Altitude needed to create an impact of 4kg using a weight of 70g?

AI Thread Summary
To create an impact equivalent to 4kg using a 70g weight in a vacuum, the required altitude is indeterminate and depends on various factors, including the rigidity of both the dropped object and the target. The force of 40 Newtons is necessary for the impact, which translates to a deceleration rate of approximately 571 meters per second squared, significantly exceeding Earth's gravity. For rigid objects, this acceleration could be achieved from a drop of less than 1cm, while softer objects would require a greater height. Estimating the height involves comparing the deflection at impact to the drop height, suggesting a ratio of 57 times the deflection. Ultimately, predicting the exact impact force is complex due to the numerous variables involved.
conordee
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Would anyone know what altitude would be needed within a vacuum in Earth's gravity to create an impact of 4kg using a weight of 70g? Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
That depends on the impact. The height (together with gravity and your weight) determines kinetic energy and momentum, but the magnitude of deceleration depends on the length of this deceleration.

In addition, it is not a good practice to talk about "an impact of 4kg". I think you mean the force of 40N (Newton), which is the gravitational force a mass of 4k feels on earth.
 
please excuse my bad wording, but I hope you can under stand what I am getting at. Say if i was to create a large tube (with a vacuum) 400ft in the air, on Earth of course. And i dropped a 70g weight from the top, what hight? would i need the tube so that the force when the weight hit the bottom would be equal to 4kg?
 
As has already been pointed out, the answer is indeterminate. It depends on the rigidity of the object you are dropping and the rigidity of the target onto which it is dropped.

In order for a 70g object to produce a force of 40 Newtons would require a decelleration rate of 40N / .070kg = 571 meters/second/second ~= 57 times the acceleration of gravity.

For sufficiently rigid objects, that acceleration could be attained after a drop of less then 1cm. For sufficiently fluffy objects, it would obviously take much farther.


One crude estimate would be to compare the deflection at impact to the height of the drop. You need the height of the drop to be roughly 57 times the deflection at impact, all things being equal.

[ But in the real world, all things are never equal ]
 
Just to expand on this a little, force of the impact is rarely a parameter you deal with. It can be important, but it's also nearly impossible to predict. Way too many factors go into it. What you can determine for a particular impact are momentum and energy transfer. Momentum is measured in kg*m/s or, equivalently, in N*s. Energy is in Joules. If you know both, you can say a lot about the impact.
 
Ok I get it now, thanks
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Energy needed to raise an object to a certain altitude
Replies
7
Views
1K
B Wanting to do some impact force experiments
Replies
15
Views
2K
Optimal Size of Rocket Engine Nozzle for Vacuum Performance
Replies
26
Views
3K
B Understanding Weight and Inertia: A Comparison of Mars and Earth
Replies
46
Views
4K
How to measure the impact force of a moving object
Replies
9
Views
5K
I Momentum, impact force and Earth
Replies
9
Views
2K
I Understanding tension and centripedal force in a puck and weight
Replies
4
Views
2K
I Modeling a Bottle Rocket: Analyzing the Maximum Altitude
Replies
4
Views
5K
Orbits from Impacts: Can Projections Achieve Orbit?
Replies
10
Views
2K
B Non-physicist needs your help torquing a nut!
Replies
9
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top