Dart Energy from Compressed Air

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on calculating the exit velocity of a dart propelled by compressed air, with the user seeking help to correct their formula. They derive an energy equation based on the initial pressure and volume of the tank, but notice inconsistencies when the dart volume is large compared to the tank volume, leading to the potential for more energy output than stored. A key point raised is the misunderstanding of pressure-volume relationships, as the user assumes isothermal conditions, while the scenario involves adiabatic expansion. This oversight results in an inaccurate assessment of energy transfer, as the temperature drop during the dart's propulsion is not accounted for. The conversation emphasizes the importance of considering thermodynamic principles in calculating energy in compressed air systems.
Billwillett
Messages
1
Reaction score
0
Hi Everyone,

I am trying to calculate the exit velocity of a dart which is propelled by compressed air. Please see the attached jpeg for diagram and my work so far.

My final formula appears to be incorrect. I'd appreciate any help figuring out what is wrong.

A pressure tank of Volume Vt is has a tube with a valve at the end. It is pressurized. A dart slides over the tube. When the valve opens, pressure acts on the dart and it begins to move off the tube, measured as distance x. Once the dart exits the tube, there is no longer any force applied.

What is the energy of the dart at this point? From this I can calculate its velocity.

I chose to integrate the instantaneous energy as the dart moves from x = 0 to x = L when the dart leaves the tube. See attached. I basically integrate Fdx where F varies as a function of X. This gives me total energy expended to move the dart.

The result is E = initial pressure x initial volume x ln(1+Area of dart*length of dart/initial volume).

Peering into this formula I notice that initial pressure x initial volume equates to the initial energy stored in the tank. Also, (area of dart x length of dart)/initial volume = the ratio of dart volume to tank volume.

So E of the dart = stored energy * ln(1+ratio of the volumes). (see attachement for more readable form of formulas)

If the dart volume is extremely small and the tank large, then the ln equates to zero. There is no energy transferred to dart. That makes sense.

It seems the best case is when the dart volume is huge. If big enough nearly all the energy stored in the tank is applied to dart. Less is wasted as the tank vents to atmospheric when the dart exits.

But this is where I think the formula fails. If we chose a large dart volume relative to tank volume then the log evaluates to a number larger than 1! That would mean I am getting more energy out of the tank then the initial stored energy of PtVt.

What am I missing?
 

Attachments

  • dartphysics.jpg
    dartphysics.jpg
    37.2 KB · Views: 558
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
You've taken pressure as inversely proportional to volume. That's only true at constant temperature (isothermal expansion). What you have here is adiabatic expansion. There's no time for heat to flow. The temperature will drop because of the work done in pushing the dart. Since you've not allowed for that work done, it isn't surprising you got too much energy out in some scenarios.
 
Thread 'Question about pressure of a liquid'
I am looking at pressure in liquids and I am testing my idea. The vertical tube is 100m, the contraption is filled with water. The vertical tube is very thin(maybe 1mm^2 cross section). The area of the base is ~100m^2. Will he top half be launched in the air if suddenly it cracked?- assuming its light enough. I want to test my idea that if I had a thin long ruber tube that I lifted up, then the pressure at "red lines" will be high and that the $force = pressure * area$ would be massive...
I feel it should be solvable we just need to find a perfect pattern, and there will be a general pattern since the forces acting are based on a single function, so..... you can't actually say it is unsolvable right? Cause imaging 3 bodies actually existed somwhere in this universe then nature isn't gonna wait till we predict it! And yea I have checked in many places that tiny changes cause large changes so it becomes chaos........ but still I just can't accept that it is impossible to solve...

Similar threads

Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
5K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
6
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
14
Views
3K
Back
Top