Rail-Guns: Recoil Comparisons and Momentum Questions

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter Jasper
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Momentum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on comparing the recoil of rail-guns and conventional guns, both firing projectiles of the same mass and achieving the same muzzle velocity. Participants explore the implications of momentum, acceleration, and the forces involved in the operation of both types of firearms.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • Some participants suggest that recoil is a result of the force required to accelerate a projectile, emphasizing the equal and opposite reaction forces involved.
  • Others argue that if both guns have the same mass and fire projectiles with the same mass and velocity, they would experience the same recoil, regardless of the method of propulsion.
  • A participant questions whether the timing of acceleration affects the recoil, noting that conventional guns accelerate projectiles quickly at the beginning, while rail-guns may provide constant acceleration.
  • Another participant introduces the concept of momentum absorption and relates it to the equation force * time = mass * velocity = momentum, suggesting that recoil might be similar in both cases.
  • Some participants highlight that conventional artillery may experience more recoil due to the additional momentum from expelled gases and the nature of its acceleration profile.
  • There is mention of the unique aspects of rail-gun recoil, particularly the sideways reaction due to the Lorentz force and the back reaction related to the magnetic field from the current flowing between electrodes.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the factors influencing recoil, including the effects of acceleration timing and the nature of propulsion. No consensus is reached regarding which type of gun would definitively have more recoil.

Contextual Notes

Some assumptions regarding the mass and acceleration profiles of the guns are not explicitly defined, leading to potential ambiguity in the discussion. The impact of additional factors, such as the behavior of gases in conventional guns, is also noted but not resolved.

Jasper
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
I have a question about rail-guns. Let’s say that you have a rail-gun and a normal gun both have the same muzzle velocity and fire a projectile of the same mass. Which of these two weapons would have the most recoil?

It seems to me like this problem involves momentum right? Is there such a thing as momentum absorption? Something like force*time?

If so then the rail-gun would seem to have the higher recoil. I am probably not even on the right track… Could someone explain this better and which one would recoil more?

Thank
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The recoil is the result of the force require to accelerate a projectile - equal and opposite (reaction) forces.

The guns are much heavier than the projectiles, but the projectiles can be accelerated to very high velocities in short distances.

With the same projectile mass and muzzle velocity, the forces on the rail-gun and a normal gun would be the same. The response of the rail-gun/normal gun depends on their masses. The heavier the gun the less recoil acceleration (and lower momentum) if would experience.

If the normal gun and rail-gun had the same mass (and length over which the projectile is accelerated), they would experience the same recoil for the same projectile mass and acceleration.
 
This would be true even though most of the normal guns acceleration occurs earlier but the rail-gun accelerates its projectile at a constant rate? The recoil force would not feel more spread out?
 
Last edited:
Jasper said:
I have a question about rail-guns. Let’s say that you have a rail-gun and a normal gun both have the same muzzle velocity and fire a projectile of the same mass. Which of these two weapons would have the most recoil?

It seems to me like this problem involves momentum right? Is there such a thing as momentum absorption? Something like force*time?

If so then the rail-gun would seem to have the higher recoil. I am probably not even on the right track… Could someone explain this better and which one would recoil more?

It's not necessarily something that gets gone over explictly in class, but:
Force * time = mass * velocity = momentum

The recoil is essentially the same.

In practice conventional (i.e. chemical propelled) artillery launches things other than the projectile (like some of the explosive gasses), and because conventional artillery does not have constant acceleration capability (conventional guns usually have most of the acceleration take place at the beginning of the shot), odds are that the conventional artillery piece would experience more recoil, both in the sense that the maximal force on the gun is higher, and in the sense that the total momentum change of the gun is higher. However, this is an practical efficiency issue, rather than some fundamental difference between the guns, and it's readily concievable that a rail gun that uses some kind of sled to accelerate a projectile could have more recoil per projectile mass than a conventional gun.
 
Jasper said:
This would be true even though most of the normal guns acceleration occurs earlier but the rail-gun accelerates its projectile at a constant rate? The recoil force would not feel more spread out?
In both cases the acceleration is so high it may as well be instantaneous: the bullet is out the muzzle before you notice that the gun is recoiling.
 
If the normal gun and rail-gun had the same mass (and length over which the projectile is accelerated), they would experience the same recoil for the same projectile mass and acceleration.

The original statement did not specify how the charge-propelled projectile would accelerate. Clearly, if the acceleration of the chemically propelled charge is higher than the acceleration of the mass in the rail-gun, then the reaction force on the normal gun is higher. On the other hand, the force (pressure * area) of the normal-gun chamber falls off as the projectile moves forward in the chamber, so the acceleration, which is initially higher than that of the rail-gun, decreases to a level below - given the constraint on the problem that the muzzle velocity is the same for both cases.
 
The recoil in the rail gun is unusual as the force is from the cross product Lorentz force, so the immediate reaction at the projectile on the rail is sideways, i.e. not linear. The back reaction is curiously due to the force on the battery caused by the magnetic field of the side bars on the current flowing between the electrodes.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
5K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
6K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 38 ·
2
Replies
38
Views
7K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K