Ski New England - New England Hiking - New England Inns, Bed & Breakfasts and Hotels
Ski New England - New England Hiking - New England Inns, Bed & Breakfasts and Hotels
Ski New England - New England Hiking - New England Inns, Bed & Breakfasts and Hotels
Ski New England - New England Hiking - New England Inns, Bed & Breakfasts and Hotels
 Saturday, July 5, 2008
Northeast Skiing, Hiking, Lodging, Outdoor GearSkiingNortheast Skiing, Hiking, Lodging, Outdoor GearHikingNortheast Skiing, Hiking, Lodging, Outdoor GearLodgingNortheast Skiing, Hiking, Lodging, Outdoor GearGearNortheast Skiing, Hiking, Lodging, Outdoor GearForumsNortheast Skiing, Hiking, Lodging, Outdoor GearNewsNortheast Skiing, Hiking, Lodging, Outdoor Gear
Ski New England - New England Hiking - New England Inns, Bed & Breakfasts and Hotels


Welcome to the New England & Northeast Ski Forums - AlpineZone Forums.

You are currently viewing our forums as a guest which only gives you limited access to view most discussions. By joining our free community you will have access to post topics, communicate privately with other members (private messages), respond to polls, upload your own photos and access many other special features. Registration is fast, simple and absolutely free so please, join our community today!

If you have any problems with the registration process or your account login, please contact the administrator.

Help me buy men's skis...


Originally Posted by Marc As far as the forces involved in a turn go, height will affect the placement of the center of mass of the skier, and where the ...

Go Back   New England & Northeast Ski Forums - AlpineZone Forums > Other Forums > Gear and Equipment Forum

Notices

Reply
 
Thread Tools Display Modes
Old Nov 28, 2007, 8:35 AM   #21 (permalink)
jack97
 
jack97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc View Post
As far as the forces involved in a turn go, height will affect the placement of the center of mass of the skier, and where the skier can move his CM to his advantage to balance the forces induced by the angular acceleration of a turn. Remember, any time you change velocity, you accelerate, so when you arc through a turn, you're experiencing acceleration.

The force placed on the skier through a turn of like radii is shown by Newton's 2nd law, force is equal to mass times acceleration. For the same skier making a turn of the same radius, the mass of the skier is accelerated by the same amount, so the skier with the greater mass will experience a greater force, which he will exert back on the snow through his skies (3rd law).

Since it is force on the ski that causes it to deform (deflect), it is only the mass of the skier and the radius of your turn that affects the force on the ski. In general, a longer ski of the same model is not only scaled up to provide a bigger spring for the bigger force, but also gives more surface edge area that the heavier skier needs to maintain the no slip edge condition.
Hmm interesting conversation.... from the top of my head, for the same weight, a skier height does come into play. The com is higher but when he/she moves laterally to make a turn, the axis of rotation is further away from the ski. IIRC, the angular forces generated would be greater b/c of the difference in com location, again assume same weight, same speed going into turn, same snow conditions and so on. Thus it would be relatively easier to deform (reverse camber) the ski due to the extra force generated.
jack97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 8:35 AM
 
AlpineZone Supporter

Old Nov 28, 2007, 9:24 AM   #22 (permalink)
Marc
 
Marc's Avatar
I'm with psycho -->
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dudley, MA
Posts: 4,761
Send a message via AIM to Marc
Quote:
Originally Posted by jack97 View Post
Hmm interesting conversation.... from the top of my head, for the same weight, a skier height does come into play. The com is higher but when he/she moves laterally to make a turn, the axis of rotation is further away from the ski. IIRC, the angular forces generated would be greater b/c of the difference in com location, again assume same weight, same speed going into turn, same snow conditions and so on. Thus it would be relatively easier to deform (reverse camber) the ski due to the extra force generated.
Well, the problem is a lot more detailed then my inital response to Greg would lead on. Height does play a factor in the placement of a skier's CM, which certainly has the potential to affect the force on the ski, but in my estimation, does not make enough of a difference (or any at all) to matter when choosing the length of a ski. I'll draw it out so it's easier to discuss...
__________________
Making sanity obsolete since 1982...
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 10:10 AM   #23 (permalink)
Marc
 
Marc's Avatar
I'm with psycho -->
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dudley, MA
Posts: 4,761
Send a message via AIM to Marc


Above we have a crude drawing of the forces acting on a skier, let's say, mid way through a carved turn.

The blue angled line represents the outside ski, inside ski not shown for simplicity's sake and the fact that much more force is typically applied to the outside ski during a turn.

CM1 represents center mass for a tall skier, CM2 represent center mass from a shorter skier, both of the same mass. The blue line marked AOR is the axis of rotation of the carved turn (approximating a circular radius if viewed from above).

Now the forces- the horizontal green arrow represents the centripetal force applied by the snow on the skier accelerating him through the turn. The vertical green arrow represents the reaction force of the ground pushing against the skiers weight, which is the same in both instances. The two black vertical arrows represent the force of gravity acting on the skiers' respective center masses. The horizontal black arrows represent the reaction force, "centrifugal" force, to the centripetal acceleration, which act on the skiers' respective center masses. The black angled force pointing on the ski is the result of the vector sum of the forces acting on the skier's CM and applied at this point. This is the force that loads the ski.

Now for torques acting on the skier, which must balance, otherwise the skier goes tumbling off tangential to the turn. All moment arms are represented by the double ended red arrows. Negative (counterclockwise) torque is generated by the centrifugal force acting on a moment arm that has a length equal to the height of the skier's CM from the ground. This torque is balanced by the skier bringing his CM closer to the AOR, and creating a moment arm on which the weight of the skier acts (lateral distance from the dashed red line to the CM of the skier). This generates postivie torque, to balance the negative.

The last element of the equation - the limit of adhesion of the ski. This is generated by the frictional force of the ski digging into the snow, which is proportional to the weight of the skier, which in this case, is the same.

Now let's assume they are tracking through a turn of the same radius (meaning ski to AOR). They both lean over to get the ski on edge to generate frictional force and to generate that positive torque. The centripetal force generated is proportional to lateral distance from CM to AOR. It first glance, it looks like the taller skier can keep his mass closer to the AOR and thereforce reduce the centripital force generated and therefore the force on the ski.

However, if you'll look at the diagram, there's an imbalance on torque on the taller skier. As he leans over moving his CM closer to the AOR, the centripital force is less, however it is acting on a larger moment arm due to his height. The shorter skier generates more centripital force, however this has a smaller moment arm to act on due to the height of the skier. So the two "centripital torques" are close to equal (not everything scales linearly, but pretty close). This means the taller skier of the same weight, by leaning over to generate less centripetal force ends up giving more moment arm to his weight, which means he is generating more positive torque than the shorter skier. To compensate, and to keep from falling over, the taller skier must bend his legs, and reduce that moment arm. To balance, he then moves his center of mass to where the shorter skier's is, and thus the applied force on the ski is still about the same.

This would only increase or decrease significantly if you changed the weight of the skier.
__________________
Making sanity obsolete since 1982...

Last edited by Marc; Nov 28, 2007 at 10:17 AM.
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 10:13 AM   #24 (permalink)
Greg
 
Greg's Avatar
Mad River Glen - 2/8/08
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Thomaston, CT
Posts: 18,916
Send a message via MSN to Greg Send a message via Yahoo to Greg
My head just exploded. I'm outta this one...
__________________
Greg

2007-08, 2006-07, 2005-06, 2004-05

Life's too short for warm up runs.
Greg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 10:14 AM   #25 (permalink)
severine
 
severine's Avatar
Arapahoe Basin
 
Join Date: Feb 2004
Location: CT
Posts: 2,866
OMG, it's just like talking to my cousin. Who was an engineer (although he recently switched professions to becoming a patent lawyer). I could totally see him diagram his argument in a discussion.
__________________
Don't cry because it's over. Smile because it happened. ~ Dr. Seuss

2007-2008 ~ 20
2005-2006 ~ 2
2004 ~ 18

It is not easy to find happiness in ourselves, and it is not possible to find it elsewhere. ~Agnes Repplier
severine is online now   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 10:16 AM   #26 (permalink)
Greg
 
Greg's Avatar
Mad River Glen - 2/8/08
 
Join Date: Jul 2001
Location: Thomaston, CT
Posts: 18,916
Send a message via MSN to Greg Send a message via Yahoo to Greg
Marc - I have to know. Is all this stuff off the top of your head, or do you have Wikipedia or something fired up in another browser? If the former, then I think it's quite possible you are an alien.
__________________
Greg

2007-08, 2006-07, 2005-06, 2004-05

Life's too short for warm up runs.
Greg is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 10:18 AM   #27 (permalink)
Marc
 
Marc's Avatar
I'm with psycho -->
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dudley, MA
Posts: 4,761
Send a message via AIM to Marc
Quote:
Originally Posted by Greg View Post
Marc - I have to know. Is all this stuff off the top of your head, or do you have Wikipedia or something fired up in another browser? If the former, then I think it's quite possible you are an alien.
Nope, that's all in my head. It's easy, just identify and balances the forces and torques
__________________
Making sanity obsolete since 1982...
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 10:22 AM   #28 (permalink)
MRGisevil
 
MRGisevil's Avatar
 
Join Date: Jan 2007
Location: Westfield, MA
Posts: 1,161
Send a message via AIM to MRGisevil
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc View Post
Nope, that's all in my head. It's easy, just identify and balances the forces and torques
I work with Engineers all day. I can vouch for all of that being as common knowledge to him as shoe tieing is to the rest of us.
__________________
Keep moving forward.
MRGisevil is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 10:24 AM   #29 (permalink)
Marc
 
Marc's Avatar
I'm with psycho -->
 
Join Date: Sep 2005
Location: Dudley, MA
Posts: 4,761
Send a message via AIM to Marc
Quote:
Originally Posted by MRGisevil View Post
I work with Engineers all day. I can vouch for all of that being as common knowledge to him as shoe tieing is to the rest of us.
Oh man, and you shoulda seen the last time I tried to tie my shoes on my own. What a disaster.
__________________
Making sanity obsolete since 1982...
Marc is offline   Reply With Quote
Old Nov 28, 2007, 11:46 AM   #30 (permalink)
jack97
 
jack97's Avatar
 
Join Date: Mar 2006
Posts: 1,149
Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc View Post
Now for torques acting on the skier, which must balance, otherwise the skier goes tumbling off tangential to the turn.
I have thinks about this one, I would agree that there is a critical angle that the ski edge has to take else one would tumble over. I think there are more parameters to this.

Quote:
Originally Posted by Marc View Post
However, if you'll look at the diagram, there's an imbalance on torque on the taller skier. As he leans over moving his CM closer to the AOR, the centripital force is less, however it is acting on a larger moment arm due to his height.

Hmm, ok I got it, the centripital force would be lower for the taller skier since there is less mass at the radius of rotation. And it would be roughly the same for the tall and short skier.

But I beleive that the conservation of angular momentum does favors the taller skier.... still have to think one through.
jack97 is offline   Reply With Quote
Reply

Go Back   New England & Northeast Ski Forums - AlpineZone Forums > Other Forums > Gear and Equipment Forum

Thread Tools
Display Modes

Posting Rules
You may not post new threads
You may not post replies
You may not post attachments
You may not edit your posts

BB code is On
Smilies are On
[IMG] code is On
HTML code is Off
Trackbacks are Off
Pingbacks are Off
Refbacks are Off


All times are GMT -5. The time now is 4:57 PM.


Powered by vBulletin® Version 3.7.1
Copyright ©2000 - 2008, Jelsoft Enterprises Ltd.
Content Relevant URLs by vBSEO 3.0.0 RC6

Ski Gear | Snowboard Gear | Cycling Gear | Camping/Hiking Gear | Ski & Snowboard Racks | Gear Outlet | Men's Clothing | Women's Clothing | Kids' Clothing

Alpine Skis | Ski Colorado | Ski Vermont
Sugarbush / Mad River Glen Message Boards | Whiteface / Gore Message Boards | Hourly Outdoor Gear Deals
Skiing | Hiking | Lodging | Gear | Message Board | News | Search | Site Map | RSS

 Advertising | Link to Us | Privacy Policy

Copyright © 1998 - 2008 AlpineZone. All Rights Reserved.