Brian Davis (brdavis@[EMAIL PROTECTED]
) writes:
> This came up in a different newsgroup, and upon trying to answer it I
> blew it badly. I=92m not sure the original group really cares, but folks
> here might, and it=92s kind of interesting to me, so=85
>
> Let=92s say you have a person (named, let=92s say, =93Callie=94)
standing in=
>
> the middle of a large airlock (10 [m] long by 3[m] by 3[m]). The bad
> girl opens the large doors at the end, =93blowing the lock=94 (it starts
> at 1 [Atm]). What happens to the helpless heroine? I understand
> decompression, but I=92m trying to figure out how fast (if at all) they
> =93exit=94 the airlock. For a first cut, I assumed the doors instantly
> crack open 10 [cm] along their entire 3 [m] length, forming a
=93breach=94
> with an area of 0.3 [m^2] through which the air starts rushing at
> roughly Mach 1 (I know it would be less, but ballpark). Back by
> Callie, the cross-sectional area is about 9 [m^2], so conservation of
> mass (assuming uniform density) says the airspeed by her is a gusty
> 11.1 [m/s]=85 which is pretty much trivial. I assumed she is accelerated
> =93breachward=94 by the stagnation pressure of this flow against the
front
> of her body (frontal surface area 0.36 [m^2, mass of 45 [kg]), but the
> result is a really trivial acceleration. Running it through Excel (to
> keep track of the rapid density/pressure drop, which reduces the
> stagnation pressure all the more), I get her hitting the breach after
> a little over 8.5 [sec], and the leisurely pace of about 0.67 [m/s] (a
> slow walk). She really only accelerates for the first couple seconds,
> after that the lock is at such a low pressure that the remaining
> =93wind=94 just doesn=92t have enough force to do anything.
>
> OK, so what did I screw up?
Your subject header? But never mind ...
I realize approximating the exit velocity
> as 333 [m/s] isn=92t good, and I=92m ignoring the question of adiabatic
> vs. nonadiabatic effects, etc. I do take into account the increased
> airspeed as she gets very close to the breach (closer than 2 [m] or
> so). But anything major? Or does Callie really fully decompress in the
> airlock, and gently drift out about 10 seconds later? One interesting
> artifact of my calculation is that Callie takes a sharp jump up in
> velocity during the brief time she =93wedges=94 in the breach, but I=92m
not=
>
> as worried about that because in the real situation, the doors would
> have been fully opened by then.
>
> PS- I=92d love to take the rate of the doors opening (i.e., breach area
> increasing) into account, but it makes things more difficult, and in
> particular makes the assumption of sonicly-limited flow questionable
> (if the =93breach=94 is one entire side of your airlock, I think I have
to
> worry about the force required to accelerate the mass of air in
> addition to everything else, yes?).
>
I haven't verified your numbers, but for a quick sanity check, there's
about
100 kg of air in the lock, but only half of that is behind her--her
own body weight--and most of _that_ will escape past her. If you really
want
the damsel to experience dramatic accelerations, I think you should start
her
closer to the opening, or have the inner door open, or maybe use a longer,
thinner lock that she almost blocks with her body.
--John Park
|
