Why does DataStudio compute velocity from x(t) the way it does?

  • Thread starter Thread starter damosuz
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Velocity
AI Thread Summary
DataStudio calculates velocity using a method that averages position over a larger time interval to reduce noise and improve accuracy, particularly in scenarios with non-constant acceleration. The formula v(t) = (x(t + 3Δt/2) - x(t - 3Δt/2)) / 3Δt provides a smoother estimate compared to v(t) = (x(t + Δt/2) - x(t - Δt/2)) / Δt, which could be more susceptible to fluctuations. This approach helps mitigate high-frequency jitter that can arise from sensor noise. The discussion highlights the trade-off between precision and stability in measuring velocity. Overall, the chosen method enhances the reliability of velocity calculations in dynamic systems.
damosuz
Messages
72
Reaction score
0
A motion sensor gives the position of an object at times separated by Δt. DataStudio then calculates velocity by this method:

v(t) = (x(t + 3Δt/2) - x(t - 3Δt/2)) / 3Δt

I wonder why it doesn't do it like this: v(t) = (x(t + Δt/2) - x(t - Δt/2)) / Δt

I know it gives the same v if acceleration is constant since in both cases it corresponds to average speed in the middle of the interval, but if acceleration is not constant (e.g. mass-spring) it must give a value for v that is not as accurate.

Thank you.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Maybe the velocity is averaged over multiple timesteps as a smoothing (filtering) feature. An average velocity computed using every single sample might have too much high frequency jitter due to noise.
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Kinematic equations ##\textbf{purely}## from graphs
Replies
49
Views
3K
Relationship between velocity, acceleration, and a circle?
Replies
6
Views
2K
Finding the 'g-force' of a decelerating falling mass.
Replies
1
Views
2K
How can the 0.5 in the acceleration and distance formula be explained?
Replies
6
Views
6K
Velocity change under drag and other forces: small mass, large delta-t
Replies
3
Views
2K
Visualizing the SHM of 2 blocks attached by a spring
Replies
2
Views
2K
The order of calculating velocity and position alters the solution?
Replies
31
Views
3K
Why Does My Ball Trajectory Simulation Show Only Positive Vertical Velocities?
Replies
3
Views
2K
B In uniform acceleration, mean velocity ##\bar v = \frac{v_0+v}{2}##?
Replies
23
Views
3K
I Non-Newtonian description of an accelerated object
Replies
8
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top