What is the terminal velocity of a ping pong ball?

AI Thread Summary
The terminal velocity of a ping pong ball is approximately 9.5 m/s, which is reached after falling about 12.5 meters. The discussion explores how long it takes for the ball to reach this speed, with a focus on the calculations involved. A specific equation is provided to determine the velocity at intervals until terminal velocity is achieved, but there is confusion about how to apply it. Participants encourage sharing previous attempts to clarify the problem-solving process. Understanding the physics behind terminal velocity is essential for accurately answering the question.
guitarhero123
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
1. How long does it take a ping pong ball to reach terminal velocity?
2. What is the terminal velocity of a ping pong ball?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

guitarhero123 said:
1. How long does it take a ping pong ball to reach terminal velocity?
2. What is the terminal velocity of a ping pong ball?

Hi guitarhero123! Welcome to PF! :wink:

Is this a theory or an experiment question?

Anyway, show us what you've tried, and where you're stuck, and then we'll know how to help. :smile:
 
The Terminal Velocity is about 9.5 m/s

98% of which is attained after falling 12.5 m. (Im not sure of the time it takes to get to this)

Did you want to know the values? Or the working?

I can't help you with the working, I simply found an answer from a quick google search.

http://adsabs.harvard.edu/abs/1984AmJPh..52..890B" is the site.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
I wasn't sure how to start working out the problem.
I was given this equation Vi+1=Vi+(g-c^2/m*Vi^2)t
im not sure if that makes sense or not i think its supposed to read velocity initial plus one equals velocity initial plus the quantity gravity minus c squared over mass times initial velocity squared times the change in time
We were told to determine the velocity every .1 second until we reach terminal velocity.
I'm sorry if this doesn't make sense I'm really lost.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...

Similar threads

Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
3K
Replies
20
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
4K
Replies
19
Views
17K
Back
Top