Optimizing the Launch of a Projectile to Hit a Target
Carl E. Mungan
Citation: The Physics Teacher 55, 528 (2017);
View online: https://doi.org/10.1119/1.5011825
View Table of Contents: http://aapt.scitation.org/toc/pte/55/9
Published by the American Association of Physics Teachers
Optimizing the Launch of a Projectile to
Hit a Target
Carl E. Mungan, U.S. Naval Academy, Annapolis MD
S
ome teenagers are exploring the outer perimeter of
a castle. They notice a spy hole in its wall, across the
moat a horizontal distance x and vertically up the wall
a distance y. They decide to throw pebbles at the hole. One
girl wants to use physics to throw with the minimum speed
necessary to hit the hole. What is the required launch speed v
r
y
and launch angle above the horizontal?
The situation is sketched in Fig. 1, where x and y are mea-
v θ φ
sured from the launch point near the girl’s right shoulder.
Standard kinematics for projectile motion imply that the
flight time is x
(1)
Fig. 1. Trajectory of a stone launched with optimal speed v and
and angle such that it passes through a hole located at rectangular
(2) coordinates (x,y) relative to the launch point. In polar coordinates
the hole is located at (r, ).
where g = 9.8 m/s2 is Earth’s surface free-fall acceleration.
(Air resistance is assumed negligible.) Substituting Eq. (1)
ly = 45o and which are the familiar formulas for
into (2) and rearranging leads to
maximum range) and for x = 0 (namely = 90o and
(3) corresponding to a vertical throw). As a realistic example, if
x = y = 10 m, then = 67.5o and v < 15.4 m/s = 34.3 mph.
Intuitively, minimizing v with respect to for fixed x and
where tan = y/x from Fig. 1. Take the derivative of Eq. (3)
y should be equivalent to maximizing x with respect to for
with respect to the launch angle and set it equal to zero to
fixed y and v. To prove it, solve Eq. (7) for r, square the result
minimize the launch speed. As shown in the online appen-
and equate it to x2 + y2, and then isolate x to get
dix,1 the result simplifies to the quadratic equation
tan2 – 2 tan tan – 1 = 0, (4) (8)
whose positive root is
This formula indeed gives the maximum range of a pro-
tan = tan + sec . (5) jectile launched from height h = –y relative to the final level.3
As further shown in the appendix, this equation has the It can alternatively be written in the compact form x = v2ave/g,
simple solution2 where vave is the geometric average of the initial speed v
and the final speed (v2 –2gy)1/2 from energy conservation.
= 45o + /2 . (6) Equation (8) could be used to find the maximum horizontal
Operationally, the girl could determine this optimal distance a basketball player could be away from the hoop
launch angle as follows. Holding the stone in her right hand, and hope to score if the ball is thrown with a given speed. As
point her left arm directly at the hole in the wall. Next bring shown in the appendix, the final vertical velocity component
her right arm upward until it points perpendicular to her left is
arm. Then slightly rotate her left arm upward until it bisects (9)
the angle between the ground and her right arm. She can then
release her right arm from its position, while her left arm is which is negative, and thus the ball will fall into the hoop. For
held fixed as the bore line along which the stone in her right all positive values of x and y, the projectile passes the vertex
hand must be thrown. of its parabolic path before it reaches the target, as sketched in
Substituting Eq. (5) into (3), the appendix shows that the Fig. 1.
minimum launch speed is To experimentally verify these concepts, a PASCO Mini
(7) Launcher4 was used to project a standard 16-mm diameter
steel solid ball. The long-range “third click” trigger setting was
where r = (x2 + y2)1/2 is the distance from the launch point of used at a launch angle of = 35.0o 0.5o above the horizon-
the stone to the hole in the wall, as shown in Fig. 1. Equations tal. The launch speed v is simply related to the range R mea-
(6) and (7) have the expected limiting forms for y = 0 (name- sured at a final height equal to the launch height marked on
528 The Physics Teacher ◆ Vol. 55, December 2017 DOI: 10.1119/1.5011825
the muzzle of the launcher. The range for about 10 trials was
Look What’s in
found to be R = 2.36 0.02 m, where the uncertainty includes
both the repeatability of the result and the measurement error
in the distance. Consistent with that uncertainty in range, the
target used was a 4-cm diameter plastic cup held in the clamp
of a ring stand. The clamp was raised until the rim of the cup
was at a vertical height of h = 30.8 0.2 cm above the launch The Physics Store!
mark. As shown in the appendix, the cup then needs to be po-
sitioned a horizontal distance D away from the launch mark
Preconceptions
on the muzzle given by
(10)
which works out to be 1.78 0.04 m. The ring stand was
moved along the floor to center the cup at that distance from
in Mechanics
the launcher, and the ball was found to consistently fall into This second edition of Charles Camp and John J.
it. However, it would bounce out of the 3-cm deep cup. To
Clement’s book contains a set of 24 innovative lessons
prevent that from happening, the bottom of the cup was cut
off, and the ball would then pass through it. Reproducing this and laboratories in mechanics for high school physics
kind of setup could be a fun challenge for introductory stu- classrooms that was developed by a team of teachers
dents to perform in lab. and science education researchers. Research has shown
that certain student preconceptions conict with current
References physical theories and seem to resist change when using
1. See the “Supplemental” tab at TPT Online, http://dx.doi.
org/10.1119/1.5011825, for the appendix. traditional instructional techniques. This book provides
2. Compare to Eq. (1) in H. Van Dael and H. Bert, “Range of a a set of lessons that are aimed specically at these
projectile,” Am. J. Phys. 47, 466–467 (May 1979) and to Eq. (21) particularly troublesome areas: Normal Forces, Friction,
in R. A. Brown, “Maximizing the range of a projectile,” Phys. Newton’s Third Law, Relative Motion, Gravity, Inertia, and
Teach. 30, 344–347 (Sept. 1992).
3. See Eq. (4) in W. S. Porter, “The range of a projectile,” Phys.
Tension. The lessons can be used to supplement any course
Teach. 15, 358 (Sept. 1977); Eq. (9) in D. B. Lichtenberg and J. that includes mechanics. Each unit contains detailed
G. Wills, “Maximizing the range of the shot put,” Am. J. Phys. step-by-step lesson plans, homework and test problems,
46, 546–549 (May 1978); Eq. (5) in S. K. Bose, “Maximizing as well as background information on common student
the range of the shot put without calculus,” Am. J. Phys. 51,
458–459 (May 1983); and Eq. (6) in B. Bušić, “A simple solution misconceptions, an overall integrated teaching strategy,
for maximum range of projectile motion,” Phys. Teach. 51, 52 and key aspects of the targeted core concepts. A CD of all
(Jan. 2013). duplication materials is included.
4. https://www.pasco.com/prodCatalog/ME/ME-6825_
mini-launcher/.
Members: $28
Non-Members: $30
Carl Mungan is a professor of physics experiencing the triumphs and frustra-
tions of his two children making the transition to college.
U.S. Naval Academy, Department of Physics, Annapolis, MD 21402;
[email protected] Order yours now at
www.aapt.org/store
The Physics Teacher ◆ Vol. 55, December 2017 529
