What is the maximum velocity of a bullet at the instant it leaves the barrel?

  • Thread starter Thread starter stvsxm
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Velocity
AI Thread Summary
The maximum velocity of a bullet is referred to as the muzzle velocity, which is the speed at the moment it exits the barrel. Once the bullet leaves the barrel, it immediately begins to decelerate due to drag forces from air resistance and gravity, as the propelling gas pressure ceases. The discussion draws parallels to a baseball being hit, where the ball accelerates after contact and does not achieve its maximum speed instantaneously. The mechanics of how a bullet accelerates within the barrel and the effects of barrel length on velocity are also highlighted, emphasizing that longer barrels allow for greater exposure to propellant gas pressure. Overall, the consensus is that the bullet does not continue to accelerate after leaving the barrel but starts to slow down immediately.
stvsxm
Messages
3
Reaction score
0
hi, my high school physics is letting me down here and I just have to get an explanation...

when you talk to gun guys, they say that the maximum velocity that a bullet reaches is the muzzle velocity ... i.e. the absolute velocity of the bullet at the instant that it clears the barrel. their assertion is that , once the gases stop pushing the bullet, that everything after that is " slowing down.

I understand the logic and science of their position but I can't get it to make sense to me. I certainly remember f=ma ... a given force imparted to a given mass results in a given acceleration... fine. then any unbalanced force acts to offset that acceleration. fair enough... so the bullet is immediately subjected to a drag force as a function of air versus its instantaneous velocity and gravity pulling it down...

I did that calculation a hundred times in school... " someone throws a rock of x mass with a force of y lbs off a cliff z feet high in a vacuum . how far does it travel before it hits the ground ? " that was all linear... time to ground etc... but in the real world it just seems , just like the guy throwing the rock, that the bullet accelerates for some period of time AFTER it leaves the barrel before it reaches an equilibrium with the drag and starts slowing down... i.e. max v occurs not at the muzzle but somewhere down range.

just like a pitcher throwing a 100 mph fast ball... the pitchers arm isn't moving at 100 mph when the ball leaves his hand ( is it ? ) so the ball accelerates to max v and then slows down... the velocity is a curve... of distance vs time rather than a straight line ... starting at max and ending at zero... so... somebody please remind me what the truth is , please...
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Your intuition is wrong and your gun friends are right. As soon as the bullet leaves the barrel and the hot gasses stop pushing on it, the bullet begins slowing down. This is a simple consequence of F=ma. Also, a pitcher's hand is moving at 100 mph when the ball leaves his hand.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
stvsxm said:
just like a pitcher throwing a 100 mph fast ball... the pitchers arm isn't moving at 100 mph when the ball leaves his hand ( is it ? )

Of course not. It's moving faster since the ball slows down between release and catch. :wink:

stvsxm said:
so the bullet is immediately subjected to a drag force as a function of air versus its instantaneous velocity and gravity pulling it down...

Note that the bullet immediately begins to experience drag at the moment the cartridge is fired since there is air inside the barrel. The drag force increases as the bullet accelerates down the barrel and once out of the barrel the force from the expanding gas that propels it is lost and it begins to decelerate because of this drag.
 
  • Like
Likes russ_watters
Drakkith said:
Of course not. It's moving faster since the ball slows down between release and catch. :wink:
Note that the bullet immediately begins to experience drag at the moment the cartridge is fired since there is air inside the barrel. The drag force increases as the bullet accelerates down the barrel and once out of the barrel the force from the expanding gas that propels it is lost and it begins to decelerate because of this drag.
ok. I get it. thanks for reminding me .
 
stvsxm said:
ok. I get it. thanks for reminding me .
on second thought,... let's talk about this for a minute... take the example of a baseball bat hitting a pitched baseball...

ignore , for the sake of discussion, the compressibility of the ball and the coefficient of restitution of the bat...

so the ball approaches the bat at some given velocity. the bat of a given mass makes contact with the ball in the opposite direction and imparts some given force ... now... at the instant of impact the ball has zero velocity. then the ball accelerates in the other direction to some terminal V before it slows down and begins to fall.

ignoring the vector analysis of the trajectory and just discussing the velocity/acceleration question, there can be no way that the ball achieves max V in the other direction instantaneously as it leaves the bat. it has to go from 0 velocity in the outgoing direction to some max v over some distance and time... so it has to accelerate.

now... I suppose this could be a conservation of momentum deal... where once the bat contact the ball and that system has a given momentum so once the ball leaves the bat ( like a hub cap falling off a moving car ) the ball has the same system momentum and being of substantially less mass , now much achieve a higher speed and therefore accelerates...

and I am thinking that's what happens to the pitched ball as well... there is no way a pitchers hand is moving at a 141 fps to thor a 100 mph fast ball all you have to do is watch it with a stop watch and the time it takes for a full forward movement vs the linear distance isn't even close to that... and I can't help but think the same thing happens with the bullet... that's why long barrel guns have higher velocity than short barrel ones... because the bullet has a longer time exposed to the propellant gas pressure... so it becomes a momentum issue the gas+the bullet vs the bullet alone...

and that's why I am talking to you guys because you are , presumably , far better educated than I and can rationalize the observed data vs the theoretical... I m not arguing... I am trying to understand.
 
Last edited by a moderator:
stvsxm said:
...there can be no way that the ball achieves max V in the other direction instantaneously as it leaves the bat. it has to go from 0 velocity in the outgoing direction to some max v over some distance and time... so it has to accelerate.
Here's your distance and time:



The universe looks a lot different if you zoom in or zoom out a lot in distance or time. What looks instantaneous to our eyes is in fact a process that takes time, during which the baseball covers a distance and accelerates due to an applied force.
... there is no way a pitchers hand is moving at a 141 fps to thor a 100 mph fast ball
I don't quite agree with what you were told before. Because the ball is rolling off the pitcher's fingertips, there is a mechanical advantage due to the changing angle of the hand and changing point of contact. The ball and therefore the point of contact with the hand moves at 100mph, but the hand itself (fingertips) doesn't have to.

It is important not to underestimate the impact of technique in sports. I read somewhere that a pro golfer has a substantially lower peak head acceleration than a typical amateur, it's just that their body mechanics enable them to maintain the acceleration more consistently throughout the swing. Pitching is similar, where you have multiple pivot points (waist, shoulder elbow, wrist) rotating in sync to achieve progressively faster motion at the end of each lever.

and I can't help but think the same thing happens with the bullet... that's why long barrel guns have higher velocity than short barrel ones... because the bullet has a longer time exposed to the propellant gas pressure...
That's true, but aren't you arguing against your point?

[Go Phillies!]
 
Last edited:
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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?
Back
Top