Notices
Results 1 to 19 of 19

Thread: why mach no ?

  1. #1 why mach no ? 
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    8
    In aeronautics ,why do we use Mach number as a reference 4 speed, and not jst simply knots, kph or mph etc.............We know the drag increases around Mach 1, giving the impression once upon a time tht der was a barrier der there. Is that the only reason.


    Reply With Quote  
     

  2.  
     

  3. #2  
    Forum Ph.D.
    Join Date
    Jan 2009
    Posts
    951
    they do, Mach 1 just designates thge speed of sound at the given conditions-simple , no?


    Reply With Quote  
     

  4. #3  
    Anti-Crank AlexG's Avatar
    Join Date
    Mar 2012
    Posts
    2,809
    I believe Mach was the first to determine the speed of sound in the atmosphere. Hence, the designation.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  5. #4  
    Forum Freshman
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Posts
    8
    what i think is that designating in terms of mach is easy when compared to other units(of speed) . moreover Mach 1 is the sonic speed & if more then 1 it is supersonic....... etc , which is easy to understand and calculate....
    Reply With Quote  
     

  6. #5  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    It's not a trivial calculation, as it depends on pressure, temperature, humidity, etc
    Reply With Quote  
     

  7. #6  
    Time Lord
    Join Date
    Mar 2007
    Posts
    8,035
    So, Mach #/speed ratio changes if those conditions change (pressure, temperature, humidity, etc)?

    I think I'll just stick with meters per second then. A lot easier to keep track of.
    Some clocks are only right twice a day, but they are still right when they are right.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  8. #7  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Yes, that's correct. In common usage, it is used as a multiple of the speed of sound under standard temperature and pressure. But that's really not the definition.

    It really is tied to whether the flow under the conditions is faster or slower (and if faster, by how many times) than the speed of sound under those same conditions.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  9. #8  
    Suspended
    Join Date
    May 2012
    Location
    United States
    Posts
    226
    Sorry if this was already answered. Is mach always used by that specific standard or is it always preferred in reference to the local conditions?

    since it's realted to the speed of sound, technically, local conditions are the standard.
    Last edited by MeteorWayne; May 30th, 2012 at 08:54 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  10. #9  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    as a child, the advent of the x-planes /rocket ships attaining anf surpassing the speed of sound mach1 were a constant delight
    then the supersonic craft and saying mach 7 instead of 5376 mph is a tad easier

    ///edit thanx to waynes comment
    Last edited by sculptor; May 30th, 2012 at 09:39 PM.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  11. #10  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    sculptor,

    Please stop posting nonsense in the Physics forum.

    Just a friendly suggestion for now...
    Reply With Quote  
     

  12. #11  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by halorealm View Post
    Sorry if this was already answered. Is mach always used by that specific standard or is it always preferred in reference to the local conditions
    Accidental edit, no changes were actually made. I hit the wrong button.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  13. #12  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    Quote Originally Posted by halorealm View Post
    Sorry if this was already answered. Is mach always used by that specific standard or is it always preferred in reference to the local conditions?

    since it's realted to the speed of sound, technically, local conditions are the standard.
    Since it's related to the speed of sound, local conditions are the reference. Technically. In popular usage (even by NASA, which drives me nuts) that's not always the case.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  14. #13  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    sculptor,

    Please stop posting nonsense in the Physics forum.

    Just a friendly suggestion for now...
    maybe you're too young to remember the x planes and the first breaking of the sound barrier?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  15. #14  
    Comet Dust Collector Moderator
    Join Date
    Mar 2011
    Location
    New Jersey, USA
    Posts
    2,848
    But you said the speed of light... so it's nonsense. And I remember the X-planes very well, thank you.

    "attaining anf surpassing the speed of light mach1 "
    Reply With Quote  
     

  16. #15  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by MeteorWayne View Post
    But you said the speed of light... so it's nonsense. And I remember the X-planes very well, thank you.

    "attaining anf surpassing the speed of light mach1 "
    oops speed of light was a mistake
    carryover from another thread
    speed of sound is what i meant
    thanx
    to quote richard nixon
    "I misspoke myself"

    and now x-15 and x-43
    Reply With Quote  
     

  17. #16  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    It's what I pointed out elsewhere: you aren't using your left brain.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  18. #17  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    do you think it'd help if i closed my left eye?
    Reply With Quote  
     

  19. #18  
    Universal Mind John Galt's Avatar
    Join Date
    Jul 2005
    Posts
    14,168
    I'm inclined to think if you closed both eyes and typed randomly on the keyboard it would make precious little difference.


    Edit: The views expressed in this post are solely those of the entity known as John Galt. They reflect a distaste for misplaced poetry and metaphor, contrived expression of ideas, incidental obfuscation and inflated lexical constructions. They should be taken as seriously as one wishes, or not.
    Reply With Quote  
     

  20. #19  
    Forum Radioactive Isotope sculptor's Avatar
    Join Date
    Apr 2012
    Posts
    4,211
    Quote Originally Posted by John Galt View Post
    I'm inclined to think if you closed both eyes and typed randomly on the keyboard it would make precious little difference.


    Edit: The views expressed in this post are solely those of the entity known as John Galt. They reflect a distaste for misplaced poetry and metaphor, contrived expression of ideas, incidental obfuscation and inflated lexical constructions. They should be taken as seriously as one wishes, or not.

    closing my eyes...and
    dnonsna;lud ckj zl ckjniiuf slkmdjd niuhjbnasyhiosjahuvjdsnhiu
    did that do IT for you?
    hell, i'l try almost anything once

    (you got the physiological left eye to right brain reference?)
    Reply With Quote  
     

Similar Threads

  1. Is Mach a troll?
    By PhoenixG in forum Site Feedback
    Replies: 11
    Last Post: July 29th, 2009, 07:15 PM
  2. Mach Projectile Tracker
    By GPSMach in forum Electrical and Electronics
    Replies: 3
    Last Post: February 24th, 2009, 12:12 PM
Bookmarks
Bookmarks
Posting Permissions
  • You may not post new threads
  • You may not post replies
  • You may not post attachments
  • You may not edit your posts
  •