If this is your first visit, be sure to
check out the FAQ. You may have to register
before you can post: click the register link above to proceed. To start viewing messages,
select the forum that you want to visit from the selection below.
The key thing for shrinking under pressure is the density of the shot, which is about the same for all of them, and the ability of the material to resist compaction (the surface material on the indoor shot would become thinner, however). I would guess that most of the materials will not shrink much because they have a lot of internal support. [note how little water compacts]
As for the surface area/volume, since the mass factors as the cube and the cross-section as the square of the linear dimension, it should have increased force per unit of area offering resistance.
And, by the time it got to the bottom, how much would the pressure reduce the ball's diameter?
It would probably shrink to the size of a black hole and swallow the entire earth, which means you wouldn't have to make coffee tomorrow.
But seriously, it is about 15 lbs per square inch at sea level and 35,000 ft. deep is about 1200 atmospheres. So about 9 tons per square inch. So a little smaller assuming it is solid steel, or better even iron. As for one of those indoor shots? Forget it. I think it would like a vitamin pill by the time it hit bottom.
Making various simplifying assumptions, I get something like 30 min. to reach bottom for the 16 lb shot. If made of the same material, the 12 lb shot should reach a slightly lower terminal velocity, take ~5% longer to make the same journey.
Does its smaller size (less surface friction) help it?
Terminal velocity appears to depend on both the mass and the "surface area" of the object. In the given case, the mass difference (in the numerator), seemed to more than offset the "surface area" difference (in the denominator).
Making various simplifying assumptions, I get something like 30 min. to reach bottom for the 16 lb shot. If made of the same material, the 12 lb shot should reach a slightly lower terminal velocity, take ~5% longer to make the same journey.
Does its smaller size (less surface friction) help it?
Making various simplifying assumptions, I get something like 30 min. to reach bottom for the 16 lb shot. If made of the same material, the 12 lb shot should reach a slightly lower terminal velocity, take ~5% longer to make the same journey.
A T&F connection (well, kind of a stretch.) I read somewhere long ago that a 16 lb shot, dropped in the Pacific over the Deep, would take 60 minutes to reach the bottom.
Leave a comment: