How Does Launch Angle Affect Slingshot Range and Velocity?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the relationship between launch angle, range, and initial velocity of a slingshot. Experimentation revealed that as the launch angle increased from 10 to 40 degrees, the initial velocities decreased, suggesting that some energy was converted to potential energy due to elevation changes. Participants expressed confusion over how to establish a clear relationship between angle and initial velocity, especially since initial velocity ideally should not depend on launch angle. The professor's vague feedback added to the confusion, with mixed messages about the complexity of their approach. The conversation highlights the challenges of applying theoretical concepts to practical experiments in physics.
physics_wannabe
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
First of all, I just want to take the time and thank anyone who helps me with this, it is greatly appreciated.

Homework Statement


We take a mounted slingshot where you can adjust the launch angle and pull the rubber band back to a set position that is the same everytime. We launched it from 4 angles 10 times taking the mean of the displacement of each angle. This was done for 10,20,30 and 40 degree angles with respective displacements 5.3m, 8.2m, 9.3m and 10.4m. This is all assuming no sources of error such as wind, discrepencies in how perfect the sling was pulled back into the same position each time, etc.

Now this is what is asked:

Determine each angle's initial velocity. Once the initial velocity has been established, develop a relationship between the angle of elevation of the slingshot and each of these:
1) the horizontal range of the slingshot
2) the inital velocity

Reworking the range formula I determined that the respective initial velocities are these 12.3, 11.2, 10.3 and 10.2.

Initial velocity formula I used: v=(Rg/(sin(2θ))^(1/2)

Homework Equations


Now the problem is, how can I determine a relationship when the initial velocities are different? When I first looked at this I thought to myself "wow, this is going to be easy", thinking that I would just create the formulas to determine this information via the angle. But I didn't think about how there would be different velocities with now way of showing a real relationship, at least, that I know of.


The Attempt at a Solution


There is really nothing for me to attempt. I have no idea where to start.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
If it makes you feel any better, I'm still scratching my head over what the question wants.

The initial velocity (ideally) does not depend on the angle of launch. so the only other way to look at it, is from the "real" world. As the angle increases, the initial velocity decreases a bit due to the fact that the projectile is launched from a slightly higher elevation (some of the sling's work is used to increase the potential energy, and so there is less initial kinetic energy).

Examining the relationship between angle and initial velocity from an energy point of view may be helpful.
 
Yeah, I wish it made me feel better that everyone I've talked to that is very good with physics have no idea what this question is asking considering this is only engineering physics I. :) This professor's lectures are great, I've learned a lot and he is able to make it interesting and humorous. But then he gives us labs where everything he has taught us is applicable except the questions that are asked of us don't really make any sense. And if you ask him a question all you get is a vague response.

Anyway, so your saying that based on the fact that the sling is elevated more and more as the angle increases that would explain the reason why the initial velocities are decreasing? That would make sense, the thing that confuses me is that at one point I swear he said that the initial height of the sling should be irrelevant. But I will definitely be taking that into account now that you've mentioned it. My lab partner decided to work the entire thing working with energy even though we were never taught any of this yet and he came up with a velocity equation which seems to bring out erroneous information. I plotted the velocities with their respective angles and developed a cubic equation that will calculate the velocity analytically based off the recorded data. We showed our professor both of these approaches and his analogy of what we were doing was something along the lines of "your supposed to be building a tricycle but your building a hummer".. and he claimed we were way ahead of what everyone else was doing but that was all he said lol, so it was kind of misleading. Like, one point is we are doing way too much work and then the next is that we are doing great and much better then everyone else and that we have the problem pretty much licked. This guy loves leaving us confused. This was proven from day one when our syllabus was covered with completely unheard of acronyms which he finally explained. Fortunately the first submission is only the rough draft so I will be submitting what I have and my partners derivations along with your ideas and I will let you know what comments he makes about it (If I can understand the acronyms). If I ever find a definitive answer I will be sure to post a follow-up, and if anyone has any other ideas I would love to hear them.
 
Perhaps he is being deliberately confusing to force some desperate and original thinking? Best of luck to you my friend! At least you aren't alone in that boat.
 
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