What is the speed of a skier at the bottom of a circular hill?

  • Thread starter Thread starter RedPhoenix
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Circular Hill
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a skier descending a circular hill and seeks to determine her speed at the bottom of the hill, given her initial speed at a higher point. The context includes concepts from mechanics, specifically energy conservation in a gravitational field.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the conservation of mechanical energy, questioning how to mathematically express this principle. There are attempts to calculate distances and energies involved, with some confusion about the setup and calculations.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, offering guidance on how to set up the energy conservation equation. There is a mix of interpretations regarding the calculations, and some participants express uncertainty about their methods.

Contextual Notes

There are indications of missing information from the textbook that may be affecting understanding. Participants are also navigating through potential miscalculations and unit conversions.

RedPhoenix
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
A skier weighing 0.80 kN comes down a frictionless ski run that is circular (R = 30 m) at the bottom, as shown. If her speed is 12 m/s at point A, what is her speed at the bottom of the hill (point B)?

http://www.physics.gatech.edu/people/faculty/larry/images/16212.gif

I keep getting mixed results.

I did 30(cos(40))*-1 to get the distance from A to B... but now what?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
RedPhoenix said:
I did 30(cos(40))*-1 to get the distance from A to B... but now what?
I assume you mean 30*(1 - cos40). What's conserved?
 
Doc Al said:
I assume you mean 30*(1 - cos40). What's conserved?


Energy is conserved. But I honestly do not have a clue where to proceed. I am obviously missing the portion of this in the book. The answer is in front of me, but I am being blind.
 
Yes, mechanical energy (KE + gravitational PE) is conserved. So how would you express that mathematically?
 
Doc Al said:
Yes, mechanical energy (KE + gravitational PE) is conserved. So how would you express that mathematically?


PE = mgy
KE = .5mv^2

so... 800N / 9.8 = 81.63

(.5 x 81.63 x 12^2) + (800 x 30(1-cos40)) = 11492.29/1000.. still wrong. where did I mess up?
 
RedPhoenix said:
(.5 x 81.63 x 12^2) + (800 x 30(1-cos40)) = 11492.29/1000
The left side is perfectly OK, but I'm not sure what you're doing on the right. Set the left side equal to .5mv^2 and solve for v.
 
Doc Al said:
The left side is perfectly OK, but I'm not sure what you're doing on the right. Set the left side equal to .5mv^2 and solve for v.

I was converting to kN... it did not matter, I get it.

Bingo!


(.5 x 81.63 x 12^2) + (800 x 30(1-cos40)) = 11492.29

11492.29/.5/81.63 = 281.57 ; 281.57^1/2 = 16.78m/s

Excellent, thank you for your help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
7K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K