- Forums
###### Objects in contact- what time do they meet

Watch

1 year ago

See attached:

Okay, so part a I found the force they move at is 20.8N hence acceleration of second skater is 0.306…

Part b.

They’re 1.2m apart. So, I need to calculate each skater separately to see which time they both meet the middle(0.6m)

Where am I going wrong?

First skater: u=0, s=0.6 , a=0.4 t=?

Using s=ut+½at²

t=√3

Second skater same above other than a=0.306

t=1.98 hence 3.71 seconds total for them to meet in the middle. Is my thinking correct?

I know one is accelerating faster than the other, so that would mean one travels more distance than the other would. Would this effect the outcome?

Okay, so part a I found the force they move at is 20.8N hence acceleration of second skater is 0.306…

Part b.

They’re 1.2m apart. So, I need to calculate each skater separately to see which time they both meet the middle(0.6m)

Where am I going wrong?

First skater: u=0, s=0.6 , a=0.4 t=?

Using s=ut+½at²

t=√3

Second skater same above other than a=0.306

t=1.98 hence 3.71 seconds total for them to meet in the middle. Is my thinking correct?

I know one is accelerating faster than the other, so that would mean one travels more distance than the other would. Would this effect the outcome?

(edited 1 year ago)

Original post by KingRich

See attached:

Okay, so part a I found the force they move at is 20.8N hence acceleration of second skater is 0.306…

Part b.

They’re 1.2m apart. So, I need to calculate each skater separately to see which time they both meet the middle(0.6m)

Where am I going wrong?

First skater: u=0, s=0.6 , a=0.4 t=?

Using s=ut+½at²

t=√3

Second skater same above other than a=0.306

t=1.98 hence 3.71 seconds total for them to meet in the middle. Is my thinking correct?

I know one is accelerating faster than the other, so that would mean one travels more distance than the other would. Would this effect the outcome?

Okay, so part a I found the force they move at is 20.8N hence acceleration of second skater is 0.306…

Part b.

They’re 1.2m apart. So, I need to calculate each skater separately to see which time they both meet the middle(0.6m)

Where am I going wrong?

First skater: u=0, s=0.6 , a=0.4 t=?

Using s=ut+½at²

t=√3

Second skater same above other than a=0.306

t=1.98 hence 3.71 seconds total for them to meet in the middle. Is my thinking correct?

I know one is accelerating faster than the other, so that would mean one travels more distance than the other would. Would this effect the outcome?

Attached? However (guessing the question), if they have different accelerations, they wont meet in the middle. Let one travel a distance s, then the other travels 1.2-s and you want to find the time when this occurs. But make sure you get signs etc right.

Original post by mqb2766

Attached? However (guessing the question), if they have different accelerations, they wont meet in the middle. Let one travel a distance s, then the other travels 1.2-s and you want to find the time when this occurs. But make sure you get signs etc right.

Apologies. Mmm, If it’s as I was thinking, it’s something along the lines of if the fastest accelerating one travels 1.2m in so so time.

then the one that accelerates slower would travel less distance..

I just wasn’t sure how to word it. I’ll have a go

Original post by KingRich

Apologies. Mmm, If it’s as I was thinking, it’s something along the lines of if the fastest accelerating one travels 1.2m in so so time.

then the one that accelerates slower would travel less distance..

I just wasn’t sure how to word it. I’ll have a go

then the one that accelerates slower would travel less distance..

I just wasn’t sure how to word it. I’ll have a go

Agree with the acceleration of the second skater. There is a quicker way to do it using relative motion, but have a go as per above first.

Edit - note in the OP you add the times. This isn't correct as you want them to come together at the same time.

(edited 1 year ago)

Original post by mqb2766

Agree with the acceleration of the second skater. There is a quicker way to do it using relative motion, but have a go as per above first.

I assume that’s something that I do with projected acceleration of both? I’m not sure, I’m just guessing.

so, for the fastest accelerating skater they travel 1.2m in 2.45 seconds.

If in that time the second skater at acceleration 0.306 it covers s=0.88128metres

hence, 1.2-0.88128=0.31872

If this is the moment in meters that they meet. Do I calculate the faster accelerating skater to find t?

Edit: I should calculate for both skaters and then add that time I believe

(edited 1 year ago)

Original post by KingRich

I assume that’s something that I do with projected acceleration of both? I’m not sure, I’m just guessing.

so, for the fastest accelerating skater they travel 1.2m in 2.45 seconds.

If in that time the second skater at acceleration 0.306 it covers s=0.88128metres

hence, 1.2-0.88128=0.31872

If this is the moment in meters that they meet. Do I calculate the faster accelerating skater to find t?

so, for the fastest accelerating skater they travel 1.2m in 2.45 seconds.

If in that time the second skater at acceleration 0.306 it covers s=0.88128metres

hence, 1.2-0.88128=0.31872

If this is the moment in meters that they meet. Do I calculate the faster accelerating skater to find t?

Not sure what youre doing. You need to set up

first skater: s = ut + 1/2 at^2

second skater 1.2-s = ut + 1/2 at^2

where obviously the accelerations are different. Then solve simultaneously for s and t so that at that time, they have moved a distance of 1.2m in total. s is the distance moved by skater 1, and 1.2-s by skater 2, so 1.2 in total.

Original post by mqb2766

Not sure what youre doing. You need to set up

first skater: s = ut + 1/2 at^2

second skater 1.2-s = ut + 1/2 at^2

where obviously the accelerations are different. Then solve simultaneously for s and t so that at that time, they have moved a distance of 1.2m in total. s is the distance moved by skater 1, and 1.2-s by skater 2, so 1.2 in total.

first skater: s = ut + 1/2 at^2

second skater 1.2-s = ut + 1/2 at^2

where obviously the accelerations are different. Then solve simultaneously for s and t so that at that time, they have moved a distance of 1.2m in total. s is the distance moved by skater 1, and 1.2-s by skater 2, so 1.2 in total.

Erm, if I set up the first skater at 1.2m then it would have already travelled 1.2 by itself. Do I set this up as 1.2-s too?

This is what I’ve done

Edit: so, skater two travels 0.282 metres and skater one travels 0.918m. It’s at this point they both meet. As that’s a total of 1.2m.

That’s my understanding so far based on the calculations

Okay. Got there in the end!!!

(edited 1 year ago)

Edit - solve the simultaneous equations

first skater: s = ut + 1/2 0.4 t^2

second skater 1.2-s = ut + 1/2 0.308 t^2

The question only asks for the time, so sub the first equation into the second and "solve the quadratic" for t.

Didnt see your edit, so yes for the final attempt. Note that it should be a couple of lines if you think of the relative motion. Assuming skater 1 is fixed (motion is relative to them), then the relative acceleration of skater 2 is 0.4+0.308=0.708 (you can do this using exact arithmetic) and skater 2 will travel a distance of 1.2 relative to skater 1 so

1.2 = 1/2 0.708 t^2

and solving gives t = sqrt(17/5) ~ 1.84. When you sub the first equation into the second, this is what you get. So setting it up as a relative motion problem saves setting up the two equations and reducing them to a single equation which represents the relative motion.

first skater: s = ut + 1/2 0.4 t^2

second skater 1.2-s = ut + 1/2 0.308 t^2

The question only asks for the time, so sub the first equation into the second and "solve the quadratic" for t.

Didnt see your edit, so yes for the final attempt. Note that it should be a couple of lines if you think of the relative motion. Assuming skater 1 is fixed (motion is relative to them), then the relative acceleration of skater 2 is 0.4+0.308=0.708 (you can do this using exact arithmetic) and skater 2 will travel a distance of 1.2 relative to skater 1 so

1.2 = 1/2 0.708 t^2

and solving gives t = sqrt(17/5) ~ 1.84. When you sub the first equation into the second, this is what you get. So setting it up as a relative motion problem saves setting up the two equations and reducing them to a single equation which represents the relative motion.

(edited 1 year ago)

Original post by mqb2766

Edit - solve the simultaneous equations

first skater: s = ut + 1/2 0.4 t^2

second skater 1.2-s = ut + 1/2 0.308 t^2

The question only asks for the time, so sub the first equation into the second and "solve the quadratic" for t.

Didnt see your edit, so yes for the final attempt. Note that it should be a couple of lines if you think of the relative motion. Assuming skater 1 is fixed (motion is relative to them), then the relative acceleration of skater 2 is 0.4+0.308=0.708 (you can do this using exact arithmetic) and skater 2 will travel a distance of 1.2 relative to skater 1 so

1.2 = 1/2 0.708 t^2

and solving gives t = sqrt(17/5) ~ 1.84. When you sub the first equation into the second, this is what you get. So setting it up as a relative motion problem saves setting up the two equations and reducing them to a single equation which represents the relative motion.

first skater: s = ut + 1/2 0.4 t^2

second skater 1.2-s = ut + 1/2 0.308 t^2

The question only asks for the time, so sub the first equation into the second and "solve the quadratic" for t.

Didnt see your edit, so yes for the final attempt. Note that it should be a couple of lines if you think of the relative motion. Assuming skater 1 is fixed (motion is relative to them), then the relative acceleration of skater 2 is 0.4+0.308=0.708 (you can do this using exact arithmetic) and skater 2 will travel a distance of 1.2 relative to skater 1 so

1.2 = 1/2 0.708 t^2

and solving gives t = sqrt(17/5) ~ 1.84. When you sub the first equation into the second, this is what you get. So setting it up as a relative motion problem saves setting up the two equations and reducing them to a single equation which represents the relative motion.

Mmm, so I was correct in the assumption of doing something with both their accelerations. So, adding them both and equating to the distance required.

applying s=ut+½at²

based on the sum of both their accelerations. That’s extremely useful and far more direct. Mmm, I don’t believe I’ve touched on that concept yet. Unless that’s year two where they delve deeper into the section.

what is this concept called? I’ll write it down

Original post by KingRich

Mmm, so I was correct in the assumption of doing something with both their accelerations. So, adding them both and equating to the distance required.

applying s=ut+½at²

based on the sum of both their accelerations. That’s extremely useful and far more direct. Mmm, I don’t believe I’ve touched on that concept yet. Unless that’s year two where they delve deeper into the section.

what is this concept called? I’ll write it down

applying s=ut+½at²

based on the sum of both their accelerations. That’s extremely useful and far more direct. Mmm, I don’t believe I’ve touched on that concept yet. Unless that’s year two where they delve deeper into the section.

what is this concept called? I’ll write it down

Its just relative motion, so the motion of the second body relative to the first. So think about cars travelling in opposite directions and youre in one car as opposed to watching both cars from side of the road. As far as I know, its not really on the a level syllabus, but questions of this type are often simplified if you approach them like this.

Note that it falls out of the setting up two simultaneous equations then subbing one into the other. You either do relative motion by setting up the problem like that or it arises as part of the fiddling around with the algebra, even if you don't recognise that its happening.

- Thesis Anxiety
- Bad grades, depression, dw motivation and autism?
- Pride in Sheffield
- Does this mean my old co worker doesn’t want to meet me again?
- Contact lenses / body image
- I want to approach my crush 😭
- He was looking at my legs?
- Dropping extra A-Level subject after submitting UCAS
- 'Clearing Plus' FAQ
- Suvat questions and their purpose
- 21 year old virgin, never kissed a girl or gone on a date with a girl, what do I do?
- A-level alongside Access Course
- Thermal Physics Help
- I think I chose the wrong university
- Computer Science AQA NEA Help!
- physics question-distance
- Flirted then ghosted me
- Appealing F1 ARCP decision after failing F1 for the second time
- Need opinions on the script for a 7 minute presentation
- Feeling overwhelmed at final year of uni

- The Russell Group hurt/heal game (Part 5)
- British food hurt/heal game!
- Nottingham or Lancaster
- Breakfast items hurt/heal game!
- Lloyds Banking Group 2024 Graduate Scheme
- do i need to do ielts if im an american citizen?
- Masters application?
- Imperial Mathematics offers
- whihch one of these unis r best for supply chain management degree ?
- Are Anti-Blue Light Glasses Really Effective?
- My face burns and itches from anything
- Official University College London Applicant Thread for 2024
- Updating admission statement to uni
- My ex wants me back but I’m seeing someone new
- Culture, Media and Creative Industries BA in KCL
- The Official Psychology Applicants for 2024 Entry Thread
- Official UCL Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entry
- Official Oxford 2024 Postgraduate Applicants Thread
- Official KCL Offer Holders Thread for 2024 entry
- York Law Offers

- The Same Picture of Gregg Wallace Every Day (Except when I forget)
- Does anyone ever feel like their mother hates them
- Official: St George's, University of London A100 2024 Entry
- Please mark my gcse english language paper 2 question 5!!!
- PGCE maths with unrelated degree?
- Aon Industrial Placement 2024
- Official Cambridge Postgraduate Applicants 2024 Thread
- is it okay if i use edexcel physics + chem questions to add to my revision
- i made such a silly mistake I don’t know what’s wrong with me
- Oxford History DPhil applicants 2024-25
- Would you rather attend...?
- Dvla form mistake
- psychology - work experience in year 12
- Tatakae L's GYG Journey
- Cambridge ISMM 2024 entry
- NHS trust says transgender milk just as good for babies as normal milk
- my gcse adventure ⭐
- Where do I go next
- Chem a level
- Aon Graduate Scheme 2024

- Mock set 4 paper 2 q14 a level maths (4 distinct points)
- UKMT Intermediate Math Challenge 2024 - Discussion
- Help with complex summation further maths a levels
- GCSE Mathematics Study Group 2023-2024
- Could I have some help with this suvat question?
- MAT practice
- A-level Mathematics Study Group 2023-2024
- Alevel Maths Question
- weird cosine question
- Series function not differentiable at a point

- hyperbolic function catenary problem
- can anyone answer this A level vectors question (very challenging)
- STEP foundation module help pls
- Ukmt IMC 2024
- ukmt imc
- This maths question is driving me crazy
- Maths Mechanics
- Confused on surds question
- HNC MATHS A2 Task 3 (Radio Transmitters)
- Senior Maths Challenge 2023

- Mock set 4 paper 2 q14 a level maths (4 distinct points)
- UKMT Intermediate Math Challenge 2024 - Discussion
- Help with complex summation further maths a levels
- GCSE Mathematics Study Group 2023-2024
- Could I have some help with this suvat question?
- MAT practice
- A-level Mathematics Study Group 2023-2024
- Alevel Maths Question
- weird cosine question
- Series function not differentiable at a point

- hyperbolic function catenary problem
- can anyone answer this A level vectors question (very challenging)
- STEP foundation module help pls
- Ukmt IMC 2024
- ukmt imc
- This maths question is driving me crazy
- Maths Mechanics
- Confused on surds question
- HNC MATHS A2 Task 3 (Radio Transmitters)
- Senior Maths Challenge 2023

The Student Room and The Uni Guide are both part of The Student Room Group.

© Copyright The Student Room 2024 all rights reserved

The Student Room and The Uni Guide are trading names of The Student Room Group Ltd.

Register Number: 04666380 (England and Wales), VAT No. 806 8067 22 Registered Office: Imperial House, 2nd Floor, 40-42 Queens Road, Brighton, East Sussex, BN1 3XB