Jumping on a Spring-Like Trampoline problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter KKazaniecki
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Trampoline
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a spring-like trampoline and examines the relationship between gravitational potential energy and spring potential energy as a person jumps onto it. The scenario includes the trampoline's compression when the person lands after jumping to a certain height.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the use of energy conservation principles, specifically relating gravitational potential energy to spring potential energy. There are attempts to derive the spring constant and the compression distance of the trampoline. Questions arise regarding the initial conditions and the energy transformations involved.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided alternative formulations and corrections to the energy equations being used. There is an ongoing exploration of the assumptions made about potential energy and the relationship between mass and spring compression. A few participants have confirmed their calculations while others seek clarification on specific steps.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of a homework assignment, which may limit the information available or the methods permitted. There is a noted confusion regarding the role of mass in the calculations and the initial conditions of the problem.

KKazaniecki
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
1. Homework Statement

A spring-like trampoline dips down 0.07 m when a particular person stands on it. If this person jumps up to a height of 0.35 m above the top of the uncompressed trampoline, how far will the trampoline compress after the person lands?






2. Homework Equations

here are the relevant equations I could think of :

We could use: the potential energy for the spring : U=1/2kx^2
Gravitational potential ( near Earth ) : U=mgh
Kinetic energy : K = 1/2mv^2
Hooke's law: F=-kx




3. The Attempt at a Solution


btw , before you start : I'm using x for the axis of up and down . Because the above equations have x in them and I forgot to change it to y , as it traditionally should be.

hey , this problem popped up in my mechanics homework this week. So here's my attempt at it. But somehow when I enter the answer I get it as wrong.

well okay . So first thing I guess we're going to have to do is find the Spring Constant.

which I found to be . mg/xi . I got this by using the fact that when it's stationary. The forces cancel out. So using hooke's law: mg ( force pointing downwards ) is equal to -kxi . where k is the spring constant and x is how much the spring is the displacement of the spring form the relaxed point . Re arranging mg=-kx we get k=mg/x . And here I drop the negative sign because the we're only dealing with magnitudes here. Right so we plug in the numbers and we get k = 60*9.8/0.07 which is 8400. btw we're just giving the person weight of 60kg but could be anything else.

ok so K = 8400.

now we can use other equations to find the answer.

so, When the person jumps and reaches it's maximum height of 0.35 meters in this case. He doesn't move for a moment. So his kinetic energy at that point is 0. Meaning all the energy is potential . And we have the Gravitational potential equation. Which is U= mgh. So then as it falls. it gains kinetic energy etc etc. And since there is no external forces in action. the energy is conseved. And the Potential Energy the spring ends up being equal to the potential gravitational energy. Which we get . Spring = Gravity , 1/2kx2=mgh . and rearranging that we get
x = sqrt((2mgh)/k)

right so , plugging in the numbers we obtain x = sqrt((2*60*9.8*0.35)/8400) = 0.2213594362.




So x=0.2213594362 . and I input that number and I get marked wrong. So I try rounding it to 2 decimal places , since all the givens are to 2 decimal places. But I still get marked wrong. so , please could someone check my process , and my answer and point out where I went wrong. or something. Because it's really doing my head in , the method I'm using seems to right ( well at least for me hehe ). Anyways any help would be highly appreciated :) have a great day people
 
Physics news on Phys.org
By your logic, if the initial height (and therefore initial gravitational potential energy) is zero, then the spring will not be compressed at all
 
Last edited:
what I meant is that . It's one or the other. So the energy potential at the maximum height is the same as the energy potential of the spring when it is compressed. Because Energy is conserved . It goes from Gravitational Potential --> to kinetic ( as it falls ) ---> to spring potential ( when compressed ). Since there is no friction or air resistance there is no change in the Total Energy. Is what I'm saying true or have I missed something. Thanks.
 
Right, but you only measured the (change in) Gravitational Potential Energy from the height that it initially was to the height of the unstretched spring.
What about the gravitational potential energy gained while the spring is being compressed?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
ok so , mgh + mgx = 1/2kx^2 . In other words Gravitational Potential = Spring Potential. Which as you said is the one where it's above the spring , and when it's compressing the spring. So Energy is conserved .
Rearranging that to find x , We get: x = (sqrt(g m (g m+2 h k))+g m)/k. Where k = gm/0.07. ( hooke's law ). And So x = 0.30216373532 . Rounding that to 2 d.p we get x = 0.30. And I just checked it and it's right. Thanks so much
 
Is mass canceled out somehow? I just can't figure out how to solve for x without knowing m.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
29
Views
3K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
14K
Replies
5
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K