Solving problems in Kinematics with simple calculus

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on solving kinematic problems using calculus, specifically addressing a scenario where a variable force F = bv acts on a vehicle. The initial approach using the work-energy theorem is questioned due to the velocity-dependent nature of the force. Instead, it is suggested to apply Newton's second law, leading to a differential equation that can be solved to express velocity as a function of time. This method reveals that while the vehicle travels a finite distance, it requires an infinite amount of time to stop, highlighting a limitation of the model. Additionally, the conversation clarifies that problems involving forces are categorized as dynamical rather than purely kinematic.
snath_98
Messages
6
Reaction score
0
Hi,

I have a generic question about solving kinematic problems using simple calculus. For eg.
A variable force F = bv (v is instantaneous speed at some time t) acts on a vehicle moving with speed v. Suppose the initial speed at t = 0 of the vehicle is v0. Calculate the distance through which it moves before stopping.
By work energy theorem, (1/2) m (V0)2 = ∫ F. ds
Now how do we integrate the right side and move forward? That's my main question. Any help is appreciated

Thanks
Sanjay
 
Physics news on Phys.org
b above is a constant.
 
I wouldn't start from here. I think (though I may be wrong) that the theorem in this form is not much use when the force is velocity-dependent.

Instead, assuming that the vehicle is confined to move in a straight line, you can use Newton's second law in the form F= ma. Substitute bv for F (remembering that b is negative - I'd write it as -β] and substitute dv/dt for a. This gives you a differential equation, which is easily solved to give v as a function of t. Integrate this wrt time, between zero and infinity to give you the distance gone.

This is quite interesting, as it shows that the vehicle goes a finite distance, but takes an infinite time to do it! (Well, to do every last nanometre). This is not what a real vehicle would do, because F = -βv does not model the usual rolling resistance, bearing friction etc. very well. These will not tend to zero as the vehicle's speed goes to zero.
 
Last edited:
A note on terminology. Any problem involving forces is dynamical, not kinematic.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
This has been discussed many times on PF, and will likely come up again, so the video might come handy. Previous threads: https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/is-a-treadmill-incline-just-a-marketing-gimmick.937725/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/work-done-running-on-an-inclined-treadmill.927825/ https://www.physicsforums.com/threads/how-do-we-calculate-the-energy-we-used-to-do-something.1052162/
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