If you run in the rain......

Page may contain affiliate links. Please see terms for details.

montage

God Almighty
Location
Bethlehem
ColinJ said:
Think of it like this...

If it was going to rain for your entire life, and you walked so slowly that it was almost like standing on the spot, you'd have an awful lot of water land on you.

Now, instead of walking very, very, very slowly - run! It doesn't have to be that fast. Does more rain land on you or less? :smile:

Rain would land on you more but for a shorter length of time. So you need to find out if the more water per second landing on you by running is more or less over a certain amount of seconds.

Also, more of your surface area is open to the rain (i.e. as you run you will collide with more falling droplets). Also how quick does it take you to get some body parts i.e. head , soaked while walking? If these body parts would also get soaked while running then there is no advantage to running over walking, as all you are doing is attempting to reduce the "wetness" of allready soaked body parts, when infact you are merely wetting other parts of your body.
 

montage

God Almighty
Location
Bethlehem
Ok....over the summer my college wants everybody to do a "project" on absolutely anything. This shall be my project.
 

Noodley

Guest
Crackle said:
I wonder if I ran sideways, presenting less frontal area, would that be better then.

If you were 'running' sideways it wouldn't really be running, it would be kind of shuffling or star jumping...
 
OP
OP
C

Crackle

..
Noodley said:
If you were 'running' sideways it wouldn't really be running, it would be kind of shuffling or star jumping...

hmmm, it's a good point, we'd have to give it a new name. Raincrabbing, guaranteed to keep more of you drier.

Anyway, I feel my decision to walk was justified rather than run screaming from the shop like a group of girls did :smile:
 

Noodley

Guest
Joe24 said:
Side stepping, maybe?

Is side stepping not what the oompah loompahs did? And which involves going side to side and not making progress more than one side step then back again...therefore guaranteeing you get really wet as you would stay roughly in the same spot.
 

Joe24

More serious cyclist than Bonj
Location
Nottingham
Noodley said:
Is side stepping not what the oompah loompahs did? And which involves going side to side and not making progress more than one side step then back again...therefore guaranteeing you get really wet as you would stay roughly in the same spot.

You know the answer to this is dont you?
Just wear water proofs, everywhere. Where ever you go, have them on. Make sure they are hi-vis aswell.
And when you get to where you are going, you then take them off. But not until then. This should become uniform.
Or just apply Nik-wax to all your clothes making them all water proof...........
 

Bigtwin

New Member
Don't try this at home - you'll burst your brain bits.

The variables were daunting. Body shape, speeds, weight of rain - droplet size and fall frequency, ambient humidity, ground bounce, spacial distribution of other people, density of pengiun shite in the Antaric, you name it.

Probably easier to work out how Jonathan Ross gets away with it.
 

Speicher

Vice Admiral
Moderator
Have you taken into account the amount of hair on one's head. Presumably those of us with shoulder length hair would get our clothes less wet, because of the amount of water absorbed by afore-mentionned hair.
 

Fnaar

Smutmaster General
Location
Thumberland
Just to add another variable, it would also depend on the angle at which the rain is falling... sideways rain would get you wetter than vertical rain. Probably. :biggrin:
 

Speicher

Vice Admiral
Moderator
Consider the complications when puddles start forming on the pavement.

If you are running you might not avoid the puddles, and the force of your foot landing in the puddle would create more upward splash than if you were walking. Would the displacement of water mean that your footwear get less wet, but your ankles and calves get wetter?
 
Top Bottom