Terminal Velocity and Mass Relationship in a Proportionality Argument

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on the relationship between terminal velocity and mass for a box sliding down an inclined ramp. The drag force is modeled as proportional to the square of the velocity, while sliding friction is proportional to the normal weight of the object. The analysis reveals that terminal velocity (v_T) is proportional to mass (m) raised to the power of 1/6, expressed as v_T ∝ m^(1/6). The key insight is that the proportionality constants must be treated distinctly to avoid errors in calculations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Newton's Second Law
  • Familiarity with drag force and its dependence on velocity
  • Knowledge of frictional forces and their relation to normal weight
  • Basic algebra for manipulating proportional relationships
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of drag force equations in fluid dynamics
  • Explore the concept of terminal velocity in different contexts, such as free fall
  • Learn about the effects of incline angles on motion dynamics
  • Investigate the assumptions of uniform density in physical models
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, engineers analyzing motion on inclined planes, and anyone interested in the dynamics of forces acting on objects in motion.

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.
 

Similar threads

Replies
10
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 97 ·
4
Replies
97
Views
6K
  • · Replies 33 ·
2
Replies
33
Views
2K
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
3K
Replies
39
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
987
Replies
1
Views
1K