Proving 5G in G-Max Reverse Bungee in NZ & SG

  • Thread starter Thread starter wintergirl
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Bungee Reverse
AI Thread Summary
The G-max Reverse Bungee in New Zealand and Singapore is designed to launch a car attached to giant rubber bands, reaching heights of up to 60 meters and claiming to achieve 5 Gs of acceleration. To prove this, participants are considering the mass of the car and passengers, estimated at 800 kg, and discussing the relevant physics equations, including gravitational force and Newton's second law. There is confusion regarding the variable "r" in the gravitational formula and whether a spring constant is necessary for calculations. The project aims to explore the physics behind the bungee's operation, despite a lack of formal instruction on the topic. Participants seek guidance on how to approach the problem without prior knowledge of certain concepts.
wintergirl
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
1. there is such a reverse bungee machine called the G-max Reverse Bungee in New Zealand and Singapore. Basically it works by attaching a car to two stretched giant rubber bands, then releasing them from the ground, so that it rockets up (to 60m), quite like reversed bungee jumping. it claims to be able to achieve 5 G, and we are supposed to prove it.
2. we are allowed to assume the mass of the car and the people sitting in it. there was no given equation but i found this on wikipedia.
g=-[(MG)/r^2]R
where:
r is the vector from center of the object to the location we are considering, and
G is the gravitational constant of the universe.

3. so assuming the weight of the car + 3 people is 800kg, we can substitute to solve. but what does r mean? or alternatively, does anyone have a better solution to prove that it reaches 5G?
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You won't have to use the gravity formula, and can just assume it is 9.8m/s^2. 5Gs means 5 times the acceleration of gravity, so you are looking to see if the bungee cords can accelerate the car to 5*9.8m/s^2. You will want to use Newton's second law for the forces from gravity and the spring. Are you given a spring constant, or is that what you are supposed to be solving for to see if it is reasonable?
 
thanks for your reply. ;D
i understand what you are trying to say.
and er no, actually we arent given anything. this is sort of a project, where we are supposed to find out about the topic then write an article on it. we haven't even been taught about G, only about acceleration. =(
is it possible to not include spring constant?

PS: sorry everyone, i know i haven't shown much trying in my work, but the thing is i have no idea where to start with since it wasnt taught...pls bear with me. thanks a load!
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top