| Topic: |
Science > Physics |
| User: |
"al" |
| Date: |
12 Jul 2006 01:41:50 AM |
| Object: |
calculating distance from the speed of sound |
Ok,
I am not a physics major and I cannot take into account all the
variables of wind velocity, changes of temperature in masses of air,
and other effects that would undoubtedbly give different height
measurements. Although, I am sure these effects are quite minimal for
the small distance I achieved here.
Here is what I did. I took into account the air temperature at ground
level and found the speed of sound for that temperature. (even here it
wouldn't affect the final result by a huge amount with such small
distances) at 70 degrees (it was about 74 here) the speed of sound in
air is 1129 feet per second.
I lit a rocket with a salute on top. I measured the time it took from
when I seen the light, to when I heard to boom. I used a stop watch,
but to be more accurate I used video editing software. I got a time of
1.38 seconds. So 1129 times 1.38 is 1558 feet. Even subtracting 5% for
errors it is still 1480 feet.
Am I completely wrong on my math here? Or did I get a reasonable
result?
Here is the video of my rocket is anyone would like to chime in!!
http://www.apcforum.net/files/1lbsrnno3n2mgal.wmv
Please help!!
Thanks guys!
.
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 02:38:52 AM |
|
|
In article <1152686510.701576.224990@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>, "al" <picricsalt@yahoo.com> writes:
Ok,
I am not a physics major and I cannot take into account all the
variables of wind velocity, changes of temperature in masses of air,
and other effects that would undoubtedbly give different height
measurements. Although, I am sure these effects are quite minimal for
the small distance I achieved here.
Here is what I did. I took into account the air temperature at ground
level and found the speed of sound for that temperature. (even here it
wouldn't affect the final result by a huge amount with such small
distances) at 70 degrees (it was about 74 here) the speed of sound in
air is 1129 feet per second.
I lit a rocket with a salute on top. I measured the time it took from
when I seen the light, to when I heard to boom. I used a stop watch,
but to be more accurate I used video editing software. I got a time of
1.38 seconds. So 1129 times 1.38 is 1558 feet. Even subtracting 5% for
errors it is still 1480 feet.
Am I completely wrong on my math here? Or did I get a reasonable
result?
Perfectly reasonable. Mind you, this is a distance measurement, not
necessarily a height measurement. If you can estimate the angle,
relative to you, from the vertical at which the rocket was, you can
convert the distance to height.
Here is the video of my rocket is anyone would like to chime in!!
http://www.apcforum.net/files/1lbsrnno3n2mgal.wmv
Neat. Keep it going.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
| User: "al" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 04:16:26 AM |
|
|
It went almost 90 degrees, maybe a degree or two off but pretty damn
close!
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <1152686510.701576.224990@p79g2000cwp.googlegroups.com>, "al" <picricsalt@yahoo.com> writes:
Ok,
I am not a physics major and I cannot take into account all the
variables of wind velocity, changes of temperature in masses of air,
and other effects that would undoubtedbly give different height
measurements. Although, I am sure these effects are quite minimal for
the small distance I achieved here.
Here is what I did. I took into account the air temperature at ground
level and found the speed of sound for that temperature. (even here it
wouldn't affect the final result by a huge amount with such small
distances) at 70 degrees (it was about 74 here) the speed of sound in
air is 1129 feet per second.
I lit a rocket with a salute on top. I measured the time it took from
when I seen the light, to when I heard to boom. I used a stop watch,
but to be more accurate I used video editing software. I got a time of
1.38 seconds. So 1129 times 1.38 is 1558 feet. Even subtracting 5% for
errors it is still 1480 feet.
Am I completely wrong on my math here? Or did I get a reasonable
result?
Perfectly reasonable. Mind you, this is a distance measurement, not
necessarily a height measurement. If you can estimate the angle,
relative to you, from the vertical at which the rocket was, you can
convert the distance to height.
Here is the video of my rocket is anyone would like to chime in!!
http://www.apcforum.net/files/1lbsrnno3n2mgal.wmv
Neat. Keep it going.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 11:41:40 AM |
|
|
In article <1152695786.807661.94660@h48g2000cwc.googlegroups.com>, "al" <picricsalt@yahoo.com> writes:
It went almost 90 degrees, maybe a degree or two off but pretty damn
close!
OK, so to all practical purposes the distance you measured is the
height. I'm looking forward to future tests.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cranks Reply" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 04:25:05 AM |
|
|
al wrote:
It went almost 90 degrees, maybe a degree or two off but pretty damn
close!
congratulations on inventing sound ranging.
stop top posting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "al" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 05:34:52 AM |
|
|
Did I say I invented anything? No I sure didn't. I asked for help to
make sure I wasn't missing anything. I sure hope you contribute more
with your responses in other threads. And top posting, as in above all
the other text? Does it bother you?
Cranks Reply wrote:
al wrote:
It went almost 90 degrees, maybe a degree or two off but pretty damn
close!
congratulations on inventing sound ranging.
stop top posting.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Cranks Reply" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 05:58:29 AM |
|
|
al wrote:
Did I say I invented anything? No I sure didn't. I asked for help to
make sure I wasn't missing anything.
Yawn. Also, learn to use SI units.
I sure hope you contribute more
with your responses in other threads.
whine whine. i dont does that bother you?
And top posting, as in above all
the other text? Does it bother you?
not really. it just shows your attitude and ignorance. i dont care
either way. if you want your messages to read answer before question
its fine.
normal people dont top post. you can be a jerk as much as you want.
.
|
|
|
| User: "al" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 06:07:32 AM |
|
|
Ahhhh, I have read quite a few of your posts. It explains alot.
Cranks Reply wrote:
al wrote:
Did I say I invented anything? No I sure didn't. I asked for help to
make sure I wasn't missing anything.
Yawn. Also, learn to use SI units.
I sure hope you contribute more
with your responses in other threads.
whine whine. i dont does that bother you?
And top posting, as in above all
the other text? Does it bother you?
not really. it just shows your attitude and ignorance. i dont care
either way. if you want your messages to read answer before question
its fine.
normal people dont top post. you can be a jerk as much as you want.
.
|
|
|
| User: "Greg Neill" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 10:15:31 AM |
|
|
"al" <picricsalt@yahoo.com> wrote in message
news:1152702452.154292.173880@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com...
Ahhhh, I have read quite a few of your posts. It explains alot.
Maybe so, maybe not. Still, top posting is not
considered to be good form 'round these parts.
Why antagonize the group you'd like to ask
questions of?
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
13 Jul 2006 03:07:13 PM |
|
|
In article <1152805723.107936.132720@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Cranks Reply" <yt56erd@gmail.com> writes:
al wrote:
Ahhhh, I have read quite a few of your posts. It explains alot.
good. i am glad you have read them. now stop being a ***** and stop
posting. the fact you are still doing it explains more.
Will you cut out this crap. For once somebody actually does something
useful and posts something reasonable on sci.physics, and you're all
over him. I suggest you concentrate on more "deserving" targets.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
| User: "al" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
13 Jul 2006 03:44:17 PM |
|
|
wrote:
In article <1152805723.107936.132720@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Cranks Reply" <yt56erd@gmail.com> writes:
al wrote:
Ahhhh, I have read quite a few of your posts. It explains alot.
good. i am glad you have read them. now stop being a ***** and stop
posting. the fact you are still doing it explains more.
Will you cut out this crap. For once somebody actually does something
useful and posts something reasonable on sci.physics, and you're all
over him. I suggest you concentrate on more "deserving" targets.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
Well I am going to have more tests with different fuels soon.
Ammonium perchlorate / aluminum mixes
Barium nitrate / mgal mixes
Since you seem to be interested I can post them here. Unles you would
rather I email them to you. I do have video's of more traditional BP
type rockets that don't have as great of performance.
Thanks again guys! I appreciate the responses.
.
|
|
|
|
| User: "" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
13 Jul 2006 04:02:41 PM |
|
|
In article <1152823457.107728.320060@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, "al" <picricsalt@yahoo.com> writes:
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <1152805723.107936.132720@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Cranks Reply" <yt56erd@gmail.com> writes:
al wrote:
Ahhhh, I have read quite a few of your posts. It explains alot.
good. i am glad you have read them. now stop being a ***** and stop
posting. the fact you are still doing it explains more.
Will you cut out this crap. For once somebody actually does something
useful and posts something reasonable on sci.physics, and you're all
over him. I suggest you concentrate on more "deserving" targets.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
Well I am going to have more tests with different fuels soon.
Ammonium perchlorate / aluminum mixes
Barium nitrate / mgal mixes
Since you seem to be interested I can post them here. Unles you would
rather I email them to you. I do have video's of more traditional BP
type rockets that don't have as great of performance.
I suggest you post them. It won't hurt sci.physics to get some signal
once in a while, among all the noise.
As an aside, for the future, yes, top posting is considered bad form,
but the one who responded to you picked a rather improper way to
convey this point.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
| User: "p4o2" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
16 Jul 2006 09:18:49 AM |
|
|
Top posting is bad form? For who? Not for us "top posters"
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <1152823457.107728.320060@m79g2000cwm.googlegroups.com>, "al" <picricsalt@yahoo.com> writes:
mmeron@cars3.uchicago.edu wrote:
In article <1152805723.107936.132720@s13g2000cwa.googlegroups.com>, "Cranks Reply" <yt56erd@gmail.com> writes:
al wrote:
Ahhhh, I have read quite a few of your posts. It explains alot.
good. i am glad you have read them. now stop being a ***** and stop
posting. the fact you are still doing it explains more.
Will you cut out this crap. For once somebody actually does something
useful and posts something reasonable on sci.physics, and you're all
over him. I suggest you concentrate on more "deserving" targets.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
Well I am going to have more tests with different fuels soon.
Ammonium perchlorate / aluminum mixes
Barium nitrate / mgal mixes
Since you seem to be interested I can post them here. Unles you would
rather I email them to you. I do have video's of more traditional BP
type rockets that don't have as great of performance.
I suggest you post them. It won't hurt sci.physics to get some signal
once in a while, among all the noise.
As an aside, for the future, yes, top posting is considered bad form,
but the one who responded to you picked a rather improper way to
convey this point.
Mati Meron | "When you argue with a fool,
meron@cars.uchicago.edu | chances are he is doing just the same"
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "Cranks Reply" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
13 Jul 2006 10:48:43 AM |
|
|
al wrote:
Ahhhh, I have read quite a few of your posts. It explains alot.
good. i am glad you have read them. now stop being a ***** and stop
posting. the fact you are still doing it explains more.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
| User: "p4o2" |
|
| Title: Re: calculating distance from the speed of sound |
12 Jul 2006 11:24:16 AM |
|
|
ESAD
Cranks Reply wrote:
stop top posting.
.
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
|
Related Articles |
|
|
