0 Members and 1 Guest are viewing this topic.
, the velcro is not a true inelastic collision .
In which scenario does the bigger weight move away faster?Is V(sticky) bigger or smaller than V(bouncy)?
Mr. K. ,Your picture above is also different from my design . I use only loosely packed sandbags . When a steel ball hits these , it gives up ALL of it's KE : %55 to the Massive-Wall as kinetic energy (shove) , %45 to the sandbag as thermal energy (heat). The ball stops dead in it's tracks as a result of this , it is done until it is thrown again .In regards to the steel ball/wall impact : This too was pictured not like my process . The ball imparts %2 of it's KE to the steel wall , it converts ~%0 to heat , it then reflects back with %98 of it's KE intact . The sandbag transfers more KE because of it's much longer contact time , same with the steelball on sandbag impact .Note - Energy must be radiated or conducted out to make this system work .P.M.
An "adhesive" collision is fundamentally different from a true in-elastic collision
The first fifteen sentences of reply # 85 explain it nicely .
The "dead" sandbag makes a huge difference also . It's powerful shove completely outweighs the weak shove of the metal ball .
The "adhesive collision" converts two objects into one instantly . The "Shooter" object's KE is then distributed proportionately throughout the "new object" . This results in a significantly lower velocity than the "target" object in the first case .
Think of heat as dispersed , uni-directional momentum .
Any waste heat produced is omni-directional
Woops , habit . Kind of obvious I meant in all directions ( omni ) .D.
The momentum transferred to the massive plate is ~2% of 1kg.m/s. , not -2kg.m/sec. .
I believe that you are transposing photon absorption /reflection dynamics upon bulk matter collision dynamics .
Not the same thing , at all .
Try your formulas with that 2% figure in place , then congratulate me on my breakthrough !
Quote from: Professor Mega-Minda different type of shield is necessary ... Constructed mainly of high-tech , impact-absorbing materialsI recently saw some samples of shielding that had been subjected to simulated micrometeorite impacts that you expect to encounter in Earth orbit.The idea of having two thin layers of protection seems much more effective than a single thick layer.The idea of the first layer is to partially melt/vaporize the micrometeorite (and slow it a bit). What hits the second layer is a partially melted spray of particles, spread out over a larger area, so it is much less likely to penetrate the next layer.The composition of the first layer is not so important - in fact, if the first layer is particularly tough, it may provide very tough debris that can puncture the second layer. So it is probably best if the first layer is something like aluminium that is light and has a fairly low melting point, so it splatters rather than remain intact.This photo shows a 5mm thick layer of aluminium, hit by the ball bearing. The impact created a crater through most of the depth (and probably cracked and weakened the remainder of the depth). [ Invalid Attachment ] This photo shows the effect of two layers of 0.5mm each, and the splatter pattern on the second layer. [ Invalid Attachment ] From an exhibition at Scienceworks, Melbourne Australia.
a different type of shield is necessary ... Constructed mainly of high-tech , impact-absorbing materials