What is the lift force on a car's roof at 100km/hr with an area of 3.9m^2?

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on calculating the lift force on a car's roof with an area of 3.9m^2 while driving at 100 km/hr, using a density of air at 1.17 kg/m^3. It emphasizes that speed alone does not create lift on a flat surface parallel to the airflow, as there needs to be an object to deflect the air, such as a windshield. The Bernoulli principle is deemed inapplicable in this scenario because the airflow around a flat plate does not transition from high to low pressure. Instead, the ambient pressure remains constant regardless of the car's speed, as indicated by static pressure measurements. Overall, understanding the car's shape is crucial for determining any lift generated at speed.
salpal243
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
the question I am stumped on is "What is the lift force on the roof of your car that has an aera of 3.9m^2 if you are driving 100km/hr? use 1.17kg/m^3 for density of air
 
Physics news on Phys.org
There would have to be something deflecting air away from a flat roof in order to produce lift. Speed alone isn't going to create lift on a flat plate parallel to the relative wind. Bernoulli principle doesn't apply here. You could place a flush mounted static port in a flat roof to measure pressure of the moving air outside and it would indicate the same ambient pressure if the car was stopped or moving (as long as speeds are reasonably sub-sonic).

For a real car, the windshield deflects the air away from the roof, and the overall shape of most cars is similar to a common wing and tends to produce some lift. You'd have to know the profile shape of the car, similar to knowing the profile of an airfoil, in order to determine the lift versus speed.
 
Last edited:
rcgldr said:
Speed alone isn't going to create lift on a flat plate parallel to the relative wind. Bernoulli principle doesn't apply here. You could place a flush mounted static port in a flat roof to measure pressure of the moving air outside and it would indicate the same ambient pressure if the car was stopped or moving (as long as speeds are reasonably sub-sonic).

Why does Bernoulli principle not apply? My first thought was that it would indeed create a significant difference in pressure...
 
rcgldr said:
Speed alone isn't going to create lift on a flat plate parallel to the relative wind.

Lsos said:
Why does Bernoulli principle not apply?
Because the speed of the air wasn't the result of a transition from higher pressure to lower pressure. In this case, the assumption is that the pressure of the air is ambient. It doesn't matter what the speed of the flat plate is if the flat plate isn't interacting with the air (assume the flat plate doesn't change the speed of the air, ignoring any skin friction effects). This why static ports that are just small openings in the side of an aircraft's fuselage (at a point where the air's speed isn't being changed) can sense the ambient pressure of the air, regardless of the speed of the aircraft (as long as speed is sufficiently below the speed of sound).
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
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?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...

Similar threads

Back
Top