1
$\begingroup$

Consider the following non-dimensional equations of projectile motion in presence of air resistance,

enter image description here

I understand it can be numerically solved using the mid-point method, but can I also use Verlet method? Why midpoint method is more favourable in this case? Is this because the truncation error in velocity equation is of order $O(t^2)$ and $O(t^3)$ for position when midpoint method is used, which are $O(t^2)$ and $O(t^4)$ respectively when Verlet method is used? Am I thinking in the right direction?

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ Did somewhere claim that it was better to use the mid-point method, or was that just the method they chose to mention? $\endgroup$ – JMac May 23 at 20:58
  • 1
    $\begingroup$ The Verlet method is nice for mechanics problems because it conserves energy. $\endgroup$ – HiddenBabel May 23 at 21:03
  • $\begingroup$ @JMac I am reading this book called "Numerical Methods for Physics" by Alejandro L. Garcia and he mentions that mid-point method is better for projectile motion. While he didn't relate Verlet method with projectiles, he did it for pendulum. Now I am working on this assignment which asks the question why or why not Verlet method is suitable for projectiles and I couldn't find a straight answer anywhere. $\endgroup$ – Rafiul Nakib May 23 at 21:17
  • $\begingroup$ Related, if not dupe of, physics.stackexchange.com/q/239621/25301 $\endgroup$ – Kyle Kanos May 24 at 11:22
4
$\begingroup$

The reason Verlet's algorithm is less suitable than midpoint method is due to the form of the force. Verlet's algorithm requires the acceleration at time step $t+\Delta t$ in order to update velocity at time $t+\Delta t$ (I refer to the so called "velocity" form of the algorithm, although the same considerations hold for the "position" form too): $$ \begin{eqnarray} x(t+\Delta t) &=& x(t) + v(t)\Delta t +\frac12 a(t) \Delta t^2 ~~~~~~~~~~~~~~[1]\\ v(t+\Delta t) &=& v(t) + \frac12\left( a(t) + a(t+\Delta t) \right) \Delta t ~~~~~~~~[2] \end{eqnarray} $$ If the force, and then the acceleration, depends on position only, $a(t+\Delta t) $ appearing in equation $[2]$ can be explicitly evaluated from the new position evaluated at $[1]$. However, if forces and then acceleration depend on velocities, equation [2] becomes an implicit equation for the velocity $v(t+\Delta t)$. It is simple to solve such equation in the case of linear forces (linear viscous friction or magnetic Lorentz force om a charged particle) but in the case of non-linear dependence on velocity things become more complex (and in 2D or 3D, much more complex) and usually other methods become preferable.

$\endgroup$
  • $\begingroup$ So it has nothing to do with the order of error whatsoever? $\endgroup$ – Rafiul Nakib May 24 at 8:50
  • $\begingroup$ The error is the least of the problem. However, it works the other way around: Verlet's algorithm (I am referring to the velocity form) provides a reasonably good $dt^2$ global behavior for both position and velocity, therefore for energy. Midpoint formula is definitely poorer: linear decrease of the global error on velocity. Even more important, Verlets' algorithm is time-reversible and symplectic. Mid-point algorithm is neither symplectic nor time-reversible. Everything would point to Verlet's as the best choice, but velocity dependent forces don't make it explicit. $\endgroup$ – GiorgioP May 24 at 11:51

Your Answer

By clicking “Post Your Answer”, you agree to our terms of service, privacy policy and cookie policy

Not the answer you're looking for? Browse other questions tagged or ask your own question.