Relative velocity and water skier

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the relative velocity of a water skier making a 20-degree angle with the boat's axis. It is clarified that the skier's total velocity is assumed to be perpendicular to the tow line, despite the linear velocity being at a 50-degree angle. Participants emphasize the importance of constructing a velocity triangle using the Law of Sines to solve for the skier's total velocity. There is a consensus on the skier's movement being tangential to a fixed radius from the boat, leading to an agreement on one of the answers provided. However, discrepancies arise regarding another part of the problem, suggesting potential issues with unit conversions from kph to m/s.
dirk_mec1
Messages
755
Reaction score
13

Homework Statement


YBM6mM.png


Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution



The water skier makes an angle of 20 deg with the axis of the boat. I do not understand how to get the other angles.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Which angle do you want to find?
 
Apparently, you need to assume that the skier is moving perpendicular to his tow line.
That is, his total velocity is perpendicular to the tow line even tho his linear velocity (parallel to the boat)
is at 50 deg.w.r.t. the tow line.
 
I need to correct the above statement "his total velocity is perpendicular to the tow line".
A person riding in the boat would see the skier moving perpendicular the tow line.
That velocity then has to be added to the velocity of the boat to get the skier's total velocity.
Using geometry and the angles given you can construct the velocity triangle and solve with the Law of Sines.
 
I'm quite sure the person is moving along the length of the skier (relative to the water). (a) because that's how they work and (b) otherwise giving their direction would be pointless.
 
I agree that skier is moving at 20 deg to the path of the boat.
Since he is at a fixed radius (10 m) from the boat his instantaneous path w.r.t an observer
on the boat must tangential w.r.t that radius.
That assumption agrees with the answer (a) of 80.8 m/s but it doesn't agree
with the answer for part (b)?
 
J Hann said:
but it doesn't agree with the answer for part (b)?
Did you forget to convert from kph to m/s?
 
haruspex said:
Did you forget to convert from kph to m/s?

Thanks. I agree with the given answer.
 
Back
Top