Simple Canon Question (Conservation Of Momentum): Frame of Reference

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a conservation of momentum problem involving a cannon, where participants explore the relationship between different reference frames and the velocities of objects involved. The original poster attempts to express the velocity of the ball relative to the ground in terms of known variables, leading to a comparison with a teacher's answer key.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Conceptual clarification

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the setup of momentum equations and the implications of sign conventions in their calculations. There is a focus on expressing velocities in terms of one another and checking for consistency in the equations used.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, questioning the correctness of their equations and signs. Some guidance has been offered regarding the formulation of relative motion equations, and there is an exploration of different interpretations of the momentum equation.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing discussion about the directionality of velocities and how this affects the signs in the momentum equations. Participants are also considering the implications of their assumptions regarding positive and negative directions in their calculations.

Kermit_the_Phrog
Messages
22
Reaction score
3
Homework Statement
In Fig below, a mobile cannon of mass M=1300 Kg fires a ball of mass m=72 kg in the positive direction of an x axis, at velocity Vbc= 55 m/s relative to cannon. Because of the firing, the cannon recoils (moves) with velocity Vcg relative to the ground. What are the magnitude and direction of Vcg?
Relevant Equations
Pi=Pf
Canon, Dumb.png

Since Pi = Pf,

0 = MbVbg + McVcg

I just need to express Vbg in terms of Vbc and Vcg (that is, I need to express the velocity of the ball relative to the ground in terms that I know/want to solve for):

by reference frames:

Vbc = Vbg + Vcg
so Vbg = Vbc -Vcg

Now I can sub in and solve

0 = MbVbg + McVcg
0 = Mb(Vbc -Vcg) + McVcg
0 = MbVbc - MbVcg +McVcg
MbVcg - McVcg = MbVbc
Vcg(Mb - Mc) = MbVbc

therefore,
Vcg = 72*55/(72-1300)
= -3.2 m/s
which would be a.

HOWEVER the teacher's answer key states that the answer is b, -2.9 m/s.
this answer is obtained if the denominator was " (- mb - mc) ".

Thus, did I just mess up somewhere with my signs? I can't find mistake, and any help deducing this would be appreciated, as I was pretty confident about my answer until seeing that it was wrong.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Kermit_the_Phrog said:
Thus, did I just mess up somewhere with my signs?

Yes. The signs are inconsistent between the two equations

0 = MbVbg + McVcg
Vbg = Vbc -Vcg

Give it some more thought.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kermit_the_Phrog
TSny said:
Yes. The signs are inconsistent in the two equations

0 = MbVbg + McVcg
Vbg = Vbc -Vcg

Give it some more thought.

Is the momentum equation supposed to be0 = MbVbg - McVcg

Because Vcg is pointed in the opposite direction to Vbg?
 
TSny said:
Give it some more thought.

If that's true, you get

Vcg = MbVbc/(Mb+Mc)
= 72*55/(72+1300)
= 2.9

which is then negative through intuition (since its moving in the opposite direction?)

Though i suppose this works, I feel like there's a better / more accurate way to show the signs in my algebra.

Thoughts?
 
Kermit_the_Phrog said:
Is the momentum equation supposed to be0 = MbVbg - McVcg

Because Vcg is pointed in the opposite direction to Vbg?
Assuming you are taking right as positive in all cases, your original momentum equation was correct.
In writing relative motion equations, the safest approach is always to write them in the form
Motion of A relative to B = Motion of A relative to common frame - Motion of B relative to common frame.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Kermit_the_Phrog
haruspex said:
Assuming you are taking right as positive in all cases, your original momentum equation was correct.
In writing relative motion equations, the safest approach is always to write them in the form
Motion of A relative to B = Motion of A relative to common frame - Motion of B relative to common frame.

Ah so if its the other equation, I was wrong initially

so at first it would be:
Vbc = Vbg - Vcg

meaning
Vbg = Vbc + Vcg

Then the rest is the same:

0 = MbVbg + McVcg
0 = Mb(Vbc + Vcg) +McVcg
0 = MbVbc + MbVcg +McVcg
Vcg = -MbVbc/(Mb+Mc)
= -72*55/(72+1300)
= -2.9m/s

And THATS correct

So it was just a dumb mistake with the first reference frame equation

Thank you for your help!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TSny

Similar threads

  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
34
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
6K
Replies
19
Views
3K
  • · Replies 126 ·
5
Replies
126
Views
11K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K