Rotational Motion of a car on a curve

AI Thread Summary
A 600 kg car navigating a banked curve with a radius of 110m at a speed of 24.5 m/s requires a specific banking angle to maintain its path without friction. The equations governing the motion involve normal force and gravitational force, leading to the relationship tan{theta} = v^2/rg when the second equation is divided by the first. This method simplifies the problem by eliminating common variables, making it easier to isolate theta. Dividing rather than multiplying is preferred for clarity and simplicity in solving for the angle. Understanding the rationale behind this algebraic manipulation is crucial for effectively applying physics principles in rotational motion.
ajmCane22
Messages
33
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A 600 kg car is going around a banked curve with a radius of 110m at a speed of 24.5 m/s. What is the appropriate banking angle so that the car stays on its path without the assistance of friction?

Homework Equations



N cos{theta} = mg
N sin{theta} = mv^2/r

The Attempt at a Solution



I was told to divide the second equation by the first equation which gives tan{theta} = v^2/rg
I used this equation and got the right answer, but I'm just wondering if somebody could please explain WHY the second equation was divided by the first and not the other way around.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
ajmCane22 said:
I was told to divide the second equation by the first equation which gives tan{theta} = v^2/rg
I used this equation and got the right answer, but I'm just wondering if somebody could please explain WHY the second equation was divided by the first and not the other way around.

If you divided the first equation by the second, you would get:

cot(θ) = (gr/v2)

θ = arccot(gr/v2).

I imagine that ought to give you the right answer as well...
 
This might be a really dumb question, but why do you divide instead of multiply?
 
ajmCane22 said:
This might be a really dumb question, but why do you divide instead of multiply?

You do whatever algebraic manipulation makes it easiest to solve for theta. With N's on both lefthand sides, and m's on both righthand sides, it seems natural to get rid of both of them by dividing them out. Then you're left with something that is only in terms of theta on the lefthand side.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top