What is the Amplitude of a Pendulum?

  • Thread starter Thread starter potmobius
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Amplitude Pendulum
AI Thread Summary
The amplitude of a pendulum refers to the maximum displacement from its equilibrium position. The formula for the period of a pendulum, T = 2π√(l/g), is valid only for small angles (approximately 5 degrees) due to the harmonic approximation. For larger displacements, the motion is described by a non-linear differential equation, and the period cannot be expressed using elementary functions. Instead, it involves elliptic integrals, which can be approximated using series expansions for small but non-negligible amplitudes. Ultimately, the period of a pendulum is influenced by its amplitude, and exact solutions are complex even for simple configurations.
potmobius
Messages
48
Reaction score
0
How can one determine the amplitude, frequency and period of an amplitude? this is not homework, i was just curious, because i knew how to find the time using the 2 pi sqrt(l/g), but wanted to know about this, since i am learning about waves and harmonic motion! Help would be appreciated. Thanks!





P.S. this is my first time using physics forums, so tell me if i should change the way i ask a question or if i made any kind of mistake :P
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Determine as in measure? Or as in calculate using Newton's laws?
 
The 2\pi \sqrt{\frac{l}{g}} formula is only good for small amplitude displacements around 5 degrees, this is the harmonic approximation.

Lets look how we get this. Newton says, for the tangential component:

ml\ddot \varphi = - mg\sin\varphi

Where \varphi is the angle between the vertical and the string of the pendulum.

So the equation of motion for the pendulum:

\ddot\varphi = -\frac{g}{l}\sin\varphi

Now as we see this is a non-linear differential equation. For small displacements (i.e. small angles) that is:
\sin\varphi \approx \varphi

So:

\ddot\varphi = -\frac{g}{l}\varphi

As we see this equation describes simple harmonic motion, and we can extract the frequency of oscillations:

\omega^2=\frac{g}{l} \Longrightarrow T=\frac{2\pi}{\omega}=2\pi\sqrt{\frac{l}{g}}

So we obtained the formula for small displacements of the pendulum, and we can see that it (of course) doesn't depend on the amplitude...

Now if the displacements arent small we cannot approximate the sine like we did.

In this case after integrating the equation once and some manipulation, we obtain for the period:

T(\varphi_0)=4\sqrt{\frac{l}{g}}\int_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}} \frac{d\psi}{\sqrt{1-k^2\sin^2\psi}}

Where k=\sin\left(\frac{\varphi_0}{2}\right) Here \varphi_0 is the amplitude(maximum displacement) of the pendulum.

As we see this is an elliptic integral of the first kind. So the period of the pendulum at arbitrary amplitudes cannot be given using elementary functions.
We can however use a series approximation for the elliptic integral. Using this we get:

T(\varphi_0)=2\pi\sqrt{\frac{l}{g}}\sum_{n=0}^{\infty}\left[\frac{(2n-1)!}{(2n)!}\sin^n\frac{\varphi_0}{2}\right]

If the amplitude is still small but not that big, then we can further approximate the sines (now I do it upto fourth order of the amplitude):

T(\varphi_0)=2\pi\sqrt{\frac{l}{g}}\left[1+\frac{1}{16}\varphi_0^2+\frac{11}{3072}\varphi_0^4 +\dots\right]

So we can conclude that, we can't get an exact solution even for such trivial and simple configurations...
 
Hi there, im studying nanoscience at the university in Basel. Today I looked at the topic of intertial and non-inertial reference frames and the existence of fictitious forces. I understand that you call forces real in physics if they appear in interplay. Meaning that a force is real when there is the "actio" partner to the "reactio" partner. If this condition is not satisfied the force is not real. I also understand that if you specifically look at non-inertial reference frames you can...
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...
Back
Top