I dont understand how to find acceleration for the second part

  • Thread starter Thread starter Sneakatone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Acceleration
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around finding acceleration in a circular motion problem, specifically addressing confusion over the correct equations to use. The initial approach using a=v^2/r is confirmed as correct for calculating centripetal acceleration, but participants express uncertainty about the second part of the problem. There is a debate about the correct diameter to use, with clarification that the diameter is 1000, not 150. Participants suggest considering gravitational effects on acceleration, indicating that gravity must be factored into the calculations. The conversation highlights the need for understanding rotating frames of reference and the relationship between angular and linear velocity in solving the problem.
Sneakatone
Messages
318
Reaction score
0
for the first two I used the equation a=v^2/r
but for the second part I don't know what it is asking for or how to approach it. is there an equation that goes with it?
 

Attachments

  • Screen shot 2013-02-15 at 3.54.44 PM.png
    Screen shot 2013-02-15 at 3.54.44 PM.png
    21.6 KB · Views: 577
Physics news on Phys.org
the 1st two are wrong when I use a=v/r it is also wrong, and I converted km/h to m/s
 
Hi Sneakatone! :smile:

a = v2/r should be correct.

How exactly did you get 74.3 and 197.7 ? :confused:
 
a= v^2/r will give the acceleration due to the motion around the circle. The actual force the pilot experiences will be those plus or minus the weight of the pilot.
 
105.5^2/150=74.2 m/s
172.22^2/150= 197.7 ms
 
erm :redface:

it's not 150 ! :wink:
 
the diameter is 300 so 1/2 of it is 150 , that's where I got it. and then I tried using the whole diameter ans that is not right
 
no, the diameter is 1000 :wink:
 
well sonb , I can't believe I didnt see that thanks!
now that we have that I still don't know how to do the second part.
 
  • #10
Sneakatone said:
… I still don't know how to do the second part.

you mean the centripetal acceleration at the bottom?

same method :smile:
 
  • #11
would i use gravity and the magnitude?
 
  • #12
do you mean the third part? :confused:

yes, you have to take gravity into account
 
  • #13
Im thinking it would be something like 22.1-(1/2*9.82) because gravity is downward on a horizontal acceleration.?
 
  • #14
you're doing it again!

where do those figures come from? :cry:
 
  • #15
the way I am thinkg of it is that the found acceleration which is 22.1 is being acted upon a down ward acceleration of gravity.

how would you do this?
 
  • #16
(i don't make it exactly 22.1)

where did the 1/2 come from? :confused:

has your professor taught you about rotating frames of reference, and centrifugal force? what do you know about them?

(i'm off to bed now :zzz:)
 
  • #17
I believe not , i don't even know which equation I should appy
 
  • #18
I believe not , I ont even know which equaton to apply.
it seems like w^2r is a possibility.
 
  • #19
(just got up :zzz:)

has your professor taught you about rotating frames of reference, and centrifugal force? what do you know about them?

2r and v2/r are the same, since v = ωr, even when ω isn't constant)
 
Back
Top