Model Railgun Project - Don't have a grasp of the physics

AI Thread Summary
Increasing the rail length in a railgun does lead to greater projectile distance due to higher muzzle velocities achieved through constant acceleration. The fundamental physics can be expressed using the equations F = ma and v = sqrt(2ax), where F is the force from the magnetic field, m is the projectile mass, a is acceleration, and x is rail length. A longer barrel allows for greater acceleration, resulting in a higher final velocity, which directly correlates to increased travel distance. The discussion also touches on the complexity of using multiple rail pairs, suggesting that the scaling may not be linear. Understanding these principles is crucial for mathematically proving the hypothesis regarding railgun performance.
CuriousCynic
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
My hypothesis is that increasing rail length will increase the distance a projectile travels, ( which is true) unfortunately I can't quite make sense of physics behind railguns to understand how to prove the hypothesis mathematically. Thank you for your time.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Consider how the work done affects the kinetic energy and hence the velocity the projectile will leave the rail gun at.
 
I don't know if this still works for railguns...but F= ma, get a. then vf^2 = vi^2 + 2ax
vf = final velocity
vi = initial velocity
x = rail length
And to answer your question, a higher vf will surely increase the distance the projectile travels.
 
Please disregard what I stated previously.

A railgun can achieve very high muzzle velocities because of the constant acceleration that is achieved. Meaning, that, the longer the barrel, the higher the muzzle velocity will be.

If you were looking for a few formulas :
F = ma ; F -> force generated by magnetic field.
.; m -> mass of projectile
. ; a -> acceleration of said projectile due to F

then v = sqrt(2*a*x) ; v -> muzzle velocity
. ; a -> as above
. ; length of barrel

This is all assumed that you will only use 1 pair of rails. I don't know the mathematics behind more than 1 pair. To me it seems though as if it scales linearly, which can't be right.
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top