How to calculate centripetal acceleration in non-circular systems?

AI Thread Summary
Centripetal acceleration in non-circular systems, such as ellipses or parabolas, can be calculated using the formula a_c = v^2/r, where v is the tangential velocity and r is the radius of curvature at a specific point. For non-circular paths, the radius of curvature varies, so it’s essential to determine the instantaneous radius at the point of interest. The centripetal force required can also be derived from the motion equations specific to the shape of the trajectory. Understanding the geometry of the path is crucial for accurate calculations. This approach allows for the analysis of centripetal acceleration in complex motion scenarios.
Dr. Surgery
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
How can you calculate centripetal acceleration in a non circular system(I.E. if wanted to calculate the centripetal acceleration in an eclipse, or a parabola how could I do that?)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top