Kinematics Question: Child on Trampoline Jump Height Calculation

  • Thread starter Thread starter Gurvir
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kinematics
Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
6 replies · 3K views
Gurvir
Messages
19
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A child on a trampoline remains in the air for 1.5s after having jumped straight up. What height did the child reach?

Homework Equations


All kinematics equations
I was thinking of using Net Force but we don't have the mass and if you use it how could you find displacement.

The Attempt at a Solution



d = vit + 1/2at2
vi= 0
So:
d= 1/2at2
d = 1/2(9.81m/s2)(1.5s)2
d= 11m

The answer is suppose to be 2.8m
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The time given is the total time in the air. So what's the time it took to reach the highest point?
 
Doc Al said:
The time given is the total time in the air. So what's the time it took to reach the highest point?

Half of that which is 0.75s, and wow. There it is, simplest question. Thanks man!

Omg I keep getting stuck on these questions, kinematics is so easy but I can't remember anything. Check back I will have a new question posted in 1min.

Homework Statement


A truck uniformly decelerates by 5.00m/s2 to a velocity of 60.0m/s [W] in 30.0s. What was the truck's initial velocity before the driver stepped on the brakes?

Homework Equations


All kinematics equations
I'm looking for an equation but I don't have distance so I can't figure one out that will work. The closest formula I could maybe see working is
vf2 = vi2 + 2ad

The Attempt at a Solution


I'm not sure.

(EDIT)

Found it:

Solution

a = Δv / Δt
a = vf - vi / Δt

Rearrange it and you get this
vi = 60m/s -at

Put in the variables
vi = 60m/s - (-5.00m/s)(30.0s)
vi = 60m/s + (5.00m/s)(30.0s)

Answer:
vi = 210 m/s [W]
 
Last edited:
Based on the numbers you quote the result is correct, but then it sure is one fast truck. If I were you I would double check that the given numbers are correctly taken from the problem text.
 
Filip Larsen said:
Based on the numbers you quote the result is correct, but then it sure is one fast truck. If I were you I would double check that the given numbers are correctly taken from the problem text.
Yes, the numbers are comically unrealistic. Worth checking that you copied the problem correctly, but it's also not unusual for problems to use unrealistic data. (Unfortunately.)
 
Doc Al said:
Yes, the numbers are comically unrealistic. Worth checking that you copied the problem correctly, but it's also not unusual for problems to use unrealistic data. (Unfortunately.)

i guess I am just lucky, my textbook uses realistic numbers, it even has a textblock on the side that says they're all realistic =]..

and yes, that's an insanely fast truck xD