Kinematic question involving differential equation

Click For Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the relationship between the velocity of a falling particle and time, considering air resistance proportional to the square of the velocity. The key equation to prove is t = V/2g ln[(V + v)/(V - v)], where V² = mg/k. The initial attempt involves setting up the differential equation and recognizing it as separable. A user suggests using partial fractions to simplify the integration process, which will help in eliminating constants and reaching the desired equation. The conversation emphasizes understanding the integration steps and applying logarithmic properties to complete the proof.
gaobo9109
Messages
68
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A particle of mass m falls from rest; the resistance of the air when the speed is v is kv2 where k is a constant. Show that after a time t, the velocity v and the time t are related by the equation t = V/2g ln[(V + v )/(V - v)] where V2
= mg/k

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


ma = mg - kv2
a = g - k/m v2
dv/dt = g - k/m v2
dv = g - k/m v2dt
v = gt - k/m v2t
t = v/(g - k/m v2)

But I don't know how to continue from here.
I have been studying differential equation on my own, so I am not very strong in the foundation
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is a seperable differential equation. But it is enough if you replace the given v(t) relation back into the original equation.

ehild
 
It is quite complicated to solve the differential equation, but if you find v(t) from the given "solution" (which you want to prove), given as t(v), you can put this v(t) into your equation and see the all the terms cancel out. This should leave you with something like 1=1.
Just to kinda clairify.
 
I'll get you started

gaobo9109 said:

Homework Statement


A particle of mass m falls from rest; the resistance of the air when the speed is v is kv2 where k is a constant. Show that after a time t, the velocity v and the time t are related by the equation t = V/2g ln[(V + v )/(V - v)] where V2
= mg/k

Homework Equations





The Attempt at a Solution


ma = mg - kv2
a = g - k/m v2
dv/dt = g - k/m v2
dv = g - k/m v2dt
v = gt - k/m v2t
t = v/(g - k/m v2)

But I don't know how to continue from here.
I have been studying differential equation on my own, so I am not very strong in the foundation

Hi there,
OK, let me get you started on this, and I'll leave it in a place where you should be able to finish it from there. I have already gone through and done the proof, but I cannot simply give it to you as it will be removed shortly after if I do, so instead I'll get you a little over half way there, explaining what I'm doing along the way, and then I'll tell you what you need to do to finish the proof.

Let's start with what you had:

ma = mg - kv2
re-write a as dv/dt (dv/dt is the infinitesimally small change in velocity with respect to an infinitesimally small change in time, which is the acceleration at a given point in time)
m(dv/dt) = mg - kv2
mdv = (mg - kv2)dt

Now since we know that V2 = mg/k let's factor out k from the right hand side of the equation.

mdv = k(mg/k - v2)dt
mdv = k(V2 - v2)dt

dv/(V2 - v2) = (k/m)dt
The denominator on the left hand side is called the difference of two squares and can be re-written as:

dv/[(V +v)(V - v)] = (k/m)dt

Now in order to integrate the left hand side it will be far easier to do if you separate the terms in the denominator such that you only have an integration with respect to one over V+v with a constant in the numerator summed with another integral with only V-v in the denominator with again a constant in the numerator.

How you do this is called separation by partial fractions. Basically if you have something like

1/[(x + a)(x +b)] you set this equal to how you'd like it separated, for instance using my example, I would write this as:

1/[(x + a)(x + b)] = A/(x + a) + B/(x + b) where A is not a and B is not b, necessarily, as they could be equal, but they are not meant to be the same value. The right hand side of this equation is what you want your equation to look like as it is far easier to integrate than one with the product of two terms each having the variable of integration within those terms in the denominator. So to solve for A and B you multiply each side by the denominator on the left hand side to get:

1 = A(x + b) + B(x + a), now let x = -b
1 = A(-b + b) + B(-b + a)
1 = B(a - b)
B = 1/(a - b) and a and b are both constants, so that worked well. Now let's do the opposite so we can find A. We have to let x = -a and we get:

1 = A(-a + b) + B(-a + a)
1 = A(b - a)
A = -1/(a - b) a and b are still constants, so all is still well. Now let's set the original fraction equal to what we found.

1/[(x + a)(x + b)] = [(-1/(a - b))/(x + a)] + [(1/(a - b))/(x + b)]

Using partial fractions is what you need to do to the equation below (derived from above, and I don't mean from God, but further back in this reply) in order to separate the terms in the denominator on the left hand side so that you can integrate each side and solve for t.

When you get done you will have a k and an m term in there you need to get rid of, but you can because you know that V2 = mg/k, so you can plug that in and get rid of everything except V,g and the natural log of that fraction involving the velocity, v.

dv/[(V +v)(V - v)] = (k/m)dt

So this is where I leave you. Try using partial fractions to separate the left hand side into two different fractions with only one v term in each denominator, you can basically just do what I did with the partial fractions, integrate, re-arrange a little and get rid of the k and m that will still be there when you are done by using V2 = mg/k and solve for t and that should give you the same thing that you need to prove is true.

You also need to know some common (and by common I mean well known ones, not a base 10 log, although the same operations apply to both the common and natural log) log operations in order to combine stuff after integrating, like the ln(a) - ln(b) = ln(a/b).

Hopefully I have given you enough that you can take it from here and solve the proof on your own and also I hope I haven't given you too much of the procedure so that it is as easy as simply performing a couple of easy steps and you have the proof.

If what I did is something you haven't seen before, yet you understand what I have shown you, then you have learned something new, and that's always a good thing. Now just take it to its conclusion and solve for the proof.

Good luck and many smiles,
Craig :smile:
 
Thanks for the detailed answer
 
Thread 'Correct statement about size of wire to produce larger extension'
The answer is (B) but I don't really understand why. Based on formula of Young Modulus: $$x=\frac{FL}{AE}$$ The second wire made of the same material so it means they have same Young Modulus. Larger extension means larger value of ##x## so to get larger value of ##x## we can increase ##F## and ##L## and decrease ##A## I am not sure whether there is change in ##F## for first and second wire so I will just assume ##F## does not change. It leaves (B) and (C) as possible options so why is (C)...

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
2K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
2K
  • · Replies 42 ·
2
Replies
42
Views
6K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
1K
  • · Replies 32 ·
2
Replies
32
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K