Help Understanding A Paper - Brachistochrone With Friction

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around understanding the derivation of equation (18) in a paper on the Brachistochrone problem with friction, where the author skips several steps in the energy conservation approach. Participants express confusion over the complexity of substituting earlier equations into the energy conservation equation, leading to a messy result that doesn't clearly simplify to equation (18). Relevant symbols like the coefficient of friction (μ) and constants of integration (C1) are noted, highlighting the paper's challenging notation. There's also a query about contacting the Russian author for clarification, though no specific contact method is provided. Overall, the discussion emphasizes the need for clearer explanations in the paper to aid understanding.
eddiezhang
Messages
39
Reaction score
8
Homework Statement
I am currently reading this paper (https://www.researchgate.net/publication/373607009_Exact_Solution_of_the_Problem_of_Brachistochrone_with_Allowance_for_the_Coulomb_Friction_Forces), where the author models the brachistochrone (least time of descent) curve for a circular ball while considering coulomb friction.

I'm confused by the penultimate step (the working behind equation 18).
Relevant Equations
.5mv^2 + mgy = mgH
Others contained in file / attached in attempt
Conservation of energy is invoked, which I understand, but the author omits most of the steps. He arrives at (18):


1727248857569.png




I've tried to substitute (13) and (17) into the LHS of the energy conservation equation, but the result is quite messy and my gut feeling is that it doesn't simplify in a nice way to achieve equation (18). For example:



Working.png



My Maths teacher has looked at this and is also confused as to how the author arrives at (18).

I realise that having to slog your way through this paper is not a trivial task, so any help or insight into how the author arrives at (18) is deeply appreciated. My gut feeling is that there is a simple physics principle applicable that I've missed from which (18) follows.

Relevant symbols used in the paper (for your convenience):
- μ is the coefficient of friction
- α is the angle formed between the unit tangent vector of the point on the curve being investigated; φ I believe is the same, but specifically as a function of time. The notation used is a little confusing.
- C1 is introduced as a constant of integration in (13)
- H is the starting height of of the ball above (0,0), i.e. the maximum y-value the ball possesses


Many thanks
 

Attachments

Physics news on Phys.org
Forgot to mention: the author is Russian and I don't know how I might contact him (if necessary... or even welcome). Would anyone know how to and should I try?

Thanks.
 
Continued grinding away on it; I think I get it now.
 
First, I tried to show that ##f_n## converges uniformly on ##[0,2\pi]##, which is true since ##f_n \rightarrow 0## for ##n \rightarrow \infty## and ##\sigma_n=\mathrm{sup}\left| \frac{\sin\left(\frac{n^2}{n+\frac 15}x\right)}{n^{x^2-3x+3}} \right| \leq \frac{1}{|n^{x^2-3x+3}|} \leq \frac{1}{n^{\frac 34}}\rightarrow 0##. I can't use neither Leibnitz's test nor Abel's test. For Dirichlet's test I would need to show, that ##\sin\left(\frac{n^2}{n+\frac 15}x \right)## has partialy bounded sums...

Similar threads