How far apart are the stop signs?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Abdul.119
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the distance between two stop signs based on a car's motion. The car accelerates at 3.7 m/s² for 7.3 seconds, coasts for 1.6 seconds, and then decelerates at 3.3 m/s² until it stops. The total distance calculated is 252 meters, which includes 98.6 meters during acceleration, 43.216 meters while coasting, and 110.5 meters during deceleration. The use of kinematic equations such as d = vt + 1/2 a*t² and Vf = Vi + a*t is emphasized for accurate calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinematic equations, specifically d = vt + 1/2 a*t²
  • Knowledge of acceleration and deceleration concepts in physics
  • Ability to calculate final velocity using Vf = Vi + a*t
  • Familiarity with uniform acceleration scenarios
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of kinematic equations in different motion scenarios
  • Learn about the effects of friction on motion and how to incorporate it into calculations
  • Explore advanced kinematic problems involving multiple phases of motion
  • Practice solving physics problems that require the integration of multiple kinematic formulas
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on kinematics, as well as educators looking for examples of motion problems and solutions.

Abdul.119
Messages
73
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


A car starts from rest at a stop sign. It accelerates at 3.7m/s^2 for 7.3s , coasts for 1.6s , and then slows down at a rate of 3.3m/s^2 for the next stop sign.
How far apart are the stop signs?

Homework Equations


d = vt +1/2 a*t^2
Vf = Vi + a*t
Vf^2 = Vi^2 + 2a*s

The Attempt at a Solution


I believe I should calculate the distance over the first 7.3 seconds, which would be 1/2*3.7*(7.3^2) = 98.6 m.. ok when it coasts for 1.6s, I think we must assume there is no friction? so the velocity from there is Vf^2 = 0 + 2*3.7*98.6, Vf = 27m/s, traveling at that speed for 1.6s would travel 43.216 meters.. now I'm not sure how to find the distance traveled in the last part, but I know it took the car 27/3.3 = 8.1 seconds to decelerate from 27 m/s to 0 m/s .. how do I find that last distance? I tried the first equation which gave me 110.5 meters.. is that correct? and the total distance from the two stop signs would be 252 m? (I don't want to put a wrong answer because it gets penalty)
Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Abdul.119,

Welcome to Physics Forums! :smile:

Abdul.119 said:

Homework Statement


A car starts from rest at a stop sign. It accelerates at 3.7m/s^2 for 7.3s , coasts for 1.6s , and then slows down at a rate of 3.3m/s^2 for the next stop sign.
How far apart are the stop signs?

Homework Equations


d = vt +1/2 a*t^2
Vf = Vi + a*t
Vf^2 = Vi^2 + 2a*s

The Attempt at a Solution


I believe I should calculate the distance over the first 7.3 seconds, which would be 1/2*3.7*(7.3^2) = 98.6 m..
So far so good. :approve:

ok when it coasts for 1.6s, I think we must assume there is no friction?
I think that is a valid assumption. The problem didn't mentioned anything about friction, so I would just ignore friction.

so the velocity from there is Vf^2 = 0 + 2*3.7*98.6, Vf = 27m/s, traveling at that speed for 1.6s would travel 43.216 meters..
[STRIKE]You'll have to rethink that.

During that stretch, the car is coasting (with no friction). That means the final velocity (for this stretch) is equal to the initial velocity (again though, just for this stretch). What does that tell you about the car's acceleration (for this stretch)?[/STRIKE]

Edit: Oh, I see what you did. You're calculating the final velocity after the first stretch (which is also the final velocity after the second stretch). I would have used the v = at formula, which gives you the same answer. But your approach also works.

now I'm not sure how to find the distance traveled in the last part, but I know it took the car 27/3.3 = 8.1 seconds to decelerate from 27 m/s to 0 m/s .. how do I find that last distance? I tried the first equation which gave me 110.5 meters.. is that correct? and the total distance from the two stop signs would be 252 m? (I don't want to put a wrong answer because it gets penalty)
Thanks

Think about the conditions in the final stretch. The car is slowing down instead of speeding up, but it does have a nonzero, uniform acceleration. The car's initial velocity in the final stretch is not zero. The car's final velocity is zero. You don't know how long it takes the car on the final stretch, but you don't care either. Can you find a kinematics equation that goes with this?

Edit: Finding the time it takes to complete the final stretch, and then plugging that into the first equation which you used is another way to get the distance of the final stretch. But my point above is that there is a kinematics formula that will allow you to do this all in one step.
 
Last edited:
Friction is not relevant, only accelerations are interesting here.
collinsmark said:
You'll have to rethink that.

During that stretch, the car is coasting (with no friction). That means the final velocity (for this stretch) is equal to the initial velocity (again though, just for this stretch). What does that tell you about the car's acceleration?
That part is still fine. It is a complicated way to calculate the velocity, but it is possible.


Abdul.119 said:
now I'm not sure how to find the distance traveled in the last part, but I know it took the car 27/3.3 = 8.1 seconds to decelerate from 27 m/s to 0 m/s .. how do I find that last distance? I tried the first equation which gave me 110.5 meters.. is that correct? and the total distance from the two stop signs would be 252 m? (I don't want to put a wrong answer because it gets penalty)
Yes it is correct.

I'm not sure how sensitive the system is in terms of rounding errors. In doubt, use more digits in the intermediate steps.
 
mfb said:
That part is still fine. It is a complicated way to calculate the velocity, but it is possible.

Correct. :redface: I've modified my reply above to reflect that. (And I've reminded myself again to finish coffee before posting.)

Abdul.119,
As you've discovered in this case, you'll often find that there is more than one way to solve such physics problems. You can often save yourself some effort though by using a kinematics formula that best matches the situation at hand. In general, examine the problem to find which variables you know, which variables you don't know but would like to, and which variables you don't care about. Then choose the kinematics formula that doesn't contain variables that you don't care about, but allows you to solve for those which you need. (And of course, make sure that formula is applicable to the situation, such as constant velocity, uniform acceleration restrictions, etc.) :smile: There's nothing inherently wrong with using different, multiple formulas, and solving for the intermediate variables, but choosing the right formula at the beginning will save you time when taking exams.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
7K