Chronology Current Month Current Thread Current Date
[Year List] [Month List (current year)] [Date Index] [Thread Index] [Thread Prev] [Thread Next] [Date Prev] [Date Next]

[Phys-L] Re: race between car and airplane



At 03:02 PM 1/27/2006, Tim Folkerts, you wrote:
John,
///
1) Your 3rd assumption is in direct conflict with a section of the problem
statement, but since the problem itself is not clear or consistent, that
is hard to avoid. (The problem specifically states the car "in still air
goes 120 mph", but you are assuming it goes 120 mph with a 20 mph
cross-wind as the plane flies above in the same crosswind).

Tim Folkerts

Actually, all three of John's explicit assumptions are either in conflict
with the facts of the puzzle as asserted, or with the usual physical
models of aerodynamic drag when viewed from different perspectives.

But that's just fine for a class of puzzles known as tech teasers,
sometimes used on employment interviews.

For example, if we acknowledge that at some stage the car IS operating
in still air, then turns (not necessarily by 90 degrees) into a headwind;
(say after penetrating a front) - how could we possibly come to a
similar conclusion to John's? (though one smiles behind the hand
to suppose this or any other solution is at all exact.)

Easy! Two vehicles penetrating a headwind, and subject only to
aerodynamic drag can experience different drag forces at the same
"air" speed (obviously). One is flying in free-field conditions, and the
other is flying within a foot or so of the ground.
But the free field vehicle is smooth on the underside, as a matter
of course, and (until quite recently at least) the other one has immense
protuberances. Despite the fact that the car is subject to enhanced
viscous shear over the short range involved between floor and road.
When the relative speed of the road to underbody changes,
you can expect aero drag to change in a different way from that
of the free field vehicle.

This reminds me of the tale that you have probably heard about
- i.e. it's not good enough to place a car in a wind tunnel, without
attention to substrate motion.

There are other argumentations that could be aired....
how about a person who offers a long-standing model of aero drag
force as Fd = Cd.A. 1/2 .rho.V squared and then suggests that an
effective value for A, the cross section area is augmented by
sin 10 deg of the side area, if the car were operating in a
quartering headwind?

This could be quite a drag increment if Fd really scaled with A...
You may be reminded that some cars offered lower drag values
going backwards than forwards, but I fancy there are still rather
few car shapes that don't at least increase drag when placed
broadside to the wind....
There are more debating points, I feel sure, but I have written
enough.


Brian Whatcott Altus OK Eureka!
_______________________________________________
Phys-L mailing list
Phys-L@electron.physics.buffalo.edu
https://www.physics.buffalo.edu/mailman/listinfo/phys-l