[Help] creating the biggest force with air pressure?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on creating an air pressure cannon and optimizing its muzzle velocity through mathematical calculations. Key points include the importance of using the correct area for force calculations, specifically the base area of the bullet, and the need to incorporate temperature into pressure equations. Participants highlight that smaller volumes can lead to greater forces but caution against misunderstanding the relationship between volume and pressure. There is also a critique of the initial assumptions about the values of R and r, emphasizing that real units must be used for accurate calculations. Overall, the conversation emphasizes the need for precise mathematical modeling and understanding of physical principles in designing an effective air pressure cannon.
kieyard
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
hello, I'm wanting to make an air pressure cannon and am trying to mathematically find out how to get the highest muzzle velocity, could someone please check over my working and let me know of any mistakes and perhaps offer suggestions on how to improve my cannon.

verical vacuum cannon.jpg

if my maths is correct am i also right in saying that to get the maximum force out of it R and r should both be below 1?

any guidance would be appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
i also done some excel work to calculate the final velocity. i did some preliminary tests before this to find out the best optimum values for R, r and L. could you also check if the working is correct on these? iv included the formula view, so you can check.

calcs.jpg

formula.jpg
 
It looks like you are using the wrong area. You want to use the area of the base of the bullet = pi*r^2, if you are calculating the force on the bullet.

Also, the equation for pressure is missing temperature. Temperature will decrease as volume increases. You might be able to approximate it as an adiabatic expansion, in which case your equation should be
##P = \frac{c}{V^\gamma}##
##\gamma## depends on what gas you are using in your chamber. ##\gamma = 5/3## for a monatomic gas like helium or ##7/5## for a diatomic gas like air.

You should always take a step back and think about what you expect the answer to be, and if your answer makes sense at all.
This makes no sense: "if my maths is correct am i also right in saying that to get the maximum force out of it R and r should both be below 1?"
 
yeah, i realized the area thing the day after writing this and to get a greater force the volume should be the smallest as possible hence why i said the R and r below 1 because it grows exponentially if its above 1 however the smaller the volume the less mols i can fit into it and when the projectile is at the highest the volume is massive compared to its original meaning the final force will be small.
plus the temperature will only increase as pressure increase which would also increase the force and the idea is to get the highest force so even though i missed this its not too much a problem. it would be nice to include it in my maths however.
 
It made my brain hurt to read your first "sentence". Please use punctuation and capitalization. Even when I add punctuation it doesn't really make any sense. Your physics intuition is wrong. First of all, when you are working with real units with real dimensions, the number 1 doesn't mean anything special. For length, you need a unit, like 1 meter. And it sounds like you just pulled the 1 out of nowhere. Why 1 and not 2 or 0.483? There is no exponential growth in your equation. Exponential growth means ##e^x##.

For a given tank pressure, a larger volume tank will give you more impulse than a smaller tank because the pressure will not decrease as quickly as the bullet moves through the gun barrel.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top