Equations for aiming tennis ball parabolic motion

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on enhancing the computer player's ability to hit a tennis ball in a 3D game by optimizing the trajectory to pass through three specific points: the starting position, the height of the net, and the target position on the ground. The physics model used neglects air resistance, simplifying the problem to solving linear equations for parabolic motion. The initial velocity and angle must be calculated to ensure the ball clears the net and lands at the target. Key equations involve determining time to cover the court distance and using motion equations to find the required initial velocity for the vertical motion. The conversation emphasizes the need for a robust mathematical approach to achieve realistic ball trajectories in the game.
markofjohnson
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Hi, I'm writting a 3D tennis game, and I need to revamp how the computer player hits the ball. I have a simple physics model for trajectory (no air resistance) that works great, but now I need to have the computer player play smarter, and make judgements about how to get the ball over the net optimally and to the target on the other side of the court.

This is a problem of solving linear equations for parabolic motion? (Again, there is no air drag in this game). Specifically what I need is what is the angle and velocity to hit the ball so that the ball goes through 3 points:

- Start position when hit is x1,y1,z1.
- The ball must be hit to x3,y3,z3 (z3=0 when hit ground).
- The ball must also get over the net at height z2 ie position x2,y2,z2.

What equations or code will tell me speed and velocity for hitting the ball through these 3 points?

Many thanks
Mark
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
what language are you writing this in?
 
Its for iPhone, so C, but I can translate from anything if you have some handy source code. Thanks.
 
Motion occurs in three dimensions but we can simplify it to 2 dimensions by considering only the plane containing the vector we want to hit the ball in (so the 2 dimensions of the plane are up and forward).

I assume your physics model neglects drag forces so, in the forward direction, the ball is given an initial velocity via. an impulse force and then no further acceleration occurs. So, motion in the forward dimension is simply

x = v0*t + x0

or equivalently,
d = rt

Note that, hitting the ball amounts to choosing initial velocity. For this dimension we can pick an arbitrary velocity. Then we solve for t (time) to see how long it will take to cover the distance from one side of the court to the other.

The second step is to consider the vertical motion of a parabola with that previous time value in mind, such that the final height will be 0 at the given time t, indicating that the motion has completed it's arc.

From the equations of motion with constant acceleration,
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Equation_of_motion

What variables do we know? We know the final time, final position, and final acceleration but not the final velocity so we choose this equation:

x = x0+ v0*t + 1/2*a*t^2

x0 = initial height
x = final height ( = 0, since it hits table)
v0 = unknown
t = known, from first part
a = known, gravity

So you can just solve for v0.

Now you can combine the initial velocity that you chose randomly from step 1 with this one and that gives you the initial velocity vector (speed is just the length of the velocity vector)
 
height=(v^2(sin(x))^2))/(2g)
range=(v^2*sin(2x))/g
v=speed
g=9.8ms^-2
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top