Bifilar pendulum experiment

AI Thread Summary
The bifilar pendulum experiment shows data that aligns well with theoretical predictions. A question arises regarding the expected period of the bifilar pendulum matching that of a torsional pendulum when the support strings are at the same point. The user struggles to derive the bifilar equation into the torsional equation under this condition. It is noted that when the strings are attached at a single point, the motion resembles that of a simple ball-on-string pendulum. Clarification is sought on the ball-on-string problem, as existing online resources are unclear.
houlahound
Messages
907
Reaction score
223
Bifilar pendulum, data matches the theory real neat. Do have a question, I would expect the period to match the period of a torsional pendulum for the limit when the support strings are the same point ie zero separation.

I can't get the bifilar equation to reduce to the torsion equation for said limit. Any clues?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
if the 2 pendulum strings are attached at the same point, it has become a simple ball-on-string pendulum.
(the bifilar's ball motion is the same as for a single string, if the string is shorter.)
A torsional pendulum's Restoring Force is caused by a thick support's rotational elasticity, rather than gravity.
 
Not aware of the ball on string problem, google gave ambiguous results. Do you have link?
 

Thread 'Is calling fictitious forces "not real" just about terminology?'

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...
View full post »

Thread 'Derivation of Hamilton's Principle: Questions'

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...
View full post »

Similar threads

How do I measure a the period of a bifilar pendulum?
Replies
1
Views
4K
Need help with this unequal length bifilar pendulum
Replies
21
Views
4K
A Modeling the damping of a physical rigid pendulum
Replies
1
Views
2K
Measurement and Graphing. Dependence of a Pendulum on length
Replies
1
Views
1K
JEE solution wrong? (tempco of a clock)
Replies
14
Views
1K
Possible sources of error/uncertainty in bifilar pendulum?
Replies
1
Views
9K
Foucault Pendulum at the North Pole
Replies
9
Views
2K
Bifilar Pendulum: Can't justify/create a hypothesis + analyze results
Replies
3
Views
9K
Component forces of a pendulum
Replies
2
Views
1K
I Reference frames in terms of homogenity/isotropy
Replies
18
Views
2K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top