Model Car Movement Physics with \sumF = ma and \sumT = m \alpha

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on modeling car movement using the equations of motion, specifically \sumF = ma and \sumT = I\alpha. Key points include the role of frictional force, which is essential for movement, and how it interacts with engine torque. Participants clarify that friction actually aids in propelling the car forward, rather than opposing it, especially when the wheels are not slipping. The conversation also touches on the complexities of modeling torque from both the engine and frictional forces, emphasizing the need for a clear understanding of these interactions. Overall, the discussion aims to refine the equations governing car movement dynamics.
htincho
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
I want to model a car movement.

The equations are:

\sumF = ma

\sumT = m \alpha

The forces are, weight of the car, normal force and f the friccional force, but also the engine provides a constant rotational acceleration in my model.

I understand that the frictional force is the one that moves the car, so:

f = ma

But also the movement of the engine generates Torque, and I can't realize how to connect this with the torque of the friccional force. Because if the car engine stop the frictional force stop the wheel but when the car engine is connected to the wheel they must oppose.

It's correct to say something like:
Torque (of car engine) - Tf (of frictional force) = I\alpha

¿Does the frictional forces opposes to the rotation of the wheel car in the rotational movement??

I can't complete the movement description.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I can't edit the post, the formulas are "wrong" because I never use latex.

I want to solve the problem thinking of the tire as a solid ¿body? (I don't know how translate it) using these equations.

\sum F = ma

\sum T = I \alpha

I know the Torque of the car and I want to know how this is translated into equations, I've think something like:

\f (frictionalForce) = ma

\sum T(engine) - T(frictionalForce) = I \alpha

But I'm not sure if it's right to express the Torque of the car in that way.
 

Attachments

  • carTire.jpg
    carTire.jpg
    7.3 KB · Views: 442
Welcome to PF!

htincho said:
I know the Torque of the car and I want to know how this is translated into equations, I've think something like:

\f (frictionalForce) = ma

\sum T(engine) - T(frictionalForce) = I \alpha

Hi htincho! Welcome to PF! :smile:

(copy-and-paste the symbols below for future use … :smile:)


I suspect you're misunderstanding how friction affects wheels.

Friction helps wheels to move (wheels don't work on ice, do they? :rolleyes: ).

The only friction resisting movement of the car is air resistance plus the friction of the internal parts of the car. :smile:
 
Thank you for the welcome and thank you for answering, but I can't understand you completely what you are saying.

On ice the car doesn't move but the tire must spin if you're accelerating, so I don't know how to connect the engine torque that's it is providing to the wheel so that it can spin without moving on ice. That's why I added a Torque for engine. The frictional force in the Newton third law is the one that gives the acceleration but it also generates torque. At least that's what I'm thinking because that frictional force is applied over the surface and I'm taking moment over the center of the tire. The torque in the equation was negative because of the coordinate system that I doesn't draw.

On ice the rotational coefficient tends to 0, so that no force is applying. But in other cases there must be some rotational coefficient.

f = rollingFriction

Tf = torqueOfRollingFriction

Te = torqueOfEngine


f = ma

Tf - Te = I\alpha

Tf = \mu_{r} N

I know that there is friction from air and that's really important but that depends on the speed of the car, so if it's moving very slow the air friction could be avoided and the internal part of the car also have but I just want to understand this first part.
 

Attachments

  • carTire2.jpg
    carTire2.jpg
    12.5 KB · Views: 454
Hi htincho! :smile:

Imagine that the car is on ordinary ground, with the engine in forward gear, but that the wheel is slipping (so there's no acceleration).

Then the frictional force on the car will be µW (the weight times the coefficient of friction between the tyre and the ground).

And it will be forward!

Now slow the engine, so that the wheel isn't slipping … the friction force will still be forward, won't it?

The friction force is what is pushing the car!

The friction force is the lesser of µW and Tr, where T is torque and r is radius.

In other words: if the wheel is not slipping, the force which is pushing the car is the friction force, which always equals Tr. :smile:
 
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