Can non uniform circular motion come in the finals (1 Viewer)

[bishay]

i heard its been taken out and i checked the syllabus and couldnt find it. but its popped up in afew exams. can it come in the final exam?

 

[Hi there444]

Yes. Although from what I heard one with constant angular velocity not the ones with variable angular velocity.

 

[Carrotsticks]

i heard its been taken out and i checked the syllabus and couldnt find it. but its popped up in afew exams. can it come in the final exam?

It has only appeared in one HSC exam in the current syllabus, which was in 2000 HSC (the circular motion was vertical, so gravity had a role). Some schools examine it, and some textbooks have content on it, but it is not strictly within the syllabus. However, given enough hand-holding, the examiners can venture out of the scope of the syllabus.

So to answer your question, it CAN, but it seems unlikely.

 

[aDimitri]

It has only appeared in one HSC exam in the current syllabus, which was in 2000 HSC (the circular motion was vertical, so gravity had a role). Some schools examine it, and some textbooks have content on it, but it is not strictly within the syllabus. However, given enough hand-holding, the examiners can venture out of the scope of the syllabus.

So to answer your question, it CAN, but it seems unlikely.

that question was actually really nice

 

[braintic]

but it is not strictly within the syllabus.

But it IS.
6.3.1 specifically says that students should be able to prove that the tangential component of Force is Mr omega dot.
This section is about GENERAL circular motion before 6.3.2 restricts the focus to uniform circular motion.

Further, there were other examples of vertical motion in '93 and '96 (both inside the life-time of the current syllabus).

 

[Kurosaki]

Yes. Although from what I heard one with constant angular velocity not the ones with variable angular velocity.

wait what? Doesn't constant angular velocity mean uniform circular motion, or have I been doing too much HSC English lately?

*speed, not velocity though in HSC practically same thing

 

[Hi there444]

that question was actually really nice

Na I dont think it will come. Its basically considered free marks by everyone. Literally HSC gave away 11 marks in 2000 paper. The last question in 2000, took me long though- The probability one.

 

[Hi there444]

wait what? Doesn't constant angular velocity mean uniform circular motion, or have I been doing too much HSC English lately?

Na they are two things as far as I know. b/c constant angular is considered not effected by weight and usually is like on a horz table while variable is when it is affected by gravity.

 

[Hi there444]

But it IS.
6.3.1 specifically says that students should be able to prove that the tangential component of Force is Mr omega dot.
This section is about GENERAL circular motion before 6.3.2 restricts the focus to uniform circular motion.

Further, there were other examples of vertical motion in '93 and '96 (both inside the life-time of the current syllabus).

First of all: mr theta .. not mrw..
w is fixed angular velocity as far as I know.
and second of all thats resolving only, I am pretty sure, parallely and normally. Although it still is in the syllabus. Half the school like sydney girls dont do it since HSC doesn't give those kinda questions.

 

[braintic]

First of all: mr theta .. not mrw..
w is fixed angular velocity as far as I know.
and second of all thats resolving only, I am pretty sure, parallely and normally. Although it still is in the syllabus. Half the school like sydney girls dont do it since HSC doesn't give those kinda questions.

There is no requirement for omega to be constant - the formula I quoted involving omega dot comes straight from the syllabus.
And what do you mean by "resolving ONLY" ?? If the tangential component of force is not zero, then the motion is not uniform.

And "constant angular velocity" is PRECISELY the same as "uniform circular motion" (provided the radius remains constant).

 

[aDimitri]

There is no requirement for omega to be constant - the formula I quoted involving omega dot comes straight from the syllabus.
And what do you mean by "resolving ONLY" ?? If the tangential component of force is not zero, then the motion is not uniform.

And "constant angular velocity" is PRECISELY the same as "uniform circular motion" (provided the radius remains constant).

yeah we did the proofs in class.

 

[Carrotsticks]

But it IS.
6.3.1 specifically says that students should be able to prove that the tangential component of Force is Mr omega dot.
This section is about GENERAL circular motion before 6.3.2 restricts the focus to uniform circular motion.

Further, there were other examples of vertical motion in '93 and '96 (both inside the life-time of the current syllabus).

I stand corrected on its presence in the syllabus, thanks.

The '93 example places emphasis on non-uniform circular motion (very much like 2000), but I do not think the '96 example does because it is essentially banked tracks but with the positions of N and F being interchanged.