SOLUTIONS
Will be discussed in tutorial.
g = 9.81 m/s²,
then the body reaches terminal velocity v=V and is falling through air without accelerating or decelerating. So all those detailed properties of the object and air are conveniently contained in one single number, V (terminal velocity). In practice it ranges from ~10 m/s for small bodies that tend to have large A/M ratios, to 100 m/s or more for slender bodies with smaller A/M. You will just assume that in a given problem V is known, and use a nondimensional velocity defined as
u = v/V
Derive the equation of motion using u, g, and V. Show that in both upward and downward motion
du/dt = -(g/V) (1 + u |u|).
The free-fall starts at time t=0 with u=0 (initial conditions). Find the exact solution for u(t). Sketch it in a diagram. Use the nondimensional time on the horizontal axis: gt/V. You may use the calculator and compute a few points, to get the shape right.
Is the convergence to the terminal speed at large times exponential or algebraic? What is the time scale? Next, find the vertical distance traveled. When u < 0, 1+u|u| = 1-u². Instead of integrating v(t) = V u(t) over time to find z(t), use the following shortcut method:
dz = v dt, while
dt = -(V/g) du/(1-u²) by separating variables in the equation of motion, so
dz = -(V²/g) u du/(1-u²).
You can integrate the last ODE much more easily than dz = v(t) dt. True, you'll get z(u) not z(t), but u = u(t) is already known, so if you ever need z(t), you can get it as z(t) = z(u(t)). But you don't need z(t) in this problem. You may assume z=0 at u=t=0, for simplicity. Distance z(u) will then be negative. (If needed, the initial height can easily be redefined to be > 0).
SOLUTIONS
Formulate and integrate the equation of motion to obtain u(t), with initial condition u(t0) = u0 > 0, at some negative time t0, and final velocity equal v=0 at time t=0. These final conditions match the initial conditions of the fall (prev. problem). Sketch u(t) or, more precisely, u(gt/V).
Formulate the ODE for the distance traveled, and solve it to obtain z_max = z(u=0)=z(t=0) in terms of V, g, and u0.
Show that the maximum height of a vertical throw in air is always smaller than in vacuum (to obtain the latter, simplify your solution in the appropriate limit of u0, corresponding to very small air density and drag force). For example, how much smaller is z_max in air than in vacuum if u0 = 1 in both cases (upward initial velocity = terminal velocity)?
What comes up must come down and, in our problem, cover the same vertical distance |z| = z_max. Given some u0, what is the final nondimensional speed u, with which the body strikes the ground? Check that the final speed u satisfies |u| < u0, i.e. |v| < v0 (give a physical reason for this) and that during the descent |u| < 1 (why?).
Does the fraction u/u0 depend on anything (u0, g, V?).
Show that u/u0 is the same for all bodies thrown on all planets in
the universe, and only depends on u0= v0/V.
SOLUTIONS
Contains part of prob. 2 solution (distance traveled down)
SOLUTIONS
One (unstable) root is x=0 (for any d), and one is stable but impossible to compute analytically. Graphing the f(x) function, one can roughly estimate that the root is not far from $x=1/(1+d)$, so that can be the starting value.
Method 1. ODE can be evolved toward the stable root by some simple time-integration method like Euler method, with timestep dt. It is interesting that dt does not need to be very small. The final point is an attractor and, somewhat curiously, will be achieved independent of step, even for dt=1! That way one does need to make thousands of steps, which for any other ODE would typically be required, given that Euler method is only 1st order accuracy. With timestep dt=1, and naming the right-hand side of ODE $f(x)$, the method consists of iteration: $x_{next} = x + f(x)$. It converges very quickly, in 10-14 steps one gets double precision accuracy of 14 digits. Try dt > 1 and see what happens, though.
Method 2. A very fast method of finding zeros is Newton's method. Read about it on wiki. It will work in case of unstable fixed points (method 1 won't). We watched a clip from the movie "21" where Kevin Spacey (playing me :-) discussed the Newton-Raphson method. [BTW, it isn't necessarily true that 'Newton stole it from Raphson' (cf. movie). Newton had a formula practically of the same form as he much later published (later than Raphson, that much is true).] The method is an iteration: $x_{next} = x - f(x)/f'(x)$. It is quadratic for well behaved zeros like our, i.e. the number of accurate digits doubles(!) in every iteration. Four to five iterations suffice for 14 digit accuracy. That's really hard to beat, though there are algorithms with even faster convergence!
Program 1.3.py solves this problem numerically, using both methods Here is it's output.