Maximum speed of car on downhill

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a homework problem regarding the maximum speed of a car on a downhill slope, given its performance on flat and uphill roads. Participants argue that the exercise is flawed, as the calculations suggest an impossible scenario where the car cannot generate enough power to ascend the hill at the specified speed. The distinction between static friction and rolling resistance is highlighted, with the consensus that the problem likely misuses terminology. The need for clarity in the problem statement is emphasized, particularly regarding the type of friction involved. Overall, the exercise is deemed incorrect due to these inconsistencies.
Jack122
Messages
1
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


The exercise is this: The mass of the car is m=500 kg. The maximum speed of the car on flat road is v1=35 m/s and on 10 % up hill (tan(alpha)=0.1, alpha is with respect to flat) the maximum speed is v2=20 m/s. The friction force is double on up hill because it has been made with different material. What is the maximum speed of the car on down hill (5%) when the road is made with the same material than the flat surface? Suppose that the air resistance is zero.

Homework Equations


P=F*v
Gx=mg sin(alpha)
F_f=friction force

The Attempt at a Solution


I think the exercise itself is not correct. The power of the car on flat is P1=(F_f)v1 and on up hill it is P2=(2(F_f)+mg sin(alpha))v2. The powers need to be the same. So when I solve for F_f I get F_f=(mg sin(alpha)v2)/(v1-2v2) and this is smaller than zero because v1-2v2=(35-2*20) m/s=-5 m/s and mg sin(alpha)v2 is greater than zero (sin(alpha)=sin(arctan(0.1))=0.0995). But the friction force needs to be greater than zero. So I think this is incorrect exercise because the car cannot produce enough power to climb that hill with that speed.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I agree with you. Maybe it meant to say the friction is double on the flat?

There is another reason the question is nonsense. Friction between road and tyre does not impede the progress of the vehicle. In the present case that is static friction. No work is required to overcome it. Indeed, without it the hill could not be climbed. Presumably the question means rolling resistance, not friction.
 
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