Equation of Motion for a Projectile Under Quadratic Air Resistance

  • Thread starter Thread starter Oblio
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Drag Quadratic
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the equation of motion for a projectile thrown vertically, specifically considering the effects of quadratic air resistance alongside gravitational forces.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants explore the relationship between gravitational force and air resistance, questioning how to represent these forces mathematically. There is discussion about the correct formulation of equations for both upward and downward motion, and the role of integration in solving for velocity as a function of time.

Discussion Status

The conversation is ongoing, with participants sharing insights on integration techniques and variable substitution. Some guidance has been offered regarding the use of arctan in integrals, but there is no clear consensus on the approach to take for solving the equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express uncertainty about the integration process and the implications of constants in their equations. There are references to specific terms and variables that may not be fully defined within the discussion.

  • #61
what step did you take?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #62
Oblio said:
Ok because I am having trouble matching what you got taking out the last constants

show me what you get... I might have made a mistake.
 
  • #63
One more question first, how do we treat it like a parantheses, when you don't really have anything outside the 'bracket' to multiply or divide, in the simplification process.

I tried lots of things, but logically I'm not sure the proper logic behind taking out those constants when there's no 'other side' to multiply/divide etc...
know what i mean?
 
  • #64
Oblio said:
One more question first, how do we treat it like a parantheses, when you don't really have anything outside the 'bracket' to multiply or divide, in the simplification process.

I tried lots of things, but logically I'm not sure the proper logic behind taking out those constants when there's no 'other side' to multiply/divide etc...
know what i mean?

I'm not sure I understand... for example:

\int5xdx = 5\int xdx

For any integral \int A*f(x)dx = A\int f(x)dx where A is a constant.

we're just factoring it out... so you don't need an other side...

never mind about taking the constants out...

suppose I had it like this:

\int\frac{-m}{mg}*\frac{\frac{du}{sqrt[c/mg]}}{1+ u^2}

now, I just want to clean this up a little... simplify it... don't take anything outsdie the integral.
 
Last edited:
  • #65
You mean for me to to it?

I know and understand your first rule there, but does that apply to a multi layer division?
 
  • #66
Oblio said:
You mean for me to to it?

Yeah.

I know and understand your first rule there, but does that apply to a multi layer division?

Which rule?
 
  • #67
learningphysics said:
\int5xdx = 5\int xdx

For any integral \int A*f(x)dx = A\int f(x)dx where A is a constant.

QUOTE]
 
  • #68
Oblio said:
learningphysics said:
\int5xdx = 5\int xdx

For any integral \int A*f(x)dx = A\int f(x)dx where A is a constant.

QUOTE]

don't worry about taking anything out of the integral... just simplify it inside the integral.
 
  • #69
Yeah, that's what I'm aiming for, but when I simplify equations; mentally I do the 'what you do to one side, do to the other' etc. With nothing outside of the integral, how do we bring out sqrt[c/mg] ?
 
  • #70
Oblio said:
Yeah, that's what I'm aiming for, but when I simplify equations; mentally I do the 'what you do to one side, do to the other' etc. With nothing outside of the integral, how do we bring out sqrt[c/mg] ?

don't bring it out:

\int\frac{-m}{mg}*\frac{\frac{du}{sqrt[c/mg]}}{1+ u^2}

this equals

\int\frac{-m}{mg}*\frac{1}{sqrt[c/mg]}*\frac{du}{1+ u^2}

now, the first thing you can do is cancel the m's in the numerator and denominator... what else can you do to simplify...
 
  • #71
Besides moving it out of the integral?
 
  • #72
Oblio said:
Besides moving it out of the integral?

yes. forget about moving it out of the integral...
 
  • #73
learningphysics said:
yes. forget about moving it out of the integral...

we have 2 fractions multiplied together...


\frac{-1}{g} x \frac{1}{/sqrt{c/mg}}

I would think the sqrt would need to removed maybe...
 
  • #74
Oblio said:
we have 2 fractions multiplied together...


\frac{-1}{g} x \frac{1}{/sqrt{c/mg}}

I would think the sqrt would need to removed maybe...

can you do anything with the g that is there and the g inside the square root?

also try to clean up the fraction so that I don't have additional fractions inside the numerator and denominator... ie: in the numerator I want stuff being multiplied... in the denominator I want stuff being multiplied...
 
  • #75
I'm sure this isn't hard but I can't see anything...
 
  • #76
I know the fractions are technically the same thing as -1/g/sqrt[c/mg], but that doesn't help
 
  • #77
Oblio said:
I know the fractions are technically the same thing as -1/g/sqrt[c/mg], but that doesn't help

what is \frac{g}{\sqrt{g}}?
 
  • #78
In trying things out manually I'm finding that its sqrt[g] but i definitely didnt know that before now... hmm
 
  • #79
Oblio said:
In trying things out manually I'm finding that its sqrt[g] but i definitely didnt know that before now... hmm

exactly... can you further simplify the integral?
 
  • #80
Its hard since its in the denominator in the square root...

is it close to...
sqrt[c/(msqrt[g])] lol that's wrong...
 
  • #81
Oblio said:
Its hard since its in the denominator in the square root...

is it close to...
sqrt[c/(msqrt[g])] lol that's wrong...

\frac{-1}{g}\times\frac{1}{\sqrt{c/mg}}

=

\frac{-1}{\sqrt{gc/m}}

=

-\sqrt{\frac{m}{gc}}
 
  • #82
I'll have to do some research on that, I can't say I'm following manipulating such distant numbers..
 
  • #83
learningphysics said:
\frac{-1}{g}\times\frac{1}{\sqrt{c/mg}}

=

\frac{-1}{\sqrt{gc/m}}

=

-\sqrt{\frac{m}{gc}}

For the time being, I'm left with

-\sqrt{\frac{m}{gc}} \int \frac{du}{1+u^2}

Now integrate it I assume
 
  • #84
Oblio said:
For the time being, I'm left with

-\sqrt{\frac{m}{gc}} \int \frac{du}{1+u^2}

Now integrate it I assume

yeah, use arctan. we should actually have limits on that integral... so:

-\sqrt{\frac{m}{gc}} \int_{u_{initial}}^{u_{final}} \frac{du}{1+u^2}
 
  • #85
learningphysics said:
yeah, use arctan. we should actually have limits on that integral... so:

-\sqrt{\frac{m}{gc}} \int_{u_{initial}}^{u_{final}} \frac{du}{1+u^2}


We often didn't use limits. Why this time?
 
  • #86
Oblio said:
We often didn't use limits. Why this time?

Yeah, we don't need the limits... but we should add a constant when we take the integral...
 
  • #87
learningphysics said:
\int_{u_{initial}}^{u_{final}} \frac{du}{1+u^2}

That IS arctan isn't it?
 
  • #88
Oblio said:
That IS arctan isn't it?

yeah.
 
  • #89
Ok so if arctan = that, I need to find out what the integral of arctan is..
 
  • #90
Oblio said:
Ok so if arctan = that, I need to find out what the integral of arctan is..

no arctan IS the integral.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 37 ·
2
Replies
37
Views
5K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 39 ·
2
Replies
39
Views
4K