Why Does the Roller Coaster's Normal Force Exceed Gravity at the Loop's Bottom?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the mechanics of a roller coaster at the bottom of a loop, specifically addressing why the normal force exceeds gravitational force. The normal force (N) is expressed as N = mg(1 + (2h - 2d)/R), where mg is the gravitational force and mv²/R represents the centripetal force required for circular motion. Participants agree that the net acceleration must account for both gravitational and normal forces, suggesting the need for a Pythagorean approach to accurately represent the forces involved at various points in the loop.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newton's laws of motion
  • Familiarity with centripetal force concepts
  • Knowledge of gravitational force calculations
  • Basic proficiency in algebra and trigonometry
NEXT STEPS
  • Explore the derivation of centripetal acceleration in circular motion
  • Study the application of Pythagorean theorem in force analysis
  • Investigate the dynamics of roller coasters and their design principles
  • Learn about the effects of gravitational forces on objects in motion
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, mechanical engineers, and anyone interested in the dynamics of motion in circular paths, particularly in the context of amusement park rides.

Jaccobtw
Messages
163
Reaction score
32
Homework Statement
A roller-coaster car initially at position a position on the track a height h above the ground begins a downward run on a long, steeply sloping track and then goes into a circular loop of radius R whose bottom is a distance d above the ground. Ignore friction. What is the magnitude of the normal force exerted on the car at the bottom of the loop?
Relevant Equations
F = ma
K = (1/2)mv^2
a = v^2/r
245929


So, we know that at the bottom of the loop, the car will have a normal force pointing upward and gravity pointing down. However, I have discovered that the normal force is apparently greater than the force due to gravity.

Basically

N = F(g) + ?

What is this other force?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The cart is on a curved track so it is not in equilibrium.
 
oh wait, then how am I supposed to express the magnitude of the normal force?
 
Orodruin said:
The cart is on a curved track so it is not in equilibrium.

By the way, congrats on your prestige.
 
Ok I just got mg(1+(2h-2d)/R) for the Normal force.

Apparently, this force -----> mv^2/R is a completely separate force from mg

Here's what I did:

I added mg to mv^2/R, but v is expressed as sqrt(2g(h-d)) from the previous question not shown.
 
Jaccobtw said:
Ok I just got mg(1+(2h-2d)/R) for the Normal force.

Apparently, this force -----> mv^2/R is a completely separate force from mg

Here's what I did:

I added mg to mv^2/R, but v is expressed as sqrt(2g(h-d)) from the previous question not shown.
Looks right.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jaccobtw
The next question asks: What is the car's acceleration at the one-quarter position?

And I got this : (2g(h-R-d))/(R)

And the back of the book says this is correct, however, I just realized this answer does not include acceleration due to gravity, only the normal force. Isn't the net acceleration at this point in the circle down and to the left?

Something like (2g(h-R-d))/(R * cos(theta)) or g/sin(theta)

If not, what is wrong with these two answers?
 
Jaccobtw said:
The next question asks: What is the car's acceleration at the one-quarter position?

And I got this : (2g(h-R-d))/(R)

And the back of the book says this is correct, however, I just realized this answer does not include acceleration due to gravity, only the normal force. Isn't the net acceleration at this point in the circle down and to the left?

Something like (2g(h-R-d))/(R * cos(theta)) or g/sin(theta)

If not, what is wrong with these two answers?
I agree that the given answer is incorrect. It ought to include a gravitational component. But to do that, use Pythagoras.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Jaccobtw and hmmm27

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K