Throwing a ball: Motion in one direction

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves a boy throwing a ball vertically from the top of a building, with various questions regarding the ball's motion, including its initial velocity, maximum height, velocity at different points, and time of flight. The subject area is kinematics, focusing on motion under constant acceleration due to gravity.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the implications of the ball traveling upward for 4 seconds and question whether this duration includes the return trip to the original position. Some suggest considering the time to reach the peak and the time to fall back down.
  • There is uncertainty about how to find displacement without an initial velocity, and participants explore different kinematic equations to address this issue.
  • Some participants express confusion about the calculations for maximum height and the relationship between upward and downward motion.
  • Questions arise regarding the assumptions made about the ball's motion and the realism of the scenario presented.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing guidance on using kinematic equations and exploring different interpretations of the problem. There is a collaborative effort to clarify concepts and address misunderstandings, but no consensus has been reached on all aspects of the problem.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential constraints in the problem, such as the assumption of constant acceleration and the effects of gravity, as well as the lack of explicit information regarding the ball's initial velocity and displacement. Some express uncertainty about the realism of the scenario, particularly regarding the height the ball could reach.

lNVlNClBLE
Messages
21
Reaction score
0
~ Throwing a ball: Motion in one direction ~

Homework Statement


The boy throws the ball vertically from the top of the building. The ball travels upward for 4 seconds. a) What was the original velocity of the ball when it was thrown? b) How high above the building does the ball go? When the ball begins its descent, it passes its original position at the top of the building. c) What is the velocity of the ball at this point? d) If the building is 40m, compute the elapsed time of flight from when the ball left the boy's hand. e) At what velocity does the ball hit the ground? f) What is the acceleration of the ball at the peak of its flight? g) What is the acceleration of the ball just before it hits the ground?

Homework Equations


v = v-original + at
Delta(x) = V-original(time) + (1/2)at^2
Ymax = V-original(time) + 1/2 at^2

The Attempt at a Solution



a) Used velocity equation instead.
0 = Vo + (-9.8)(4)
0 = Vo + (-39.2)
39.2m/s = Vo

b) This calculation makes no sense to me. EDIT: Maybe this is better. I still don't see how a boy could possibly throw a ball twice the height of a building he's standing on top of.
Ymax = Vo(time) + (1/2) at^2
Ymax = 39.2(4) + (1/2)(-9.8)(16)
Ymax = 156-78.4
Ymax = 78.4

c)
v = Vo + at
v = 39.2 + (-9.8)(8)
v = -39.2 m/s

d)
-40 = 39.2t + (1/2)(-9.8)(t)^2
-40 = 39.2t + (-4.9)(t)^2
-4.9t^2 + 39.2t + 40 = 0
4.9t^2 - 39.2t - 40 = 0

= 39.2 plus/minus sqrt (1536.64 + 784)/9.8
= 39.2 plus/minus sqrt (2320.64)/9.8
= 39.2 plus/minus 48.17/9.8
t = 8.92 seconds

WHEW.

e) v = Vo + at
v = 39.2 + (-9.8)(8.92)
v = 39.2 + (-87.42)
v = -48.22
v = 48.22 m/s

f) -9.8 m/s^2

g) -9.8 m/s^2
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org


lNVlNClBLE said:
a) I assumed that displacement or delta(x) was 0, but I could be wrong.
It says the ball travels upward for 4 seconds, not that the round trip back to the start took 4 seconds.

Redo this, as it will affect the other answers.
 


Doc Al said:
It says the ball travels upward for 4 seconds, not that the round trip back to the start took 4 seconds.

Redo this, as it will affect the other answers.

I'm still not sure how this affects the question. Can I assume that since it takes 4 seconds to reach the peak, it will take 8 seconds to fall back down to its original position?

Physics noob, here.
 


lNVlNClBLE said:
I'm still not sure how this affects the question. Can I assume that since it takes 4 seconds to reach the peak, it will take 8 seconds to fall back down to its original position?
Sure. That's one way to do it. Another way is to use another kinematic equation that doesn't involve distance.

(Do it both ways!)
 


Doc Al said:
Sure. That's one way to do it. Another way is to use another kinematic equation that doesn't involve distance.

(Do it both ways!)

One more question, and thank you for the help by the way.

How am I to find the displacement, or distance, if I don't have an initial velocity? Using the equation Delta(x) = V-original(time) + (1/2) at^2, I have all of the variables besides Vo and delta(x) - and I assume delta(x) is stated implicitly somewhere in the problem and I'm just missing it -
 


you don't have an initial velocity, but you do have velocity after 4 seconds. When the ball hits the peak, its velocity is equal to zero.
 


SHISHKABOB said:
you don't have an initial velocity, but you do have velocity after 4 seconds. When the ball hits the peak, its velocity is equal to zero.

Thank you sir, it's much appreciated.
 


lNVlNClBLE said:
How am I to find the displacement, or distance, if I don't have an initial velocity? Using the equation Delta(x) = V-original(time) + (1/2) at^2, I have all of the variables besides Vo and delta(x) - and I assume delta(x) is stated implicitly somewhere in the problem and I'm just missing it -
You first solve for the initial velocity, of course. That's why it's part a!

If you use the displacement formula to solve for the initial velocity, you must choose an interval for which you already know the displacement. Such as a round trip. But you can also use the velocity formula to solve for the initial velocity.
 


Doc Al said:
You first solve for the initial velocity, of course. That's why it's part a!

If you use the displacement formula to solve for the initial velocity, you must choose an interval for which you already know the displacement. Such as a round trip. But you can also use the velocity formula to solve for the initial velocity.

Reworked, but I'm not sure if it's correct. I wish this thing came with an answer key.

EDIT2: Worked out part c.
 
Last edited:
  • #10


lNVlNClBLE said:
a) Used velocity equation instead.
0 = Vo + (-9.8)(4)
0 = Vo + (-39.2)
39.2m/s = Vo

b) This calculation makes no sense to me. EDIT: Maybe this is better.
Ymax = Vo(time) + (1/2) at^2
Ymax = 39.2(4) + (1/2)(-9.8)(16)
Ymax = 156-78.4
Ymax = 78.4
Looks good now.

c) Will attempt after initial help - Can I just use V = V-original + at here?
Sure. (But if you catch the trick, this shouldn't require any calculation.)
d) Will attempt after initial help - Clueless as of now. I'm new to physics, is there a general formula to use for a constant increasing downwards acceleration? 1/2gt^2?
Use the same formula. What's the displacement from the initial position?
 
  • #11


Doc Al said:
Looks good now.Sure. (But if you catch the trick, this shouldn't require any calculation.)

Use the same formula. What's the displacement from the initial position?

Woot.

I'm assuming the trick is some sort of law that states if there's no other resistance, an object that travels x meters upward at a velocity will have the same velocity as the initial if it falls the same x meters?

39.2? Which formula would I be plugging this into?
 
  • #12


lNVlNClBLE said:
I'm assuming the trick is some sort of law that states if there's no other resistance, an object that travels x meters upward at a velocity will have the same velocity as the initial if it falls the same x meters?
Yep. The same speed, not velocity, since the direction is opposite. (Thus the minus sign.)
 
  • #13


lNVlNClBLE said:
I still don't see how a boy could possibly throw a ball twice the height of a building he's standing on top of.
That depends on how fast the boy can throw and how high the building is, doesn't it? Of course, this kid is obviously a major league fastball pitcher! (Not very realistic.)

f) Assuming this is just 0m/s^2, since it should have no acceleration at the absolute peak.
 
  • #14


Doc Al said:
That depends on how fast the boy can throw and how high the building is, doesn't it? Of course, this kid is obviously a major league fastball pitcher! (Not very realistic.)

Lol. *facepalm*

Was I wrong? I'm still trying to figure out which equation I'd use to solve part d. Any hints? I suppose the displacement at the peak is 39.2, but I don't know how that helps me.
 
  • #15


an important thing about the equations used here is that they only work when acceleration remains constant. Also, acceleration is caused by forces, which means basically that acceleration only happens when something pushes on something else. In this situation, after the ball leaves the kid's hand, there is nothing pushing on the ball except for gravity (if we ignore air resistance). This is also why they make the important distinction of "just before" in g.
 
  • #16


SHISHKABOB said:
an important thing about the equations used here is that they only work when acceleration remains constant. Also, acceleration is caused by forces, which means basically that acceleration only happens when something pushes on something else. In this situation, after the ball leaves the kid's hand, there is nothing pushing on the ball except for gravity (if we ignore air resistance). This is also why they make the important distinction of "just before" in g.

Another thing I was trying to understand; I know that when objects fall in a non-vacuum, their acceleration is not constant. AKA, after one second, a ball would NOT fall 9.8 meters, but something like 4.

Arg.
 
  • #17


lNVlNClBLE said:
Was I wrong?
About the acceleration being zero? Yep, way wrong. What's the acceleration of a projectile at any point in its motion?
I'm still trying to figure out which equation I'd use to solve part d. Any hints? I suppose the displacement at the peak is 39.2, but I don't know how that helps me.
You'd use the same equation as before. (The second in your list.) Displacement (Δx) means: Final position - initial position.
 
  • #18


lNVlNClBLE said:
Another thing I was trying to understand; I know that when objects fall in a non-vacuum, their acceleration is not constant. AKA, after one second, a ball would NOT fall 9.8 meters, but something like 4.

Arg.

that's because air is in the way, basically. It's the same idea as why it's hard to move through water. The water is "pushing" back at you in the form of resistance. Air "pushes" on falling objects in the same way.

in simple problems like yours, we just forget about it because it makes things a lot more complicated
 
  • #19


lNVlNClBLE said:
Another thing I was trying to understand; I know that when objects fall in a non-vacuum, their acceleration is not constant. AKA, after one second, a ball would NOT fall 9.8 meters, but something like 4.
First solve the 'simple' problems that ignore complications such as air resistance--you can worry about the harder and more realistic problems later.
 
  • #20


Doc Al said:
About the acceleration being zero? Yep, way wrong. What's the acceleration of a projectile at any point in its motion?

You'd use the same equation as before. (The second in your list.) Displacement (Δx) means: Final position - initial position.

I don't know. ._. I know the acceleration in the x direction is always constant, I don't know about the y direction.

Will try.
 
  • #21


lNVlNClBLE said:
I don't know. ._. I know the acceleration in the x direction is always constant, I don't know about the y direction.
The only direction of motion here is along the vertical axis. (Calling it x or y doesn't matter here.)
 
  • #22


Doc Al said:
The only direction of motion here is along the vertical axis. (Calling it x or y doesn't matter here.)

That much I understand. I was always under the impression that any object at its peak would have both an acceleration and velocity of zero, since said object has stopped moving before it switches direction.

Did some work for part d using the displacement formula.
Does my algebra fail, or is that unsolvable?
 
  • #23


lNVlNClBLE said:
That much I understand. I was always under the impression that any object at its peak would have both an acceleration and velocity of zero, since said object has stopped moving before it switches direction.
Nope. The velocity is momentarily zero, but the acceleration remains constant throughout the motion.
Did some work for part d using the displacement formula.
Does my algebra fail, or is that unsolvable?
It's a quadratic equation. Perfectly solvable.
lNVlNClBLE said:
d)
78.2 = 39.2t + (1/2)(-9.8)t^2
78.2 = 39.2t + (-4.9)t^2
Right equation, but wrong displacement.
 
  • #24


Doc Al said:
Nope. The velocity is momentarily zero, but the acceleration remains constant throughout the motion.

It's a quadratic equation. Perfectly solvable.

Right equation, but wrong displacement.

Does the acceleration require calculation, then, or is there something I'm required to know?

Oh, I'll try to get that in standard quadratic form and then solve it.

Which displacement should I be using? Arg. If it reaches 78.4m above the building, isn't the displacement 78.4?
 
  • #25


lNVlNClBLE said:
Does the acceleration require calculation, then, or is there something I'm required to know?
You just have to know. What's the acceleration due to gravity?
Oh, I'll try to get that in standard quadratic form and then solve it.
Yep.
Which displacement should I be using? Arg. If it reaches 78.4m above the building, isn't the displacement 78.4?
That would be the displacement from the start to the top of the motion. What you want is the displacement for the entire trip, from start to when it hits the ground.
 
  • #26


Doc Al said:
You just have to know. What's the acceleration due to gravity?

Yep.

That would be the displacement from the start to the top of the motion. What you want is the displacement for the entire trip, from start to when it hits the ground.

9.8.

Once I figure out my displacement, I'll get back to you. Lol.

><. I'm so stumped. How do I find the displacement for the whole trip; I'm still trying to figure out what I need to plug in for my displacement rather than 78.4 or 39.2
 
  • #27


lNVlNClBLE said:
How do I find the displacement for the whole trip; I'm still trying to figure out what I need to plug in for my displacement rather than 78.4 or 39.2
What's the initial position? What's the final position? (Measure from the same point, of course.)
 
  • #28


Doc Al said:
What's the initial position? What's the final position? (Measure from the same point, of course.)

Starts at 40m, goes up to 118.4, then drops 118.4 to the ground.

0-40 = -40?
 
  • #29


lNVlNClBLE said:
Starts at 40m, goes up to 118.4, then drops 118.4 to the ground.

0-40 = -40?
Good!

I'd say: Starts at 40 m above the ground and ends up at 0 m above the ground. (No need to worry about the intermediate steps.)
 
  • #30


Doc Al said:
Good!

I'd say: Starts at 40 m above the ground and ends up at 0 m above the ground. (No need to worry about the intermediate steps.)

Phew. Long time since I used the quadratic. Can you check to see if that's right?
Also, I've never used it before in physics, so I'm assuming the whole negative part of the plus/minus can be ignored since there's no such thing as negative time.

EDIT: Completed the rest of the problem with that time. I assume f is also just 9.8 m/s^2. If so, are those accelerations -9.8, or just 9.8?
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
10K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K