Normal Force on Car at Top of Rounded Hill

  • Thread starter Thread starter y90x
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Hill
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the normal force acting on a 1000 kg sports car moving at 20 m/s over the top of a hill with a radius of 100 m. The initial calculation for centripetal acceleration was determined to be 4 m/s². The participant's formula for normal force, Fn = mv²/r + mg, yielded a result of 5800 N, while the expected answer was 6206 N. The discrepancy prompted further analysis of the forces involved and the importance of sign conventions in applying Newton's second law.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newton's Second Law of Motion
  • Knowledge of centripetal acceleration calculations
  • Familiarity with the concept of normal force in physics
  • Ability to apply significant figures in calculations
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the derivation of centripetal acceleration formulas
  • Study the application of Newton's laws in circular motion scenarios
  • Learn about the significance of significant figures in physics problems
  • Explore examples of normal force calculations in different contexts
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics and circular motion, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to forces and motion.

y90x
Messages
47
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



a 1000kg sports car moving at 20m/s crosses the round top of a hill (radius of 100 m) . Determine the normal force on the car

Homework Equations


Newton’s second law
F=ma

The Attempt at a Solution


I figured out the centripetal acceleration
Ac= v^2/r
= 4 m/s^2
My attempt at finding the normal force :
Fn= mv^2/r + mg
= 1,000•20^2 / 100 + 1,000•9.8
=5800N
But the answer is 6206 N
Where did I go wrong ?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
y90x said:
Fn= mv^2/r + mg
Presumably you are basing that on ΣF=ma. In that regard, what is ΣF and what is a? Pay attention to signs.
But maybe that was just a typo, since you have applied the correct sign to get this:
y90x said:
=5800N
I cannot explain 6206N.
 
y90x said:
Where did I go wrong ?

I honestly cannot make out what you have done wrong. Actually, I remember doing this exact question when I was studying. It was confusing, but you seem to have gotten it. 6206 N seems wrong. Forget about the numerical value, why would your physics textbook or class use 4 sig-figs for a problem with only 1 sig-fig.

Either you haven't given all the information (which I doubt) or, and I really don't want to jump to conclusions, the answer is wrong. Please ask you teacher or tutor and let us know what the answer or issue was.

P.S. Are you studying from CTY? All your posts seem to be questions from there. Just guessing, could be wrong.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
6K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
13K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
7K