I Creating a function with specific shape, intercepts, integral....

AI Thread Summary
To calculate the peak draw weight of a bow based on draw length and arrow velocity, a function must be created that reflects the shape of draw weight against distance, intersecting the x-axis at the draw length L and the y-axis at a scalar related to the peak Letoff. The integral of this function from 0 to L should equal the energy required to accelerate the arrow to a known velocity, considering the draw length as a distance rather than time. The challenge lies in the circular dependence of needing to integrate a function that is not yet defined, complicating the calculation of the peak draw weight. To resolve this, one approach is to express the function with the peak weight as an unknown parameter, calculate the integral, and set it equal to the known energy of the arrow. Additional assumptions about the curve's shape may be necessary to simplify the problem to a single unknown.
newjerseyrunner
Messages
1,532
Reaction score
637
I'm trying to see if I can calculate the peak draw weight of my bow based on the draw length and the velocity of the arrow and a known shape of a curve, but I'm not quite sure how to make such a function, if there even is such a way.

compound-draw-force-curve.jpg
This is the shape of the draw weight plotted against distance, so the the force applied to the arrow is this same shape, reflected over the y-axis and translated by the arbitrary but known draw length L.

The function must have intersect the x-axis at L because that is when the arrow releases and no further force is applied to it.

The function also needs to intercept the y-axis at some arbitrary but known scalar to the peak Letoff. My particular bow has a 70% setoff, so the x value of the y intercept should be 30% of whatever the peak is.

The integral of the function from 0 to L should accelerate the arrow of an arbitrary but known weight W to an arbitrary but known flight velocity V. Keeping in mind that L is a unit of draw length, not time, which makes this even more puzzling for me. If I know the final velocity of the arrow and the total distance it accelerated for, I feel like I should be able to figure out a time scalar for L.

But I also feel like I got stuck with some circular dependence: I seem to need to be able to do an integral on a function that I don't know yet.

Am I hopelessly stuck, or might someone point me in the right direction? I feel like knowing the shape of the plot, it's intercepts, known flight speed, and distance of acceleration should allow me to calculate backwards and get the peak draw weight, but everything is so interconnected and I come up with a curve that has the intercepts correct for my bow, but it's not general because changing variables changes the intercepts.Or I could buy a gauge and measure it, but I feel like this should be doable.
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
In practice some energy will go into the bow, but it might be a good first approximation that all energy goes into the arrow. The total energy is simply the integral of the curve over the full draw profile. You know the energy of the arrow.

Write down the function with the peak weight as unknown parameter, calculate the integral (it will depend on the peak weight), set it equal to the known arrow energy.
If you don't know the shape of the curve well enough you'll need to make some additional assumptions about it to reduce the problem to one unknown.
 
Suppose ,instead of the usual x,y coordinate system with an I basis vector along the x -axis and a corresponding j basis vector along the y-axis we instead have a different pair of basis vectors ,call them e and f along their respective axes. I have seen that this is an important subject in maths My question is what physical applications does such a model apply to? I am asking here because I have devoted quite a lot of time in the past to understanding convectors and the dual...
Insights auto threads is broken atm, so I'm manually creating these for new Insight articles. In Dirac’s Principles of Quantum Mechanics published in 1930 he introduced a “convenient notation” he referred to as a “delta function” which he treated as a continuum analog to the discrete Kronecker delta. The Kronecker delta is simply the indexed components of the identity operator in matrix algebra Source: https://www.physicsforums.com/insights/what-exactly-is-diracs-delta-function/ by...
Back
Top