Calculating Drop Time to Reach 90 km/h: Confirm/Deny!

  • Thread starter Thread starter KingNothing
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculation
AI Thread Summary
An object dropped from rest will take approximately 2.55 seconds to reach a velocity of 90 km/h (25 m/s) under the assumption of no air resistance and constant acceleration due to gravity (9.81 m/s²). The confusion arises from misapplying kinematic equations; specifically, using distance equations instead of velocity equations leads to incorrect results. The correct formula for final velocity is V_f = V_i + a t, not V_f = 1/2 a t², which is for distance. Additionally, ensuring that units are consistent is crucial for accurate calculations. The discussion highlights the importance of correctly identifying and applying the appropriate physics formulas.
KingNothing
Messages
880
Reaction score
4
Can anyone confirm/deny that if an object is dropped (init. velocity=0) that it will take about 2.26 seconds to reach 90 km/h?

S=\frac{D}{T}
A=\frac{V_f-V_i}{T_f-T_i}
D=\frac{1}{2}gT^2
V_f^2=V_i^2+2a(X_f-X_i)
\overline{V}=\frac{V_f+V_i}{2}
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Assuming no air resistance and an acceleration of 9.81 m/s^2, I get 2.55 seconds.

Or if the object falls for 2.26 seconds, it will have a velocity of 80 Km/hr.
 
Last edited:
Can you go through it for me? It's really confusing me as to why I keep getting what I do.
 
Time = Velocity/acceleration

The units I used were Seconds, m/s, m/s^2

I converted your value of 90 km/hr to m/s. Divide by 3.6 to convert km/hr to m/s. 90 km/hr = 25 m/s

I simply plugged in the values into the above formula.

T = 25 /9.81 = 2.55 seconds.

Your answer wans't really that far off. What values did you use?
 
Just to start off, we have to assume gravity to be 9.8 in our physics class, but I don't think that can attribute to the difference. Anyhoo, what is wrong with using:

V_f = V_i + \frac{1}{2} a t^2
If V_f=25 and \frac{1}{2}a=4.9 and V_i=0, then what should I come out with, or is this the wrong equation?
 
Last edited:
It's the wrong equation. 1/2 a t^2 is an expression of distance traveled under a constant acceleration for a given length of time.

Since V_i=0, your equation simplifies to V_f = 1/2 a t^2 which is not correct. D = 1/2 a t^2 when intial distance and velocity equal 0. Otherwise,

D = D_i+V_i t + \frac{a t^2}{2}

the units on one side of the equation have to match the units on the other side. That's a good way to check for errors in an equation.

V_f = V_i + a t
 
Last edited:
comparing a flat solar panel of area 2π r² and a hemisphere of the same area, the hemispherical solar panel would only occupy the area π r² of while the flat panel would occupy an entire 2π r² of land. wouldn't the hemispherical version have the same area of panel exposed to the sun, occupy less land space and can therefore increase the number of panels one land can have fitted? this would increase the power output proportionally as well. when I searched it up I wasn't satisfied with...
I think it's easist first to watch a short vidio clip I find these videos very relaxing to watch .. I got to thinking is this being done in the most efficient way? The sand has to be suspended in the water to move it to the outlet ... The faster the water , the more turbulance and the sand stays suspended, so it seems to me the rule of thumb is the hose be aimed towards the outlet at all times .. Many times the workers hit the sand directly which will greatly reduce the water...
Back
Top