Terminal Velocity and Mass Relationship in a Proportionality Argument

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on determining the relationship between terminal velocity and mass for a box sliding down a ramp at an incline. It establishes that the drag force is proportional to the square of the velocity and the sliding friction is proportional to the object's weight, which in turn is proportional to its mass. The user attempts to derive a formula for terminal velocity but encounters issues with proportionality constants, leading to confusion in their calculations. They conclude that terminal velocity is proportional to mass raised to the power of one-sixth, under the assumption of constant density. The conversation emphasizes the importance of treating proportionality constants correctly in physics equations.
opticaltempest
Messages
135
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Assume a box is sliding down a ramp with an incline of \theta radians and reaches terminal velocity before arriving at the bottom of the ramp. Assume that the drag force caused by the air is proportional to Sv^2, where S is the cross sectional area perpendicular to the direction of motion and v is the speed. Further assume that the sliding friction between the object and the ramp is proportional to the normal weight of the object. Determine the relationship between the terminal velocity and the mass of the object.

The Attempt at a Solution



The forces acting on the box will be the drag force F_d acting in the negative direction, the sliding friction F_s acting in the negative direction, and the component of gravity that is parallel to the surface of the ramp F_g_x acting in the positive direction. At terminal velocity, the box is not accelerating. Using Newton's Second Law for the net force acting on the box, we have

-F_s-F_d+F_g_x=0 (1)

Now, F_s \propto w and w \propto m so

F_s \propto m

where w is the normal weight of the box and m is the mass of the box.

The same argument can be made for F_g_x. So

F_g_x \propto m.

For F_d, note that S \propto L^2 and V \propto L^3,

where L is length and V is volume.

So L\propto S^{\frac{1}{2}} \propto V^{\frac{1}{3}}.

This implies that S \propto V^{\frac{2}{3}}.

Since volume V is proportional to mass m, we have

S \propto m^{\frac{2}{3}}.

Assuming we are at terminal velocity, v=v_T.

Now going back to (1), we have

-F_s-F_d+F_g_x=0

-m-m^{\frac{2}{3}}v^2_{T}+m \propto 0

m^{\frac{2}{3}}v^2_{T} \propto 0 (2)

The proportionality in (2) doesn't make sense. Where am I going wrong? Do I need to modify

F_g_x \propto m to be F_g_x \propto \sin{(\theta)}m.?Thanks
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
The forum is giving me a "Page Not Found" when I try to post my reply. I'll try PMing it to you...

...OK, the system doesn't like something about my post in PM as well. Write me and I'll discuss it with you there.
 
Last edited:
If you have an expression with multiple terms:

-F_s-F_d+F_g_x

You can't replace each term with values proportional to each term:

-m-m^{\frac{2}{3}}v^2_{T}+m

This is because each term has a different (hidden) constant. Try doing the problem with equalities rather than proportions, remembering to show the constant in each term. I think you'll see the mistake then.

Another thing is that you are making certain assumptions about the problem that could likely be wrong. For example, it doesn't say that the volume is proportional to the mass. Although it is rather unrealistic that the dynamic friction is unrelated to the velocity, but I guess we are to assume that.
 
Fleem, I think I see the point you are making.

Let F_s=Km,

F_g_x=Rm, and

F_d=Qm^{\frac{2}{3}} v_{t}^{2},

where K, Q, and R are some contants.

Equation (1) from my first post becomes

-Km-Qm^{\frac{2}{3}}v^{2}_{t}+Rm=0

\implies -Qm^{\frac{2}{3}}v^{2}_{t}=m(K-R)

\implies v^{2}_{t}=\frac{m(K-R)}{m^{\frac{2}{3}}(-Q)}

\implies v = \sqrt{\frac{K-R}{-Q}}\sqrt{m^{\frac{1}{3}}}

\implies v = \sqrt{\frac{K-R}{Q}}m^{\frac{1}{6}}

Let T=\sqrt{\frac{K-R}{Q}}. So,

v = Tm^{\frac{1}{6}}

\implies v \propto m^{\frac{1}{6}}.

So by replacing each term with what it was proportional to, I was assuming that all the proportionality constants were the same, which they might not be. Right?

I should also say that I am assuming that volume is proportional to mass. I guess a better assumption would be to assume some constant uniform density for all boxes. From that assumption, volume would be proportional to mass. Right? The book makes the assumption that volume is proportional to mass.
 
Last edited:
Just glanced over the algebra but, yep, that's the idea.
 
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Thread 'Variable mass system : water sprayed into a moving container'
Starting with the mass considerations #m(t)# is mass of water #M_{c}# mass of container and #M(t)# mass of total system $$M(t) = M_{C} + m(t)$$ $$\Rightarrow \frac{dM(t)}{dt} = \frac{dm(t)}{dt}$$ $$P_i = Mv + u \, dm$$ $$P_f = (M + dm)(v + dv)$$ $$\Delta P = M \, dv + (v - u) \, dm$$ $$F = \frac{dP}{dt} = M \frac{dv}{dt} + (v - u) \frac{dm}{dt}$$ $$F = u \frac{dm}{dt} = \rho A u^2$$ from conservation of momentum , the cannon recoils with the same force which it applies. $$\quad \frac{dm}{dt}...
Back
Top