(Centripetal Force) Why is this not correct?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the correct approach to calculating the normal force on a banked curve. The teacher's equation, F(normal) = F(gravity)/cosθ, is deemed appropriate for determining the normal force in this scenario, as it accounts for the banking angle. The incorrect method suggested involves using F(gravity)cosθ = F(normal) and then applying sinθ to find the x-component, which does not accurately reflect the forces at play. It is clarified that the normal force must account for the centripetal force component, leading to the correct equation: N + F_c sin(θ) = mg cos(θ). Understanding these relationships is crucial for solving banked curve problems effectively.
TheExibo
Messages
55
Reaction score
1
There is a banked curve problem asking for the correct angle to keep the car on the road:

http://imgur.com/Ni3j6dB

My teacher said the following equation must be used to find normal force:

F(normal) = F(gravity)/cosθ

Why is it, that you cannot find the x-component of the normal force, by finding normal force with

F(gravity)cosθ = F(normal)

and then using sinθ to find the x-component?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
TheExibo said:
There is a banked curve problem asking for the correct angle to keep the car on the road:

http://imgur.com/Ni3j6dB

My teacher said the following equation must be used to find normal force:

F(normal) = F(gravity)/cosθ

Why is it, that you cannot find the x-component of the normal force, by finding normal force with

F(gravity)cosθ = F(normal)

and then using sinθ to find the x-component?
The equation your teacher gave you is correct, in the situation you are describing (trying to find the "banking angle") the normal force will be greater (or perhaps equal to) the force due to gravity, so your equation is incorrect...
 
Now it makes sense, normal force is greater than the cos of geavity. Thanks!
 
TheExibo said:
Now it makes sense, normal force is greater than the cos of geavity. Thanks!
Note that they would be equal if:
\cos(\theta) = 1
ie, the surface was flat...
 
TheExibo said:
Now it makes sense, normal force is greater than the cos of geavity. Thanks!
Yes, but that only demonstrates your equation is wrong, it doesn't explain why it is wrong.
Your equation is presumably obtained by resolving forces normal to the plane, but the resultant (the centripetal force) has a component in that direction, so the full equation would be ##N+F_c \sin(\theta) = mg \cos(\theta)##.
 
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