Can someone help me calculate time to arrival based on position and velocity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter zero_sum
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Time
zero_sum
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi everyone :)

Starting off with a really simple question I'm seemingly too stupid to solve:

For a heuristic measurement I need to estimate the time it takes to get from one state (position and velocity) to another (different position and velocity). Neglecting things like speed limits, orientation, and rotational velocity (which I intend to bring in later) I came up with this basic first problem:

Given:
- a distance between two points (p0 and p1) in space, s.
- a velocity at p0, v0
- a velocity at p1, v1
- a maximum acceleration force a and a maximum deceleration force d

So from this, one can generate the time/velocity diagram in the attached file.
Now I'm looking for the time it takes to travel s, t1-t0, or, as t0 = 0, just t1.

I started off with splitting the area into an acceleration phase (duration tA) and a deceleration phase (duration tD), and stating that the velocities at the point when acceleration switches to deceleration must be equal, i.e. v0 + a*tA = v1 + d * tD, solving for tA.

So next, as I need one more variable, I tried inserting tA into the general distance/velocity/acceleration equation

s(t) = a/2 * t2 + v0 * t

but then I lost it, somehow. I got a formula, but it generates different results if I swap (v0,a) and (v1,d) - though this should be symmetrical, as far as I understand...

Anyone there to enlighten me?
Thanks :)
 

Attachments

  • prob.png
    prob.png
    7.7 KB · Views: 431
Mathematics news on Phys.org
Are you trying to find the acceleration/deceleration profile that minimises the time of travel, or are there some other constraints perhaps?
 
Hi nmf77,

sooner or later, yes. Right now having acceleration and deceleration fixed at their maximum values will ensure the quickest traversal. So everything I listed as "given" is a constant.
 
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...
Fermat's Last Theorem has long been one of the most famous mathematical problems, and is now one of the most famous theorems. It simply states that the equation $$ a^n+b^n=c^n $$ has no solutions with positive integers if ##n>2.## It was named after Pierre de Fermat (1607-1665). The problem itself stems from the book Arithmetica by Diophantus of Alexandria. It gained popularity because Fermat noted in his copy "Cubum autem in duos cubos, aut quadratoquadratum in duos quadratoquadratos, et...
I'm interested to know whether the equation $$1 = 2 - \frac{1}{2 - \frac{1}{2 - \cdots}}$$ is true or not. It can be shown easily that if the continued fraction converges, it cannot converge to anything else than 1. It seems that if the continued fraction converges, the convergence is very slow. The apparent slowness of the convergence makes it difficult to estimate the presence of true convergence numerically. At the moment I don't know whether this converges or not.
Back
Top