What is the effect of acceleration on a projectile's motion?

  • Thread starter Thread starter KingKai
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Kinematics
AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the equation v² = v₀² + 2aΔy, which calculates the change in position, acceleration, or velocity of a projectile influenced by a quadratic force. On Earth, the standard acceleration due to gravity is a = -9.8 m/s², leading to specific calculations for Δy when the final velocity (v²) is zero at the peak of the projectile's motion. If the initial velocity is upward, Δy is positive, indicating upward motion, while assuming upward acceleration results in a negative Δy, suggesting downward motion. The conversation highlights the importance of distinguishing between initial velocities and the direction of acceleration in projectile motion analysis. Understanding these dynamics is crucial for accurately predicting a projectile's trajectory.
KingKai
Messages
34
Reaction score
0
The equation


v22 = vo2 + 2aΔy


is used to determine the change in position, acceleration, or velocity of a particle under the influence of a quadratic force.


on earth, the acceleration value in this equation would, under normal circumstances, be
a= -9.8 m/s2.


so, this substitutes into

v22 = vo2 + -19.6Δy

In this

Δy = v22 - vo2 / -19.6

Lets now assume that v22 is 0, the crest of a projectiles motion.

Δy = 0 - vo2 / -19.6


If the objects initial v is facing upwards, then obviously the net Δy would be positive.



Now, keeping all conditions the same, let's assume that the acceleration is 9.8m/ss upwards

This would yield

Δy = 0 - vo2 / 19.6

Δy would thus be negative, and the object would be thrown downwards, accelerating upwards.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I'm sorry - was there a question in all that?
 
I just want to go through your reasoning to make sure I follow:
KingKai said:
The equation

v22 = vo2 + 2aΔy

is used to determine the change in position, acceleration, or velocity of a particle under the influence of a quadratic force.
That would be a net unbalanced force which is constant.
on earth, the acceleration value in this equation would, under normal circumstances, be
a= -9.8 m/s2.
"normal circumstances" being, +y = "upwards", Δy<<REarth, and gravity is the only force acting on the object.
so, this substitutes into

v22 = vo2 + -19.6Δy
Your value has changed somehow [x2 of course] ... better to put g=9.8N/kg so a=-g so it does not matter what units you want to work in just yet... you get:$$v_2^2=v_0^2-2g\Delta y$$
In this

Δy = v22 - vo2 / -19.6
$$\Delta y = \frac{v_2^2-v_0^2}{-2g} = \frac{v_0^2-v_2^2}{2g}$$
Lets now assume that v22 is 0, the crest of a projectiles motion.

Δy = 0 - vo2 / -19.6
$$\Delta y = \frac{v_0^2}{2g} > 0$$
If the objects initial v is facing upwards, then obviously the net Δy would be positive.
No problems there.
Now, keeping all conditions the same, let's assume that the acceleration is 9.8m/ss upwards
All conditions?
So you put gravity upwards, and the final velocity is zero, but the assumption that the initial velocity is also upwards is incorrect - as you found below:
This would yield

Δy = 0 - vo2 / 19.6
$$\Delta y = \frac{0-v_0^2}{2g}=-\frac{v_0^2}{2g} < 0$$
Δy would thus be negative, and the object would be thrown downwards, accelerating upwards.
Well ... you did specify that the final velocity is zero ... if the object were thrown upwards with an upwards acceleration, that would not be the case would it?
 
Last edited:
When an object is thrown upwards, the acceleration is still 9.8 m/s2 downwards, but there is now an initial upward velocity imposed on the object which was simply not present in the case where the object was initially at rest and allowed to drop.
 
Chestermiller said:
When an object is thrown upwards, the acceleration is still 9.8 m/s2 downwards, but there is now an initial upward velocity imposed on the object which was simply not present in the case where the object was initially at rest and allowed to drop.
Not the situation described though - here there was an initial speed.
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...

Similar threads

Back
Top