230 The UMAP Journal 24.3 (2003) We consider each mechanism acting independently of the other. By solving the equations of motion in each stage, we predict the trajectory of a stunt person moving through a single box, and by extension through the box catcher as a whole Whether or not the performer is stopped before reaching the botton being injured)depends on the structure of the box catcher and the size boxes. Taller is safer but shorter is cheaper(and may be necessary to off-camera); we must balance safety with cost and size We present a solution where 9 layers of boxes are used to break the fall of the elephant-leaping motorcyclist, each with a height of 3 m and a width of, m This is a poor solution, for the force on the falling stunt person is not optimized We also present a slightly better solution with only 8 layers of boxes and outline the principles for continued optimization Finally, we observe that airresistance is the dominant force with highspeeds, hile box deformation provides greater resistance at low speeds Strengths of the model All parameters in the program are flexible. Whether humid weather tends to weaken the cardboard(and lower both the tensile strength and Youngs modulus), or the height of the jump changes, the stunt coordinator can test the safety of the box catcher with our program The algorithm is robust, in that small changes in initial conditions do not cause drastic changes in the end result. We have seen results for extreme cases, such as extreme impact velocities(falling from great heights)or ex- treme weight considerations(a person on a motorcycle) Our algorithm takes just a few seconds to compute the trajectory of the stunt erson through the box catcher, so it is practical for a stunt coordinator to test a variety of box-catcher configurations Weaknesses of the model We were unable to derive an optimal box configuration We could not get a good estimate of the magnitude of the force experienced by by a box catcher, but the force function that we use is discont r s tion of energy the stunt person. We present a plausible mechanism for dissip box layers, though the actual physics of the situation has a continuous force Future research Future research on this project should develop an algorithm that not only tests the safety of a configuration of boxes butsuggests an optimal configuration230 The UMAP Journal 24.3 (2003) We consider each mechanism acting independently of the other. By solving the equations of motion in each stage, we predict the trajectory of a stunt person moving through a single box, and by extension, through the box catcher as a whole. Whether or not the performer is stopped before reaching the bottom (and being injured) depends on the structure of the box catcher and the size of the boxes. Taller is safer but shorter is cheaper (and may be necessary to remain off-camera); we must balance safety with cost and size. We present a solution where 9 layers of boxes are used to break the fall of the elephant-leaping motorcyclist, each with a height of 1 3 m and a width of 1 2 m. This is a poor solution, for the force on the falling stunt person is not optimized. We also present a slightly better solution with only 8 layers of boxes and outline the principles for continued optimization. Finally, we observe that air resistance is the dominant force with high speeds, while box deformation provides greater resistance at low speeds. Strengths of the Model • All parameters in the program are flexible. Whether humid weather tends to weaken the cardboard (and lower both the tensile strength and Young’s modulus), or the height of the jump changes, the stunt coordinator can test the safety of the box catcher with our program. • The algorithm is robust, in that small changes in initial conditions do not cause drastic changes in the end result. We have seen results for extreme cases, such as extreme impact velocities (falling from great heights) or ex￾treme weight considerations (a person on a motorcycle). • Our algorithm takes just a few seconds to compute the trajectory of the stunt person through the box catcher, so it is practical for a stunt coordinator to test a variety of box-catcher configurations. Weaknesses of the Model • We were unable to derive an optimal box configuration. • We could not get a good estimate of the magnitude of the force experienced by the stunt person. We present a plausible mechanism for dissipation of energy by a box catcher, but the force function that we use is discontinuous between box layers, though the actual physics of the situation has a continuous force. Future Research Future research on this project should develop an algorithm that not only tests the safety of a configuration of boxes but suggests an optimal configuration