A baseball's movement when considering air drag

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around solving the differential equation for a baseball's motion under the influence of gravity and air drag. The initial conditions include a mass of 0.145 kg, an initial speed of 45 m/s, and a drag coefficient of 0.0013 Ns²/m². Participants clarify that the maximum height reached is approximately 58.4 meters, and the time to reach this height is about 3.16 seconds, indicating discrepancies with the book's answers. The conversation emphasizes the importance of integrating the velocity-dependent acceleration correctly to avoid errors in calculating the maximum height and descent time. Ultimately, the consensus is that the book's figures are incorrect, affirming the participants' understanding of the problem.
dan1el
Messages
4
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A baseball, with mass m = 0.145 kg, is thrown directly upward from z(0) = 0 m, with initial speed v(0) = 45 m/s. The air drag on the ball is given by Cv2, C = 0.0013 Ns2/m2. Set up a diff. eq. for the ball's movement and solve it for both v(t) and z(t).

m = 0.145 kg
C = 0.0013 Ns2/m2
g = 9.81 m/s2
v(0) = 45 m/s
z(0) = 0 m


Homework Equations


F = ma


The Attempt at a Solution


m \cdot \frac{\mathrm{d}v}{\mathrm{d}t} = -mg-Cv^2

\frac{\mathrm{d}v}{v^2 + \frac{mg}{C}} = -\frac{C}{m}\mathrm{d}t

-\frac{C}{m}t = \sqrt{\frac{C}{mg}}\arctan(\sqrt{\frac{C}{mg}}v) + A

V(t) = \sqrt{\frac{mg}{C}}\tan(-\sqrt{\frac{Cg}{m}}t - B)

V(0) = \sqrt{\frac{mg}{C}}\tan(-B) = 45 m/s \Rightarrow B = -0.94

V(t) = \sqrt{\frac{mg}{C}}\tan(-\sqrt{\frac{Cg}{m}}t + 0.94)

The ball is supposed to reach its maximum height after 3.36 s, according to the book. However, when I set v(t) = 0, I get this:

\sqrt{\frac{mg}{C}}\tan(-\sqrt{\frac{Cg}{m}}t + 0.94) = 0

\sqrt{\frac{Cg}{m}}t = -B \Rightarrow t = -B \cdot \sqrt{\frac{m}{Cg}} = 3.17 s

Maple gives me the same answer.

What am I doing wrong?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What you are doing wrong is that you are evaluating the indefinite integrals first, then try to apply the initial conditions. The correct way to do it is as shown below. Then v0 will find its proper place.

<br /> \int^{v}_{v_{0}}\frac{\mathrm{d}u}{u^2 + \frac{mg}{C}} = -\int^{t}_{0}\frac{C}{m}\mathrm{d}t&#039;<br />
 
I still get the same result.

\int^v_{v_0} \frac{\mathrm{d}u}{u^2 + \frac{mg}{C}} = \sqrt {{\frac {C}{mg}}} \left( \arctan \left( \sqrt {{\frac {C}{mg}}}v<br /> _{{0}} \right) -\arctan \left( \sqrt {{\frac {C}{mg}}}v \right) <br /> \right)

If you then let
B = -\arctan (\sqrt{{\frac {C}{mg}}}v_{{0}}),
you get what I had to begin with.
 
You are right. If it is any consolation, I checked the numbers according to the last result above and my answer is 3.16 s. There may be a typo in the book, but I think that your analysis of this problem is correct and that there is very little left to learn from it.
 
I have the same result of 3.16 seconds.
 
Last edited:
CFDFEAGURU said:
I have the same result of 3.16 seconds. I also have the result of 21.78 seconds to return to the Earth and a total height of 191.2 meters.

If by "total" you mean "maximum" height, then I think the number is too large. Without air resistance the maximum height v02/2g = 103.3 m.
 
Since air resistance is taken into account in the calculation of the time of 3.16 seconds how could the distance be incorrect?

It would seem that you could use the standard equation

x(t) = x(0) + V(0) * t + 1/2*a*t^2

to determine the maximum height. Otherwise, it would seem you are "doubling up" on the air resistance.

Correct me if I am wrong.

Thanks
Matt
 
The kinematic equation is valid only if the acceleration is constant. In this problem it is not. It is velocity-dependent and given by

a = -g - Cv2

One needs to integrate the expression for v(t) to get x(t) then evaluate this last result at the the time of 3.16 s. If I did this correctly, the maximum height reached is 58.4 m. To calculate the time the ball takes to come down, one needs to solve the diff. eq. again because the resistive force changes sign relative to gravity.
 
Yes,

I agree with the above. I starting thinking the same as I drove into work this morning.

Thanks
Matt
 
  • #10
The answers in the book are wrong, apparently, so there's no problem after all. Thanks anyway!
 
  • #11
The consolation is that you know how to do the problem. It has nothing left to teach you.
 
Back
Top