Finding (Eq. 2) from (Eq. 3): A Simple Guide

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter DivGradCurl
  • Start date Start date
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the derivation of the equation for damped simple harmonic motion (SHM), specifically how to obtain Equation 2 from Equation 3. Participants explore the implications of different forms of the solution to a second-order linear differential equation related to damped SHM.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant notes that the general solution to a second-order linear differential equation typically consists of two solutions, suggesting that the textbook's simplification may overlook the distinct amplitudes of the components.
  • Another participant questions whether specific phase values should be assigned to obtain Equation 2 from Equation 3.
  • A participant emphasizes the importance of initial conditions in determining the specific solution, indicating that the general solution can vary based on these conditions.
  • Discussion includes the possibility of both real and imaginary solutions, depending on the initial conditions and the method used to solve the differential equation.
  • One participant provides a detailed derivation showing how to equate the two forms of the solution, leading to equations involving the amplitudes and phases.
  • Subsequent replies highlight potential errors in the derivation, particularly regarding signs and the formulation of certain equations, prompting further clarification and corrections.
  • Another participant expresses confusion over the derivation of a specific expression, indicating that the signs in the equations can be misleading.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

The discussion reveals multiple competing views regarding the derivation process and the significance of initial conditions. Participants do not reach a consensus on the correct approach or the validity of certain expressions.

Contextual Notes

Participants mention the need for initial conditions to fully specify the solution, and there are unresolved issues regarding the correctness of certain mathematical expressions and their derivations.

DivGradCurl
Messages
364
Reaction score
0
Hello everybody...

In my school textbook, I have the following explanation to Damped SHM:

[tex]\hline[/tex]
Soving the differential equation:

[tex]m \frac{d^2x}{dt^2}+\gamma m \frac{dx}{dt}+m\omega _0 ^2x = 0[/tex] (Eq. 1)

gives

[tex]x(t)=x_{m}e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left( \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi \right),[/tex] (Eq. 2)

where:

[tex]\gamma = \frac{b}{m}[/tex]
and
[tex]\omega _{\gamma}=\sqrt{\omega _0 ^2 - \frac{b^2}{4m^2}}[/tex]
and
[tex]\omega _0 = \sqrt{\frac{k}{m}}.[/tex]

[tex]\hline[/tex]

It goes as simply as that. However, I've read on the web that this is an under damped SHM, and that the answer really goes like this:

[tex]\hline[/tex]

[tex]x(t)=Ae^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left( \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi _1 \right)+Be^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left(- \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi _2 \right)[/tex] (Eq. 3)

[tex]\hline[/tex]

My question is: How do I go about finding (Eq. 2) out of (Eq. 3). Is there any special trick?

Thank you very much. :smile:
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Generally, a second order linear differential equation will have two solutions and the particular solution will be a linear superposition of the two. I think the author of your text was just being a little lazy and took both components to have the same amplitude.
 
What about the phase? Shall also I set [tex]\phi _1 = \phi[/tex] and [tex]\phi _2 = \frac{\pi}{2}[/tex] in order to get Eq. 2?

Thanks
 
You have not fully specified the problem. Where are, and what are, the initial conditions? The first solution may result in applying the initial conditions, while the second is the full general solution with no initial conditions applied.
 
Besides, you can have real solutions as well as imaginary solutions. it depends on the initial conditions and ofcourse you must also know the algorithm for solving second order differential equations. You can have a solution of the form exp(iAt) where A is a constant. But Euler's rule states that this is equal to cos(At) + isin(At). Now in differential equations You also need to implement constants that can be determined by using the initial conditions. A general solution would be of the form : Bcos(At) + Csin(At)

So basically all depends on the given initial conditions. I just wanted to give some general possibilities concerning solutions of the diff.equation...

regards
marlon
 
If you want to see how it is done completely, let me know...

regards
marlon
 
thiago_j said:
[tex]x(t)=x_{m}e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left( \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi \right),[/tex] (Eq. 2)


It goes as simply as that. However, I've read on the web that this is an under damped SHM, and that the answer really goes like this:


[tex]x(t)=Ae^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left( \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi _1 \right)+Be^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left(- \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi _2 \right)[/tex] (Eq. 3)



My question is: How do I go about finding (Eq. 2) out of (Eq. 3). Is there any special trick?


Yes. You can find the parameters of eq. 2 from those in eq. 3.

[tex]x_{m}e^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left( \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi \right)=Ae^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left( \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi _1 \right)+Be^{-\frac{\gamma}{2}t}\cos \left(- \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi _2 \right)[/tex]

[tex]x_m\cos \left( \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi \right)=A\cos \left( \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi _1 \right)+B\cos \left(- \omega _{\gamma}t + \phi _2 \right)[/tex]

[tex]x_m\cos( \omega _{\gamma}t)cos(\phi )-x_m\sin( \omega _{\gamma}t)sin(\phi)=A[cos (\omega _{\gamma}t)cos(\phi_1)-sin( \omega _{\gamma}t)sin(\phi1)]+B[cos( \omega _{\gamma}t)cos(\phi_2)+sin( \omega _{\gamma}t)sin(\phi_2)][/tex]

[tex]cos( \omega _{\gamma}t)[x_mcos(\phi)-Acos(\phi_1)-Bcos(\phi_2)]-sin( \omega _{\gamma}t)[x_msin(\phi)+Asin(\phi_1)-Bsin(\phi_2)]=0[/tex]

The equation can hold for every value of t only if the coefficients of both terms [tex]cos( \omega _{\gamma}t)\mbox { and }sin( \omega _{\gamma}t)[/tex] are zero.

[tex]x_mcos(\phi)=Acos(\phi_1)+Bcos(\phi_2)[/tex]
[tex]x_msin(\phi)=Asin(\phi_1)-Bsin(\phi_2)[/tex]

Solving these equations, we get

[tex]x_m^2= A^2+B^2+2ABcos(\phi_1-\phi_2)[/tex]
[tex]tan(\phi)=\frac{Asin(\phi_1)-Bsin(\phi_2)}{Acos(\phi_1)+Bcos(\phi_2)}[/tex]

I hope I haven't made too many mistakes in the derivations...


ehild
 
Well, I guess [tex]x_msin(\phi)=Asin(\phi_1)-Bsin(\phi_2)[/tex] should actually be [tex]x_msin(\phi)=-Asin(\phi_1)+Bsin(\phi_2)[/tex].

To be honest, I just could not understand how you found the expression: [tex]x_m^2= A^2+B^2+2ABcos(\phi_1-\phi_2)[/tex]. Anyway, great job!
 
thiago_j said:
Well, I guess [tex]x_msin(\phi)=Asin(\phi_1)-Bsin(\phi_2)[/tex] should actually be [tex]x_msin(\phi)=-Asin(\phi_1)+Bsin(\phi_2)[/tex].

To be honest, I just could not understand how you found the expression: [tex]x_m^2= A^2+B^2+2ABcos(\phi_1-\phi_2)[/tex].

You are right, the signs are very confusing, especially if I have to write in TEX... :smile:
The error was in the formula

[tex]cos( \omega _{\gamma}t)[x_mcos(\phi)-Acos(\phi_1)-Bcos(\phi_2)]-sin( \omega _{\gamma}t)[x_msin(\phi)-Asin(\phi_1)+Bsin(\phi_2)]=0[/tex]

I hope it is correct now, (but one never can be sure about signs) so

[tex]x_msin(\phi)=Asin(\phi_1)-Bsin(\phi_2)[/tex]

is all right, but there is an other error in [tex]x_m^2[/tex]. The correct form is

[tex]x_m^2= A^2+B^2+2ABcos(\phi_1+\phi_2)[/tex].

You can get it by taking the square of both equations

[tex]x_mcos(\phi)=Acos(\phi_1)+Bcos(\phi_2)[/tex]

and

[tex]x_msin(\phi)=Asin(\phi_1)-Bsin(\phi_2)[/tex]

summing up the squared equations, collecting terms with [tex]A^2 \mbox{, } B^2 \mbox{ and } 2AB[/tex] and using the trigonometric identities [tex]cos^2(\alpha)+sin^2(\alpha)=1[/tex] and [tex]cos(\alpha +\beta) = cos(\alpha)cos(\beta)-sin(\alpha)sin(\beta)[/tex]. You can use the same method any time when you want to replace the sum or difference of two harmonic motions(signals) of the same frequency with a single one. (You will bump into it when you learn about ac circuits or about interference of waves.)

ehild
 
  • #10
I get it

Thank you, ehild. That works!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
4K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K