Kinematics motion-police's radars(answer check)

  • Thread starter Thread starter negation
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kinematics
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the necessary deceleration to avoid a speeding ticket when detected by a police radar. The police radar has an effective range of 1 km, while the radar detector has a range of 1.9 km. The vehicle is traveling at 110 km/h in a 70 km/h zone. Key points include the importance of sign conventions in kinematics, the necessity of converting units to base SI for accuracy, and the correct interpretation of acceleration as a positive value when decelerating. The final calculated deceleration is 0.3 m/s².

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinematic equations and motion concepts
  • Familiarity with unit conversions, particularly to SI units
  • Knowledge of sign conventions in physics
  • Ability to interpret radar detection and speed limits
NEXT STEPS
  • Learn about kinematic equations and their applications in real-world scenarios
  • Study unit conversion techniques, especially for speed and acceleration
  • Explore the implications of sign conventions in physics problems
  • Investigate the functioning of police radar systems and their detection ranges
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly in kinematics, drivers interested in understanding speed regulations, and anyone involved in traffic law enforcement or vehicle safety analysis.

negation
Messages
817
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A police radar's effective range is 1km and your radar detector's range is 1.9km. You're going at 110kmh^-1 in a 70kmh^-1 zone when the detector beeps. At what rate must negatively accelerate to avoid a speeding ticket?


Homework Equations


none


The Attempt at a Solution


Capture.JPG
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your answer looks correct. But a couple of points: firstly, you should be careful about your sign conventions. It appears that you took the police radar gun's position as being the origin (this should be stated). Distances going outward from the police position toward you are increasing in a positive direction. So you start out at +1.9km (when your detector goes off), and you're heading in a negative y direction toward the police position. Your aim is to decelerate to 70km/h before you hit a position of +1.0km, when the police radar would've acquired your speed.

This convention is fine, but in this case, remember that your velocities are actually all negative. It doesn't matter when you square them, of course, but you should still write them correctly within the parantheses. Also, note that the deceleration you calculate will be an acceleration directed along the positive direction (i.e. a "push" away from the police cruiser, opposite to your direction of your car's motion), and hence will come out positive, which explains why the "a" value you calculated is positive. Nothing wrong with this, but it's worth noting why it came out positive when the usual convention is to have a negative value signifying a deceleration.

A slightly more intuitive approach would be to let your car's position at the point of your radar detector beeping be the origin. Your ordinate increases in the direction of travel, and your aim is to decelerate from +110km/h to +70km/h before you hit +0.9km (which is where the police radar can pick up your speed). This way, you get a conventional negative answer for "a".

One more thing: about your units. It really would be better to convert everything to base SI units before doing the calculation. The numbers work out fine in what you did, but some of the units are wrong. For instance when you square the velocities and subtract, the result should be expressed in ##km^2h^{-2}## and not ##kmh^{-1}## as you did. Also, the denominator should have a unit, i.e. ##(3600sh^{-1})^2 = (3600)^2s^2h^{-2}##. It's also clear that you didn't include a factor of 1000 in that expression, even though you did actually multiply by it before getting the final answer. The expression should really be:

##\displaystyle \frac{\frac{4900 km^2h^{-2} - 12100km^2h^{-2}}{(2)(-0.9km)}}{10^{-3}(km)m^{-1}(3600sh^{-1})^2}##, which would give you the correct answer. But this is very unwieldy, and you're better off just converting to base SI units from the get-go.
 
Last edited:
looks good (Your answer was actually .0003 km/s^2, which you apparently converted behind the scenes to 0.3m/s^2)
Edit: ..and with signage/unit errors as noted by Curious.
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K