Active force of spring on mass (D'alemberts)

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter buildingblocs
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Force Mass Spring
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the implications of eliminating a mass (m1 = 0) from a system involving a spring and its effect on the active forces and equations of motion. Participants explore the theoretical aspects of D'Alembert's principle in this context, considering both the mechanics of the spring and the resulting equations of motion.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant questions how the active force from the spring affects the remaining equations of motion when mass m1 is eliminated, noting that the active force on m1 does not include m1 in its expression.
  • Another participant points out that while the force of the spring does not depend on the mass, the equations of motion are affected by mass, emphasizing that setting mass to zero may lead to non-physical results.
  • A participant provides equations of motion for the system with two masses and discusses the implications of eliminating m1, leading to a simplified equation that raises questions about the correctness of the resulting dynamics.
  • One participant asserts that even if m1 is set to zero, the forces acting on r1 cannot be ignored, indicating that the mechanics still involve these forces and their interactions.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the implications of eliminating mass m1 from the system. There is no consensus on how the active forces and equations of motion should be interpreted in this scenario, indicating an unresolved debate.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the complexities of applying D'Alembert's principle when mass is set to zero, including potential oversights regarding the forces acting on the system and the assumptions made about the spring's influence.

buildingblocs
Messages
17
Reaction score
1
I am trying to understand the effect that eliminating the mass m1 (m1 = 0) has on the active forces (Fa). I have gone through a scenario where m1 is taken into consideration (refer to uploaded images). The active force on m1 is from the spring and does not have m1 in the expression (Fs1 = (l-r)k), so I did not think that there would be any change. However the set of D'alemberts reduces if m1 is eliminated, so how does active force from the spring effect the remaining equation of motion.

If more info or clearing up is required please do not hesitate to ask. Any help would be much appreciated.

Cheers.
 

Attachments

  • page1.jpg
    page1.jpg
    38.4 KB · Views: 454
  • page2.jpg
    page2.jpg
    36.2 KB · Views: 477
Physics news on Phys.org
Can you write it up there? The attachments are hard to read and their wrong orientation does not help either.

I don't understand what you want to test/show.
The force of the spring at a specific location does not depend on the mass, but the equations of motion certainly do because acceleration is force divided by mass. This also means you cannot expect a physical answer if you set the mass to zero. If you have a spring without mass attached, you still have the mass of the spring (which is often neglected).
 
Figure1.png

figure1.

In figure1, the generalised variables are q and θ, and there are two masses (mass of the spring is neglected). The active forces are Fa1 = Fspring1 (horizontal direction) and Fa2 = Fweight (vertical direction). Therefore it follows that there should be four parts for the equations of motion:
(Fa1 - m1a)∂r1/∂q + (Fa1 - m1a)∂r1/∂θ + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂q + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂θ = 0 [eq1]

this is simplified to:
(Fa1 - m1a)∂r1/∂q + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂q + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂θ = 0 [eq2]

as ∂r1/∂θ=0

My query is what happens when m1 is eliminated from the system (m1 = 0)
The is now two generalised variable and only one mass:
(Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂q + (Fa2 - m2a)∂r2/∂θ = 0
[eq3]


figure2.png

figure 2.

Now consider figure2 (Spring is removed and m1=0)
The equation of motion of system in figure2 is the same as that for eq3, where the spring was included. This intuitively does not appear correct, and I wish to understand how to take into account the effect of spring on the remaining system when m1 =0;
 
If you set m1 to zero, you cannot ignore the forces on r1 - they are still part of the mechanics. The only difference is the exact cancellation of the force from the spring and the horizontal component of the force in the beam (the experiment does not work properly with a string of course)
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 30 ·
2
Replies
30
Views
3K
  • · Replies 35 ·
2
Replies
35
Views
7K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K