Can the Inverse Tan Function Justify Phase Lag in a Driven Harmonic Oscillator?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the phase lag of a driven harmonic oscillator, particularly focusing on the mathematical justification for using the inverse tangent function in this context. Participants explore the implications of different driving frequencies and their relationship to phase lag, including resonance conditions and the behavior of the system at various frequency ratios.

Discussion Character

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

Main Points Raised

  • One participant presents an equation for the phase lag of a driven oscillator, noting specific behaviors at different frequency ratios (W much smaller than Wo, W equal to Wo, and W much larger than Wo).
  • Another participant critiques the use of the naive arctan formula for determining phase shifts, suggesting that a more nuanced approach is necessary to define the angle correctly in polar coordinates.
  • A participant asks for a better formula that accurately represents the phase characteristics from 0 to pi as the driving frequency increases.
  • One participant provides a conventional equation of motion and discusses the amplitude and phase shift for weak damping, later retracting the claim about its validity for all damping cases.
  • Another participant introduces a rewritten equation involving arctan that addresses the initial concerns about phase lag and suggests careful consideration of multi-valued functions.
  • A participant emphasizes the limitations of using arctan for finding polar angles, advocating for the use of atan2 instead, which provides a more accurate range of values.
  • Some participants express differing opinions on the appropriateness of using arctan, with one asserting that the rewritten formula is effective.
  • Another participant comments on the positivity of the imaginary part in the context of the rewritten formula, suggesting it supports the validity of the approach.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the appropriateness of using the arctan function for phase lag calculations. While some propose alternative formulations and emphasize the importance of correctly defining angles in polar coordinates, others defend the rewritten formula involving arctan. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the best approach to justify the phase lag in the context of driven harmonic oscillators.

Contextual Notes

There are limitations regarding the assumptions made about damping conditions and the mathematical steps involved in deriving phase relationships. The discussion highlights the complexity of the topic and the need for careful consideration of definitions and functions used in the analysis.

Glenn G
Messages
113
Reaction score
12
TL;DR
Confused by the Pi rads phase lag
1666170306103.png
This is an equation I found for the delta phase lag of a driven oscillator. W is the driving angular frequency and Wo is the natural angular frequency of the driven system. Of course this is just a small part of the solution to the differential equation.
Now ... 1) when W is much smaller than Wo the delta phase lag is zero (the driven moves in synch with the driver
2) when W = Wo we have a resonance condition and the phase lag is pi/2
3) when W is much larger than Wo there is a phase lag of pi radians
This can be observed nicely with Barton's pendulae.

The shape of the graph of delta phase lag against w that you find looks like ...
1666170733572.png

But if you plot a graph of a made up function such as ...
1666170813731.png

It seems that if you move the negative portion up you get the correct kind of shape but my issue is that inverse tan only goes from -pi/2 to +pi/2 so the inverse tan of anything, whatever it is never approaches pi.

How can this approach be justified? because it almost seems to me that from the maths that if W is very much bigger than Wo then the arctan is negative so rather that a phase lag, if you are changing sign doesn't this suggest a phase lead? Clearly this is not what happens though when you watch the system oscillating and also it can't be anyway, doesn't make sense.

I would love your input on this ...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
This is the usual trouble with this formula to get phase shifts. You shouldn't use the naive arctan formula. It's the same as finding the angle of a point ##(x,y)## (Cartesian coordinates) in polar coordinates. The angle is uniquely defined by the two equations ##\cos \varphi=x/R## and ##\sin \varphi=y/R## with ##R=\sqrt{x^2+y^2}##. Then it's easy to see that the uniquely defined angle is given by
$$\varphi=\begin{cases} \text{sign} y \arccos\left (\frac{x}{R} \right ) & \text{for} \quad y \neq 0, \\ 0 & \text{for} \quad y=0, \quad x>0, \\
\pi &\text{for} \quad y=0, \quad x<0. \end{cases}$$
This angle is in the range ##\varphi \in (-\pi,\pi]##.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: sophiecentaur, DaveE, topsquark and 1 other person
Thanks Vanhees71 …. So is there a better ‘match’ of formula for the actual shape of the phase characteristics that does go from 0 to pi as W goes from 0 to infinite as in my sketch if the normal arctan isn’t appropriate ?
 
My convention for the equation of motion is
$$\ddot{x}+2 \gamma \dot{x} + \omega_0^2 x=A \cos(\Omega t)$$
Then amplitude and phase shift for the stationary state are
$$\hat{x}=\frac{A}{\sqrt{(\omega_0^2-\Omega^2)^2+4 \gamma^2 \Omega^2}},$$
$$\varphi=+\arccos \left (\frac{\omega_0^2-\Omega^2}{\sqrt{(\omega_0^2-\Omega^2)^2+4 \gamma^2 \Omega^2}} \right ).$$
This is of course only valid for the case of weak damping, i.e., ##\omega_0>\gamma##.
[EDIT] This is, of course, nonsense. It's valid for any case of damping!
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: topsquark and Glenn G
Yay, that looks great for giving the 0, pi/2 and pi relationship for the correct ‘zones’ - was Barton’s pendulae that got me thinking about this. Thanks.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
The relation ## \cot x = 1 / \tan x ## translates to ## \text{arccot}~x = \arctan \frac 1 x ##, and ## \cot x = \tan(\frac \pi 2 - x) ## to ## \text{arccot}~x = \frac \pi 2 - \arctan x ##. So you can use ## \arctan x = \frac \pi 2 - \arctan \frac 1 x ## to rewrite the original puzzling equation as $$
\delta = \frac \pi 2 + \arctan {\omega^2 - \omega_0^2 \over 2 \gamma \omega} \ .
$$ With multi-valued functions one should be careful not to cross branch cuts inadvertently.
 
arctan is never a good idea when it comes to find the polar angle in polar coordinates. For that reason most computer languages have a function like atan2 (in Fortran it's ##\phi=\text{atan2}(y,x)## leading to values between ##-\pi## and ##\pi## and with specific rules for ##y=0##).
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: Andrea42
vanhees71 said:
arctan is never a good idea
Never? The rewritten formula works just fine. :-)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: vanhees71
It's right, because in this case the imaginary part is always positive ;-).
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
10K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
4K
Replies
2
Views
989
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K