2)*(32.8 s)2The answer in the answer key says it is:

1720 M

..that is not what I got.
[/B]
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What did you get?

Are you aware that "2" at the end of your equation should be squared?

that is,

##d = v_i t + 0.5 a t^2##

I get the same answer as the key using that equation.
 
e.bar.goum said:
What did you get?

Are you aware that "2" at the end of your equation should be squared?

that is,

##d = v_i t + 0.5 a t^2##

I get the same answer as the key using that equation.
Ahh yes. I am aware is should be squared. I'm completely new to physics and am struggling a bit. Is the first part of the equation: d = (0 m/s)*(32.8 s)
not equal to zero since you are multiplying 32.8 by zero? From there I'm just..sort of lost. I apologize if this seem ignorant and basic.
 
billy_joule said:
It's t squared.

d = vi*t + 0.5*a*t2
not
d = vi*t + 0.5*a*t2

Pasting your work into wolfram and adding the missing caret gives the correct answer:

http://www.wolframalpha.com/input/?i=d+=+(0+m/s)*(32.8+s)++0.5*(3.20+m/s2)*(32.8+s)^2

Haha my ignorance is killing me. I guess I'm just not sure how to go about the math. I'm assuming the first part d = (0 m/s)*(32.8 s) is equal to zero since you are multiplying it...and then what?
 
Infinty said:
Ahh yes. I am aware is should be squared. I'm completely new to physics and am struggling a bit. Is the first part of the equation: d = (0 m/s)*(32.8 s)
not equal to zero since you are multiplying 32.8 by zero? From there I'm just..sort of lost. I apologize if this seem ignorant and basic.

Yep! That part is absolutely equal to zero. What about 0.5*(3.20 m/s2)*(32.8 s)^2 ?
 
e.bar.goum said:
Yep! That part is absolutely equal to zero. What about 0.5*(3.20 m/s2)*(32.8 s)^2 ?

So then I assume I take half of 3.20 and multiply it by 32.8 squared?
 
Infinty said:
So then I assume I take half of 3.20 and multiply it by 32.8 squared?

Sure. What do you get?
 
e.bar.goum said:
Sure. What do you get?

By George, I think I've got it!

I'm not even sure what I was doing wrong now before! Hahah. 1721.344

Ahh thank you for humoring me on this...I think perhaps I wasn't even squaring at the end. Couldn't even tell you now. :)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: billy_joule and e.bar.goum
  • #10
Since there is no initial velocity, ## x = \frac{at^2}{2} ##, you know what the acceleration is, the time is also given and ##\frac{1}{2} ## is ##\frac{1}{2}##, work it out !
 
  • #11
Infinty said:
By George, I think I've got it!

I'm not even sure what I was doing wrong now before! Hahah. 1721.344

Ahh thank you for humoring me on this...I think perhaps I wasn't even squaring at the end. Couldn't even tell you now. :)

Great! And no worries, we've all been there before!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
7K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K