Determine the magnitude of its radial acceleration for ball

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the magnitude of radial acceleration for a ball swinging in a vertical circle. The ball is at a specific angle, and its total acceleration is provided in vector form. Participants are exploring the relationship between the components of acceleration and the radial acceleration in the context of circular motion.

Discussion Character

  • Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are questioning why the components of acceleration are added to find the radial acceleration instead of using one component directly. There is a discussion about the application of right triangle principles to resolve components and their implications for radial acceleration.

Discussion Status

Several participants are engaging in a detailed examination of the concepts involved, with some providing clarifications on the relationships between components of acceleration and their resultant vectors. There is an ongoing exploration of different interpretations regarding the calculation of radial acceleration.

Contextual Notes

Participants are grappling with the definitions and relationships between radial and tangential components of acceleration, as well as the implications of using trigonometric functions in this context. The discussion reflects a mix of understanding and confusion about the underlying physics principles.

sugz
Messages
110
Reaction score
0
< Mentor Note -- Thread moved from the General Physics forum to HH >

A ball swings counterclockwise in a vertical circle at the end of a rope 1.50 m long. When the ball is 36.9 degrees past the lowest point on its way up, its total acceleration is (-22.5i + 20.2j) m/s^2. For that instant, (a) sketch a vector diagram showing the components of its acceleration, (b) determine the magnitude of its radial acceleration\

Attempt at understanding:

I am able to visually picture the system and has been shown in the following link (question #2):
http://facultyfiles.deanza.edu/gems/lunaeduardo/Winter2013Exam1Solutions.PDF

What I don't understand is why the components are being added to find the radial acceleration. Why isn't one of the components simply used to find the radial component. For example, if 22.5 is the horizontal component with an angle for 36.9 degrees with the rope, then why isn't the radial acceleration simply acceleration (radial) = 22.5*cos(36.9).

Unless I am missing some concepts here, please clarify this.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
sugz said:
if 22.5 is the horizontal component with an angle for 36.9 degrees with the rope, then why isn't the radial acceleration simply acceleration (radial) = 22.5*cos(36.9)
That is clearly not right since by the same logic you could say the radial acceleration is the radial component of the vertical acceleration, but that will in general give a different number.
Acceleration is the second derivative of displacement. It might be easier to think about it in terms of displacements.
If you move the object left by distance x (from the given position) then you have moved it closer to the centre (reduced the radius) by ##x \sin(\theta)##. If you then move it up by y then you have moved it another ##y \cos(\theta)## closer to the centre. The two add up.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sugz
Hi haruspex,

Thank you for your reply. I guess I am thinking of right angle triangles where with one component, you can get the hypotenuse or adjacent. I am guessing I am trying to apply the same principles here but I still do not understand why you just add the component of the "i" and "j" along the rope. Can you please explain this a little more in detail. Thanks again!
 
sugz said:
Hi haruspex,

Thank you for your reply. I guess I am thinking of right angle triangles where with one component, you can get the hypotenuse or adjacent. I am guessing I am trying to apply the same principles here but I still do not understand why you just add the component of the "i" and "j" along the rope. Can you please explain this a little more in detail. Thanks again!
First, let me correct what I wrote before. I should have specified small displacements:
If you move the object left by a small distance dx (from the given position) then you have moved it closer to the centre (reduced the radius) by ##dx \sin(\theta)##. If you then move it up by dy then you have moved it another ##dy \cos(\theta)## closer to the centre. The two add up.​
Let me try to put it in terms of your right angled triangle, a, b, c. Overall, you wish to travel along c, the hypotenuse direction. You start off along a, at angle theta to the hypotenuse. Having reached the corner, in terms of movement in the hypotenuse direction you have gone distance ##a \cos \theta=c \cos^2 (\theta)##. You now go along b. This takes you distance ##b \sin(\theta) =c \sin^2 (\theta)## in the original hypotenuse direction, for a total movement of ##c \cos^2 (\theta)+c \sin^2 (\theta) = c## in that direction.
That was in terms of displacements, and performing them sequentially. But can you see that this carries over to velocities, and thus to accelerations? And if in each short time dt you make one movement, then the other, it's the same as doing both movements at once in time dt.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sugz
Thanks again for your informative post. I am curious, if you have a force vector at an angle of 30 degrees with the horizontal, and if given the x component of the force, can't you simply find the force vector using triangles (Fx*cos 30)? I am so sorry but I seem to completely missing something. Or do you actually have to add the x vector and y vector in order to obtain the magnitude vector? I thought you would only add the x and y component vectors when you don't know the angle. Please clarify for me.

Thanks a lot for your help again!
 
sugz said:
if you have a force vector at an angle of 30 degrees with the horizontal, and if given the x component of the force, can't you simply find the force vector using triangles (Fx*cos 30)?
No, it's the other way around, and I often see this mistake made.
If F acts at 30 degrees to the horizontal and you know the horizontal component of F has to balance some other force G then Fx = -G, but by definition Fx = F cos(30), so F = Fx sec(30) =-G sec(30).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sugz
haruspex said:
No, it's the other way around, and I often see this mistake made.
If F acts at 30 degrees to the horizontal and you know the horizontal component of F has to balance some other force G then Fx = -G, but by definition Fx = F cos(30), so F = Fx sec(30) =-G sec(30).

Sorry, that was a mistake on my part as I didn't think before submitting. I understand that part actually. Now, would this same principle not apply for obtaining the radial acceleration using the x or y component of the total acceleration from the initial question.
 
sugz said:
Sorry, that was a mistake on my part as I didn't think before submitting. I understand that part actually. Now, would this same principle not apply for obtaining the radial acceleration using the x or y component of the total acceleration from the initial question.
No. In the example in post #6, you know that the total resultant from the two components is F: ##\vec F_x+\vec F_y = \vec F##. In the OP question, the x and y accelerations have a resultant in an unknown direction, of which we are extracting the radial component: ##\vec F_x+\vec F_y = \vec F_{rad} + \vec F_{tang}##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
20K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
8K
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
19K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
25K