Center Cap vs Tire Diameter Rotation

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the relationship between the RPMs of a 22-inch tire and a 2.5-inch center cap while a car travels at 30 MPH. It concludes that both the tire and center cap have the same RPMs, as they rotate together on the same hub. However, the tangential velocity differs due to their varying circumferences; the tire travels a greater distance per rotation compared to the center cap. The calculations provided illustrate how to derive the RPMs and tangential velocities using angular frequency and radius. Ultimately, while rotations are equal, the distance traveled by each point on their circumferences is not.
element80
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hello all,

Just trying to find a formula and need some help.

If a tire is 22 inches in diameter, what are the RPMs of the outer diameter of a 22 inch tire versus the RPMs of the outer diameter of a 2.5 inch center cap, on a car traveling 30 MPH?

Are they the same, or are the rotations of the diameter of center cap different than the diameter of the tire?

Any help would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
element80 said:
Hello all,

Just trying to find a formula and need some help.

If a tire is 22 inches in diameter, what are the RPMs of the outer diameter of a 22 inch tire versus the RPMs of the outer diameter of a 2.5 inch center cap, on a car traveling 30 MPH?

Are they the same, or are the rotations of the diameter of center cap different than the diameter of the tire?

Any help would be appreciated.

If a point somewhere on the circumference of the cap revolved a different amount of times than a point somewhere on the circumference of the tire during a minute of rotations, then they would no longer be aligned, and your tire would probably have something wrong with it (if the tire slipped around the hub or if the hub twisted). So you can assume the RPMs are the same, which is a scalar quantity. What is not the same is the distance traveled by each point and the tangential velocity.
 
Last edited:
Here is a little more help:

Tangential velocity = V_{tangent}
Angular frequency = \omega in revolutions/minute, this must be converted to radians/minute for units to work correctly, which 1 rpm = 6.28 rads/min.
Radius = r in inches
speed of car = 30mph, so to make units agree, 30mph = 31680 inches/minute

And we use the formula:
V_{tangent} = \omega * r

If you consider the tangential velocity of the point on the tire that contacts the road, this velocity vector will tell you how fast the car is moving. So,

V_{tangent} = 31680 \frac{inches}{minute} = 11in\;*\;\omega

So now, solve for \omega:

\omega = 31680\frac{inches}{minute} * \frac{1}{11\;inches} = 2880 \frac{rad}{min}

This is in units of radians/minute, so convert to RPM now:

\frac{2880\;rads}{min}\;*\;\frac{1\;revolution}{6.28\;rads} = 458.6 RPMThere is also a much simpler way of computing this, if you consider that when a tire travels distance of its circumference, it has completed 1 revolution, and then you can calculate how many of those circumferences (revolutions) must be traveled in an hour to get 30 miles, and then convert to minutes.
 
Last edited:
Thank you for your reply DragonPeter. So the rotations are the same for both , it is just the distance that is effected by the radius.
 
...it is just the distance that is effected by the radius.

the circumference gets bigger as the radius gets bigger...so an outer point moves thru
a greater circumference during one rotation than does an inner point...hence it has to go faster [v = wr] than an inner point...
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top