Simple Conservation of energy question

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The forum discussion centers on the physics of pole vaulting, specifically the conversion of kinetic energy into gravitational potential energy. A pole vaulter running at 30 km/h (8.4 m/s) achieves a height of approximately 4.6 m, which is derived from the conservation of energy principles. The calculation of 3.6 m for the height increase is based on the formula KE = PE, but the actual height achieved is influenced by additional factors such as body orientation and technique. The discussion highlights that elite pole vaulters can exceed 5 m due to these additional energy contributions and techniques, such as the "Fosbury flop."

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of kinetic energy and potential energy equations
  • Familiarity with the concept of center of mass in physics
  • Knowledge of pole vaulting techniques, particularly the "Fosbury flop"
  • Basic grasp of the effects of air resistance on athletic performance
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the physics behind the "Fosbury flop" technique in pole vaulting
  • Explore the impact of altitude on pole vaulting performance and air resistance
  • Learn about the biomechanics of center of mass during athletic jumps
  • Investigate advanced energy conversion techniques used in pole vaulting
USEFUL FOR

Athletes, coaches, physics students, and sports scientists interested in the mechanics of pole vaulting and energy conversion in athletic performance.

Derek1997
Messages
63
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Pole-vaulting is a fantastic example of energy being converted from one form to another. A pole- vaulter 1.7 m tall runs at 30 km/h (8.4 m/s) with her pole before starting her jump. The kinetic energy she generates is converted into elastic potential energy of the pole bending.This is then returned to the jumper as gravitational potential energy. Assume that her centre of mass is 55% of her height:
1)-Show that the height achieved of 4.6 m is close that that predicted by simple conservation of energy equations
2)- Discuss why this calculation is not exact - including consideration of the fact that the women’s pole vault world record is over 5 meters and that it’s not possible to run faster than 30 km/h with a
Thanks

Homework Equations

The Attempt at a Solution


Well, I got 3.6h for my first question i did KE=P and solved for h. Although I am not sure it said 4.6 and I got 3.6. Also for second part I say because since world record is 5m and not possible run more than 30, this athelte did run 30km and acheived lower than world record? thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Hello Derek, :welcome:,

Culture at PF is that you show your work in detail and we'll ask questions and give hints etcetera. (It doesn't help you if we do the exercise for you )

You got 3.6 m (meter, I hope, not hours :smile: ) starting from where ?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Derek1997
I got 3.6 m too for the increase of her height.
 
BvU said:
Hello Derek, :welcome:,

Culture at PF is that you show your work in detail and we'll ask questions and give hints etcetera. (It doesn't help you if we do the exercise for you )

You got 3.6 m (meter, I hope, not hours :smile: ) starting from where ?
Hi, So i got 3.6 as height using the equation but I hope I am in a right track, so it says height of achieved is close to 4.6m which I don't get it, but for explaining second part I said it's because even tho he/she ran for 30km/h achieved fairly low height (3.6m)
 
Derek1997 said:
So i got 3.6 as height using the equation
Using what equation? As BvU has suggested, you need to show your work in detail. Is the 3.6 (meters) result supposed to be the height attained?
Derek1997 said:
I said it's because even tho he/she ran for 30km/h achieved fairly low height (3.6m)
So, how might one clear a bar at 5 meters when one only has enough kinetic energy to raise one's center of mass to [an assumed] 3.6m?
 
I think we agree that her height increased by 3.6 m, but you have to consider where the starting point is. Hint: 4.6 m is the right answer.

For part b, the problem is telling you that pole vaulters are able to clear a 5 m bar. Then they ask how that can be possible considering that she doesn't produce enough kinetic energy to be able to increase her center of mass to that height.
 
I really appreciate your helps guys, first off, I gone 1/2mv2=mgh cancell h and solved for h which I got 3.6m. But she has a starting height of 1.7m so 1.7+3.6=5.3m?
 
Have you ever seen a pole vaulting exihibition?
What is the body orientation of the vaulter when clearing the bar?
What sources of energy, other than legs, are available to the contestant?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: TomHart
Tom.G said:
Have you ever seen a pole vaulting exihibition?
What is the body orientation of the vaulter when clearing the bar?
What sources of energy, other than legs, are available to the contestant?
No, I haven't seen any pole vaulting or I did when i was really young. I guess hands?
 
  • #10
Derek1997 said:
I really appreciate your helps guys, first off, I gone 1/2mv2=mgh cancell h and solved for h which I got 3.6m. But she has a starting height of 1.7m so 1.7+3.6=5.3m?
If she has a height of 1.7 m and jumps up by 3.6 meters, that gets the top of her head over a 5.3 m bar. Would that be enough?
 
  • #11
Derek, here's a YouTube clip of a pole vaulter in slow motion.

 
  • #12
jbriggs444 said:
If she has a height of 1.7 m and jumps up by 3.6 meters, that gets the top of her head over a 5.3 m bar. Would that be enough?
Well since the record is over 5m, I guess it makes sense? so yes
 
  • #13
TomHart said:
Derek, here's a YouTube clip of a pole vaulter in slow motion.


Thank you Tom, but what confuses me most is the 4.6m part, I don't get it.
 
  • #14
Make a sketchy drawing, showing clearly where the 3.6 m you calculated (correctly), is located ...
 
  • #15
O
BvU said:
Make a sketchy drawing, showing clearly where the 3.6 m you calculated (correctly), is located ...
Okay then?
 
  • #16
I expected a drawing, not a question. Okay what ?
 
  • #17
BvU said:
I expected a drawing, not a question. Okay what ?
I can't upload it here man, But I am pretty sure I got it right(thats what I sketched) so assuming the bar is 5m he pushes himself 3.6m using spear since he is 1.7m tall he passes the 5m bar with 0.3m difference. right?
 
  • #18
No. Passing isn't the word. The bar will hit her throat (it was her pole). if she stays upright.
 
  • #19
Hi Derek. Here is a YouTube video that describes the "Fosbury flop" high-jumping method. It's the method currently used by . . . virtually all high jumpers. It is a good visual description of the physics involved in high-jumping. Also, contrast the pole vaulter and the high jumper. Once the high jumper's feet leave the ground, there's nothing he can do to apply more energy to increase his maximum height - well, except for maybe trying to flap his arms like a bird. The pole vaulter still has his hands on the pole. Can he use that to any advantage?

 
  • #20
Derek1997 said:
I guess hands?
Yes!
Now, since you've seen the videos, when a body freely rotates, around what point in the body does it rotate?

edit: strike-out
 
Last edited:
  • #21
Tom.G said:
in the body
Did you mean to specify that?
 
  • #22
What I did was 0.55x1.7+3.6= 4.6m So I got a
for B i said some energy concerted into heat also Air friction impacts as well.
 
  • #23
Part a looks right. But for b, the factors you mentioned would REDUCE the height she could jump. And actually, she is able to jump HIGHER than the calculated height of 4.6 m.
 
  • #24
TomHart said:
Part a looks right. But for b, the factors you mentioned would REDUCE the height she could jump. And actually, she is able to jump HIGHER than the calculated height of 4.6 m.
Wait so, for part B we have to say why she has to jump higher than 4.6m? if that's a case i guess techniques would help? eg hand postures and etc? am I right
 
  • #25
Derek1997 said:
Wait so, for part B we have to say why she has to jump higher than 4.6m? if that's a case i guess techniques would help? eg hand postures and etc? am I right
What techniques, specifically?
 
  • #26
Hint: If her running/KE gets her to 4.6m she needs another source of energy to get to >5m.
 
  • #27
Derek1997 said:
Wait so, for part B we have to say why she has to jump higher than 4.6m? if that's a case i guess techniques would help? eg hand postures and etc? am I right
Put yourself in her place. Your mass centre is at a height of 4.6m, but you have to get it up another 0.4m (well, maybe not quite, but we can discuss that later). You are still holding onto the pole. The pole is straight and vertical. The bottom of the pole is on the ground. What are you going to do?
 
  • #28
Ohh, I think I get it now, it's easy you just stretch up your body and move ur legs first then and swing ur arm to pack it up and move from cross bar.
 
  • #29
Derek1997 said:
Ohh, I think I get it now, it's easy you just stretch up your body and move ur legs first then and swing ur arm to pack it up and move from cross bar.
That might be right, just not quite clear what you mean. To clarify, where is the extra energy coming from in that?
 
  • #30
haruspex said:
That might be right, just not quite clear what you mean. To clarify, where is the extra energy coming from in that?
Extra energy technically isn't coming from somewhere, It's just saving of energy to use it in a good cause that is stretching more.
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
44
Views
6K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K