Acceleration when an object hits the ground

AI Thread Summary
When an object falls and hits the ground, its velocity approaches zero at impact, but this does not imply an instantaneous change, as both the object and the ground experience deformation. The acceleration during impact can be extremely high, often reaching levels much greater than gravity, due to the rapid deceleration. Realistically, no object is perfectly rigid, leading to temporary compression of both the object and the ground upon impact. This phenomenon is crucial in fields like shock testing, where objects are subjected to accelerations up to 3000 times that of gravity to assess durability. Ultimately, the interaction at impact involves complex dynamics rather than a simple stop.
Uranium235
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Ok so this is a problem that's been bothering me ever since the first few days of learning kinematics.

We've been taught that when an object falls, the object has a positive velocity up until the moment that it hits the ground. At that moment, the velocity becomes zero. Wouldn't this imply that the acceleration that the object experiences when hitting the ground is negative infinity since it stops the very moment that it lands?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The falling object will dent the ground slightly. also the object itself will be deformed a little by the force of the impact. Thus the object does not stop the very moment it lands, it just slows down very rapidly.
 
Does it really stop the moment that it lands? Might not both the object and the ground bend a slight amount the moment it touches the ground?
 
That's not realistically what happens when an object hits the ground. Even if the the ground and the object were rigid, electrostatic forces that prevent solid objects from passing through each other would not result in an such an instantaneous change of velocity. In reality, though, an object and the ground probably would not be perfectly rigid, and the ground would deform downward, a bit like the object was being caught in a net.
 
Ok got it! Thanks for the answers guys!
 
No real objects are perfectly rigid, so even if there is no permanent change in shape of either the object or the ground, both will be compressed a bit during the time of the impact and then spring back again.

The accelerations when a "rigid" object like a brick falls on the ground can be very large - "shock testing" to check that accidental bumps and falls won't cause damage to objecst is often done at accelerations up to 3000 times the acceleration due to gravity (i.e. about 30,000 m/s2)
 
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top