Calculating Time of Freefalling Sphere w/Drag and Varying Air Density

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the time it takes for a free-falling sphere to reach the Earth's surface while considering drag and varying air density. The drag force is modeled using the equation Drag = 1/2*A*Cd*v^2*ρ, but the challenge arises from the assumption of constant air density. Participants suggest replacing the constant density with a function that describes its variation, although this complicates the calculus involved. Numerical methods are recommended for solving the differential equations, especially when modeling scenarios like free-fall from near space. Additionally, the drag coefficient varies with Reynolds number, complicating the modeling further and suggesting that empirical fitting may be necessary.
ARROW 3
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I am looking at the problem of a freefalling sphere and want to calculate time taken to fall a distance. I want to model drag as well as take account of the varying density in the atmosphere.
I am using Drag = 1/2*A*Cd*v2*ρ; A - cross-sectional area, Cd - drag coefficient, v2 - velocity squared and ρ - air density.
I have been able to form a DE and solve it for v and s (distance) but this assumes a constant density of air. I am also having trouble with the hyperbolic trig functions so think i might be taking a 'large hammer to break a small nut'.
Any ideas on how to simplify this or is the DE the right way to approach?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The simplest model I've seen just adds a drag proportional to the cube of the instantanious speed.

If you have a problem with density not being contant just replace that part with a function that describes how the density varies. You thinking of something like free-fall from near-space?
 
Thanks for the reply.
With the simple model you mention, does the drag proportional to v3 replace the drag proportional to v2?
With regards to the function for density, I think the calculus is getting too complicated.
I am looking at freefall near space and want to model time taken to return the Earth's surface.
 
ARROW 3 said:
Thanks for the reply.
With the simple model you mention, does the drag proportional to v3 replace the drag proportional to v2?
Yes, and it would be empirically fitted.
In general you can make any model you feel you can get away with.
With regards to the function for density, I think the calculus is getting too complicated.
I am looking at freefall near space and want to model time taken to return the Earth's surface.
Well that's what you are going to have to do I'm afraid.

drag has form kf(x)v^2: k = constant so you'll be solving

m\frac{d^2y}{dt^2} = mg-k\rho(y)\left ( \frac{dy}{dt}\right )^2
... you'll have to make an approximation for the air density function anyway ... but you don't need a general solution: you could do this numerically!
 
If you're modelling a small spehere that means you're probably modelling some type of asteroid. It can't be a spacecraft because they wouldn't follow such a trajectory. If it is an asteroid, what about modelling the reduction in mass due to break up in the atmosphere?
 
The hyperbolic function the correct one, there is no simpler solution.
Something like V(t) = Vmax*atanh(...*t) with Vmax limited by drag
and x(t) = log(acos(...*t)) if I remember properly.

That was at constant density. If density varies, you need to model it first, like exp(-height), but then the problem is probably too complicated for hand calculation.

One more difficulty: the sphere has no constant Cx. It varies a lot with Reynold's number. The best-known physicists were historically fooled with that. It's because the place where the stream rips off wanders a lot. The corrugated golf ball avoids this, and also decreases its drag.
 
Venus does not have a magnetosphere, so the Galactic Cosmic Rays (GCRs) environment shall be much worse than in a LEO environment. Looking to the std radiation models for Venus, the standard radiation-hard space level electronic component with tested immunity LET = 85 MeV-cm2/mg seems not enough, so, for example, a 1cm2 Si die will suffer considerable flux above this level during a long mission (10 years for example). So, the question is, usually we are not paying attention to latch-up...
Due to the constant never ending supply of "cool stuff" happening in Aerospace these days I'm creating this thread to consolidate posts every time something new comes along. Please feel free to add random information if its relevant. So to start things off here is the SpaceX Dragon launch coming up shortly, I'll be following up afterwards to see how it all goes. :smile: https://blogs.nasa.gov/spacex/
Thread 'SpaceX Starship development: 7th flight January 10'
Watch the progress live This is a fully stacked Starship (top) and Super Heavy (bottom). A couple of too-small-to-see cars near the bottom for scale, I also added a Saturn V and the Statue of Liberty for comparison. 120 meters tall, about 5000 tonnes when fully fueled. Twice the mass and over twice the thrust of Saturn V. The largest rocket ever built by mass, thrust, height, and payload capacity. N1 had the largest diameter.[/size] But its size is not the revolutionary part. It is designed...
Back
Top