Modeling Projection Motion Problem - Calc 3

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves modeling the motion of a projectile thrown from a distance towards a cliff, specifically calculating the height at which the projectile strikes the cliff. The subject area is calculus-based physics, focusing on projectile motion and kinematics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the importance of unit conversion, particularly between feet and meters, and question how time was determined in the calculations. There are attempts to clarify the equations used and the values plugged into them.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on ensuring proper unit conversion and have suggested algebraic methods to eliminate variables. Multiple interpretations of the problem-solving approach are being explored, particularly regarding the use of trigonometric functions and their modes.

Contextual Notes

There is a noted constraint regarding the use of different measurement units (feet vs. meters) and the need for clarity on how time was calculated in the context of the equations presented.

Will15
Messages
5
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A person is standing 80 ft from a tall cliff. She throws a rock at 80 ft/sec at an angle of 45 degrees from the horizontal. Neglecting air resistance and discounting the height of the person, how far up the cliff does it hit?

Homework Equations


r = ((xo + vo*cos(~))t) i + (yo + (vo*sin(~)t - ((1/2)gt^2))j
r = the distance ; xo = initial distance from horizontal direction ; yo = initial distance from vertical direction ; vo = initial velocity; t = time; g = gravity (9.8m/s); ~ = degrees

The Attempt at a Solution



The correct answer is 48 feet. I did not get that answer from plugging in all the values in the equation.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What exactly did you plug in?

Your listed gravity was in m/s, although all given measurments were in feet. Is it possible that the numbers weren't converted?
Also, your equations have time in them, and you never mentioned how you solved for time.
 
Villyer said:
What exactly did you plug in?

Your listed gravity was in m/s, although all given measurments were in feet. Is it possible that the numbers weren't converted?
Also, your equations have time in them, and you never mentioned how you solved for time.

Man that was it! I didn't convert the m/s into ft/s!

For time, I used the first part of the equation r = xo + (vo*cos~)t => 80/(80*cos45) = t = 1.414
Then I just plugged this into the second equation r = yo + (vo*sin~)t-(.5)(g)(t^2) => r = (80*sin45)(1.414)-(4.9)(1.414)^2) = 70.2ft is the answer i gotten.

If I replace 4.9 with the converted ft (32.1522) I would get ~48ft!

Thanks bud!
 
The problem can be solved algebraically. Just get rid of t, express vertical displacement in terms of v,g, vertical distance, and angle. A little extra pain is converting dead King's finger unit to SI back and forth. And if you are using calculator to find sin(), cos(), and you were entering 45, make sure it's in degree mode.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K