Intial Velocity of an Object In Free Fall

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the initial velocity of an object in free fall from a height of 2.195 meters, which took 0.96 seconds to reach the ground. Participants explore the application of kinematic equations and the implications of initial velocity in the context of gravitational acceleration.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks guidance on how to approach the problem of finding initial velocity without asking for a direct answer.
  • Another participant outlines the integration of acceleration to derive the velocity and position equations, suggesting a method to solve for initial velocity.
  • There is a repeated emphasis on the kinematic equation for initial velocity, with variations presented by different participants.
  • Participants discuss the values for time, change in position, and acceleration, with some confusion about the correct assignment of these variables.
  • One participant calculates an initial velocity and questions the significance of a negative result, prompting further discussion about the direction of motion.
  • Another participant confirms the negative initial velocity indicates upward motion, leading to a question about the object's trajectory and distance traveled.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the use of kinematic equations and the interpretation of the negative initial velocity. However, there is some uncertainty regarding the implications of the object's motion and whether the distance traveled needs further consideration.

Contextual Notes

Some participants express uncertainty about the calculations and the significance of the negative sign in the context of direction. There is also a lack of consensus on whether the object's trajectory requires additional analysis beyond the initial and final positions.

KermitFrog
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
So I have to calculate the initial velocity of an object I dropped from 2.195 meters that took .96 seconds to hit the ground, given that the Earth's gravitational pull is 9.81m/s^2. What direction/step should I first take in order to solve this? I'm not asking for the answer just a step or two in the direction of finding the answer. Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I would begin with:

$$\d{v}{t}=a$$ where $a$ is a constant.

Thus:

$$dv=a\,dt$$

Now, if we integrate with respect to time $t$, we obtain:

$$\int_{v_0}^{v(t)}\,dv=a\int_0^t\,dt$$

And so we have:

$$v(t)-v_0=at\implies v(t)=at+v_0$$

Now, we also know:

$$\d{x}{t}=v(t)=at+v_0$$

Integrating again w.r.t $t$, we get:

$$\int_{0}^{x(t)}\,dx=\int _0^t at+v_0\,dt$$

$$x(t)=\frac{a}{2}t^2+v_0t$$

So, solving for $v_0$, what do you get?
 
MarkFL said:
I would begin with:

$$\d{v}{t}=a$$ where $a$ is a constant.

Thus:

$$dv=a\,dt$$

Now, if we integrate with respect to time $t$, we obtain:

$$\int_{v_0}^{v(t)}\,dv=a\int_0^t\,dt$$

And so we have:

$$v(t)-v_0=at\implies v(t)=at+v_0$$

Now, we also know:

$$\d{x}{t}=v(t)=at+v_0$$

Integrating again w.r.t $t$, we get:

$$\int_{0}^{x(t)}\,dx=\int _0^t at+v_0\,dt$$

$$x(t)=\frac{a}{2}t^2+v_0t$$

So, solving for $v_0$, what do you get?

v0 = ( x(t)- (a/2)t^2 )/t ?
 
KermitFrog said:
v0 = ( x(t)- (a/2)t^2 )/t ?

Yes! (Yes)

I have written this formula equivalently on my "cheat sheet" for kinematics as:

$$v_0=\frac{1}{2t}\left(2\Delta x-at^2\right)$$

So, now we need to identify, from the given data, the following:

$$t,\,\Delta x,\,a$$

And then plug them into our formula...what do you get?
 
MarkFL said:
Yes! (Yes)

I have written this formula equivalently on my "cheat sheet" for kinematics as:

$$v_0=\frac{1}{2t}\left(2\Delta x-at^2\right)$$

So, now we need to identify, from the given data, the following:

$$t,\,\Delta x,\,a$$

And then plug them into our formula...what do you get?

Is it t= .96, Delta x = 9.81, and a = 2.195?
 
KermitFrog said:
Is it t= .96, Delta x = 9.81, and a = 2.195?

Well, you are correct that (don't forget your units) that:

$$t=0.96\text{ s}$$

However, the acceleration $a$ here is that which is due to gravity, so we have:

$$a=g=9.81\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}^2}$$

and the change in position is:

$$\Delta x=2.195\text{ m}$$

So, plugging those into our formula, what do you find?
 
MarkFL said:
Well, you are correct that (don't forget your units) that:

$$t=0.96\text{ s}$$

However, the acceleration $a$ here is that which is due to gravity, so we have:

$$a=g=9.81\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}^2}$$

and the change in position is:

$$\Delta x=2.195\text{ m}$$

So, plugging those into our formula, what do you find?

v(0) = -2.232 m/s ?
 
KermitFrog said:
v(0) = -2.232 m/s ?

I get:

$$v_0=\frac{1}{2\left(0.96\text{ s}\right)}\left(2\left(2.195\text{ m}\right)-\left(9.81\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}^2}\right)\left(0.96\text{ s}\right)^2\right)=-\frac{290681}{120000}\,\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}}\approx-2.42\,\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}}$$

Without seeing your computations, I can't say why our answers differ. Do you understand the significance of the negative sign? Which direction are we taking to be positive here?
 
MarkFL said:
I get:

$$v_0=\frac{1}{2\left(0.96\text{ s}\right)}\left(2\left(2.195\text{ m}\right)-\left(9.81\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}^2}\right)\left(0.96\text{ s}\right)^2\right)=-\frac{290681}{120000}\,\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}}\approx-2.42\,\frac{\text{m}}{\text{s}}$$

Without seeing your computations, I can't say why our answers differ. Do you understand the significance of the negative sign? Which direction are we taking to be positive here?

I made an error when plugging the numbers into my calculator! Since gravity pulls objects downward wouldn't the negative sign indicate that the object was going upward?
 
  • #10
KermitFrog said:
I made an error when plugging the numbers into my calculator! Since gravity pulls objects downward wouldn't the negative sign indicate that the object was going upward?

Yes, we have set in our derivation down to be the positive direction, and so a negative initial velocity would mean it was initially moving in the upward direction. :)

Do we need to concern ourselves with the fact that the object then actually moved though a greater distance than the distance from the initial and final positions? It started out at 2.195 m above the ground and then moved up, and then down to the ground...
 
  • #11
MarkFL said:
Yes, we have set in our derivation down to be the positive direction, and so a negative initial velocity would mean it was initially moving in the upward direction. :)

Do we need to concern ourselves with the fact that the object then actually moved though a greater distance than the distance from the initial and final positions? It started out at 2.195 m above the ground and then moved up, and then down to the ground...
I don't think so. Thanks for the help!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
752
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
23
Views
3K
Replies
22
Views
3K