Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article

To: freedumb2003
“They” were Mythbusters.

And they made a couple of bad assumptions in that episode. The reasoning behind placing the sandbag on the glass window to simulate water pressure greater on the outside than the inside had a big flaw in it. The coefficient of static friction between wet burlap on glass is much higher than water on glass. Moreover the sand bag was much smaller than the surface area of the window, thereby placing the same force on a smaller area creating an even higher level of static friction.

The fact is that in fresh water, electric car windows in undamaged doors DO open.

32 posted on 06/28/2010 9:35:34 AM PDT by ElkGroveDan (Now can we forget about that old rum-runner Joe Kennedy and his progeny of philandering drunks?)
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 12 | View Replies ]


To: ElkGroveDan
The coefficient of static friction between wet burlap on glass is much higher than water on glass.

Being a liquid, liquid water exhibits no "coefficient of static friction."

And the "skin friction" between a glass window and water would be very small, indeed.

Regards,

43 posted on 06/28/2010 9:44:37 AM PDT by alexander_busek
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

To: ElkGroveDan

But still, it looks like we all agree that you should be able to use the power switch to open the windows, and do so right away.

Plan B is to have that safety tool that cuts seat belts and breaks open windows (that WAS a valid test underwater).

I think collectively we have helped our FRiend out pretty well here...


76 posted on 06/28/2010 5:37:09 PM PDT by freedumb2003 (The frog who accepts a ride from a scorpion should expect a sting and the phrase "it is my nature.")
[ Post Reply | Private Reply | To 32 | View Replies ]

Free Republic
Browse · Search
Bloggers & Personal
Topics · Post Article


FreeRepublic, LLC, PO BOX 9771, FRESNO, CA 93794
FreeRepublic.com is powered by software copyright 2000-2008 John Robinson