Projectile motion with air resistance

AI Thread Summary
When air resistance is included, the trajectory of a projectile deviates from a simple parabolic curve, resulting in more complex shapes that depend on various factors such as the object's shape, mass distribution, and orientation. Analytical solutions exist for cases where air resistance is proportional to velocity, typically involving hyperbolic functions, but these are not realistic for most scenarios where drag is proportional to the square of the velocity. In cases of laminar flow, which occurs mainly with small objects, drag can grow linearly with velocity, but these situations are rare and typically short-lived. The discussion highlights that while some analytical expressions can be derived, they often lack practical relevance in real-world applications. Overall, the complexities of air resistance significantly alter projectile motion compared to ideal conditions without drag.
guysensei1
Messages
31
Reaction score
0
Without air resistance, bodies travel in a parabola.

What is the curve that is traveled when air resistance is included?

I found that there are different air resistances, which curves would these types produce?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With air resistance, you don't get a nice curve (such as a simple parabola). I don't think there is a special name for all those types of curves you can get.
 
mfb said:
With air resistance, you don't get a nice curve (such as a simple parabola). I don't think there is a special name for all those types of curves you can get.
For air resistance proportional to the velocity, you may derive analytical expressions for the curve, that typically(if I remember correctly) involves the hyperbolic functions and their inverses.
 
arildno said:
For air resistance proportional to the velocity, you may derive analytical expressions for the curve, that typically(if I remember correctly) involves the hyperbolic functions and their inverses.

Unfortunately, for the vast majority of cases, this is not a physically realistic solution, since air resistance is proportional to the square of the velocity (and there is no nice, analytical solution for that).
 
cjl said:
Unfortunately, for the vast majority of cases, this is not a physically realistic solution, since air resistance is proportional to the square of the velocity (and there is no nice, analytical solution for that).
Your point being?
 
arildno said:
Your point being?

My point being that if you care about physical reality, rather than mathematical prettiness, the existence of a solution for drag proportional to velocity isn't terribly useful or relevant.
 
cjl said:
My point being that if you care about physical reality, rather than mathematical prettiness, the existence of a solution for drag proportional to velocity isn't terribly useful or relevant.
Any relevance to my first post?
 
Some objects (mainly small objects) can have laminar flow where drag grows linear with the velocity.
Unfortunately, their typical timescale is so short that you cannot really call their motion "falling".
 
guysensei1 said:
Without air resistance, bodies travel in a parabola.

What is the curve that is traveled when air resistance is included?

I found that there are different air resistances, which curves would these types produce?

This question is not well posed. When there is air resistance, there is also lift. Both depend on the shape and the mass distribution of the body, and its orientation and rotation. These effects can be very significant, in which you can certainly convince yourself by comparing the flight of a glider and a ball.
 
  • #10
mfb said:
Some objects (mainly small objects) can have laminar flow where drag grows linear with the velocity.
Unfortunately, their typical timescale is so short that you cannot really call their motion "falling".

It's not so much that the flow is laminar, it's that the flow (for very low reynolds numbers) is dominated by viscous, rather than inertial forces. Laminar (but inertially-dominated) flow still has drag that scales as v2. As you noted, in air, the only time you would have viscous-dominated flow is for very small, slow moving objects. There are however some physical cases where this could occur at larger scales. In a fairly viscous fluid (corn syrup, for example), a BB, marble, or even golf-ball sized object could have drag that scales with v rather than v2. Most of the time, though, when people ask about drag, they aren't thinking of a marble falling through corn syrup :smile:
 
  • #11
Short answer: there is no simple closed form except in very extraordinary circumstances.
 
  • #12
mfb said:
Some objects (mainly small objects) can have laminar flow where drag grows linear with the velocity.
Unfortunately, their typical timescale is so short that you cannot really call their motion "falling".

Quite so.

And?

It doesn't follow from this that what I wrote in my post was wrong. I pointed out that there were cases with air resistance in which analytical expressions could be found, I did not say that that was generally true.
 
Back
Top