Does a sling or a gun exert more initial force of the projectile?

AI Thread Summary
A comparison between the initial force exerted by a sling and a gun reveals that while a .22 caliber bullet has greater kinetic energy (approximately 160 Joules) than a slingshot projectile (around 113 Joules), the concept of impulse, which measures momentum, differs. The stone from the sling, weighing about 2 ounces, has a calculated kinetic energy of 51 Joules, while a .22 CB round has slightly less at 45 Joules. The discussion highlights that kinetic energy scales with the square of speed, while momentum scales linearly, suggesting that the bullet has more energy but less momentum than the slower-moving sling stone. Thus, while a bullet exerts more kinetic energy, it does not necessarily require a greater impulse than a sling projectile. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for evaluating the forces involved in projectile motion.
Allenph
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
First of all this is probably the only time I will be on this forum.

At first this seems a no brainer. But I am a weekend survivalist and I made a sling that can sling rock a little more then 1" in diameter 120 yards at an angle of about 50-55 degrees. After some research the type of rock I am flinging is limestone which means it weighs about 2 ounces. Let's use say, a .22 caliber bullet. The bullet would weigh a little less then .09 ounces and go around 175 yards at 90 degrees. I have NO idea how to figure this out and am curious to know the answer. So does it take more force to shoot the rock or shoot a bullet?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
It's kind of important to know an accurate weight for the rock you used if you want to calculate the impulse required to accelerate it. Looking up the weight of a similar small rock won't do.

Instead, let's find some figures from the internet to use. The muzzle energy of an average .22 LR pistol is about 160 Joules, according to the wikipedia entry below. This means that the bullet leaves the muzzle of the gun with 160 Joules of kinetic energy.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Muzzle_energy

In the following video, they claim that the world record kinetic energy for a handheld slingshot projectile is 113 Joules. This is less energy than a .22 bullet, and chances are you're firing them off with quite a bit less energy than the world record holder.
http://youtu.be/1v4TEX2erog

So, in short, a projectile from a handgun has more kinetic energy (and requires a greater impulse) than a projectile from a handheld slingshot.
 
Excellent thanks for answering my question
 
I learned the math. My stone has 51 joules and a .22 CB round has 10% less at 45 Joules.
 
Nessdude14 said:
So, in short, a projectile from a handgun has more kinetic energy (and requires a greater impulse) than a projectile from a handheld slingshot.

More kinetic energy, yes. More impulse -- I don't think so.

The kinetic energy of a projectile scales as the square of its speed. The momentum of a projectile scales linearly with its speed. That means that a fast-travelling .22 slug has lots of kinetic energy but relatively little momentum compared to a slow-travelling sling stone.

"Impulse" is a measure of momentum, not energy.
 
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...
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...
Back
Top