Horizontal acceleration of a person

AI Thread Summary
Calculating the maximum horizontal acceleration a person can sustain without falling backward involves understanding both biological and physical factors. The coefficient of friction between the feet and the board is crucial, as it determines grip during acceleration. The dynamics can be modeled by considering the person as a rigid body with a center of mass, where the angle of lean and the moment of resistance from the ground play significant roles. Newton's laws can be applied to derive a differential equation that relates acceleration to the maximum angle before tipping occurs. Ultimately, the strength of the relevant muscles and their ability to counteract the forces at play are also important in determining how much acceleration a person can endure.
GingerKhan
Messages
13
Reaction score
0
Let's say that an athletic person of average height (1.75 m) and weight (75 kg) is strapped by the feet to a small motorized board. How would one go about calculating the maximum acceleration the person can sustain without falling backwards?

There is no wind and the air density is at sea level.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The question doesn't really work. If the acceleration starts slow enough, they can just lean forward until they are near horizontal and get crushed by their own weight due to the g-force.
 
In addition to post#2, the coefficient of fricion between feet and board must in some way be specified...unless that "curl toes and hang ten".

Ginger: maybe you are thinking about tensing muscles to offset the tipping?? That's a really tough question to ask as it's biological and physics...and could depend as well on the length of their feet and the location of their leg with respect to both ends.
 
If, however you assume foot and the board as a joint (so only rotation), then there is a moment. The axis of rotation is the joint, the distance is the y-coordinate of the center of mass. From Newton's second law:

rxF=rxma => M = mr^2 thetaDoubleDot

How you proceed from this point depends on how you model the problem. You can, for instance, assume that there is a maximum resistance moment from the ground that, when surpassed, will make the object (human) fall.

A more realistic way to model it would be to consider a rectangle with a center of mass. There is a maximum angle after which the rectangle will fall over. You can calculate this angle if you consider a line that originates from the point of rotation (so one corner of the rectangle), and that is perpendicular to your surface. If the center of mass goes beyond this line, the rectangle will fall over.

From Newton's law you have a differential equation of motion for your problem, so you can get the angle as a function of acceleration (angle comes into play from the y-coordinate of the "r" vector).

Depending on the initial conditions, you can derive from that the acceleration that causes you to reach that maximum angle.
 
If what you are asking is how much pushing force a human could take before falling over then you would need to find out the strength of all the relevant muscles. As a starting point here is a paper discussing the testing methods for isokinetic testing of the ankle (disclosure: I haven't read more than the abstract).
 
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...
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?
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top