Is This Calculator Incorrect for Predicting Impact Force of a Falling Object?

  • Thread starter Thread starter westerndragon76
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Calculator
AI Thread Summary
The calculator in question appears to only consider the stopping force after a falling object encounters a surface, neglecting the continuous influence of gravity during the fall. It is suggested that the stopping distance should be included in the height measurement to accurately calculate impact force. For example, using a mass of 50kg and a height of 10m with a stopping distance of 5m results in a calculated force of 1480N, while the calculator outputs 980N. This discrepancy arises because the calculator's assumptions may not apply when the stopping distance is significant compared to the height. Clarification of the calculator's caveat regarding height and stopping distance is essential for accurate predictions.
westerndragon76
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I believe that this calculator generates answers assuming that the only force acting on a falling object after it has encountered a stopping surface is the force of the stopping surface. The calculator needs to factor in gravity throughout the whole fall. Would someone else please verify?
http://hyperphysics.phy-astr.gsu.edu/hbase/hframe.html
Click Mechanics, work-energy principle, and then impact force of falling object, and "Since you know velocity, mass, and kinetic energy, can you predict the force of impact?"
Example numbers:
m=50kg, h=10m, d=5m
stopping force should be about 1480N, but the calculator is saying 980N.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Read the little note at the bottom of that page.

Note that the above calculation of impact force is accurate only if the height h includes the stopping distance, since the process of penetration is further decreasing its gravitational potential energy.

That should take care of your problem (you probably should use d=5, h=5 to describe the situation I think you have in mind). If not for this disclaimer, the calculation would be, as you point out, wrong for the general case where d is not necessarily small compared to h.
 
I didn't take time to read that disclaimer carefully. Thanks for the quick answer!
 
It is not a disclaimer, it is a caveat. :mad:
 
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...
Thread 'A bead-mass oscillatory system problem'
I can't figure out how to find the velocity of the particle at 37 degrees. Basically the bead moves with velocity towards right let's call it v1. The particle moves with some velocity v2. In frame of the bead, the particle is performing circular motion. So v of particle wrt bead would be perpendicular to the string. But how would I find the velocity of particle in ground frame? I tried using vectors to figure it out and the angle is coming out to be extremely long. One equation is by work...
Back
Top