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

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the forces acting on a roller coaster car at the bottom of a loop, specifically examining why the normal force exceeds the gravitational force. Participants are exploring the dynamics involved in circular motion and the implications of forces in a non-equilibrium scenario.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to express the normal force in relation to gravitational force and other forces acting on the roller coaster car. Questions arise about how to accurately represent the normal force and its relationship to acceleration at different points in the loop.

Discussion Status

There is an ongoing exploration of the forces involved, with some participants providing mathematical expressions for the normal force and acceleration. Guidance has been offered regarding the inclusion of gravitational components in acceleration calculations, indicating a productive direction in the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework assignment, which may limit the information available and the methods they can use to derive their answers. There is also a mention of previous questions that are not shown, which may affect the clarity of the current discussion.

Jaccobtw
Messages
167
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
3K