Time taken for a parachute to fall

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on a KS3 coursework experiment investigating how parachute area affects fall rate. The experimenter has developed a formula considering factors like mass, gravitational force, drag coefficient, air density, and cross-sectional area. There is confusion regarding the correctness of the formula and the units used, particularly the meaning of 's' in the context of time and distance. Participants emphasize the importance of consistent units and clarify that 's' refers to seconds. The conversation highlights the need for better explanation of the calculations and their derivation.
Andrew Howe
Messages
4
Reaction score
0
Hi.

I'm doing a KS3 coursework experiment whereby I need to investigate the question, 'Does the area of a parachute affect the rate of fall?' Obviously the answer is yes, however the theoretical physicist within me wanted to take this much further, so I attempted to pull together my basic understanding of drag, air resistance etc. in order to come up with a formula. I am using square parachute material made out of standard polyphene shopping-bags attatched to a spherical 1g weight of plasticine via. cotton. I am not taking into account the drag of the weight or cotton or the weight of the parachute material or the cotton, each of which I believed were neglieable. I came up with the formula seen in 'parachute2.JPG'. What I was trying to find, as explained better in 'Basicfor.JPG', was the length of time it takes for the parachute to reach its terminal velocity plus the time it takes for the parachute to travel the rest of the distance to the floor.

In the formula:
b = total time taken (seconds?)
m = mass of weight attactched to parachute (in kg?)
g = gravitational force (9.81?)
C = numerical drag coefficent (1.28 for a flat plane?)
p = air density (0.0022 approx.)
A = crossectional area (cm sqaured?)
'9.81' = acceleration under the affect of gravity (metres/second squared?)
d = total distance from where parachute was dropped from to floor (cm?)
u = initial velocity of parachute (zero m/s)
t = time taken
a = acceleration (9.81 m/s squared?)


Firstly, is this formula correct? And secondly, are the units correct? I would appreciate any help in this matter.
 

Attachments

  • Parachute2.JPG
    Parachute2.JPG
    3.5 KB · Views: 767
  • Basicfor.JPG
    Basicfor.JPG
    2.2 KB · Views: 720
Physics news on Phys.org
Please identify what 's' means.
Terminal velocity is when the drag force exactly equals the gravitational force.
Its best to work in MKS, meters kilograms seconds.
Whatever units you decide, stick with them throughout.

Also tell us how you got those equations.
 
'S' (as in m/s) means 'seconds', as in m/s means metres per second.

The equation basically works out the time taken for the parachute to reach its terminal velocity added to the time taken for the paracute to traverse the remaining distance to the floor.
 
Your work makes no sense.

In picture "BasicFor" you are subtracting 's' with units of time from 'd' with units of distance.

I asked you to explain how you got to your conclusions but I still don't see any explaining.
 
Sorry. I appear to have misunderstood your previous enquiry.

'S' represents the distance traveled by the parachute whilst it reached mits terminal velocity.
 
Thread 'Is 'Velocity of Transport' a Recognized Term in English Mechanics Literature?'
Here are two fragments from Banach's monograph in Mechanics I have never seen the term <<velocity of transport>> in English texts. Actually I have never seen this term being named somehow in English. This term has a name in Russian books. I looked through the original Banach's text in Polish and there is a Polish name for this term. It is a little bit surprising that the Polish name differs from the Russian one and also differs from this English translation. My question is: Is there...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
Back
Top