Fall with Air Drag - Which Value for Velocity to Use?

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

This discussion focuses on numerically simulating free fall with air drag using specific equations and methods. The user initially employed a simple numerical integration method but encountered discrepancies when comparing results to the analytical solution of free fall. The user proposed using the average of the current and next velocity, but was advised by a forum member, dracayr, to adhere to the book's recommendation of using the current velocity for accurate results. The conversation highlights the importance of understanding numerical methods in solving differential equations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of basic physics concepts such as acceleration, velocity, and force.
  • Familiarity with numerical methods for solving ordinary differential equations.
  • Knowledge of air drag and its mathematical representation (Fd=b|v|m).
  • Experience with spreadsheet software for numerical simulations (e.g., Microsoft Excel).
NEXT STEPS
  • Research numerical methods for solving ordinary differential equations, focusing on upwind and central differencing techniques.
  • Explore the impact of air drag on falling objects, specifically the role of the drag coefficient (b) and mass (m).
  • Learn about the analytical solutions for motion under air drag and how to derive them.
  • Investigate advanced numerical integration techniques, such as Runge-Kutta methods, for improved accuracy in simulations.
USEFUL FOR

Physics students, engineers, and anyone interested in numerical simulations of motion under the influence of forces, particularly air drag.

dracayr
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


I want to numerically simulate a fall with air drag. In class, we used these equations to produce a table simulating free fall (using a ti calculator):
Code:
dt=0.1s
a=9.81m/s²
t[SUB]n+1[/SUB]=t[SUB]n[/SUB]+dt
v[SUB]n+1[/SUB]=v[SUB]n[/SUB]+a*dt
x[SUB]n+1[/SUB]=x[SUB]n[/SUB]+v[SUB]n[/SUB]*dt

When I compared that system with the curve produced by the direct equation, x=1/2at², I noticed a slight error. After looking at the equations again, I figured that the error came from the fact that I used vn, so the curve would always be a bit lower than 1/2at². So I fixed that by changing the Equation to
Code:
x[SUB]n+1[/SUB]=x[SUB]n[/SUB]+((v[SUB]n+1[/SUB]+v[SUB]n[/SUB])/2)*dt

Now I want to create a similar system but with air drag. As before, my physics book says that I should use vn and not (vn+vn+1)/2. But the book was wrong when it came to free fall, so I don't know which value to use for v. I think I should use (vn+vn+1)/2. But since I don't know the direct equation this time (if there is one), I can't compare to the correct solution..

2a. Relevant equations
v=x/t
a=v/t
F=ma

Fd=b|v|m
vE=(mg/b)1/m
a=g(1-vm/vEm)

Fd is the air drag
b and m are constants depending on the drag (I think in the case of air, m is about 2)
vE is the end velocity the falling body will achieve


The Attempt at a Solution



These are the spreadsheets with the 2 systems:

http://dracayr.awardspace.com/physik.ods"
http://dracayr.awardspace.com/physik.xls"


dracayr
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Ah, you've unknowingly ran into problems solving differential equations numerically. Essentially, what you're doing is time-marching an ordinary differential equation. You're comparing results using upwind and central differencing. For what you're doing, just do as the book says.

Numerically, upwinding (essentially using the value of the velocity at the current time) will damp waves, so you will typically have a lower magnitude than the analytic solution.
 
OK, thanks for the information :)

dracayr
 
Last edited:

Similar threads

Replies
57
Views
3K
  • · Replies 31 ·
2
Replies
31
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K