Explanation of acceleration of a ball bouncing up and down on the ground

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the acceleration of a ball bouncing vertically, particularly at the moment of impact with the ground. It highlights that the ball experiences a sudden change in acceleration, switching to the opposite sign upon hitting the ground. The conversation explores the complexities of modeling this scenario, including the implications of perfect versus non-ideal collisions and the role of the ball's spring constant. Participants discuss how to express the relationship between time, displacement, and acceleration, emphasizing the need for precise definitions and relationships in the equations used. Ultimately, the conversation seeks clarity on the behavior of acceleration during the ball's bounce and the conditions under which it changes direction.
city25
Messages
7
Reaction score
0
I am from HK. Hope you guys can understand my poor English! ^^
actually, this is not for my homework but my preparation for the public exam.

Homework Statement


The situation is that a ball bouncing up and down on the ground in vertical direction.
The question is to choose which graphs best describes the variation of its acceleration a.
It is a MC-question. Althought I know the ans., I want to have a full explanation but I am not sure if I am correct.

Homework Equations


No

The Attempt at a Solution


We all know that there is a sudden change in acceleration to the opposite sign at the moment that the ball hits ground. I want to explain it. Please comment on my explanation.


  u↓ ↑v
   O    ↓+ve
-------
  ground

where u ≥ -v
ps. the ball with mass m.Let's consider momentum.
impact force
= (mv - mu)/t
≥ [m(-u) - mu]/t (since v ≥ -u)
= -2mu/t which is negativenet Force = ma
impact force - mg = ma
ma ≤ -2mu/t - mg
a ≤ -2u/t - g

hence, when the ball hits the ground, it experiences acceleration in the sign opposite to gravitational field.

Am I correct?
Can I explain in other way(s)? or simplier way(s)?
I want explanation as much as possible.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, for a perfect collision between an immovable ground and perfectly elastic ball, the acceleration would be infinite, and all you need are the conservation laws. For a non-ideal situation, you have to consider the ball as some sort of spring, you can get an expression for the time the impulse will be delivered based on the spring constant (or equation).

The rate at which the acceleration changes direction--which, I think, is what you want to find out--depends sensitively on how you're modeling/thinking about the ball.
 
zhermes said:
Well, for a perfect collision between an immovable ground and perfectly elastic ball, the acceleration would be infinite, and all you need are the conservation laws. For a non-ideal situation, you have to consider the ball as some sort of spring, you can get an expression for the time the impulse will be delivered based on the spring constant (or equation).

The rate at which the acceleration changes direction--which, I think, is what you want to find out--depends sensitively on how you're modeling/thinking about the ball.
So, you mean that there is different explanation when it is in different cases?
Is there any wrong or improper concept?

How about this?
Since t ∝ kx where k is the spring constant and x is displacement (how should I difine x?)
=> t = μkx where μ is a constant.

hence, a ≤ -2u/μkx - g
since x change from -ve to +ve, and then -ve, acceleration changes its direction "gradually".

is it correct?
 
oh, i must make a mistake

now, let v be the velocity of the ball when it hits ground
impluse
= (mv - mu)/t

net Force = ma
impluse - mg = ma
ma = (mv - mu)/t - mg
a = (v - u)/t - g

since t ∝ 1/k => t = μ/k where k is spring constant, μ is a constant
hence, a = (v - u)k/μ - g
da/dt = (k/μ)(dv/dt) - uk/μ - g

When the ball hits ground,
speed of the ball ↓,
=> (dv/dt) is -ve.
=> da/dt is also -ve
=> slope of the a-t graph is -ve

when the ball leaves ground,
speed of the ball ↑,
=> (dv/dt) is +ve.
=> da/dt may become +ve
=> slope of the a-t graph may be +ve

however, it seems that i can't say "may be +ve" in this case, i should say "must be +ve". i don't know whether i made something wrong before. If no, how should I deduce "must"?
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top