Why Is the Coefficient of Restitution Less Than 1 in a Tennis Racket Collision?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the coefficient of restitution in the context of a tennis racket collision with a ball. The original poster attempts to calculate this coefficient based on the velocities of the ball and racket before and after the collision, noting an unexpected result of greater than 1.

Discussion Character

  • Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the formula for the coefficient of restitution, questioning the correct application of relative velocities before and after the collision. There is a focus on understanding the direction of velocities and the implications of the racket moving in the opposite direction.

Discussion Status

Some participants have pointed out a potential misunderstanding in the application of the formula, suggesting that the original poster may have inverted the terms. There is acknowledgment of a mistake, but no consensus on the resolution of the issue has been reached.

Contextual Notes

The original poster's calculations are based on specific velocities provided, and there is an indication that assumptions regarding directionality may need to be revisited.

charlie1990
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
1. calculate the coefficient of restitution when a player hits a ball traveling into a racket at 10m/s and the racket is stationary before the ball hits it. after the ball hits it, the ball has a velocity of 5m/s and the racket is moving in the opposite direction at 1 m/s (Velocity before a - velocity before b)/(Velocity after a - velocity after b)
I know this is what's used to get the answer normally, but I am getting the wrong answer (above 1).


I think it has something to do with racket going opposite direction but not sure what to do?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
charlie1990 said:
(Velocity before a - velocity before b)/(Velocity after a - velocity after b)
You have that a bit backwards (or upside down). You want the relative speed after the collision over the relative speed before the collision.
 
Doc Al said:
You have that a bit backwards (or upside down). You want the relative speed after the collision over the relative speed before the collision.
cheers, poor mistake
 
charlie1990 said:
cheers, poor mistake
... and the sign reverses.
 

Similar threads

Replies
16
Views
3K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
5K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
8K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
7K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K