Equations of Motion for an Object Falling in a Parabolic Bowl

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on deriving the equations of motion for an object falling in a parabolic bowl defined by the equation y=x^2, under the influence of gravity and without friction. Participants suggest using conservation of energy to relate speed and position, leading to the expression for velocity as a function of position. The conversation reveals the complexity of integrating these equations, resulting in elliptic integrals that complicate the motion analysis. Key insights include the relationship between velocity components and the resulting motion, with the final equations indicating that the period of oscillation depends on the bowl's dimensions. The discussion concludes with a numerical approximation for the period of oscillation based on different bowl sizes.
Binaryburst
Messages
24
Reaction score
0
I have a bowl in the form of a parabola (say y=x^2, motion is in 2d! On the graph of the parabola) and i place an object on the edges of the bowl and let if fall in the bowl. I have gravity, and no friction. My question is plain simple: what are it's equations of motion? I know it has to oscillate. I know calculus quite well, but that doesn't seem to help. Is there something I'm missing out? I would simply love to see the correct equations :D. Thank you very, very much in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF!

Hi Binaryburst! Welcome to PF! :smile:

Start by using conservation of energy, and that will give you v as a function of y.

Carry on from there. :wink:
 
Thanks for the tip :D but I've already gotten the speed with respect to x or y. I was wondering how I could get it as a function of time :)
 
ok, now use cos or sin to get the x or y component of the speed …

you now have x' as a function of x (or y' as a function of y) :wink:
 
I'm on it.
 
I get elliptic integral !?
 
very likely!

well, if you will start with a parabola! :rolleyes:
 
Wow... Thanks a lot! :D this is great!
 
If I take the whole speed, not just it's components I get a sin(t) :D
 
  • #10
sorry, not following you :redface:

you'll need to show the equations :smile:
 
  • #11
Binaryburst said:
I get elliptic integral !?

I was trying too. Do you get:

dx/dt=sqrt(2g) sqrt((1-4*x^2)*(x1^2-x^2))
 
  • #12
Nope. I'll post the equations right away.
 
  • #13
I get this: (2g(x1^2-x^2))^0.5. Then if i integrate it with respect to t i get x=x0*sin(t(2g)^0.5).
 
  • #14
Binaryburst said:
I get this: (2g(x1^2-x^2))^0.5. Then if i integrate it with respect to t i get x=x0*sin(t(2g)^0.5).



Somehow my expression for v_x has an additional (1-4x)^0.5 factor. Not sure what I'm doing wrong.
 
  • #15
Binaryburst said:
I get this: (2g(x1^2-x^2))^0.5. Then if i integrate it with respect to t i get x=x0*sin(t(2g)^0.5).

This term (2g(x1^2-x^2))^0.5

Is that your v or v_x?
 
  • #16
My equation is for v alone.
 
  • #17
I'm thinking how could i get it without using the conservation of energy and using forces.
 
  • #18
Binaryburst said:
My equation is for v alone.

What did you do next?
 
  • #19
I had v=f(x). Rewritten it as follows: v/f(x)=1 ; 1/f(x)*dx/dt=1. ; Integrate with respect to t
Int( 1/f(x)* dx/dt * dt ) = int( 1 dt )
 
  • #20
Binaryburst said:
I had v=f(x). Rewritten it as follows: v/f(x)=1 ; 1/f(x)*dx/dt=1. ; Integrate with respect to t
Int( 1/f(x)* dx/dt * dt ) = int( 1 dt )

That's where I think you are wrong.

You've put v=dx/dt.

Only v_x = dx/dt

But I could be talking nonsense! Be warned. But I'd love to see your opinion.

Your solution does look super tempting! :)
 
  • #21
Hmmm.. That's interesting I actually got the vx. Sorry for the blunder. I was too excited :) correcting the mistake.
 
  • #22
Binaryburst said:
Hmmm.. That's interesting I actually got the vx. Sorry for the blunder. I was too excited :)

Funny point is your solution seems to satisfy all the boundary conditions etc. I'm puzzled.

My solution integrates to something super messy. :(
 
  • #23
I am super puzzelled as well. I can't figure out what I did.
 
  • #24
Another reason why your solution seems wrong to me.

take dx/dt and dy/dt

v_x^2 + v_y^2 = v^2

But yours don't seem to sum up to v. Try.
 
Last edited:
  • #25
Actually i got the total speed dependent only on the x-axis so saying that v.total is dx/dt is correct because it's no longer the slope of the parabola but the slope of f(x).
 
  • #26
Binaryburst said:
Actually i got the total speed dependent only on the x-axis so saying that v.total is dx/dt is correct because it's no longer the slope of the parabola but the slope of f(x).

I don't agree.

The only way v = dx/dt is if \vec{v} was directed along the x axis.

i.e. v_y was zero.

But here the velocity does have a y component so I don't see how you are allowed to do what you did.

OTOH, your elegant solution form tempts me but still...

PS. Maybe I am wrong. I'm no expert.
 
  • #27
Omg! What a humongous mistake in my formulation of the conservation of energy!
 
  • #28
Binaryburst said:
Omg! What a humongous mistake in my formulation of the conservation of energy!

Conservation is fine. Your v is ok.

It's where you put v=dx/dt that the problems start.
 
  • #29
Here's what I get :

\frac{dx}{dt} = \sqrt{2g} \sqrt{\frac{x_1^2-x^2}{1+4x^2}}

Sad part: If this is right the integral is ugly.
 
  • #30
It is right. That's what I got too... That's just v*cos(theta). It results that v is equal to f(x).
 
  • #31
Binaryburst said:
It is right. That's what I got too... That's just v*cos(theta). It results that v is equal to f(x).

Now try writing x(t). :)
 
  • #32
In the consevation of Energy formula you got the speed with respect to the height only which is x^2 so we actually got vx :~> when you replace y with x^2 and vy when you leave y unchanged. PS: I'm not an expert either. :D
 
  • #33
Binaryburst said:
In the consevation of Energy formula you got the speed with respect to the height only which is x^2 so we actually got vy :~>

Nope. I don't think so.
 
  • #34
I did a simulation with vx and it matched the sinusoidal, it seems. Any help from the experts?
 
Last edited:
  • #35
Where do you consider the motion along the bowl? It will lead to accelerations both in vx and vy, to follow the shape.I'll try to start from scratch - with energy conservation, but it is possible to avoid this word if necessary.

If the object is at rest at position ##x_0>0##, it has a total energy of ##gx_0^2##, setting its mass and a meter to 1.
At position x, ##0<x<x_0##, energy conservation leads to ##v^2=2g(x_0^2-x^2)##.
The derivative of the parabola there is 2x, therefore ##v_x=\frac{1}{2x}v_y##. It follows that ##v^2 = v_x^2 + v_y^2 = v_x^2 (1+4x^2)##. Combining both,
$$\frac{dx}{dt}= v_x = \sqrt{\frac{v^2}{1+4x^2}} = \sqrt{\frac{2g(x_0^2-x^2)}{1+4x^2}}$$
The sign is arbitrary and depends on the current part of the oscillation.
This leads to ugly elliptic integrals. It can be written as
$$\frac{dt}{dx}=\sqrt{\frac{1+4x^2}{2g(x_0^2-x^2)}}$$
While this gives elliptic integrals as well, it allows to determine t(x) via numerical integration.

g=10 and x0=1 leads to a period of T=2.36s.
For large x0 (>>1), most of the parabola is like a free fall, and the period should approach 4 times this free-fall time. As an example, x=sqrt(500) leads to T=40.06, whereas a free fall would give T=40s.
For small x0 (<<1), the deflection of the bowl is negligible, and we get a harmonic oscillator. The numerator for dt/dx can be approximated as 1, and the period approaches ##T \approx \frac{2\pi}{\sqrt{2g}}##.
 
  • #36
Thank you! At last :D
 
Back
Top