Finding ratio of smaller terminal velocity to larger terminal velocity

AI Thread Summary
The terminal velocity of a skydiver varies significantly between positions, with 188 km/h in a spread-eagle position and 320 km/h in a nosedive. The discussion focuses on calculating the ratio of the effective cross-sectional area in these two positions, using the formula for terminal velocity. The initial calculations led to confusion, as the ratio was mistakenly found to be less than one. Clarification revealed that the ratio should actually be greater than one, indicating that the area in the slower position is larger. The correct approach involved taking the reciprocal of the initially calculated ratio.
rockchalk1312
Messages
38
Reaction score
0
The terminal speed of a sky diver is 188 km/h in the spread-eagle position and 320 km/h in the nosedive position. Assuming that the diver's drag coefficient C does not change from one position to the other, find the ratio of the effective cross-sectional area A in the slower position to that in the faster position.


vt = sqroot (2mg/pAC)


188=sqroot(2(90)(9.8)/(1)(A)(1))

320=sqroot(2(90)(9.8)/(1)(A)(1))

Basically I just set v to each value given, set everything else the same and solved for A then divided the smaller value by the larger one and got .34 but this was the wrong answer.

Really thought this was a pretty simple thing to figure out but I'm probably just making a stupid mistake? Thank you!
 
Physics news on Phys.org


"find the ratio of the effective cross-sectional area A in the slower position to that in the faster position."

Should the ratio be greater than or less than unity?
 


I'm sorry, what do you mean by unity?
 


Unity means the number one. Should the ratio be greater than or less than one?
 


LawrenceC said:
Unity means the number one. Should the ratio be greater than or less than one?

Ok yeah I see it should be greater than 1 since the area of A for the slower one would be greater than for the faster one...but was it still ok to approach the problem the way I did?
 


Ok it was just the reciprocal! Thank you very much :)
 


Glad you got it. I was trying to give you a subtle hint rather than saying take the reciprocal.
 
Back
Top