Solving an Integration Error with Acceleration Data

  • Thread starter Thread starter mark2468
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Error Integration
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a set of acceleration data and the subsequent calculations of velocity and distance through integration. The original poster expresses concern about discrepancies in the calculated distance, which should return to zero, indicating a potential error in the integration method used.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Assumption checking, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the integration method and question the accuracy of the velocity values derived from the acceleration data. There are inquiries about the inclusion of time intervals and how they affect the calculations. Suggestions for alternative methods, such as using the Runge-Kutta method, are mentioned, along with discussions on averaging velocities for displacement calculations.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants providing insights into the relationship between acceleration, velocity, and displacement. Some guidance has been offered regarding the calculation of displacement using average velocity, but there is no consensus on the best approach yet.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working with a fixed time interval of 0.333 seconds, and there are questions about the units of acceleration and the implications for the velocity calculations. The original poster seeks clarification on how to synchronize the data effectively.

mark2468
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hi.

I have a set of data representing acceleration. To get the distance I integrate twice using a summation method and looks like:

accelleration: 0, 40, 30, -50,-80, -40.
velocity: 0, 40, 70, 20, -60, -100.
distance: 0, 40, 110, 130, 70, -30.

The distance should be zero as the movement goes back to the original point so there clearly is an error. Is there a better way to get the distance. I have heard runge kutta is good for this sort of stuff but am not sure where and how to put the data in. Any suggestions to how i can sort out this error.

Thanks.

Mark.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
mark2468 said:
Hi.

I have a set of data representing acceleration. To get the distance I integrate twice using a summation method and looks like:

accelleration: 0, 40, 30, -50,-80, -40.
velocity: 0, 40, 70, 20, -60, -100.
distance: 0, 40, 110, 130, 70, -30.

The distance should be zero as the movement goes back to the original point so there clearly is an error. Is there a better way to get the distance. I have heard runge kutta is good for this sort of stuff but am not sure where and how to put the data in. Any suggestions to how i can sort out this error.

Thanks.

Mark.

Can you include time information in your dataset? What are the time intervals?
 
time intervals are 0.333 seconds.
 
mark2468 said:
time intervals are 0.333 seconds.

If your acceleration is 40m/s^2 for 1/3 of a second, you are not going 40m/s at the end of that time interval...
 
mark2468 said:
time intervals are 0.333 seconds.
And is the acceleration in units per second^2? If so, haven't you got the wrong values for velocity, as the time intervals were less than a second?

EDIT: missed berkeman's post, sorry
 
Apart from the length of the time interval, the displacement during a time interval Δt is the average velocity multiplied by Δt. In the first interval it is 20 (Δt)2, and the total displacement is the sum of all the individual displacements.

ehild
 
So what is the best way to synchronise them. Is there a formula or just divide by that ammout. e.g. 40/3, 30/3 etc or whatever the sample interval is. Any links with examples of this available?

Thanks again.
 
Assuming constant acceleration during a time interval Δt, the displacement during Δt is

d=(v(initial)+v(final))/2 *Δt.

ehild
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
4K
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
8K
  • · Replies 41 ·
2
Replies
41
Views
7K