Bar hanging from two springs with unequal masses

  • Thread starter Diracobama2181
  • Start date
  • Tags
    Springs
In summary, the problem involves two different masses, m1 and m2, attached to a massless rod of length l at its ends. Each mass is attached to a separate spring with a constant k, both springs extending from the same point on the ceiling. The Lagrangian for the system can be expressed using coordinates of the center of the rod, taking into account the kinetic energy of translation and rotation about the center. The potential energy can be found by considering the equilibrium positions of the masses on the springs. The parallel axis theorem must be used to find the moment of inertia about the center of the bar since it is massless.
  • #1
Diracobama2181
75
2
Suppose we have two different masses, m1m1 and m2m2 with each at the end of a massless rod of length ll, with each mass being attached to a separate spring of constant k such that both springs stem from the same point on the ceiling? What would be the Lagrangian of this system. I have tried several different approaches, but none seem to be quite right.
What I got thus far, r1=(x1,y1)(coordinate of the first mass) r2=(x2,y2) (coordinate of the second mass)
So T=(1/2)m1T=(1/2)m1((x˙1)^2+(y˙1)^2)+(1/2)m2((x˙2)^2+(y˙2)^2)
U=-mgy1-mgy2+(1/2)k((x1)^2+(y1)^2)+(1/2)k((x2)^2+(y2)^2).
From here, I get L=T-V. Is there any issues with my setup?
 

Attachments

  • 20190812_140232.jpg
    20190812_140232.jpg
    24.2 KB · Views: 282
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
Hello DIrac, :welcome: !

For this kind of problem we have an introductory physics homework forum with a decent template -- please use it.

And try ##\LaTeX## to make your expressions legible. If not, at least ue the sub/superscript buttons under ...
1565639088769.png


Questions to you:

You don't specify it's a 2D problem, but from your expressions it appears you do treat it as such, right ? Is it 2D ?

How many degrees of freedom are there (considering the constraint) ? So how many generalized coordinates ?
Diracobama2181 said:
From here, I get L=T-V.
I don't see the logic. Do you mean With L = T-U I would get the following expression ... ?

What is you zero point for U ?
 
  • #3
Yes, it is constrained to two dimensions. The problem itself seems to be a variation on a Goldstein problem. In that problem, a coordinate system can be taken with respect to the center of mass. The problem has three degrees of freedom, the center of mass of the bar in the ##x## and ##y## directions as well as an angular component about the center of mass. ##L=T-U## is the Lagrangian. I was thinking I could instead use coordinates about the center of mass, so T=##(1/2)(m_1+m_2)((\dot x)^2+(\dot y)^2)+(1/2)I(\dot \theta)^2##. However, now I seem to have trouble finding the extensions on the springs.
 
  • #4
Yes, it seems to go messy.
Perhaps try a simpler case first (identical masses & springs)

1565693508494.png


[edit] are you looking for the full langrangian or one for small deviations from equilibrium ?

[edit]@haruspex : any suggestions ?
 
Last edited:
  • #5
Diracobama2181 said:
Yes, it is constrained to two dimensions. The problem itself seems to be a variation on a Goldstein problem. In that problem, a coordinate system can be taken with respect to the center of mass. The problem has three degrees of freedom, the center of mass of the bar in the xx and yy directions as well as an angular component about the center of mass. L=T−UL=T-U is the Lagrangian. I was thinking I could instead use coordinates about the center of mass, so T=(1/2)(m1+m2)((˙x)2+(˙y)2)+(1/2)I(˙θ)2(1/2)(m_1+m_2)((\dot x)^2+(\dot y)^2)+(1/2)I(\dot \theta)^2. However, now I seem to have trouble finding the extensions on the springs.

As is so often the case, you have leaped into the dynamics without paying adequate attention to the kinematics. Until you figure out how to express the positions of the masses in terms of your generalized coordinates, you will not make any progress. Ask yourself first, what are x, y, and theta? Secondly, how is the position of the first mass expressed in terms of these?

Over the years, I've seen countless students stumble on this very issue, the failure to address the kinematics. It is absolutely essential!
 
  • Like
Likes BvU
  • #6
Rethought the problem and decided to use coordinates of the center of the rod. That way, the kinetic energy will be the translational kinetic energy plus the energy of rotation about the center.

Thus, setting ##m=m_1+m_2##
##K=(1/2)m(\dot x)^2+(1/2)m(\dot y)^2+(1/2)I(\dot\theta)^2##
where ##I=I_{cm}+md^2##
and ##d=(l/2) \frac {m_1-m_2} {m_1+m_2}##
Then, assuming the system is initially in equilibrium,

##U=(1/2)k( ((x+(l/2)sin \theta )^2+(y+(l/2)sin \theta)^2))+((x-(l/2)cos \theta)^2+(y-(l/2)sin \theta)^2)##

From here, I can find the Lagrangian.
 
  • #7
Diracobama2181 said:
Rethought the problem and decided to use coordinates of the center of the rod. That way, the kinetic energy will be the translational kinetic energy plus the energy of rotation about the center.

Thus, setting ##m=m_1+m_2##
##K=(1/2)m(\dot x)^2+(1/2)m(\dot y)^2+(1/2)I(\dot\theta)^2##
where ##I=I_{cm}+md^2##
and ##d=(l/2) \frac {m_1-m_2} {m_1+m_2}##
Then, assuming the system is initially in equilibrium,

##U=(1/2)k( ((x+(l/2)sin \theta )^2+(y+(l/2)sin \theta)^2))+((x-(l/2)cos \theta)^2+(y-(l/2)sin \theta)^2)##

From here, I can find the Lagrangian.
Correction, I only need to use the moment of inertia about the center of the bar. The parallel axis theorem is unnecessary.
 
  • #8
Diracobama2181 said:
Correction, I only need to use the moment of inertia about the center of the bar. The parallel axis theorem is unnecessary.
The correction is actually incorrect. The bar itself is massless, so you do need to use the parallel axis theorem to get the MMOI for the system about the system CM.
 

1. How does the mass of each spring affect the motion of the bar?

The mass of each spring affects the motion of the bar by influencing the equilibrium position and the stiffness of the system. A heavier spring will have a lower equilibrium position and a higher stiffness, causing the bar to oscillate at a faster rate.

2. What is the relationship between the spring constants and the natural frequencies of the system?

The spring constants and the natural frequencies of the system have a direct relationship. As the spring constants increase, the natural frequencies of the system also increase. This means that the bar will oscillate at a faster rate.

3. How does the unequal mass distribution affect the center of mass of the system?

The unequal mass distribution affects the center of mass of the system by shifting it towards the heavier mass. This means that the center of mass will not be in the middle of the bar, but closer to the heavier mass.

4. What happens to the amplitude of the bar's oscillations as the masses of the springs are changed?

The amplitude of the bar's oscillations will decrease as the masses of the springs are increased. This is because the heavier spring will have a higher stiffness, causing it to resist movement and dampen the oscillations of the bar.

5. How does the bar's motion differ when the springs have equal masses versus unequal masses?

The bar's motion will differ in terms of amplitude and frequency when the springs have equal masses versus unequal masses. With equal masses, the bar will oscillate at a lower frequency and with a larger amplitude compared to when the masses are unequal. This is due to the unequal masses affecting the stiffness and natural frequencies of the system.

Similar threads

Replies
5
Views
354
Replies
4
Views
983
Replies
2
Views
1K
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
20
Views
1K
  • Introductory Physics Homework Help
Replies
12
Views
232
Replies
5
Views
920
  • Precalculus Mathematics Homework Help
Replies
7
Views
866
Replies
2
Views
1K
Back
Top