How far up the hill will it coast before starting to roll back down?

  • Thread starter Thread starter spartan55
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hill Roll
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

A car traveling at 22.0 m/s on a 24.0-degree slope will coast up the hill before rolling back down. The acceleration parallel to the slope is calculated as -3.986 m/s² using trigonometric manipulation of gravitational acceleration (-9.8 m/s²). By applying the kinematic equation, the distance coasting up the hill is determined to be approximately 60.712 m. An alternative energy approach, equating kinetic energy at the bottom to potential energy at the top, simplifies the calculation significantly.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinematic equations
  • Basic knowledge of trigonometry
  • Familiarity with gravitational acceleration (9.8 m/s²)
  • Concept of energy conservation (kinetic and potential energy)
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the derivation of kinematic equations in physics
  • Learn about energy conservation principles in mechanics
  • Study trigonometric functions and their applications in physics
  • Investigate the effects of slope angle on motion dynamics
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics and kinematics, as well as educators looking for practical examples of energy conservation and motion on inclined planes.

spartan55
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A car traveling at 22.0 m/s runs out of gas while traveling up a 24.0deg slope. How far up the hill will it coast before starting to roll back down?


Homework Equations


(v_final)^2 = (v_initial)^2 + 2*(a_parallel)*(x_final - x_initial)
...and some trig

The Attempt at a Solution


I know the acceleration that is important is the acceleration parallel to the plane which is found by some trig manipulation:
(a_y)sin(24.0deg) = a_parallel, where (a_y) = -9.8 m/s^2.
Thus: a_parallel = -3.986 m/s^2.
Now would I use (v_initial) = 22.0 m/s and plug this with a_parallel, x_initial = 0, and v_final = 0 m/s into the above kinematic equation to get: 60.712 m ?
For some reason this just seems like too big of an answer. Any help appreciated. Thanks.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That answer looks good to me!
It is interesting to check it with an energy approach. KE at the bottom equals PE at the top so
mgh = .5*mv²
Solve for h, then convert that to a distance along the slope using trigonometry.
 
Wow it is a lot easier with the energy approach. We haven't talked about that yet, we're still on basic kinematics. Thanks for your help!
 
Most welcome!
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
4K
Replies
39
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K