## Questions about 'Jerk'

For the discussion of the sciences. Physics problems, chemistry equations, biology weirdness, it all goes here.

Moderators: gmalivuk, Moderators General, Prelates

ecshafer
Posts: 63
Joined: Mon Aug 18, 2008 4:23 am UTC

### Questions about 'Jerk'

First sorry for the math equations, i don't know TeX.

Okay, the basic equations of motion are driving me nuts. I know the basics of Sf=Si+Vi(t)+1/2a(t)^2 but that works for constant acceleration. where Sf is final position, Si is initial position, Vi is initial velocity, t is time, and a is acceleration.

Is what I am wondering is what is the basic equations for mechanics with a non zero jerk?

since jerk is da/dt it would have to be J (if J symbol for jerk, i know its already impulse) Jt^3 so the units would end up as meters. and from calculus im thinking it would be 1/6J(t)^3, so the acceleration would be 1/2a(t)^2.

But if I put this in all I can come up with would be Sf=Si+Vi(t)+1/2ai(t)^2+1/6J(t)^3, where ai is initial acceleration, so when I take the derivative ill end up eventually getting J=J. since 3rd derivative of s needs to be j, 2nd a, and 1st v. by definition.

So am I getting this correct, or am I missing something? What is the correct equation if anyone knows it. This is all I can come up with, without doing a differential equation or something, and I am not really sure how I would make it. I can not find this equation anywhere online, I cant google and find anything past basic physics 1 mechanics. thanks for any help

danpilon54
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:10 am UTC

### Re: Questions about 'Jerk'

There are only 1 set of equations for constant acceleration. There is an infinite number of possible accelerations. The way to get the equations of motion is by integrating acceleration to get velocity, and then integrating velocity to get position.
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:Well, I killed a homeless man. We can't all be good people.

Sir_Elderberry
Posts: 4206
Joined: Tue Dec 04, 2007 6:50 pm UTC
Location: Sector ZZ9 Plural Z Alpha
Contact:

### Re: Questions about 'Jerk'

Your equations seem right to me, I just did the integrating.
http://www.geekyhumanist.blogspot.com -- Science and the Concerned Voter
Belial wrote:You are the coolest guy that ever cooled.

I reiterate. Coolest. Guy.

Well. You heard him.

danpilon54
Posts: 322
Joined: Fri Jul 20, 2007 12:10 am UTC

### Re: Questions about 'Jerk'

O whoops I didn't see that you assumed a constant jerk.

As a side note, I just noticed if you keep doing this you get a Taylor series, and that method is a good way to derive the Taylor series. (This may be the only way to derive it but I always forget how it was taught in class).
Mighty Jalapeno wrote:Well, I killed a homeless man. We can't all be good people.

LaserGuy
Posts: 4582
Joined: Thu Jan 15, 2009 5:33 pm UTC

### Re: Questions about 'Jerk'

ecshafer wrote:First sorry for the math equations, i don't know TeX.

Okay, the basic equations of motion are driving me nuts. I know the basics of Sf=Si+Vi(t)+1/2a(t)^2 but that works for constant acceleration. where Sf is final position, Si is initial position, Vi is initial velocity, t is time, and a is acceleration.

Is what I am wondering is what is the basic equations for mechanics with a non zero jerk?

[snip]

So am I getting this correct, or am I missing something? What is the correct equation if anyone knows it. This is all I can come up with, without doing a differential equation or something, and I am not really sure how I would make it. I can not find this equation anywhere online, I cant google and find anything past basic physics 1 mechanics. thanks for any help

You probably won't see this equation terribly often online, because an acceleration that varies linearly with time (eg. constant Jerk) isn't a scenario with really much physical significance, since it corresponds to an unbounded time-varying force. As an exercise in calculus, it is somewhat interesting, but there isn't terribly much physics that you will be able to get out of this. Beyond constant acceleration, we don't usually have general equations of motion like what you describe except for a few very common cases, such as the harmonic oscillator [imath]\frac{d^2 x}{dt^2} = -kx[/imath]. Otherwise, you just get the acceleration from either Newton or Lagrange for mechanics, then solve the differential equation to get x(t). In a physics setting, I've rarely seen jerks ever come up as something of interest; I think engineers may use them on occasion for one reason or other.

Alexius
Posts: 342
Joined: Mon Nov 03, 2008 4:45 pm UTC

### Re: Questions about 'Jerk'

LaserGuy wrote: In a physics setting, I've rarely seen jerks ever come up as something of interest; I think engineers may use them on occasion for one reason or other.

My maths teacher in my penultimate year of school said that they were used by roller-coaster designers. Apparently, they're important in how fun a roller-coaster is...

gmalivuk
GNU Terry Pratchett
Posts: 26767
Joined: Wed Feb 28, 2007 6:02 pm UTC
Location: Here and There
Contact:

### Re: Questions about 'Jerk'

Yeah, you want to minimize jerk for anything where comfort is concerned. But probably the parameters of whatever you're doing will give you acceleration more directly, and then you integrate that to get velocity and position, and differentiate to get jerk and higher-order quantities.
Unless stated otherwise, I do not care whether a statement, by itself, constitutes a persuasive political argument. I care whether it's true.
---
If this post has math that doesn't work for you, use TeX the World for Firefox or Chrome

(he/him/his)