What is the Work-Energy Theorem for a Skier Crashing into Netting?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a skier with a mass of 85 kg crashing into netting at a speed of 65 km/h, which is incorrectly converted to 234 m/s instead of the correct 18.06 m/s. The work done by the netting to bring the skier to rest is calculated using the work-energy theorem, yielding approximately 1.5 x 10^5 J. The spring constant of the netting is given as 13,500 N/m, and the distance the netting stretches when the skier comes to rest is determined to be about 0.64 m. The importance of accurate unit conversion is emphasized in the calculations.
kylepetten
Messages
25
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



A skier comes crashing into the netting at the bottom of a ski hill. The skier has a mass of 85 kg and is moving at a speed of 65 km/h (234 m/s).

(a) How much work is done by the netting while bringing the skier to rest?
(b) If the "spring" constant for the netting is 13500 N/m, how far is the netting stretched when the skier comes to rest?

m = 85 kg
v1 = 234 m/s
v2 = 0 m/s
k = 13500 N/m
w = ?
[PLAIN]http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/5/d/f5d889f32d6794e1bc2ed394e9688c76.pngx[/URL] = ?

Homework Equations



(F)(d) = [1/2(m)(v2^2)] - [1/2(m)(v1^2)]
KE = [1/2(m)(v^2)]
PEe = [1/2(k)(x^2)]

The Attempt at a Solution



(a)

W = [PLAIN]http://upload.wikimedia.org/math/f/5/d/f5d889f32d6794e1bc2ed394e9688c76.pngKE[/URL]

= [1/2(m)(v^2)]
= [1/2(85 kg)(234 m/s)^2]
= 2327130
= 2.3 x 10^6 J

This answer seems reasonable.

(b)

Now here is where I need help.

2.3 x 10^6 J = [1/2(k)(x^2)]
2.3 x 10^6 J = [1/2(13500 N/m)(x^2)]
x = sqrt{[-2.3 x 10^6 J]/[1/2(13500 N/m)]}
x = 18 m

Does this look right?
Thanks in advance!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
65 km/h ≠ 234 m/s

1h = 3600 s.

Convert it over.
 
rock.freak667 said:
65 km/h ≠ 234 m/s

1h = 3600 s.

Convert it over.

Ahh! I multiplied by 3.6 instead of dividing! Thanks!
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
Thread 'Voltmeter readings for this circuit with switches'
TL;DR Summary: I would like to know the voltmeter readings on the two resistors separately in the picture in the following cases , When one of the keys is closed When both of them are opened (Knowing that the battery has negligible internal resistance) My thoughts for the first case , one of them must be 12 volt while the other is 0 The second case we'll I think both voltmeter readings should be 12 volt since they are both parallel to the battery and they involve the key within what the...
Thread 'Trying to understand the logic behind adding vectors with an angle between them'
My initial calculation was to subtract V1 from V2 to show that from the perspective of the second aircraft the first one is -300km/h. So i checked with ChatGPT and it said I cant just subtract them because I have an angle between them. So I dont understand the reasoning of it. Like why should a velocity be dependent on an angle? I was thinking about how it would look like if the planes where parallel to each other, and then how it look like if one is turning away and I dont see it. Since...
Back
Top