Can a Thief Escape a Building Using a Rope?

  • Thread starter Thread starter brycenrg
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Escape
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
5 replies · 2K views
brycenrg
Messages
95
Reaction score
2

Homework Statement


A 75 kg thief wants to escape a building. He has a rope that supports 58kg how can he escape?

Homework Equations


f=ma

The Attempt at a Solution


75kg*g = W
58kg*g = T
T - W = 75kg*a
a = (t-w)/m
If he applies a acceleration upwards at 2.2 m/s^2 he would survive.
When i do the calculation I get a negative number, which would mean he would be applying a acceleration downwards which doesn't make sense. Why is that?
In my equation T is positive
 
Physics news on Phys.org
brycenrg said:

Homework Statement


A 75 kg thief wants to escape a building. He has a rope that supports 58kg how can he escape?

Homework Equations


f=ma

The Attempt at a Solution


75kg*g = W
58kg*g = T
T - W = 75kg*a
a = (t-w)/m
If he applies a acceleration upwards at 2.2 m/s^2 he would survive.
When i do the calculation I get a negative number, which would mean he would be applying a acceleration downwards which doesn't make sense. Why is that?
In my equation T is positive
Why would he want to climb upward to get out of a building? Shouldn't he lower himself down from the building?
 
Mark44 said:
Why would he want to climb upward to get out of a building? Shouldn't he lower himself down from the building?
That makes sense he has to accell downwards to go. But what it means is if he accels downwards more that 2.2 then the rope wouldn't support him right?
 
brycenrg said:
That makes sense he has to accell downwards to go. But what it means is if he accels downwards more that 2.2 then the rope wouldn't support him right?
I think you are confused. If he was just hanging from the rope, with no acceleration, the rope would break, right? If he slid down the rope, just barely hanging onto it (which would burn his hands), he would be acclerating at just under ##9.8 \frac m {sec^2}##. Would the rope break then?
 
Mark44 said:
I think you are confused. If he was just hanging from the rope, with no acceleration, the rope would break, right? If he slid down the rope, just barely hanging onto it (which would burn his hands), he would be acclerating at just under ##9.8 \frac m {sec^2}##. Would the rope break then?
I am, I want to say if he used friction to slow him down to just = to T and under that force he would be ok. Which is under 2.2m/s^2.
But it seems like your saying he has to be going faster than gravity, which doesn't make sense to me
 
brycenrg said:
I am, I want to say if he used friction to slow him down to just = to T and under that force he would be ok. Which is under 2.2m/s^2.
But it seems like your saying he has to be going faster than gravity, which doesn't make sense to me
Yes, it doesn't make sense, and that isn't what I was saying, either.

The acceleration due to gravity is acting downward. What is the tension on the rope if his downward acceleration, relative to the fixed rope, is less than 2.2 m/sec^2? What's the tension on the rope if his downward acceleration, again relative to the fixed rope, is more than 2.2 m/sec^2? You're getting bogged down in the minutiae of the problem and are missing the bigger picture.