What Is the Correct Banking Angle for a Road Curve with No Friction?

  • Thread starter Thread starter x86
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Radius
Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The correct banking angle for a road curve with a radius of curvature of 350 m, allowing a car to turn at a velocity of 15 m/s without friction, is calculated using the equation tan(x) = v² / (gr). The derived angle is 3.75 degrees; however, this is incorrect as the expected angle is approximately 30 degrees. The discrepancy arises from a potential misinterpretation of the radius, which may actually be 35 m instead of 350 m.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics concepts, particularly forces and motion.
  • Familiarity with trigonometric functions and their applications in physics.
  • Knowledge of free body diagrams and their use in solving physics problems.
  • Ability to apply Newton's laws of motion in practical scenarios.
NEXT STEPS
  • Review the principles of centripetal force and its relationship with banking angles.
  • Study the derivation of the banking angle formula in detail.
  • Examine real-world applications of banking angles in road design.
  • Explore the effects of friction on banking angles in different scenarios.
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, civil engineers involved in road design, and anyone interested in the mechanics of vehicle motion on curved paths.

x86
Gold Member
Messages
256
Reaction score
18

Homework Statement


you want to design a curve with a radius of curvature of 350 m, so a car can turn at a velocity of 15 m/s without relying on friction. Find the angle at which the road must be banked.


Homework Equations


I've derived this equation via free body diagram, x component is gravity pushing the car into the curvature

Fn sinx = mv^2/r
Fn cosx = mg

tanx = v^2 / (gr) where r = radius, g = gravity, v = velocity

I've used it before so I know its correct.


The Attempt at a Solution



tanx = 15^2 m^2/s^2 / (9.8 m/s^2 * 350 m)

x = 3.75 degrees.

The book says this answer is incorrect, and I'm not sure where I went wrong. (The book got around 30 degrees)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Youe solution is correct, but have you copied the data correctly?

350 m for the radius is a bit too great. Was not it 35 m instead?

ehild
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
3K