How Long Should a Gravel Ramp Be to Stop a Runaway Truck?

AI Thread Summary
Truck brakes can fail due to overheating, prompting the need for gravel ramps in mountainous areas to safely stop runaway trucks. The discussion focuses on calculating the appropriate length of a gravel ramp with a 6.0° slope and a coefficient of friction of 0.46 for a 10,000-kg truck entering at 35 m/s. The initial approach to the energy equations was flawed, particularly in how kinetic energy, potential energy, and work were related. A revised equation, K_i = U_f + W, correctly accounts for the conversion of kinetic energy into potential energy and work done by friction. This adjustment leads to a proper understanding of the ramp's length needed for effective stopping.
LinearBeat
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Truck brakes can fail if they get too hot. In some mountainous areas, ramps of loose gravel are constructed to stop runaway trucks that have lost their brakes. The combination of a slight upward slope and a large coefficient of friction in the gravel brings the truck safely to a halt. Suppose a gravel ramp slopes upward at 6.0° and the coefficient of friction is 0.46. Use work and energy to find the length of a ramp that will stop a 10,000-kg truck that enters the ramp at a speed of 35 m/s (75 mph).

F_f=Force of Friction (F_f=μF_n; F_n=Normal Force)
m=Mass of the truck
U=Potential Energy, U-i= initial U, U_f=final U
L=Length of the ramp
K=Kinetic Energy, K_i=initial K, K_f=final K
W=Work (in this case done by friction)
v=initial velocity of the truck

Looking at the diagram I drew I determined:
F_f=μmg/cosθ
U=Lsinθmg

ΔK=ΔU-W
K_f-K_i=U_f-U_i-W
-K_i=U_f-W
-1/2mv^2=Lsinθmg-(μmg/cosθ)L
-1/2v^2=L(sinθg-μg/cosθ)
-v^2/(2(sinθg-μg/cosθ))=L

Using this process I've gotten the wrong answer, but I don't understand what I've done wrong and how I need to revise it.
Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I think the problem may lay in your equation where you related energies.

Your statement -K_i=U_f-W is saying that all of the initial kinetic energy is being transformed into work, except for the potential energy that is being gained (dividing through by a negative gives K_i=W-U_f). This is also saying that initial kinetic plus initial gravitational results in the work done by friction, which seems incorrect.
 
Okay so that's a great way to evaluate my original statement. The way I understand it, the kinetic energy that the truck has will all be converted into potential energy and work. So I think a better equation is:
K_i=U_f+W
Using Villyer's method I think this equation holds up; the kinetic energy minus the work should equal the potential energy and the kinetic energy minus the potential energy should equal the work.
and the verdict is...
Correct!
Thanks so much Villyer.
 
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