How Does Mass Affect Calculations in Non-conservative Force Problems?

  • Thread starter Thread starter kristen151027
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Forces
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around a physics problem involving a car descending a hill with friction. The poster struggles with the setup of energy equations, particularly regarding the role of mass and the frictional force. They initially use an equation that includes the frictional force multiplied by the cosine of 180 degrees, which is debated as unnecessary since it complicates the calculation. The importance of using the normal force and understanding the geometry of the hill is emphasized, as well as the need for mass to solve the problem accurately. Ultimately, the consensus is that mass is crucial for finding the correct initial speed of the car.
kristen151027
Messages
43
Reaction score
0
I'm having trouble with the following problem:

"There is a car ready to go down a hill. The height of the hill is 9.0 m, and the length of the slope is 11.0 m (hypotenuse). The frictional force opposing the car is 125 N, and the car must be going 12.5 m/s when it reaches the bottom. What is the initial speed required for the car to overcome friction and reach required speed at the bottom of the hill?"

I set up the following equation: KE_i + PE_i + (frictional force)(cos 180)(11.0 m) = KE_f

I don't know if I have the right setup because whenever I try to solve it, I run into trouble because there is no mass provided and I get an answer to be around 50 (it should be a little less than 3 m/s).
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You can express the frictional force in terms of the normal force. Mass will thus cancel out.
 
cos 180?? That's equal to -1 but why do you have that? There is no 180 angle in your problem. If you want the cosine of the angle the hill makes, then you can use the Pythagorean theorem to get the "near side".
 
By using the pythagorean theorem and the law of sines, I found the normal force to be approx. 5.17 N, which I multiplied by 11.0 m to get 56.92 J. Correct? Then I inserted that in the equation:

KE_i + PE_i + (normal force x hypotenuse) = KE_f

But I got the wrong answer. What am I doing wrong?
 
kristen151027 said:
I set up the following equation: KE_i + PE_i + (frictional force)(cos 180)(11.0 m) = KE_f

I see nothing wrong with this equation or your approach. (The "cos 180" may look strange, but it is correct since the friction force and displacement are 180 degrees apart.)

However I don't see how you can solve the problem without additional information, such as the mass of the car.
 
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Correct statement about a reservoir with an outlet pipe'
The answer to this question is statements (ii) and (iv) are correct. (i) This is FALSE because the speed of water in the tap is greater than speed at the water surface (ii) I don't even understand this statement. What does the "seal" part have to do with water flowing out? Won't the water still flow out through the tap until the tank is empty whether the reservoir is sealed or not? (iii) In my opinion, this statement would be correct. Increasing the gravitational potential energy of the...
Back
Top