Search found 4 matches

by Excaliber
Sat Sep 11, 2010 6:45 am
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Mystery Bullet In Rowlett
Replies: 44
Views: 8160

Re: Mystery Bullet In Rowlett

Lonest4r wrote:
Excaliber wrote:
ScottDLS wrote:
glock27 wrote: ...
i watch mythbusters they did a terminal velocity test on dropping a penny from "empire state building" all in scale of course. but a pennies maximum speed is something like 62 miles per hour. a .22 would weigh less than a penny and have less terminal velocity
....
Oh...please tell me you are joking. I believe it was Galileo c.1634 that proved that all objects regardless of weight, fall at the same rate of acceleration (absent wind resistance). Newton then described the physics in much more detail somewhat later. So, drop an anvil and a coyote from a plane and both will fall at the same speed unless coyote spreads out to have a bigger surface area than the anvil.

A .22 would have less wind resistance than a penny and so have a terminal velocity somewhat higher, but I would volunteer to catch it in my hand at 1 mile.
What you're both missing is the difference between drop speed and forward speed, and the role of mass. All are in play. The forward speed is imparted by the expanding gas produced by the burning powder charge, and the drop speed is that imparted to the bullet by gravity. The forward speed is what makes the .22 dangerous instead of merely an annoyance.

That's also why you might not mind catching a penny dropped from the empire state building in a sturdy hat, but you wouldn't want to catch that same coin from a supersonic fighter in flight because the penny would also carry the fighter's forward velocity.

The anvil's mass is what makes that much more dangerous than a coyote when dropped straight down. The formula for terminal energy is mass x velocity squared. If you add a lot of mass, it bumps this number up substantially.

Correspondingly, if you take two items of the same mass and impart lots more speed to one than the other, the faster one will deliver significantly more energy to the target, all other things being equal.
Excaliber is correct in many ways, however, I am a mechanical engineering student with significant experience in Newtonian mechanics and agree that this problem is about bullet energy. There are two basic types of energy. Kinetic energy, which is the energy of objects in motion, and potential energy, which can be in various subtypes (chemical, elastic, gravitational). When the round is sitting in the chamber, it has an abundance of chemical potential energy, which is rapidly converted into kinetic energy (KE=0.5mv^2) as the bullet accelerates down the barrel. Now that the bullet has left the barrel, it is subject only to gravity and resistance from the fluid it is travel traveling through.

Some of that potential energy was also converted to rotational energy, which makes the bullet fly straight, but also reduced the shape factor that produces "air resistance." As long as we can reasonably make the assumption that the bullet is still spinning along an axis parallel to the direction of travel we can also assume a high terminal velocity. When that bullet leaves the gun and travels at an angle from the ground, an amount of energy that was formerly kinetic, builds up as gravitational potential (GPE=mgh) . As the bullet descends, that energy is once again transferred back into kinetic energy, less the amount lost to air resistance. Like I said before, if that bullet maintains its rotation the losses will be small. As that bullet is coming down, it accelerates at a constant 9.8 m/s^2 downward, which means the farther past the apex of the trajectory it goes the greater the angle at which it will be coming down. So for long shots that strike a target after the apex of the shot they will have to be at steeper angles.

When that shot hits, its energy is NOT either going to be the dropping energy or the forward energy that hits you, but a vector sum of the two combined. Since those two energies are merely converted, the magnitude of the energy imparted on the target will be the same.

I hope this helps!
SIDENOTE: if you are interrested, spheres actually make for terrible ballistic objects because of the low pressure wake that trails them in flight.
That's what I had in mind - but explained MUCH better. Thanks!
by Excaliber
Fri Sep 10, 2010 9:22 pm
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Mystery Bullet In Rowlett
Replies: 44
Views: 8160

Re: Mystery Bullet In Rowlett

ScottDLS wrote:
glock27 wrote: ...
i watch mythbusters they did a terminal velocity test on dropping a penny from "empire state building" all in scale of course. but a pennies maximum speed is something like 62 miles per hour. a .22 would weigh less than a penny and have less terminal velocity
....
Oh...please tell me you are joking. I believe it was Galileo c.1634 that proved that all objects regardless of weight, fall at the same rate of acceleration (absent wind resistance). Newton then described the physics in much more detail somewhat later. So, drop an anvil and a coyote from a plane and both will fall at the same speed unless coyote spreads out to have a bigger surface area than the anvil.

A .22 would have less wind resistance than a penny and so have a terminal velocity somewhat higher, but I would volunteer to catch it in my hand at 1 mile.
What you're both missing is the difference between drop speed and forward speed, and the role of mass. All are in play. The forward speed is imparted by the expanding gas produced by the burning powder charge, and the drop speed is that imparted to the bullet by gravity. The forward speed is what makes the .22 dangerous instead of merely an annoyance.

That's also why you might not mind catching a penny dropped from the empire state building in a sturdy hat, but you wouldn't want to catch that same coin from a supersonic fighter in flight because the penny would also carry the fighter's forward velocity.

The anvil's mass is what makes that much more dangerous than a coyote when dropped straight down. The formula for terminal energy is mass x velocity squared. If you add a lot of mass, it bumps this number up substantially.

Correspondingly, if you take two items of the same mass and impart lots more speed to one than the other, the faster one will deliver significantly more energy to the target, all other things being equal.
by Excaliber
Sat Sep 04, 2010 10:23 am
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Mystery Bullet In Rowlett
Replies: 44
Views: 8160

Re: Mystery Bullet In Rowlett

Relative elevation can also come into play.

If the range is at a significantly higher elevation than the victim's property, the drop begins shortly behind the berm, and there are no high intervening obstacles, it would be possible for a bullet that just cleared the berm to travel considerably further than it could over level ground while it dropped to the elevation of its final resting place.
by Excaliber
Fri Sep 03, 2010 9:55 am
Forum: General Gun, Shooting & Equipment Discussion
Topic: Mystery Bullet In Rowlett
Replies: 44
Views: 8160

Re: Mystery Bullet In Rowlett

The Dallas Morning News reports that there's a landfill, a creek bed, a field, and an undeveloped wooded area between the range and the victim's home. There are hundreds or even possibly thousands of locations and angles from which a bullet could have been fired and landed where it did. Someone shooting at a squirrel or other treed critter would be one way something like that could happen. Someone who elevated his barrel enough for the round to cover the distance between the range and the point of impact would most certainly have raised considerable alarm among other shooters at the time.

Although it's still possible that the bullet came from the range, without some person or event to connect it to at the other end, that's just one unsupported guess among many possibilities. I strongly suspect that the bullet's origin will never be fully resolved, and I seriously doubt a lawsuit could establish by a preponderance of the evidence that the range is responsible for the victim's injuries.

This will likely end up as the ballistic equivalent of a hit and run wreck where the responsible party is never identified.

Return to “Mystery Bullet In Rowlett”