Help with the Separation of Variables and Integration

Join the discussion
Ask a follow-up here, or get your own question answered by working scientists, mathematicians and engineers — people, not an autocomplete.
Real named experts · corrections over time · the nuance an AI answer skips
75 replies · 5K views
silento
Messages
66
Reaction score
5
Homework Statement
Hello! This is a combination of physics and calculus. I have a non constant drag force I’m trying to integrate in relation to velocity and position. I’ve started it, however I’m getting stuck on the separating and integrating. I’ve tired moving equations over to different sides however it’s just not working. I’m trying to get v to the right side and dx and m to the left. Everything besides the position (x) are known constants
Relevant Equations
See pic below.
image.jpg
 
Last edited:
on Phys.org
image.jpg

Tried a few approaches but all became very complex and couldn’t separate the dx from dv
 
solve for dv/dx and integrate with respect to x.
 
mathhabibi said:
solve for dv/dx and integrate with respect to x.
I may have forgot to add that v isn't a single constant. it is changing from 120 to 0 which will be the bounds for the right side But ∆x is what I'm solving for in the end
 
silento said:
I may have forgot to add that v isn't a single constant
which is why you should integrate.
 
silento said:
But ∆x is what I'm solving for in the end
In the post you said you are solving for v. Be more clear next time. What even is ##\Delta x##?
 
8XxdOEDHtx3L4J1NLkjXEDX8Kmrw1VEBcRAR0NAYYHxw=s2048.jpg

Its similar to what I am doing here. But, there is now two additional forces in additon to the drag force but only the drag force is non constant both the usFN and urFN are just constants
 
I'm not sure
silento said:
View attachment 340969
Its similar to what I am doing here. But, there is now two additional forces in additon to the drag force but only the drag force is non constant
It will take me some time but from what I am seeing, after integrating you want to solve for ##x_f-x_i##, is that correct?
 
No problem. I am a bit sketchy with physics but is it true that ##F_n=m\frac{dv}{dt}##?
 
okay I started my tutoring session will be back later.
 
Fn is known as the normal force. see you later!
 
Your equation is of the form:

$$ \varphi - \beta v^2 = m v\frac{dv}{dx}$$

Where ##\varphi## is a constant.

Make the substitution ## u = \varphi - \beta v^2##, and differentiate ##u## w.r.t. ##x##.

Show us what you get.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: silento
erobz said:
Your equation is of the form:

$$ \varphi - \beta v^2 = m v\frac{dv}{dx}$$

Where ##\varphi## is a constant.

Make the substitution ## u = \varphi - \beta v^2##, and differentiate ##u## w.r.t. ##x##.

Show us what you get.
should there be one more of the constant symbols out front or does it not matter? Or can the two constants be combined into one number?
 
silento said:
should there be one more of the constant symbols out front or does it not matter? Or can the two constants be combined into one number?
If they are both constant just combine them ##\varphi## to work with less symbols. You can add them back in at the end.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: silento
silento said:
I may have forgot to add that v isn't a single constant.
That is obvious, as your equation includes the derivative ##\frac{dv}{dx}##.

Also, most of the images you've posted are of poor quality due to bad lighting. This is one of the main reasons we ask members to post using LaTeX rather than images of hand-written work.

It's not that difficult to use the version of LaTeX that is supported on this site. The equation you wrote in post #1 of this thread is
$$\mu_sF_n - \mu_rF_n = mv\frac{dv}{dx} + \frac 1 2 Cd Apv^2$$
This is how what you wrote appears to me.

The code I wrote is $$\mu_sF_n - \mu_rF_n = mv\frac{dv}{dx} + \frac 1 2 Cd Apv^2$$.

At the lower left corner of the text entry pane there is a link to our LaTeX tutorial.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erobz
erobz said:
Your equation is of the form:

$$ \varphi - \beta v^2 = m v\frac{dv}{dx}$$

Where ##\varphi## is a constant.

Make the substitution ## u = \varphi - \beta v^2##, and differentiate ##u## w.r.t. ##x##.

Show us what you get.
I'm trying to understand this. So when differentiating u, it would be 2Bv. how do I do it with respect to x?
 
silento said:
I'm trying to understand this. So when differentiating u, it would be 2Bv. how do I do it with respect to x?
Chain rule.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Mark44
would I add a dx behind 2Bv? (I apologize, my calc skills are a bit rusty so please bear with me)
 
silento said:
would I add a dx behind 2Bv? (I apologize, my calc skills are a bit rusty so please bear with me)
Look up the Chain Rule. ##u## is a function of ##v## and ##v## is a function of ##x##.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: silento
erobz said:
Look up the Chain Rule. ##u## is a function of ##v## and ##v## is a function of ##x##.
(du/dx)=(du/dv)*(dv/dx)
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erobz
silento said:
So when differentiating u, it would be 2Bv.
You've omitted the minus sign, plus what @erobz says below.
erobz said:
Look up the Chain Rule. u is a function of v and v is a function of x.
 
Reply
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: erobz and silento
silento said:
would it just be View attachment 340971?
Nope. You have the factor ## \frac{du}{dv} = -2 \beta v ## correct. What is the derivative of ##v## w.r.t ##x##? Don't over think this.
 
Last edited:
Reply
  • Sad
Likes   Reactions: silento
erobz said:
Nope. You have the factor ## \frac{du}{dv} = -2 \beta v ## correct. What is the derivative of ##v## w.r.t ##x##? Don't over think this.
apologies. had to go to work. Ima keep tackling this now