Does Running in the Rain Keep You Drier?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter PhizKid
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Rain Running
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers around the question of whether running in the rain keeps a person drier compared to standing still. It explores various factors influencing wetness, including body orientation, speed, and the duration of exposure to rain. The conversation touches on theoretical considerations, practical implications, and personal experiences related to running in the rain.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that standing still results in less overall wetness due to a smaller cross-sectional area exposed to the rain, while running increases exposure to rain hitting the front of the body.
  • Others argue that running reduces the time spent in the rain, potentially leading to less water accumulation on the top of the body, which could offset the increased exposure to rain on the front.
  • A participant mentions the Mythbusters' study and questions the validity of their methods, suggesting that thought experiments with extreme scenarios (like moving very slowly versus sprinting) can provide insights into the problem.
  • One participant emphasizes the educational value of the running in the rain problem, noting its relevance in teaching concepts like simplifying assumptions and equations of motion.
  • Another participant presents a mathematical approach, proposing that the total amount of water received is influenced by both vertical and horizontal speeds, suggesting that running may indeed keep a person drier under certain conditions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the effectiveness of running versus standing still in terms of staying dry, with no consensus reached. The discussion includes various hypotheses and personal experiences, indicating that multiple competing perspectives remain.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions made in the discussion include the vertical fall of rain and the simplification of body shape for calculations. The implications of different speeds and distances traveled in the rain are also considered, but the discussion does not resolve these complexities.

PhizKid
Messages
477
Reaction score
2
Physics news on Phys.org
personally I prefer singing in the rain.

with respect to the question though. If you stand still then you'll be taking a shower that lasts the duration of the storm so your cross-section area is your head and shoulders. If you run then your cross-section is the front of your body and the amount of wetness depends on the duration of the storm or how fast you run and how far away the shelter is.

To solve this problem you first need to decide what worth is. Many runners will tell you its worth it to get the experience especially if you're into marathons. Here's a website that provides tips for running:

http://www.nydailynews.com/blogs/running_dialogue/2010/09/expert-tips-for-running-in-the.html

If worth is defined as money then standing still you're less likely to fall than running and so won't incur an ER visit. On the other hand standing still you might catch cold or pneumonia based on how cold it is outside or have a higher risk of getting struck by lightning if you're in a thunderstorm or hail if that is present...

If worth is defined by how heavy you'll be then that depends on what you wear if anything , how much water hits you and how much is retained in your clothing and skin.

Heuristically speaking, the end result is common sense rules: Run if it just starts raining and slow down if you're getting soaked but get inside as soon as you can and dry off unless you like singing in the rain.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
^^What he said!

The Mythbusters studied this one, but I recall I found a flaw in their method (I don't think they collected the water-on-head correctly).

When thought-experimenting, it is useful to exaggerate things, and look at extreme cases:

If you moved very slowly, to the point that it takes you an hour to move the 100 yards to your door, would you be wetter or dryer than if you sprinted there taking only 10 seconds (I said exaggerate!)?

I've done this. Sprinting = dryer (my real name is Carl Lewis, by the way).

However, when walking slowly, the water hits your head and shoulders primarily. If you have a hat, then most of the water comes off with it when you get inside. If you sprint, you need to change your shirt.

If it is a true downpour, and you have more than 100 yards to go, you're just going to be wet, so enjoy it.
 
PhizKid said:
http://iopscience.iop.org/0143-0807/8/3/011

I guess it's hard to come by original questions in science these days..
First off, this article is from 1987. I don't know what you mean by "these days".

This obviously isn't a burning question in physics research. Physics researchers however aren't the only ones who publish in physics journals. Physics educators also publish. It's very easy to create a bad homework type problem. Creating a problem that is interesting to students, that stresses key points rather than sidebars, and that is neither too easy nor too hard to solve -- that's a hard problem!

The running in the rain problem is a perennial favorite. It's an interesting problem with which students can identify. It involves multiple concepts such as how to make good simplifying assumptions, how to mathematically formulate and solve equations of motion, and the concept of cross section that is so important in particle physics. This problem can also be modernized by having students develop a simulation, and perhaps even relax some of the not quite realistic simplifying assumptions.

In short, this is a nice problem for physics educators.
 
When I some time ago thought about this, I concluded, assuming rain falls vertically
and body could be approximated as a parallellepipede:

1) Rain hitting top of you is proportional to time dwelled in the rain, independent of
horisontal distance travelled.

2) Rain hitting front of you is proportional to distance, independent of time passed in
the rain.

So it should pay running because it reduces water hitting the top surface of you, but
doesn´t change water hitting your front. If you could be approximated as an upright
straight column or something.

If your body may be approximated as a sphere of cross section A, the water droplets
uniformly distributed falling at vertical speed Vv and you run the distance S at speed Vh: Then your speed relative to the "cloud of raindrops" is SQRT(Vv^2 + Vh^2) and the time you pass is S / Vh, so the length of "tunnel in cloud" and total amount of water you receive is proportional to SQRT[1 + (Vv / Vh)^2]. So also in that case it pays run. :eek:
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 55 ·
2
Replies
55
Views
13K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
3K
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
7K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
6K
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K