Rod Cross' collisions, sports balls, and silly putty

AI Thread Summary
Rod Cross' research on small-ball sports physics provides valuable insights into collision physics, particularly through extensive notes and data on ball bounce and impact forces. The findings include F-t graphs that are beneficial for educational purposes, especially in understanding the dynamics of impacts. Additionally, the study features an intriguing section on the effects of dropping heavy objects onto Silly Putty, showcasing unique material properties. This research serves as a resource for experiments involving ball bearings and force transducers. Overall, it highlights the intersection of sports science and physics in an engaging manner.
Simon Bridge
Science Advisor
Homework Helper
Messages
17,871
Reaction score
1,661
A surprising find looking for something else:
http://www.physics.usyd.edu.au/~cross/

Somewhat extensive notes on various small-ball sports physics - including material on collision physics and a neat vid of a falling slinky.

I've mined:
Ball bounce for comparative data for experiments involving a ball-bearing hitting a force transducer plate.
The paper has F-t graphs for several different situations appropriate to a class and useful for answering those questions about the "force of an impact".

Including a whole section on what happens when you drop heavy objects onto Silly Putty :D
 
  • Like
Likes Greg Bernhardt and Enigman
Physics news on Phys.org
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Back
Top