Force and motion -- Person falling from 20m onto a cushion (EASY)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on the physics of a person falling from a height of 20 meters onto a 3-meter-high cushion. Approach 1 correctly calculates the height above ground when the person is stopped by the cushion as 0.717 meters, using the equation s = (v+u)/2 * t. Approach 2 incorrectly assumes constant acceleration during the impact, leading to a flawed calculation of 0.363 meters. The consensus is that a spring model would better represent the cushion's behavior during impact.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinematic equations, specifically s = (v+u)/2 * t
  • Knowledge of potential energy (PE = mgh) and kinetic energy (KE = mv^2/2)
  • Familiarity with the concept of force and work (Ft = mv - mu)
  • Basic principles of uniform acceleration and deceleration
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the application of spring models in impact physics
  • Learn about energy conservation principles in collision scenarios
  • Explore advanced kinematic equations for variable acceleration
  • Investigate real-world applications of force calculations in cushioning systems
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, educators, and professionals in engineering or biomechanics who are interested in understanding the dynamics of impacts and energy transfer during falls.

guest948
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Homework Statement
A cushion is 3m high when inflated. Assume a person of mass 50kg falls onto the cushion from 20m above the ground and is brought to a stop in 0.25s after hitting the cushion. Assume air resistance is negligible.

How high is the person from the ground when he is stopped by the cushion? Assume that he decelerates uniformly.

TASK: Please help explain why approach 2 is INCORRECT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The following have been confirmed:
- The person's velocity just before he hits the cushion is 18.263 ms-1 (downwards).
- The average net force acting on the person during the impact is 3652.62 N (upwards).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Relevant Equations
s = (v+u)/2 * t
PE = mgh
KE = mv^2/2
Ft = mv - mu
APPROACH 1 (correct):

Height above ground = 3 - (v+u)/2 * t
= 3 - 18.263/2 * 0.25
= 0.717 m

-----------------------------------------------------
APPROACH 2 (incorrect):

Let d be the height from the ground when he is stopped by the cushion.
PE loss = Work done against motion by cushion
mgh = Fs
mg(20-d) = F(3-d)
50 * 9.81 * (20-d) = 3652.62 * (3-d)
d = 0.363 m
 
Physics news on Phys.org
guest948 said:
Homework Statement:: A cushion is 3m high when inflated. Assume a person of mass 50kg falls onto the cushion from 20m above the ground and is brought to a stop in 0.25s after hitting the cushion. Assume air resistance is negligible.

How high is the person from the ground when he is stopped by the cushion? Assume that he decelerates uniformly.

TASK: Please help explain why approach 2 is INCORRECT.
----------------------------------------------------------------------
The following have been confirmed:
- The person's velocity just before he hits the cushion is 18.263 ms-1 (downwards).
- The average net force acting on the person during the impact is 3652.62 N (upwards).
----------------------------------------------------------------------
Relevant Equations:: s = (v+u)/2 * t
PE = mgh
KE = mv^2/2
Ft = mv - mu

APPROACH 1 (correct):

Height above ground = 3 - (v+u)/2 * t
= 3 - 18.263/2 * 0.25
= 0.717 m

-----------------------------------------------------
APPROACH 2 (incorrect):

Let d be the height from the ground when he is stopped by the cushion.
PE loss = Work done against motion by cushion
mgh = Fs
mg(20-d) = F(3-d)
50 * 9.81 * (20-d) = 3652.62 * (3-d)
d = 0.363 m
Both methods are wrong since they assume constant acceleration after meeting the cushion. That might be right for a snowpack, but not for an inflated cushion. A spring would be a better model.

In your second method, on the left of the equation you have the work done by gravity over the whole descent. On the right, you have the work done by the net force (which includes gravity) in the last 3-d of the descent. So you are counting the work done by gravity in the last 3-d on both sides.
See what happens if you change the 20-d to 17.
 
Last edited:
haruspex said:
.

Both methods are wrong since they assume constant acceleration after meeting the cushion. That might be right for a snowpack, but not for an inflated cushion. A spring would be a better model.

Thanks, but constant acceleration (deceleration) is assumed in this question.
 
guest948 said:
Thanks, but constant acceleration (deceleration) is assumed in this question.
Ok, so see my edit to post #2.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: guest948

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K