Air resistance differential equation

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around solving a differential equation related to air resistance in classical mechanics. The original poster is exploring the drag force equation, specifically the equation of motion for a particle experiencing quadratic air resistance, which leads to a nonlinear differential equation.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to solve the differential equation by substituting the drag force into the motion equation but encounters difficulties due to its nonlinear nature. Some participants suggest that the equation is separable and question the integration steps taken by the original poster. Others raise concerns about the omission of the constant of integration and its potential impact on the solution.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging with the problem, questioning assumptions, and exploring different methods of integration. There is a focus on understanding the implications of nonlinear equations and the importance of initial conditions in the integration process. No consensus has been reached, but various lines of reasoning are being examined.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the challenges posed by nonlinear ordinary differential equations and the necessity of considering initial conditions in the integration process. Participants are also referencing specific mathematical techniques and concepts related to the problem.

David Koufos
Messages
9
Reaction score
4
Hello all, I want to say thank you in advance for any and all advice on my question. My classical mechanics textbook (Marion Thornton) has been taking me through motion for a particle with retarding forces.

The example it keeps giving is:

m dv/dt = -kmv

which can be solved for:
v = v0e-kt and
x = v0/k(1-e-kt)

But out of curiosity I tried using the actual drag force equation "1/2ρCAv2" instead of "kmv." But I can't figure out how to solve the differential:
##\ddot x ## + 1/2ρCA##\dot x ##2 = 0

How do you solve this thing? I'm stuck since it's not the standard
x'' + ax' + bx = 0

My solution yielded:

$$ \int\frac{\mathrm{d}\dot x }{ \dot x^2} = \frac{1}{2m}\rho CA\int \mathrm{dt} $$

which just gives some weird thing:
$$t = e^{\frac{1}{2m}\rho CAx} $$
which can't be right.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Having a quadratic air resistance term, your differential equation is no longer linear so you will need to apply other methods. As you have noted, the differential equation you get for ##v## is separable, i.e.,
$$
\frac{dv}{v^2} = K\, dt.
$$
However, your integration of this does not seem correct to me. Please show the details of your computation.
 
I treated ##
\int {\frac {\mathrm {d \dot{x}}} {\mathrm {\dot{x^2}}}}## the same as ##\int \frac {\mathrm{dx}} {x^2} = \int x^{-2} \mathrm{dx} = -x^{-1}##.

So then I got ##- \dot x^{-1} = \frac {\mathrm {dt}}{dx} = \frac {1}{2m}\rho CA t##.

Then multiplied and divided: ##\frac {\mathrm {dt}}{t} = \frac {1}{2m}\rho CA \mathrm {dx}##.

Then integrated ##\int {\frac {\mathrm {dt}}{t}} = \frac {1}{2m}\rho CA \int {\mathrm {dx}}##.

So I got ##\ln {t} = \frac {1}{2m}\rho CAx##, ##t = e^{\frac {1}{2m}\rho CAx}##
 
David Koufos said:
I treated ##
\int {\frac {\mathrm {d \dot{x}}} {\mathrm {\dot{x^2}}}}## the same as ##\int \frac {\mathrm{dx}} {x^2} = \int x^{-2} \mathrm{dx} = -x^{-1}##.

So then I got ##- \dot x^{-1} = \frac {\mathrm {dt}}{dx} = \frac {1}{2m}\rho CA t##.

Then multiplied and divided: ##\frac {\mathrm {dt}}{t} = \frac {1}{2m}\rho CA \mathrm {dx}##.

Then integrated ##\int {\frac {\mathrm {dt}}{t}} = \frac {1}{2m}\rho CA \int {\mathrm {dx}}##.

So I got ##\ln {t} = \frac {1}{2m}\rho CAx##, ##t = e^{\frac {1}{2m}\rho CAx}##
What about taking into account the initial condition in your integration to get v? You omitted the constant of integration.
 
Thank you by the way Orodruin for mentioning that it's nonlinear. I'm doing some research on "homogeneous first-order nonlinear ordinary differential equations." I guess that's the kind of equation this is.
 
Chestermiller said:
What about taking into account the initial condition in your integration to get v? You omitted the constant of integration.
Would that make a big difference tho? I could always just set up the constant to be trivial.
 
David Koufos said:
Would that make a big difference tho? I could always just set up the constant to be trivial.

Try it for yourself: with a constant of integration, and without it. Do you get mathematically equivalent ##x(t)## formulas?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Chestermiller
David Koufos said:
Would that make a big difference tho? I could always just set up the constant to be trivial.
Ask yourself this: Do you think I would have responded the way I did if I didn't already know that it would alleviate your difficulty?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K