Kinetic energy, size of object, and force applied

AI Thread Summary
When comparing two bullets with the same kinetic energy, size and weight can influence their impact on a target. A larger, heavier bullet traveling slower may impart more force and cause a target to tip over, while a lighter, faster bullet may pass through without transferring all its energy. Momentum plays a significant role in the ability to move or tilt the target, while kinetic energy relates to damage and deformation. The discussion emphasizes the importance of considering both momentum and energy in evaluating bullet performance. Ultimately, the physical characteristics of the bullets can affect their effectiveness despite having equal kinetic energy.
Skeet_man
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Kinda looking to confirm what I already suspect.

All things being equal, if two objects have the same kinetic energy, does the fact that one is larger and heavier than the other (although at a slower velocity) mean anything?

Specifically when comparing bullets. One bullet .451" in diameter, 230 grains in weight, traveling at 880 feet per second. Second bullet .356" in diameter, 124 grains in weight, traveling 1200fps. Both bullets have 396 ft/lb of kinetic energy. However, in a somewhat ad-hoc comparison against targets, the larger slower bullet is ostensibly being shown to impart more force on the target, causing it to tip over, whereas the faster lighter bullet fails to do so.

To my mind, at least in this instance, ft/lb is ft/lb.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Skeet_man said:
All things being equal, if two objects have the same kinetic energy, does the fact that one is larger and heavier than the other (although at a slower velocity) mean anything?
Other than what you have stated, not really.
Skeet_man said:
Specifically when comparing bullets. One bullet .451" in diameter, 230 grains in weight, traveling at 880 feet per second. Second bullet .356" in diameter, 124 grains in weight, traveling 1200fps. Both bullets have 396 ft/lb of kinetic energy. However, in a somewhat ad-hoc comparison against targets, the larger slower bullet is ostensibly being shown to impart more force on the target, causing it to tip over, whereas the faster lighter bullet fails to do so.
Just for reference, a ft/lb is not a unit of energy by a ft*lb is. To answer your question, the faster bullet may just go through the target before it can transfer all of its energy to the target.
 
Skeet_man said:
However, in a somewhat ad-hoc comparison against targets, the larger slower bullet is ostensibly being shown to impart more force on the target, causing it to tip over, whereas the faster lighter bullet fails to do so.
The heavier slower bullet has more momentum, if kinetic energies are the same.

Assuming the bullet stays in the target:
- Momentum is relevant to moving/tilting the target.
- Energy is relevant to the damage/deformation of target/bullet.
 
Last edited:
@Skeet_man do you know how to calculate the kinetic energy and the momentum of a bullet? I

t seems to me that if you were looking at the equations, that you could answer your own question.
 
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
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...
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...
Back
Top