Are These Projectile Formulas Effective for Calculating Object Trajectories?

  • Thread starter Thread starter Radiatedtheory18
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Formula Projectile
AI Thread Summary
The discussed projectile motion formulas effectively calculate the trajectory of objects like bullets, considering both horizontal and vertical motion. The horizontal motion formula, x2 = x1 + Vx1t, describes constant horizontal velocity, while the vertical motion formula, Y2 = Y1 + Vy1t - 0.5gt^2, accounts for gravity's effect on vertical motion. The angle of launch can be determined using the arctangent of the vertical and horizontal velocities, and absolute velocity is calculated using the Pythagorean theorem. However, these formulas assume an idealized scenario, neglecting factors like air resistance and environmental conditions. Overall, while the formulas are foundational for understanding projectile motion, practical applications require consideration of additional variables.
Radiatedtheory18
i found these 2 formulas on a website and it says these are projectile motion formulas both horizontal motion and vertical motion.

HORIZONTAL MOTION
x2 = x1 + Vx1t


VERTICAL MOTION
Y2 = Y1+ Vy1t - 0.5gt2

in terms of physics do these formulas work out things that are fired from e.g. a gun etc.? i was thinking that are these formulas to work out the angle and velocity of the moving object?

any help would be apprecated
 
Physics news on Phys.org
These are the formulas to determine position (x2,y2) as a function of initial position (x1,y1), initial velocity (Vx,Vy), time (t), and gravity (g).

The angle the thing is launched at is just atan(Vy/Vx).
 
Yes they do. But only if you neglect for friction.
As for velocity:
Velocity in x: Vx = dX2/dt
Velocity in y: Vy = dY2/dt
Absolute velocity: V = sqrt(Vx^2 + Vy^2)
As for angle (WRT x-axis):
tan (alpha) = Vy/Vx.
 
Whoa arcnets! Going differential equations style! Slick Maybe I might understand the calculus of kinematics better after this semester.Anyway:

The horizontal component of the projectile is constant in this idealized situation. The vertical component changes due the acceleration of gravity, and its horizontal position is exactly analogous to an object thrown directly up at with velocity Vy1 from an initial height y1. Like arcnets said ,the total initial V is (Vx^2+Vy^2)^.5 and theta initial equals arctan(Vy1/Vy2x).Think of the components forming the two perpendicular sides of a right triangle with hypotenuse V total making angle theta with the horizontal. A convenient way of expressing these two equations and the ones you provided:

HORIZONTAL MOTION
x2 = x1 + Vx1t = x(t) =x1 + cos(theta)+Vx1t

and

VERTICAL MOTION
Y2 = Y1+ Vy1t - 0.5gt2 = y(t) =y1 +sinVy1 - 0.5gt^2


These idealized equations are the foundation, but in practical applications such as missle deployment, factors such as wind, air density, temperature are to greate to be ignored.


 
All projectile equations are derived from fact that projectile is in free fall, so its acceleration is always a=g.

Integrate this equation over time once: v(t)=gt+v0, twice: r(t)=gt^2/2+v0t+r0

Projecting vectors in xyz directions yeilds all projectile equations in component form.
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top