Projectile Motion here then simulated in a different gravity

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the simulation of projectile motion in different gravitational environments, specifically comparing Earth and the Moon. Participants explore the implications of applying a force to a mass and how this affects the height achieved in varying gravitational conditions. The conversation includes theoretical considerations, mathematical relationships, and experimental setups.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes an experiment involving a mass pushed upward with a force (F) to achieve a height (y) and seeks to understand how this force would translate to a different mass under lunar gravity.
  • Another participant notes that force alone is insufficient without knowing the duration or distance over which the force is applied.
  • A participant introduces a comparison to a compressed spring, suggesting that the energy from the spring must account for both lifting the mass and the object's flight, leading to a derived ratio of jumping heights based on gravitational differences.
  • Concerns are raised about the instantaneous nature of the spring's impulse and how to measure the duration of force application.
  • Discussion includes the relationship between takeoff velocity, mass, and height, with one participant stating that takeoff velocity is inversely proportional to mass and height is proportional to the square of velocity.
  • Another participant expresses confusion regarding the derivation of the equations and seeks verification of their understanding of the relationships involved.
  • One participant concludes that if impulse is the same for both cases, mass and gravity do not affect impulse, leading to a proposed relation that remains unverified.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express varying levels of understanding and agreement on the relationships between force, mass, height, and gravity. Some participants propose models and equations, while others challenge or seek clarification on these ideas. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views on the derivation and implications of the concepts presented.

Contextual Notes

Participants acknowledge limitations in their understanding of the spring's potential energy and the instantaneous nature of the impulse, which complicates the derivation of the relationships discussed. There are also unresolved mathematical steps related to the application of force and its effects in different gravitational environments.

Tomas1337
Messages
13
Reaction score
1
So I'm working on an experiment where I do a projectile motion simulation here on Earth and want to know how it will fair in a low gravity environment such as in the moon with one common parameter in between, Force.

Imagine, here on earth, I have a mass that I push up with a force(F) for it to jump y meters. I record the mass, the height at which it reached and the time it took for it to reach that height which will then allow me to compute for my Force(F).

Now I want to know, if I used this same Force(F) on a different mass under a different gravity, how high it will reach?

I`ve come up so far with this.
Snapshot.jpg


My problem is, when I do solve for the Force, I still have 2 missing parameters which is y and t which is preventing me from solving each variable. Any suggestions?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi, A.T.!

Thank you for your reply and pointing the thread out to me. Learned a lot about the duration the force is applied. The only most important information to my experiment that helped me understand my problem was:

sgphysics said:
I think bahamagreen's comparision to a compressed spring would be an ok representation of the problem. The energy of the compressed spring ##E_c## must be spent on partly lifting an object with a mass while extending the spring ## E_{ext}=mg\delta## and partly on the objects flight ## E_f=mgh ##. The only difference between moon and Earth here are the value of g, beeing 6 times larger for earth. (I neglect the possible difference in ##\delta##).
In other words we get:
## E_{f}=E_{c}-E_{ext} ##
so from this you can show that the ratio of jumping heights are:

##\frac{h_m}{h_e}=\frac{g_e}{g_m} \frac{E_c-mg_m\delta}{E_c - mg_e\delta}## (index m=moon, e=earth)

In reality, my experiment is not a finger pushing but a spring of some sort which will be attached inside the mass. The spring is this:

My theory is that the impulse of the spring when it `snaps` will pass on to the object which it is attached to and will then make the whole thing jump.

Any ideas on how I can proceed? The snap is instantaneous so I can`t (dont know how) to do record the duration on which the force acts on it`s joints...
 
Tomas1337 said:
The snap is instantaneous
For a very short impulse, the take off velocity will be approximately the same in both cases. So the maximal height is proportional to g.
 
I thought as much if it were the same mass yeah, any idea on how to factor in different masses of the objects? Using the equation above would require me to Solve for the Spring`s potential energy which in my case is... kind of hard since it`s not a conventional spring. Is there a more straightforward way?
 
Tomas1337 said:
any idea on how to factor in different masses of the objects?
Take off velocity is inversely proportional to mass. The maximal height is proportional to velocity squared.
 
Okay so, sorry i`m really having a hard time here.

Can you verify if this is correct? Based on what you said... And if it is, I still don`t get the derivation.

Snapshot1.jpg
 
Tomas1337 said:
I still don`t get the derivation.
Assuming the short impulse Δp is independent of m and g:

v = Δp / m
h = v2 / (2*g) = Δp2 / (2*g*m2)
 
Got it!
I think I finally got it right.
Assuming impulse is the same for both cases and the mass and gravity do not affect impulse at all.

So the relation is*
Snapshot2.jpg


Am I right?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 25 ·
Replies
25
Views
4K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 23 ·
Replies
23
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K