What is the time to reach 98% of terminal velocity?

  • Thread starter Thread starter rockytriton
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Physics Type
AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the time required for an object to reach 98% of its terminal velocity using the differential equation dv/dt = 9.8 - (v/5). The solution for terminal velocity is found to be v = 49, leading to the equation 0.98 = 1 - e^(-t/5) for 98% of this velocity. A mistake was identified in the original calculation, where the sign was incorrect, leading to confusion about the result. The correct derivation shows that e^(-t/5) equals 1/50, which explains the appearance of "5 * ln(50)" in the book's solution. Ultimately, the correct time to reach 98% of terminal velocity is confirmed to be t = 5 * ln(50).
rockytriton
Messages
26
Reaction score
0
Ok, there's a differential equation that is:

dv/dt = 9.8 - (v/5), v(0) = 0

to represent a falling object. So the solution ends up being

v = 49(1 - e^t/5)

and the equilibrium solution (terminal velocity) is v = 49.

Now I have a problem that says "find the time that must elapse for the object to reach 98% of its limiting velocity"

To do this, I am doing the following:

terminal velocity * 98% = the equation...
49 * 0.98 = 49(1 - e^t/5)

div by 49...
0.98 = 1 - e^t/5

move 1 over and multiply both sides by -1...
1 - 0.98 = e^t/5

use ln...
ln(1 - 0.98) = t/5

mult by 5...

5 * ln(1 - 0.98) = t

so:
t = -19.56


now... in the book's solution, it states:
T = 5 * ln(50) ~= 19.56

So, where is this 50 coming from? And my answer looks to be right except for the sign, where did I go wrong?
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
It should be v = 49(1 - e^(-t/5)). Your solution has the velocity exponentially growing.
 
thanks! I knew it would be something stupid that I missed. I still don't get where they got the "5 * ln(50)" from though...
 
0.98 = 1 - e-t/5

e-t/5= 1-0.98= 0.02= 2/100= 1/50
That's where the "50" is from.

Now -t/5= ln(1/50)= -ln(50) so t= 5 ln(50).
 
Seemingly by some mathematical coincidence, a hexagon of sides 2,2,7,7, 11, and 11 can be inscribed in a circle of radius 7. The other day I saw a math problem on line, which they said came from a Polish Olympiad, where you compute the length x of the 3rd side which is the same as the radius, so that the sides of length 2,x, and 11 are inscribed on the arc of a semi-circle. The law of cosines applied twice gives the answer for x of exactly 7, but the arithmetic is so complex that the...
Back
Top