Ball rolling with varying deceleration

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving a formula for the position of a rolling ball over time, accounting for initial speed and the effects of air resistance. The user seeks to express the position as a function of time while considering that deceleration due to air drag is proportional to the square of the speed. The conversation highlights the challenge of eliminating speed from the position equation, leading to the suggestion of using differential equations to model velocity changes over time. It is noted that at low speeds, drag may be proportional to speed rather than speed squared, and integrating the acceleration function is necessary for accurate modeling. The integration approach is recommended to account for the effects of drag and potentially friction on the ball's motion.
inflation
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
I'd like to see an example of a formula describing the position of a rolling ball over time. It has been given one impuls at the start, after which air resistance and friction decelerates it (the ground is flat). At high speed the ball might be sliding, until it decelerates to some treshold speed when it starts to roll. The deceleration might behave quite different in those two modes, I guess.

How should I formulate the balls position as a function of time based on those characteristics?

I intend to observe the position of a rolling (sliding) ball at different times, and I want to formulate a function to fit with those observations in order to figure out where the ball has been at any given point in time. I thought it might make more sense to estimate the parameters of a model with some basis in real physics, rather than to fit any curve.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
BUMP
Let's skip the "two modes" sliding and rolling for now, and just look at air drag:

I want an expression for the position of an object over time. I know its position x0 and speed v0 at time t=0. I know that it is decelerating due to air drag and can assume that the deceleration is proportional to speed squared: a=k*v² (can I do this and assume that k has the unit "1/meter" so that the units work out?)

Now, step by step:

1) The position given constant speed is x = v0*t.
2) Given constant deceleration x = v0*t-a*t²/2.
3) With air drag changing the deceleration x = v0*t-k*v²*t²/2.

My problem is to get rid of that "v" in equation 3. How does v change over time?

If I try something like this:
x = a*t²/2
a = 2x/t²
2x/t² = k*v²
v = root(2x/(k*t²))

And insert in equation 3:
x = v0*t-k*[2x/(k*t²)]*t²/2.

Then t cancels out from everything but v0*t so that the motion is linear. So I was just going in a circle there.
 
Last edited:
inflation said:
Now, step by step:

1) The position given constant speed is x = v0*t.
2) Given constant deceleration x = v0*t-a*t²/2.
3) With air drag changing the deceleration x = v0*t-k*v²*t²/2.
Your equation #2 is only valid for constant acceleration, so it won't apply here. To see how the velocity varies with time, you must integrate the acceleration function.
 
Yea you can assume that, but I believe at low speeds drag is proportional only to v. I think you can write a differential equation: v' = (k/m)*v then just find the solution to
v' - (k/m)*v = 0 which I got was v(t) = c1*e^(kt/m) c1 being a new constant from integrating. This is just a hunch as I am new to applying DEs and this only takes in drag as the only thing affecting the motion. You can add friction in too.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top