Solve Your Tennis Racket Problem with a Geometric Approach

  • Thread starter Thread starter IamVector
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kinematics Tennis
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a tennis racket problem that involves geometric approaches to analyze motion and collisions. Participants are exploring the implications of symmetry and the geometric representation of vectors in the context of elastic collisions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the potential of using symmetry in the problem, with some expressing confusion over the geometric approach compared to algebraic methods. There are attempts to decompose vectors and visualize the problem using geometric shapes like trapezoids.

Discussion Status

The conversation reflects a mix of attempts to clarify the problem and explore different approaches. Some participants have provided geometric hints, while others express difficulty in understanding these concepts. There is no clear consensus on the best method to proceed, and multiple interpretations of the problem are being considered.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem involves an elastic collision in the racket frame, which complicates the use of symmetry in the ground frame. There are indications of misunderstandings regarding the nature of the collision and the geometric representation required.

IamVector
Messages
98
Reaction score
9
Homework Statement
A tennis ball falls at velocity v onto a heavy racket
and bounces back elastically. What does the racket’s velocity
u have to be to make the ball bounce back at a right angle to
its initial trajectory and not start spinning if it did not spin
before the bounce? What is the angle β between ⃗u and the
normal of the racket’s plane, if the corresponding angle for ⃗v is α?
Relevant Equations
take one of the axes (say x) to be
perpendicular to the racket’s plane and the other one

(y) parallel to it. Absence of rotation means that the y-
components of the ball’s and racket’s velocities are equal
Is there any geometric approach??
 
Physics news on Phys.org
IamVector said:
Is there any geometric approach??
Symmetry may be a fruitful approach. The arrival and departure trajectories should be similar.
 
jbriggs444 said:
Symmetry may be a fruitful approach. The arrival and departure trajectories should be similar.
got u = v/2 cos α by algebraic approach and the angle. didn't got the geometric approach I think it will be easy by geometric approach.
 
Last edited:
IamVector said:
got u = v/2 cos α by algebraic approach and the angle? didn't got the geometric approach I think it will be easy by geometric approach.
Never mind. I misunderstood the problem. It's not an elastic collision per se. It's an elastic collision in the racket frame. Which means that in the ground frame, there is no symmetry to exploit.
 
jbriggs444 said:
Never mind. I misunderstood the problem. It's not an elastic collision per se. It's an elastic collision in the racket frame. Which means that in the ground frame, there is no symmetry to exploit.
I saw the hint by geometric approach it says :
Geometric approach: draw a right trapezoid as follows:

we decompose ⃗v into parallel and perpendicular compon-
ents, ⃗v = ⃗vx + ⃗vy; let us mark points A, B and C so that

AB⃗ = ⃗vx and BC⃗ = ⃗vy (then, AC⃗ = ⃗v). Next we mark
points D, E and F so that CD⃗ = ⃗v ′

y = ⃗vy, DE⃗ = −⃗vx,

and EF⃗ = 2⃗ux; then, CF⃗ = ⃗v ′

y − ⃗vx + 2⃗ux ≡ ⃗v ′ and
AF⃗ = 2⃗vy + 2⃗ux ≡ 2⃗u. Due to the problem conditions,
∠ACF = 90◦

. Let us also mark point G as the centre of
AF; then, GC is both the median of the right trapezoid
ABDF (and hence, parallel to AB and the x-axis), and

the median of the triangle ACF. What is left to do, is ex-
pressing the hypotenuse of △ACF in terms of v = |AC|I found this very tricky to understand but it is considered to be more easy than algebraic one so please help.
 
jbriggs444 said:
Never mind. I misunderstood the problem. It's not an elastic collision per se. It's an elastic collision in the racket frame. Which means that in the ground frame, there is no symmetry to exploit.
so what we can use??
 

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
8K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
11K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K