Does the Flow of Water Impact the Effects of High-Speed Impact?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Argon_Asimov
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Impact Water
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the effects of high-speed impacts with water and how the flow of water may influence these effects. Participants explore the properties of water under different impact conditions, including the role of surface tension, relaxation time, and the dynamics of fluids versus solids during collisions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Debate/contested
  • Technical explanation

Main Points Raised

  • One participant suggests that water exhibits different properties at varying impact speeds due to its polar nature, likening high-speed impacts in water to striking concrete.
  • Another participant counters that the damage from high-speed impacts is primarily due to deceleration, regardless of the surface properties of water.
  • A different viewpoint introduces the concept of 'relaxation time' of materials, indicating that most liquids behave similarly under high-speed impacts, though the specific relaxation time of water compared to other fluids is questioned.
  • Surface tension is mentioned as a factor, with an anecdote about a steel worker who survived a fall by breaking the surface tension of the water with a hammer.
  • One participant recalls a Mythbusters episode suggesting that breaking surface tension does not significantly aid survival from high falls into water.
  • Another participant argues that at high impact velocities, solid materials behave like fluids, emphasizing the energy dynamics involved in fracturing materials versus displacing them.
  • A question is raised about the implications of impacting a flowing body of water, suggesting that less energy would be expended when impacting moving fluid compared to stationary fluid, which could affect survival outcomes.
  • It is noted that for the flow of water to significantly impact the dynamics, the fluid would need to be moving at a considerable fraction of the object's speed.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the impact dynamics of water at high speeds, with no consensus reached on the primary factors influencing outcomes. Multiple competing perspectives remain regarding the role of water's properties, surface tension, and the effects of fluid motion.

Contextual Notes

Some claims rely on anecdotal evidence or references to popular media, which may not provide scientifically valid conclusions. The discussion includes unresolved questions about specific physical properties and their implications for high-speed impacts.

Argon_Asimov
Messages
1
Reaction score
1
I had an argument with a friend and fellow engineering student the other day about the properties of water in a high-speed impact.

It started when I casually mentioned that water (like the new item from thinkgeek.com that we were discussing) exibits different properties at different impact speeds, because of its polar nature; and that further, striking a body of water at sufficient speed was like striking concrete.

He refuted this theory on the grounds that striking any surface at high enough speeds would cause enough decceleration to damage the human body just as concrete would, and that it has nothing to do with the properties of water.

I originally heard this from a friend who was a Navy rescue diver, and again from one of my professors, and I've always taken it for granted, but I could be wrong here. My friend challenged me to do the research and find any studies that backed up my claims, but I'm drawing a blank so far and I'd like to see if anyone can prove this one way or another with pure physics.

Thanks in advance!
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Rll1969
Physics news on Phys.org
It has to do with the 'relaxation time' of the material I believe. Most liquids will behave the same way if struck at high enough speed, though I don't know the relaxation time of water compares to other fluids.
 
Not sure but I think that surface tension comes into it.
There is an account from the building of the Sydney Harbour Bridge, IRC, that one of the steel workers fell off the bridge. He threw his rivet hammer into the water just before he hit thus breaking the surface tension and survived with just serious injuries rather than the more common fatal ones.
 
Wasn't this done on Mythbusters? If I remember correctly, they found that breaking the surface tension with a hammer didn't really help when the dummy was thrown from a sufficient height.

(By the way Panda, what does "IRC" stand for in the context of your post? :blushing: )
 
"If I recall correctly" IRC... I'm not necessarily using the correct abbreviations but IMHO they are right...
 
If I Remember/recall Correctly - IIRC.

Anyway, I think you may be looking at the issue backwards: with a sufficiently high impact velocity, a solid material acts like a fluid, not the other way around. Think: crater vs splash. The dynamics are very, very similar and the key is how much energy is required to fracture a material (which is constant) vs how much energy is required(is imparted on it) to push it out of the way (which depends on speed). So as the collision energy increases, the fraction of that energy used to break the objects decreases.
 
Last edited:
What though if the surface you are impacting is already flowing? preferably away from you. More energy would be expended in moving stationary fluid than mobile fluid, and as survival is based on deceleration the less energy you expend at any instant the better.

As for it being disproved on myth busters. I haven't seen the programme, but not all the proofs on these TV shows are scientifically valid.
"Vroom Vroom" on Sky prooved that putting go faster stripes on your car actually slows it down... This was based on the highly scientific statistics of one sample in each state.
 
Panda said:
What though if the surface you are impacting is already flowing? preferably away from you. More energy would be expended in moving stationary fluid than mobile fluid, and as survival is based on deceleration the less energy you expend at any instant the better.
The fluid would need to be moving at a significant fraction of the object's speed for that to matter.
 

Similar threads

Graduate How is initial acceleration accounted for in the impact of two bodies
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Undergrad Flow rate of water dropping out of a pipe
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
12K
Undergrad Jumping off from a high altitude and the landing.
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
4K
High School Experimental evidence for effective mass increasing with speed
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Undergrad Is Late Water Flow on Mars Linked to Climate Change or Permafrost Melting?
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Undergrad What is the impact speed of a high-siding motorcycle rider?
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
14K
High School Does a Black Hole with Lower Density Than Water Float or Sink?
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
3K
Undergrad Ebb and Flow Effects: Impacts on Moon & Earth?
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
Why Bellyflops Hurt: Impact on a Water Surface
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
High School Can Relativistic Effects Alter Thermodynamic Processes in Experiments?
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K