What is the minimum initial speed needed to pass the puck to a teammate?

  • Thread starter Thread starter mmiller39
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Friction Velocity
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a physics problem related to kinematics, specifically the motion of a hockey puck being passed between players. The original poster, Matt, is trying to determine the minimum initial speed required for the puck to reach a teammate, given that a previously attempted speed of 2.89 m/s was insufficient due to kinetic friction.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are discussing the relationship between initial velocity, acceleration due to friction, and distance traveled. There is an exploration of kinematic equations, particularly one that relates velocity changes to acceleration and distance.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance by referencing relevant kinematic equations and prompting further consideration of how to adjust the initial velocity to achieve the desired distance. However, there is no explicit consensus on the correct approach or conclusion yet.

Contextual Notes

Matt expresses confusion about how to start solving the problem, indicating a need for clarification on the effects of friction and the relationship between initial speed and distance traveled. The problem constraints include the assumption that the same force of kinetic friction acts on the puck throughout its motion.

mmiller39
Messages
32
Reaction score
0
Here is a problem I am having difficulty with:

In attempting to pass the puck to a teammate, a hockey player gives it an initial speed of 2.89 m/s. However, this speed is inadequate to compensate for the kinetic friction between the puck and the ice. As a result, the puck travels only one-half the distance between the players before sliding to a halt. What minimum initial speed should the puck have been given so that it reached the teammate, assuming that the same force of kinetic friction acted on the puck everywhere between the two players?


What we know:

Vo = 2.89 m/s <---- this speed only derives half of the expected result
fk angle is Cos 180 = -1, which is the direction of the force acting on the puck.

I am completely confused as to where to begin here.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Matt
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mmiller39 said:
Here is a problem I am having difficulty with:

In attempting to pass the puck to a teammate, a hockey player gives it an initial speed of 2.89 m/s. However, this speed is inadequate to compensate for the kinetic friction between the puck and the ice. As a result, the puck travels only one-half the distance between the players before sliding to a halt. What minimum initial speed should the puck have been given so that it reached the teammate, assuming that the same force of kinetic friction acted on the puck everywhere between the two players?


What we know:

Vo = 2.89 m/s <---- this speed only derives half of the expected result
fk angle is Cos 180 = -1, which is the direction of the force acting on the puck.

I am completely confused as to where to begin here.

Any help would be appreciated.

Thanks,

Matt
The problem is telling you that friction causes a certain (but unknown) deceleration of the puck. It is also telling you that the puck needs enough initial velocity to travel twice as far as it did with a known initial velocity. What equation do you know that relates velocity changes to acceleration and distance travelled?
 
Thanks for the response,

I am thinking that I would use the Kinematics in one dimension type equation for this:

V^2 = Vo^2 + 2ax

Which would lead me to believe that the initial velocity should be the square of the original initial velocity that only made it half way.

-Matt
 
mmiller39 said:
Thanks for the response,

I am thinking that I would use the Kinematics in one dimension type equation for this:

V^2 = Vo^2 + 2ax

Which would lead me to believe that the initial velocity should be the square of the original initial velocity that only made it half way.

-Matt
Not quite the right conclusion, but it is the right equation. In both cases you have a negative acceleration and zero final velocity. In going from the first case to the second case you are trying to double the x. What do you have to do to Vo to double the x?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K