Can a Hot Wheels Car Travel 42 cm with Initial Kinetic Energy Alone?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on whether a Hot Wheels car, with an initial velocity of 1.7 m/s and a combined mass of 350g (car and block), can travel 42 cm using only its initial kinetic energy. The student calculates the kinetic energy as 0.505 J but struggles to determine the distance traveled from this value. Participants clarify that the equations used, particularly involving cosine theta, are not applicable since the surface is flat and the forces involved need to be analyzed differently. They emphasize the importance of understanding the physics concepts rather than just applying formulas mechanically. Ultimately, the student's prediction of 42 cm is questioned based on the energy calculations and the forces acting on the system.
suekz
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A Hot Wheels car, whose mass is 200g is hauling a mass block of 150g along a flat table surface
with a string as shown in the graph below. Assume the car and the attached mass is moving with
an initial velocity of 1.7 m/s. A student predicts that the car will travel a maximum distance of
42 cm. Is this a reasonable prediction? Explain fully.


Same

Homework Equations



KE = 1/2mV2
\SigmaF = mgcos\thetas

The Attempt at a Solution



I know that the formulas listed above are needed to solve this. After plugging in:

m = .350, v = 1.7, I get KE = .505 J
But where do I go from here to get distance? What would be theta be in this instance?

I have this formula KEf = KF0 + \SigmaF = mgcos\thetas, but I'm not sure what to use for theta?

I've attached the image to this post

Thanks for any hints!
 

Attachments

Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
We can't see your attachment yet, because it is pending approval. So it's a bit hard to help you with your problem.

Theta typically refers to an angle. There is no angle in this problem, because, as it says in the description, the table surface is flat.

What was the the information source that gave you the idea that you needed to use those formulae? Have you considered that perhaps they just may not be relevant to this problem? Also, what is the letter s in your sum of forces equation? mgcos(theta) already has units of force. So, if s is distance, then that equation makes no sense.
 
The s stands for distance in the equation. This equation was what we discussed in class, so i assume it is what we should use, since it is the only one I've seen with all the variables:

velocity, distance, and mass.

The picture is something like this, where the 200g car is hauling that 150g block off the side of the table:

| (pulley)--------rope------[200g car]
| ________table_________________
|
r
o
p
e
|
|
|
[150g block]
 

Attachments

  • prelab.JPG
    prelab.JPG
    2.8 KB · Views: 417
Welcome to PF.

The block then - all m*g of it - is retarding the forward motion?

Initially the car and the block are moving, as a system at 1.7 m/s positive x?

That would seem to suggest that the retarding deceleration of the system is 3/7*g?
 
First of all can you see that

\sum{F} = mg\cos \theta s

makes no sense?

By a dimensional analysis, your left hand side and your right hand side are not consistent. You have

[force] = [force] * [distance}

This makes no sense. The left hand side should be the work done i.e. W = (\sum{F})s

In words, you are trying to invoke the work-energy theorem, which states that

Work done = net force*distance = change in kinetic energy = difference between final and inital KE

or in symbols:

W = (\sum{F})s = \Delta KE = KE_f - KE_i

Second of all, can you see that the equations you have written are not necessarily relevant to the problem (esp. the factor of cosine theta, which has nothing to do with anything here!).

suekz said:
This equation was what we discussed in class, so i assume it is what we should use, since it is the only one I've seen with all the variables:

Well, you would be much better off approaching problems using your understanding of physics, rather than using blind matching of formulae to variables! The whole point of doing these labs is to apply your knowledge of physics, rather than to go through a mechanical exercise in applying formulae that is not accompanied by any conceptual understanding of what is going on.

You would be well-advised to look at LowlyPion's hint, which can be bit cryptic, unless if you realize that the word "that" in his third sentence refers specifically to the student's estimate of a distance of 42 cm.
 
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