Weightlifting mathematically

[PowerBuilder]

I found this pretty cool vid on youtube and thought id share it here

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=tyz4oMaRvDQ&feature=youtube_gdata_player]Ruslan Albegov 210kg Snatch + 245kg Clean and Jerk - YouTube[/ame]


See how the 120kg snatch was performed? In about 1 second, the bar moved 137cm.

Let's do some calculus.....

velocity = Distance / Time
137cm / 1s = 1.37 meters per second


With the clean and jerk, in a time of approximately 1 second, the barbell moves 1.07cm. This results in a velocity of 1.07 meters per second. That sucker was flying!! Well as flying as a 245kg loaded barbell can.

Please note its mass is 245...its weight is a different matter.

 

[wingman]

That velocity can't be correct since 137cm isn't a straight line distance?

 

[adamklam]

That velocity can't be correct since 137cm isn't a straight line distance?

if they are talking about total vertical velocity then that would be correct (i think), as you ignore the horizontal travel distance (calculated separately)

starting point is 0, vertical displacement (at the end of clean is 137, although it got to 140, then dropped a bit back to 137)

although I think they should use the maximum height (and the time taken to get there)

bar speed would be different as that would use the sum of the total distance traveled over time

 

[0ni]

Was going to post this video then noticed it's by the same guy!

[ame=http://www.youtube.com/watch?v=YIVuktMpD5Y]Coach Wu Snatch - YouTube[/ame]

 

[Darkoz]

BRB.......working out the trajectory, angle, speed, mass, weight, gravitational pull, wind velocity, humidity, wind chill factor, atmospheric conditions before I lift.

 

[Rambodian]

BRB.......working out the trajectory, angle, speed, mass, weight, gravitational pull, wind velocity, humidity, wind chill factor, atmospheric conditions before I lift.

Well Darkoz, your limiting your training because you haven't factored in the hole in the ozone layer mate, gotta work out if over exposure to excess radiation is going to affect your lifting mate...........sheesh

LOL

 

[Darkoz]

Well Darkoz, your limiting your training because you haven't factored in the hole in the ozone layer mate, gotta work out if over exposure to excess radiation is going to affect your lifting mate...........sheesh

LOL

Damnit, I knew I missed something!

Back to the drawing board!

 

[bull]

Please note its mass is 245...its weight is a different matter.

I'm intrigued by this. I did physics at school (good while ago now) but I am no longer 100% clear on this exact issue. Tell me if I'm wrong;

Weight is a measure of force, F=MA therefore M=F/A.

Acceleration in this case is gravity at 9.8 m/s/s, so

Weight of 245 divided by 9.8 gives a mass of 25. Yes or no and is mass measured in kg or something else?

The reason that I'm asking is that my understanding here does not fit with the quoted part of your post and I don't know whether I'm right or not.

 

[Darkoz]

I think it's a typo, the 245 is referring to the bar's weight ie: the force of gravity acting on it's mass.

 

[0ni]

Weight decreases as acceleration and speed increases. Mass stays the same
Which is why powerlifters do speed training and why dead squats are harder than regular squats

 

[Darkoz]

Weight decreases as acceleration and speed increases. Mass stays the same
Which is why powerlifters do speed training and why dead squats are harder than regular squats

Can you elaborate as to how weight decreases with speed?
And explain what are dead squats?
Please try and answer immediately

 

[PowerBuilder]

Correct. I made a typo.

Mass and weight are related but distinctly different properties of an object. Mass is an inherent property; weight is the gravitational force acting on an object.

The mass of a barbell, plates and colars would be the same while on the moon...but be lighter when on a planet with a smaller gravitational force.

 

[Darkoz]

Correct. I made a typo.

Mass and weight are related but distinctly different properties of an object. Mass is an inherent property; weight is the gravitational force acting on an object.

The mass of a barbell, plates and colars would be the same while on the moon...but be lighter when on a planet with a smaller gravitational force.

Understood but why mention mass in your original post as it has no bearing to lifting a weight here.

 

[PowerBuilder]

Understood but why mention mass in your original post as it has no bearing to lifting a weight here.

Self pleasure.

 

[bull]

Correct. I made a typo.

Mass and weight are related but distinctly different properties of an object. Mass is an inherent property; weight is the gravitational force acting on an object.

The mass of a barbell, plates and colars would be the same while on the moon...but be lighter when on a planet with a smaller gravitational force.

Thanks PB. I wasn't sure whether the 245 was actually weight or mass. Meaning either a mass of 25 something or a weight of 2400 something else.

 

[0ni]

Can you elaborate as to how weight decreases with speed?
And explain what are dead squats?
Please try and answer immediately

PB's reply was adequate enough
A dead squat is a squat from a dead stop (like a deadlift), for example a bottoms up squat from pins

 

[Darkoz]

PB's reply was adequate enough

PB didn't say that weight decreases with speed, you did, so I'm intrigued as to how this happens, which is why I asked you to elaborate.

 

[PowerBuilder]

Weight decreases as acceleration and speed increases. Mass stays the same

explain what you mean in as much detail as possable. If I through a stone....would it lose weight as it picked up acceleration (the 2nd derivitivr of motion)?

 

[0ni]

explain what you mean in as much detail as possable. If I through a stone....would it lose weight as it picked up acceleration (the 2nd derivitivr of motion)?

because weight is related to relativistic mass

 

[0ni]

Get on a scale and weigh yourself
Now jump up and down on the scale and see what happens to the numbers
This is the simplest analogy I can think of