What is the maximum height reached by an object with air resistance?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the maximum height reached by an object projected vertically into the air while considering air resistance. Participants explore various mathematical approaches to solve the differential equations governing the motion, including both analytical and numerical methods.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents a differential equation for motion with air resistance and attempts to derive the maximum height but encounters issues with integration.
  • Another participant suggests that there may be a problem with units in the presented formulas.
  • A different viewpoint is raised questioning whether the problem can be solved analytically, proposing that it might only be solvable numerically.
  • One participant provides an alternative method using separation of variables, leading to a different expression for the velocity function.
  • Another participant acknowledges a mistake in their previous calculations and corrects the expression for the velocity function, leading to a negative height result.
  • Concerns are raised about the logarithmic function yielding negative values, prompting discussions about the properties of cosine and secant in the context of the problem.
  • Further corrections are suggested regarding missing square roots and the manipulation of logarithmic expressions, which could affect the sign of the final result.
  • One participant proposes a shorter formulation for the problem, emphasizing a different approach to the equations of motion.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing opinions on the validity of the methods used to derive the maximum height, with no consensus reached on the correct approach or final result. Multiple competing views remain regarding the analytical versus numerical solutions and the handling of mathematical expressions.

Contextual Notes

Participants note potential issues with unit consistency, the correctness of antiderivatives, and the implications of logarithmic and trigonometric identities in their calculations. These limitations contribute to the ongoing uncertainty in the discussion.

nos
Messages
40
Reaction score
0
Hello everyone,

I was playing around with some equations regarding air resistance. I tried to calculate the height that is reached by an object that is projected vertically into the air. However something seems to go wrong when integrating.

Starting with the equation of motion
\begin{align*}
m\frac{dv}{dt}=-mg-kv^2.
\end{align*}
Setting \begin{align*}a=\sqrt{\frac{km}{g}},\\
v(0)=v_0.
\end{align*}
Then the solution to this differential equation is
\begin{align*}
v(t)=\frac{\tan{(\arctan{(av_0)}-gt})}{a}.
\end{align*}
Then the time it take to slow the object to a standstill(where it reaches maximum height) is
\begin{align*}
t_{end}=\frac{\arctan{(av_0)}}{g}.
\end{align*}

So the distance traveled in this time can be found by integrating the velocity function over this time.

\begin{align*}
h&=\int_0^{t_{end}}\frac{\tan{(\arctan{(av_0)}-gt})}{a}dt\\
&=\frac{1}{ga}(\ln{\cos{(arctan{(av_0)}-gt_{end})}}-\ln{\cos{(\arctan{(av_0)}}}.
\end{align*}
I did not even bother going through with it, it's going to come out negative.

I'm not actually sure this is the right antiderivative. Or maybe I lost a minus sign somewhere. I can't spot it.
Thanks :)
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Something went wrong with units, the formulas cannot be right.
 
How are you sure that you can solve this analytically? I think it can only be solved numerically. I could be wrong though.
 
It's solvable by separation of constants:
$$-\frac{m}{mg+k v^2} \mathrm{d} v=\mathrm{d} t.$$
Because we have
$$\int \mathrm{d} v \frac{m}{mg+k v^2} =\frac{1}{g} \int \mathrm{d} v \frac{1}{1+(\sqrt{k/(mg)} v)^2} = \sqrt{\frac{m}{gk}} \arctan \left (\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}} v \right),$$
we get
$$\sqrt{\frac{m}{gk}} \left [\arctan \left (\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}} v \right)-\arctan \left (\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}} v_0 \right) \right]=-t.$$
This gives you ##v(t)##. Integrating once more gives ##h(t)##.
 
This is the correct answer for the velocity function. I realized I missed a constant and instead \begin{align*}
a=\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}}\end{align*}

So \begin{align*}
v(t)=\sqrt{\frac{mg}{k}}\tan{\Big[\arctan{\Big(\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}}v_0\Big)}-\sqrt{\frac{gk}{m}}t\Big]}
\end{align*}
Integrating this
\begin{align*}
h&=\sqrt{\frac{mg}{k}}\int_0^{t_{end}} \tan{\Big[\arctan{\Big(\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}}v_0\Big)}-\sqrt{\frac{gk}{m}}t\Big]}dt\\
&=\frac{m}{k}\Big[\ln{\cos{0}}-\ln{\cos{\Big(\arctan{\big(\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}}v_0\big)}\Big)}}\Big]\\
&=-\ln{\Big(\sqrt{1+\frac{k}{mg}v_0^2}\Big)}.
\end{align*}

This will give me a negative height, which is impossible.
 
Last edited:
The cosine of something cannot exceed 1, so the logarithm of it has to be negative or zero. The second last line is always zero or positive, not sure what happened afterwards.
 
Oh right thanks, so the second last line is positive. I tried to simplify the answer a bit more and this is where I think made a mistake.
Imagine a triangle with angle θ.
\begin{align*}
\theta=\arctan{\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}}v_0}
\end{align*}
Then the opposite and adjacent sides are
\begin{align*}
O&=\sqrt{\frac{k}{mg}}v_0\\
A&=1
\end{align*}
Then the cosine of this configuration must be \begin{equation*}\cos{\theta}= \frac{\sqrt{1+\frac{k}{mg}v_o^2}}{1}\end{equation*}

Edit: I see this is the secant and not cosine haha, so that will account for the minus sign :) thanks for replying
 
In the last equation there is a square root missing and you have to swap numerator and denominator. Taken out of the log that gives a factor -1/2 which makes the result positive.
 
the formulas could be much shorter

Let ##s## be the path, ##\dot s=v##. Then equation
nos said:
mdvdt=−mg−kv2.​
takes the form
##m\frac{dv}{ds}v=-mg-kv^2## and
separating variables we get
$$s-s_0=\int_{v_0}^0\frac{mvdv}{-mg-kv^2}=-\frac{m}{2k}\ln(mg+kv^2)\Big|_{v_0}^0$$
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71, nasu and Delta2

Similar threads

  • · Replies 0 ·
Replies
0
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 21 ·
Replies
21
Views
1K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
1K