Solving a Rotating Platform Ride Problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter jnthn205
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Platform Rotating
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the speed of seats on a rotating amusement park ride with a circular platform. The platform has a diameter of 9.87m, and seats are suspended by 2.59m chains at an angle of 39.3 degrees. The user initially derived a radius of 7.525m but questioned the method used by another user who calculated a radius of 6.6m. There is confusion regarding the correct formula and calculations, as the user’s results differ from those of the referenced solution. Clarification on the radius computation is needed to resolve the discrepancies in the speed calculations.
jnthn205
Messages
17
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


An amusement park ride consists of a rotating circular platform 9.87m in diamter from which 10kg seats are suspended at the end of 2.59m massless chains (L). When the system rotates, the chains make an angle of 39.3 degrees with the vertical. The acceleration of gravity is 9.8m/s^2. What is the speed of each seat? Answer in m/s.


Homework Equations


Force = Mv^2/r



The Attempt at a Solution



look at this thread which is the exact same problem:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=191527

I figured out how to do it from there. My question is how did that user get 6.6 for his radius and also how did he get his answer? I tried doing what he did, (even put his numbers in) and i still got different answers.

I found that my radius of the system = 7.525m correct?
And so I used sqrt((r + L*sin(theta)) *g*tan(theta))
which comes out to sqrt((7.525 + 2.59*sin(39.3)) *9.8*tan(39.3)).
Which is 8.57m/s. Before i checked my answer, i used the users numbers to find the answer, and it was different then what he said was correct. I think my formula is wrong, but I cannot figure out why.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
jnthn205: Show your work for how you computed radius r. Your current radius is incorrect, but we do not yet know why, because you did not show how you computed r.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 46 ·
2
Replies
46
Views
4K
Replies
9
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K