Launching an anvil 200ft in the air with black powder

rottenseedsays...

>> ^gwiz665:
He reminds me of Daniel Dennett.
Well, rottenseed, it's not really wrong. The force of gravity is constant and when that force influences the anvil more than the force from the explosion ("overcomes" it) it goes in the direction of gravity.

physics *fail. PM myself or mycroft for further explanation.

rottenseedsays...

>> ^Drachen_Jager:
I can foresee a problem if they keep using the same anvils metal fatigue will eventually cause one or both of them to explode sideways sending some bits of shrapnel out.
Other than that it looks like fun!

oooooo...that's a good point. Hahaha, hopefully they make a trip out to the ol' anvil depot once in a while.

foadsays...

>> ^rottenseed:
If you can't quite grasp the idea that gravity doesn't "overcome it", rather, it's a force that's constantly being applied to the object, then maybe you shouldn't be blowing shit up...


>> ^rottenseed:
>> ^gwiz665:
He reminds me of Daniel Dennett.
Well, rottenseed, it's not really wrong. The force of gravity is constant and when that force influences the anvil more than the force from the explosion ("overcomes" it) it goes in the direction of gravity.

physics fail. PM myself or mycroft for further explanation.


1. People been blowing shit up with gunpowder for millenia before the concepts of force and gravity were formalised. Doesn't mean it can't still be safe, and this guy seems to have had a lot of practice.

2. Don't judge his intelligence based on one utterance. Perhaps this dude has a PhD in physics for all you know...

3. Jesus H. Christ go toke a bong already!!

sineralsays...

rottenseed is being pedantic

If we have two horses, A and B, in a race, where A is faster but currently behind B, A will eventually pass B and when it does we could say A "overcame" B. Or, if we have two piles of sand, one of a fixed size and the other constantly increasing in size but currently smaller than the first, when it eventually becomes the larger of the two we could say it "overcame" the first pile.

Gravity imparts an acceleration on the anvil. Acceleration summed over time gives a velocity. We could break the anvil's velocity into a pair of components such as initial velocity vs velocity changes during the evolution of the system, or put more simply as gunpowder vs gravity. As time moves forward, the velocity under the gunpowder column is constant, but the velocity under the gravity column is steadily adding up. When the gravity and gunpowder components of the velocity are equal, the anvil has stopped moving. When the gravity component is greater, the anvil has switched directions. To say gravity "overcame" it seems adequately accurate for casual conversation and, in fact, more descriptive than you would expect from most people in casual conversation. My impression when I heard him say that was that he was actually familiar when the relevant equations.

rottenseedsays...

>> ^sineral:
rottenseed is being pedantic
If we have two horses, A and B, in a race, where A is faster but currently behind B, A will eventually pass B and when it does we could say A "overcame" B. Or, if we have two piles of sand, one of a fixed size and the other constantly increasing in size but currently smaller than the first, when it eventually becomes the larger of the two we could say it "overcame" the first pile.
Gravity imparts an acceleration on the anvil. Acceleration summed over time gives a velocity. We could break the anvil's velocity into a pair of components such as initial velocity vs velocity changes during the evolution of the system, or put more simply as gunpowder vs gravity. As time moves forward, the velocity under the gunpowder column is constant, but the velocity under the gravity column is steadily adding up. When the gravity and gunpowder components of the velocity are equal, the anvil has stopped moving. When the gravity component is greater, the anvil has switched directions. To say gravity "overcame" it seems adequately accurate for casual conversation and, in fact, more descriptive than you would expect from most people in casual conversation. My impression when I heard him say that was that he was actually familiar when the relevant equations.


pedantic...meaning by the book. Yea try to pass a physics course with your fuzzy logic bullshit. By the book is how we roll...just pray the person who designed the plane or car you're in did the same

sineralsays...

>> ^rottenseed:

pedantic...meaning by the book. Yea try to pass a physics course with your fuzzy logic bullshit. By the book is how we roll...just pray the person who designed the plane or car you're in did the same


My description of the anvil's behavior is physically and mathematically sound. In fact, using vector math to break velocities and forces into multiple components is exactly what they teach you in any introductory physics course. Which I did pass, with an A, easily, incidentally.

longdesays...

*eia

They have absolutely no idea of/ or control over the winds above, and little control over the trajectory of the anvil. Looks like a deathwish to me.

Lannsays...

Blacksmiths have been doing this for over a hundred years...it's also not exclusively an American tradition either...although I can see why some Americans keep up with it.

gwiz665says...

>> ^rottenseed:
>> ^gwiz665:
He reminds me of Daniel Dennett.
Well, rottenseed, it's not really wrong. The force of gravity is constant and when that force influences the anvil more than the force from the explosion ("overcomes" it) it goes in the direction of gravity.

physics fail. PM myself or mycroft for further explanation.


Isn't this just semantics? Drawing in the forces as vectors, you add (I think) the vectors together and factor in wind resistance and all that and get the final direction the anvil flies. Because gravity is constantly at about 9.8 m/s2 (depending on where on the earth it was launched, how far it goes up - negligible differences) and the energy from the explosion is not constant, the resulting force vector becomes less and less upwards and eventually turns and points downwards towards the center of gravity ("overcomes" it).

Where is that so horribly wrong? I''m not a physics guy, I'm just going by my high school stuff and what makes sense when you program physics stuff - so enlighten me with your mighty brain.

Send this Article to a Friend



Separate multiple emails with a comma (,); limit 5 recipients






Your email has been sent successfully!

Manage this Video in Your Playlists




notify when someone comments
X

This website uses cookies.

This website uses cookies to improve user experience. By using this website you consent to all cookies in accordance with our Privacy Policy.

I agree
  
Learn More