Question regarding Centripetal Acceleration

AI Thread Summary
In the discussion about calculating centripetal acceleration for a lab report, two formulas are highlighted: Acceleration Centripetal = Force Centripetal/Mass and Acceleration Centripetal = Velocity^2/Radius. The results obtained from both formulas are close, with values of .625 and .631 respectively. The accuracy of these values depends on the precision of the measurements used in the calculations. To determine which formula yields a more accurate result, it's essential to analyze the measurement methods and any potential errors involved. The consensus is that both formulas should theoretically provide similar accuracy, but practical measurement accuracy will ultimately influence the results.
accesskb
Messages
16
Reaction score
0
Hi I'm doing a lab report on centripetal acceleration and we are asked to find the centripetal acceleration using 2 formulas.
(1)Acceleration Centripetal=Force Centripetal/Mass

(2)Acceleration Centripetal=Velocity^2/Radius

I get answers that are very close but I also have to answer the question (Which value of Acceleration Centripetal would be considered more accurate? ie: which formula would be more accurate?)

hope someone can help me out here. thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The formulas should yield the same "accuracy". The difference will be in your ability to measure. Which of your measurements are the most accurate?
 
I get answers that are very very close. .625 for the first formula and .631 with the second formula
 
What measurements did you make? How did you make them? What are the measurement errors?

You need to consider the answers to these questions in order to determine which of the given forumlas yield the best answer.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
Back
Top