How Does Positive Lift Affect the Ascent Rate of a Heavily Loaded Truck?

AI Thread Summary
Removing a one-pound rock from a neutrally buoyant truck connected to a helium balloon creates a positive lift of one pound, allowing the truck to rise. However, due to its large mass, the ascent rate will be significantly slower compared to a small balloon with the same lift. The relationship between lift and ascent rate is inversely proportional, meaning that as mass increases, the ascent rate decreases. The acceleration can be calculated using the formula a = f/m, where 'f' is the net lift and 'm' is the mass of the truck. Thus, while the truck experiences positive lift, its ascent will be minimal compared to lighter objects.
Syed F. Karim
Messages
14
Reaction score
0
Let's say that I rig up a truck to a giant helium balloon, but I load up the back of the truck with enough stones so that the truck has reached a state of neutral buoyancy--its just floating in mid-air, not rising not falling, just there. Now let's say I take away a one-pound rock from the truck's bed. Does the truck now have a positive lift of one pound? And will it now rise just like a small balloon with one pound of positive lift?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Originally posted by Syed F. Karim
Let's say that I rig up a truck to a giant helium balloon, but I load up the back of the truck with enough stones so that the truck has reached a state of neutral buoyancy--its just floating in mid-air, not rising not falling, just there. Now let's say I take away a one-pound rock from the truck's bed. Does the truck now have a positive lift of one pound? And will it now rise just like a small balloon with one pound of positive lift?

Yes, when the truck has neutral buoyency the forces acting on it perpendicalr to the ground are in equilibrium, by removing 1 pound you are removing 1 pound* from the downward force which means that there will be a net lift of 1 pound*.

* Isn't it pound-force? I I've never used anything other than the SI system in mechanics.
 
Yup. Pound-force.

- Warren
 
Originally posted by Syed F. Karim
Let's say that I rig up a truck to a giant helium balloon, but I load up the back of the truck with enough stones so that the truck has reached a state of neutral buoyancy--its just floating in mid-air, not rising not falling, just there. Now let's say I take away a one-pound rock from the truck's bed. Does the truck now have a positive lift of one pound? And will it now rise just like a small balloon with one pound of positive lift?

Yes it has positive lift of one pound, but No it does not rise just like a small balloon. It still has very large mass, so that one pound lift results in very small acceleration.
 
Yes it has positive lift of one pound, but No it does not rise just like a small balloon. It still has very large mass, so that one pound lift results in very small acceleration.

If a small balloon with a positive lift of one pound has an ascent rate of 1000ft/min, would a 1000lb-truck with the same one-pound positive lift have an ascent rate of just 1ft/min? Is it an inverse relationship? How do you calculate the rate of ascent of massive bodies? (This is not a homework problem, I am an inventor.)
 
Originally posted by Syed F. Karim
If a small balloon with a positive lift of one pound has an ascent rate of 1000ft/min, would a 1000lb-truck with the same one-pound positive lift have an ascent rate of just 1ft/min? Is it an inverse relationship? How do you calculate the rate of ascent of massive bodies? (This is not a homework problem, I am an inventor.)
a=f/m
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Back
Top