Force of impact for human falling different heights

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on analyzing the impact force of a human head hitting the ground from different heights, specifically comparing a fall from a hill versus a flat surface. A 95 kg individual falling backwards experiences greater kinetic energy due to the additional height gained from the slope, with calculations indicating that the head's velocity at impact is higher when falling from an incline. The key physics equations used include kinetic energy and gravitational potential energy, emphasizing that the height of the fall significantly affects the impact force. Participants agree that velocity is a crucial factor in determining injury severity, with higher velocities leading to increased risk. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding these dynamics in forensic assessments related to potential assaults in sports settings.
brettsyoung
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I am trying to prove a human head hitting the ground after falling backwards down a hill suffers a significantly greater impact than one hitting the ground on a flat surface. The person is 95KG, 180cm tall, and the impact point of the head was 60cm below (in altitude) the point where the feet were placed at the time of falling.

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Unfortunately I have no physics background and have no idea where to start. This is one element of a broader forensic brief I would like to put together regarding a theoretical random assault in a sport's stadium. At some stage I understand I will need a professional report on this element of the brief, but first I would be very grateful for a ballpark assessment on whether this is indeed a relevant issue, and whether forces and hence injury are significantly greater as the slope comes into play. In other words, does pushing hooligans down the stands risk greater physical threat then pushing them up. Inituitively it does, but infact I'm less sure My schoolboy physics doesn't go beyond its ability to confuse me, so apologies if this seems a dumb question. Rather I hope it intrigues some of you. Thanks Brett
 
Physics news on Phys.org
brettsyoung said:
does pushing hooligans down the stands risk greater physical threat then pushing them up.
Ask yourself, "How far are they falling?"
 
brettsyoung said:

Homework Statement


I am trying to prove a human head hitting the ground after falling backwards down a hill suffers a significantly greater impact than one hitting the ground on a flat surface. The person is 95KG, 180cm tall, and the impact point of the head was 60cm below (in altitude) the point where the feet were placed at the time of falling.

Homework Equations


The kinetic energy of the head is given by KE = 1/2 mv2. Rather than the head traveling 180 cm on flat ground, it travels 180 cm + 60 cm on an incline. The kinetic energy is acquired by the loss of gravitational energy U = mgh. g is 10 m/sec2 and h is either 180 cm or 240 cm. The velocity of the head is

v = √(2⋅10 m/sec2⋅.24 m) on the incline, or
v = √(2⋅10 m/sec2⋅.18 m) on flat ground

Notice that the mass does not enter into the final result.
 
DrSteve said:
v = √(2⋅10 m/sec2⋅.24 m) on the incline, or
v = √(2⋅10 m/sec2⋅.18 m) on flat ground
I think you mean 2.4m and 1.8m.
But is the velocity (i.e. momentum) the key measure or is it v2 (energy)?
 
Thanks for your replies. Very useful! Velocity is a suitable measure as we have lots of data of the effect of impact at increasing rates of velocity on the human head, including key low velocity ranges where the relative effect increases at a greater rate than the velocity. Thanks again. I didn't expect to hear back so quickly! regards Brett
 
haruspex said:
I think you mean 2.4m and 1.8m.
But is the velocity (i.e. momentum) the key measure or is it v2 (energy)?
You're correct - I meant 1.8 m and 2.4 m
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top