How Do You Calculate the Initial Height of a Ski Jump?

  • Thread starter Thread starter juggalomike
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Jump Physics
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the initial height of a ski jump based on the skier's motion as they take off horizontally. The problem involves concepts from energy conservation and kinematics, specifically focusing on the relationship between height, velocity, and distance traveled.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the energy conservation principle and its application to the skier's motion. There are attempts to derive the horizontal velocity and height using kinematic equations. Some participants question the assumptions made regarding the velocity at takeoff and the effects of gravity.

Discussion Status

Several participants have provided insights into the problem, with one suggesting a method involving kinematic equations to eliminate time from the calculations. There is acknowledgment of differing results, and some participants express uncertainty about the correctness of their approaches, indicating an ongoing exploration of the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the assumption of negligible friction and are exploring the implications of this assumption on the calculations. There is also a mention of varying interpretations of the energy conservation equation and its application to the problem.

juggalomike
Messages
49
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A skier (m=53.00 kg) starts sliding down from the top of a ski jump with negligible friction and takes off horizontally. If h = 8.00 m and D = 9.50 m, find H.
http://img517.imageshack.us/img517/616/prob21a.gif


Homework Equations


.5mv^2+mgh=.5mv^2+mgh


The Attempt at a Solution


I first divided to vertical distance by 9.81 to get .81seconds, then 9.50/.81 to get the horizontal velocity, which is 11.72 m/s

I then plugged the information into the above equation for

53*9.81*x=.5*53*11.72^2+53*9.81*8
solving for x i got 15.01 m, which is not correct.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Well, I think you need to consider the velocity of the skier when he leaves the ramp. mgH-mgh is the kinetic energy at that point, right? And if there is no drag, then the horizontal velocity at the time he leaves the ramp will be constant throughout the drop.

Then you can use kinematics to solve for that x velocity, right? Use a system of kinematics equations(I think this is what you are missing) to get rid of time and I believe there is only one variable left: H

EDIT: I get 10.82m for the answer. If that isn't correct, then the way I suggested might not be right.
 
Last edited:
Brilliant said:
Well, I think you need to consider the velocity of the skier when he leaves the ramp. mgH-mgh is the kinetic energy at that point, right? And if there is no drag, then the horizontal velocity at the time he leaves the ramp will be constant throughout the drop.

Then you can use kinematics to solve for that x velocity, right? Use a system of kinematics equations(I think this is what you are missing) to get rid of time and I believe there is only one variable left: H

EDIT: I get 10.82m for the answer. If that isn't correct, then the way I suggested might not be right.
your answer was correct, thanks for the help but could you please tell me how you used kinematics to solve for velocity? after plugging the height u gave me back into the energy equation i see the velocity was 7.44, which is way off from what i was getting.
 
Yeah, of course.
So in the x direction, I used the equation:
[tex] \Delta x = v_{x}t+\frac {1}{2}at^2[/tex]
So in terms of this problem:
[tex] D= v_{x}t[/tex]
Because there is no acceleration.

In the y direction, I used the same equation, and in terms of this problem:
[tex] h= \frac {1}{2}at^2[/tex]
I left off the vt because there is no initial y velocity since the skier leaves the ramp horizontally.

I solved this for t and substituted it into the first equation, and then solved it for vx

I think you can finish it once you have this velocity.
 

Similar threads

Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
8K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
16K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K