Basic stuff - velocity dependant friction

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter abertram28
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Friction Velocity
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of velocity-dependent frictional forces in the context of an engineering physics problem. Participants explore the integration of equations of motion involving friction, specifically focusing on the forms of friction that depend on velocity, such as linear and quadratic friction models. The conversation includes attempts to derive equations for velocity and position under these conditions.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes their understanding of the standard model for velocity-dependent friction, using the equation F(friction) = -bv and applying F=ma to derive motion equations.
  • Another participant introduces a different friction model, Fr = -mk(v)^2, and discusses the challenges faced when integrating and conceptualizing the mass factor in the equations.
  • There is a mention of the need for an initial velocity Vo in the derived equations, with one participant expressing confusion about its origin and role in the solution.
  • One participant suggests using partial fractions for integration, while another emphasizes the use of inverse hyperbolic functions without needing partial fractions.
  • Participants discuss the integration process and the implications of initial conditions, particularly how they affect the integration limits and the resulting equations.
  • There are corrections regarding the use of arctangent versus hyperbolic tangent in integration, highlighting the differences in their definitions and applications.
  • One participant expresses uncertainty about handling the definite integral and the implications of reaching an undefined expression when evaluating limits.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the integration methods or the role of initial conditions in the equations. Multiple competing views on the integration process and the interpretation of the friction models remain evident throughout the discussion.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the assumptions underlying their models, particularly regarding the treatment of mass in the equations and the implications of different friction forms. There are also unresolved questions about the integration steps and the definitions of functions used in the calculations.

Who May Find This Useful

This discussion may be useful for students and educators in engineering physics, particularly those interested in the dynamics of motion involving friction and the mathematical techniques for solving related differential equations.

abertram28
Messages
54
Reaction score
0
please help! recently we went over velocity dependent frictional forces in my engineering physics I class. we all went through the standard model using

F(friction) = -bv

we applied F=ma and got

mg-bv = m (dv/dt)

i realize how this works. I am a little fuzzy when it comes to integrating these and using "dummy variables" but i understand how to work around them.
we derived a few equations for t and an equation for v and position using more integration and some simplification.

more or less, i understood this. then we decided to create problems where the F(friction) had some factor of v in it. we then traded with partners. mine was pretty easy, Fr = -(bmv). my partner made one a bit harder. he chose Fr = -mk(v)^2 unluck for me, we traded, then solved. he had a bit of trouble with conceptulizing the mass being a factor in each term, having it cancel out... it wasnt that bad though.

for some reason when i tried to do this problem myself, i ran into some kind of error setting it up or integrating it. please show me step by step how to get a v equation.

my teacher looked at this for about 20 mins and then told me when i have an equation that is using Vo then i am on the right track. she says she got
V=(Vo)/(1 + (Vo)kt) she said we need Vo because of the V^2. please show me how to start this problem at least.

i did this

looking at mg-bv = m (dv/dt)
i decided that I am using -mkv^2 instead of -bv. we are theorizing a solution for a ball falling through a liquid. i know the units don't make sense, we made these problems up.
so mg-mkv^2 = m (dv/dt) (F=ma)
Terminal velocity is mg=mkv^2 with v= (g/k)^(1/2)

so, i rearranged my initial equation to be with v and dv on the left and dt on the right.
m factors out and divides. I am left with

(dv)/(g-kv^2)=(dt)
integrate both sides. left from 0 to v using vprime as variable. right from 0 to t with tprime as variable. my calculus II class skipped hyperbolic functions.

isnt this a hyperbolic solution? anyhow, my TI-92 gives me

(gk)^(-1/2) *ArctanH(v*(k/g)^(-1/2))

i guess i would have done a factoring of -1/k out of the left side and used arctan rule. i guess i would have been wrong. anyhow. i looked up the definitions of hyperbolics. using the arctanH x = (1/2) ln ((1+x)/(1-x))
AHH! out of boredom i find that the original ingrand fits the
Int(du/(a^2-x^2)) = 1/2a ln(abs((a+u)/(a-u)))+C from the hyperbolic chapter of my calc text.

so i can replace a with (g/k)^(1/2) and pull a 1/k out like i thought would be good... i suppose i could have done this by hand if my damn calc teacher had bothered to go over these. so anyways. I am lost after this, if I am correct or not, i don't know. i tried to differentiate my answer, buts its too hard for me to do by hand. I am tired. do i just solve for v? how do i go about doing that? where the heck does Vo come into play?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Arctangent is the anti-derivative of [itex]\frac{1}{1+x^2}[/itex], not [itex]\frac{1}{1-x^2}[/itex]. Since you are doing this with real numbers, the difference is important! Of course, the difference between tangent and hyperbolic tangent is that x is replaced by ix.

To integrate [itex]\frac{dv}{g-kv^2}[/itex] "by hand", use partial fractions. g-kv2 can be factored as [itex](\sqrt{g}- \sqrt{k}v)(\sqrt{g}+\sqrt{k}v)[/itex], of course.
 
I can't follow your explanation but I did a similar problem last week and I recognized many of the things you mentionned as part of the way I proceeded to solve the problem so you must be very near from the answer.


you have mg - bv² = m*dv/dt

You simply put all the v and dv on the same side and the dt on the other side so that you get a big messy function of v on one side and a constant function on the other side. Like this:

dt/m = dv/(mg - bv²)

You integrate both sides from t=0 to t=t. You will need to take b out of there though so you can use the formula I think you mentionned (int [] is for integral)

1/m int[dt] = 1/b int[dv/(mg/b - v²)]

Setting v(0) = 0 (since the ball is stading still in your hand before then you drop it into water), you get (abs[] is for absolute value)

t/m = 1/2(mg/b)½ ln(abs[v+(mg/b)½/v-(mg/b)½])

e^((mg/b)½ * 2t/m) = v+(mg/b)½/v-(mg/b)½

Ok, if you permit I will use easier notation. We will call...

A = e^((mg/b)½ * 2t/m) and B = (mg/b)½

Now all we got to do is isolate v

A = v+B/v-B

A(v-B) = v+B

Av - AB = v+B

Av - AB - v = B

v(A - 1) - AB = B

v(A - 1) = B + AB

v(A - 1) = B(A + 1)

v = B (A + 1)/(A - 1)

and you can figure out that (A + 1)/(A - 1) is tanh[(mgb)½ * t/m]

and that's your final answer. There are no Vo because Vo = V(t=0) = 0
 
Last edited:
halls>

my antiderivitive up there is the hyperbolic function arctanH not arctan. my mention of the arctan was just that it was my original direction. to integrate
du/(a^2 - u^2) you most certainly do not need to use partial fractions. though it is an accepted method, the inverse hyperbolic functions yield this integral and my calc ii class hasnt gotten to partial fractions by the time i need this integral in physics! how silly! my understanding wasnt that in hyperbolic functions x was replaced by ix. i learned that they are defined by using e^x and e^-x and division by 2. sin is minus, cos is add. is that wrong? there are no i or imaginary numbers in that.

quasar> my masses canceled out, but i see how to do that algebra since you cleaned it up for me.

thanks guys.
 
sorry to double post...

im screwed up where i get to the V = Vo/(1+Vokt)

where do Vo come from, the C from integration?
 
ok, i figured out my problem with this problem.
first of all, i misinterpreted the problem. f=-mkv^2 the opposing force is a constant and not needed to find the v and a equations.

my problem is after i integrate my dv/-kv^2=dt i need to solve the definite integral from 0 to V, right? if i solve 1/kv for v=0, i get 1/0.

how do i work through this?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
2K
  • · Replies 63 ·
3
Replies
63
Views
5K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 59 ·
2
Replies
59
Views
6K