Calculating drag for high mach numbers

  • Thread starter Thread starter LT72884
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Mach Rocket
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around calculating drag for high Mach number scenarios, particularly in the context of a high-powered rocket reaching speeds of approximately 420 m/s. Participants explore the transition from skin friction dominance at low Mach numbers to the significance of pressure drag and wave drag at higher speeds.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that at low Mach numbers, drag is primarily due to skin friction, allowing for the calculation of the drag coefficient (Cd) based on Reynolds number (Re) and geometry.
  • Another participant argues that the drag force equation remains applicable at all Mach numbers, emphasizing that it defines the drag coefficient rather than directly calculating drag force.
  • It is mentioned that at high Mach numbers, wave drag becomes a significant component that can be estimated mathematically.
  • A participant expresses uncertainty, indicating they have received differing explanations regarding the applicability of the drag force equation at high speeds.
  • A brief exchange occurs regarding the phenomenon of sonic booms, with one participant confirming that they can hear them in some cases.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants exhibit disagreement regarding the applicability of the drag force equation at high Mach numbers, with some asserting it remains valid while others suggest it may not be suitable in this regime. The discussion remains unresolved with multiple competing views.

Contextual Notes

Participants reference different components of drag (skin friction, pressure drag, wave drag) without reaching a consensus on the primary governing factors at high speeds. There are indications of varying interpretations of the drag force equation's relevance across Mach numbers.

LT72884
Messages
335
Reaction score
49
Ok, so i have a high powered rocket i made and it hits about 420 m/s

At low mach numbers, most the drag is due to skin friction, hence why you can solve for the Cd based on the Re and geometry alone (Dr. Gerald M. Gregoreks work shows this)

However, as soon as you hit higher mach numbers, pressure drag is the governing "force"

Meaning that Fd=(roh)(0.5)(A)(Cd)(v^2) is not really applicable anymore

So what is the new equation i should be using?

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Drag_coefficient said:
The drag coefficient of any object comprises the effects of the two basic contributors to fluid dynamic drag: skin friction and form drag. The drag coefficient of a lifting airfoil or hydrofoil also includes the effects of lift-induced drag. The drag coefficient of a complete structure such as an aircraft also includes the effects of interference drag.

Definition​

The drag coefficient is defined as

be358f44b989746a70ff5a96f5ea6ff4a242ea8b
So the equation is always applicable since, no matter the Mach number, there is always a drag force and a fluid density. The equation is used to define the drag coefficient, NOT to find the drag force.

In addition, at high Mach numbers, you get a wave drag component whose value can be estimated mathematically.
 
  • Like
  • Informative
Likes   Reactions: russ_watters, LT72884 and berkeman
jack action said:
So the equation is always applicable since, no matter the Mach number, there is always a drag force and a fluid density. The equation is used to define the drag coefficient, NOT to find the drag force.

In addition, at high Mach numbers, you get a wave drag component whose value can be estimated mathematically.
Thats what i thought. Though i have been informed differently a few times, and each time they do have a good explanation too.

Im hoping the other user, i think its Russ, will chime in.

I love learning and this is good stuff
 
Do you hear a sonic boom?
 
On some yes
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur

Similar threads

  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
12K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
12K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
4K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K