Projectile Motion: Solving for Overall Velocity with Hang Glider Example

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on calculating the overall velocity of a hang glider that runs off a cliff at an initial speed of 3 m/s. The correct vertical velocity after 5 seconds is determined using the equation v(t) = v_i + at, resulting in -50 m/s due to gravitational acceleration. The horizontal velocity remains constant at 3 m/s, contrary to an erroneous substitution of 9 m/s found in a solution manual. The final magnitude of the velocity vector is calculated using the Pythagorean theorem, yielding approximately 50.09 m/s.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinematic equations, specifically v = v(initial) + at
  • Knowledge of gravitational acceleration (g = 10 m/s²)
  • Familiarity with vector addition and the Pythagorean theorem
  • Basic principles of projectile motion
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation and application of kinematic equations in projectile motion
  • Learn about the effects of air resistance on projectile motion
  • Explore advanced topics in vector mathematics for physics applications
  • Review common misconceptions in physics problems involving free-fall and gliding
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on kinematics and projectile motion, as well as educators seeking to clarify common errors in physics problem-solving.

eddy10188
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A hang gilder runs off a cliff, with a speed of 3 m/s. What is its overall velocity after 5 seconds?

Some constants like gravity are rounded because this is an MCAT problem.

Homework Equations


v=v(initial) + at
a^2 + b^2 = c^2

The Attempt at a Solution



vertical velocity:
v=v(initial) + at
0=v(initial) + at
v(initial) = -at
= (-10 m/s)(5s)

What i find strange is that in the solution manuel for this problem, 0.5 seconds is used for time, giving the overall vertical velocity -5 m/s.

Then you find the overall velocity with pythagorean's theorum, but what is strange is instead of using 3 m/s for the horizontal velocity, 9 m/s is used instead! :
v= (9^2 + -5^2)^(1/2)
Making it just a tad over 10.

Why is 0.5 seconds used instead of 5 seconds?

And why is 9 used instead of 3??

Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
You manipulated the equation wrong, and your units are wrong as well. The units for acceleration are \frac{meters}{second^2}

I have absolutely no idea how your book/coursework or whatever reached its answers.
A substitution of t=5 sec in the v(t) function was required. No clue on why they chose to substitute with t=0.5 sec
Same goes for the magnitude of the velocity vector, the horizontal velocity remained constant at 3 \tfrac{m}{s} so that should have been substituted into the equation, and not the nonsensical 9 \tfrac{m}{s}

You were on the right track, a few minor errors aside, so I don't have any qualms about posting the full solution.

In order to find his vertical velocity after 5 seconds:
v(t)=v_i+at

Now we substitute for the question's known variables.
v(t)=0-gt

Calculating for t=5 yields:
v(5)=-g*5=-50 \tfrac{m}{s}

As you've correctly pointed out, his horizontal velocity remains constant as there are no forces acting on him in that direction.

Some quick vector math gives us the magnitude of the velocity vector:
|\vec v|=\sqrt{|\vec v_x|^2+|\vec v_y|^2}
Substituting:
|\vec v|=\sqrt{3^2+50^2}=\sqrt{2509}\approx 50.0899 \tfrac{m}{s}
 
This is a hang glider, and it's supposed to be in free-fall? This is probably the worst physics problem I've ever seen!
 
Doesn't seem like a very nice problem, because hang-gliders are assumed to actually fly and glide, instead of "running and plummeting".
 
ideasrule said:
This is a hang glider, and it's supposed to be in free-fall? This is probably the worst physics problem I've ever seen!

Maybe the guy who made the glider was the same guy who made the problem.
 
iamthegelo said:
Maybe the guy who made the glider was the same guy who made the problem.

Then he should jump off the cliff without the glider. This would make the problem more consistent with projectile motion. My apologies about the sarcasm, but this is indeed a terrible problem.
 
iamthegelo said:
Maybe the guy who made the glider was the same guy who made the problem.

Maybe his problem is that his hang-glider doesn't quite glide?

Anyway, a model including simple air resistance (Ignoring lift and other pressure effects), could do nicely here as well, but as you're not given any constants for the drag force, that's out of the question as well. Where exactly are you getting these questions? You should very seriously consider using a different book/tutor/website.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
40
Views
3K
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K