The Durability of Bone: Long Falls

  • Thread starter Thread starter enterthetaiga
  • Start date Start date
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the physics behind the "Long Fall Boots" in Valve's Portal, specifically comparing their durability to human legs during a fall. It highlights that human leg bones can absorb approximately 200 joules of energy before breaking, with the angle and type of impact significantly affecting the likelihood of injury. Landing with bent knees can reduce impact forces by up to 36 times, emphasizing the importance of body position during a fall. The concept of terminal velocity is introduced, indicating that beyond a certain height, the speed of landing remains constant, limiting the effectiveness of protective gear. Overall, the conversation underscores the fantasy nature of the boots compared to real-world physics.
enterthetaiga
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
I am doing a paper on the physics in Valve's Portal and got interested in the "Long Fall Boots" that prevent any damage no matter how far you fall. I can calculate the force they can withstand and all of that, but I wonder how much more durable these boots are than plain human feet. So here is my question:

How much force is required to break a pair of human legs given that the person is in free fall and lands on her (the character in portal is an average-sized female) feet on a hard, sturdy surface (like tile), or how much energy can a pair of human legs absorb?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The long-fall boot are total fantasy.

The maximum energy a bone can absorb without breaking is surprisingly small. The leg bones can absorb about 200 J - and you get two of them per human. (I'm pressed to find a reference though.)

Breaking a bone depends on the angle and type of the impact as well as the force of the impact.
Breakages from modest falls usually result from a bad angle of landing - for a very long fall, the knee joint will fail even if nothing else does.

You'll have noticed that if you land with bent knees it is less painful than landing with straight knees.

If you bend your legs then the momentum change when you land is spread over longer.

Also see:
https://www.physicsforums.com/showthread.php?t=312805
 
Humans have a terminal velocity so above a certain height (call it Hmax) any increase in height makes no difference to how fast you land. So that limits how effective the boots need to be.

The maximium safe height without magic boots is only a few meters (call it Hs).

So one approach would be to say that the boots are Hmax2/Hs2 times as effective.

Bending the knees is recommended...

http://www.wikihow.com/Survive-a-Long-Fall

Bend your knees. Possibly nothing is more important to surviving a fall (or simpler to do) than bending your knees. Research has shown that having one’s knees bent at impact can reduce the magnitude of impact forces 36-fold

Sadly no source cited.

Perhaps of interest..

http://scienceblogs.com/dotphysics/2009/12/16/dangerous-jumping-calculator/
 
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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...
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...
Back
Top