Bullet acceleration into moist clay

AI Thread Summary
A bullet traveling at 367 m/s penetrates moist clay for 0.0621 m, and the correct acceleration is calculated using the formula Vf² = Vi² + 2ad, yielding -1.08 x 10^-6 m/s². The initial approach using average velocity (183.5 m/s) is incorrect because it does not account for the initial velocity properly, leading to a significant error in the calculated acceleration. The mistake stems from substituting average velocity instead of initial velocity into the equations. Understanding the distinction between average and initial velocity is crucial for accurate calculations in this context. The discussion highlights the importance of using the correct values in physics equations to avoid miscalculations.
thehitchcocks
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
The problem:
A bullet is moving at a speed of 367 m/s when it embeds into a lump of moist clay. The bullet penetrates for a distance of 0.0621m. Determine the acceleration of the bullet while moving into the clay.


I can get the correct answer by using Vf2 = Vi2 + 2ad (result: -1.08*10-6 m/s2).

However, I'm trying to understand why an approach using the average velocity doesn't work (that's what I tried first). Can you help me understand what's wrong with the following approach? :

Vavg = (Vi + Vf)/2 = 183.5 m/s

t = d/v
t = 0.0621m / (183.5 m/s) = 0.00034s

d = Vit + 1/2at2
0.0621m = 183.5 m/s * 0.00034s + 1/2a(0.00034s)2
a = -5017.3 m/s2

(you can double-check my math, but I don't believe that's the issue).

So, my specific question: this approach clearly doesn't yield the correct answer - there's something wrong with my thinking here. What specifically is wrong with it?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your math was wrong.
thehitchcocks said:
The problem:
A bullet is moving at a speed of 367 m/s when it embeds into a lump of moist clay. The bullet penetrates for a distance of 0.0621m. Determine the acceleration of the bullet while moving into the clay.


I can get the correct answer by using Vf2 = Vi2 + 2ad (result: -1.08*10-6 m/s2).

However, I'm trying to understand why an approach using the average velocity doesn't work (that's what I tried first). Can you help me understand what's wrong with the following approach? :

Vavg = (Vi + Vf)/2 = 183.5 m/s

t = d/v
t = 0.0621m / (183.5 m/s) = 0.00034s

d = Vit + 1/2at2
0.0621m = 183.5 m/s * 0.00034s + 1/2a(0.00034s)2

a = -5017.3 m/s2

(you can double-check my math, but I don't believe that's the issue).

So, my specific question: this approach clearly doesn't yield the correct answer - there's something wrong with my thinking here. What specifically is wrong with it?

You use Vavg where you should use Vi.
Also, you have a negative exponent on what you call the correct answer.
 
You plugged in average velocity instead of initial velocity.

If you don't mind my saying, I don't see any maths in your post: just lots of numbers. Part of the reason you made this mistake is that one number looks very like another and as soon as you plug in the numbers, you lose sight of the maths and physics.
 
thehitchcocks said:
0.0621m = 183.5 m/s * 0.00034s + 1/2a(0.00034s)2
Hi thehitchcocks:

The term 183.5 m/s is not Vi. It is 1/2 Vi.

Regards,
Buzz
 
Thanks for all the replies! Super helpful. We understand now - we got ourselves wrapped up mistakenly in average velocity, when all we needed was initial velocity. Using initial velocity yields the correct answer.

@RUber: Yes, the negative exponent was a typo - sorry about that, our first post ever here, and I didn't catch the error amidst all the markup :( Thanks also for coming back and updating your original response, re: the relationship between our answer and the correct answer.
 
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...

Similar threads

Back
Top