Confusion with Lagrangian function in a calculation example

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the application of the Lagrangian function in a specific problem involving a ball moving through a waterpipe described by a curve. Participants explore the derivation of equations of motion, the implications of constraints, and the relationship between Lagrangian mechanics and Hamilton's principle.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested
  • Mathematical reasoning

Main Points Raised

  • One participant describes the system and derives the Lagrangian function, leading to an equation of motion that appears to be problematic.
  • Another participant expresses confusion regarding the derivation of a specific equation (Eq. 4) and suggests that the Lagrangian should suffice to derive the equations of motion without needing additional force analysis.
  • A later reply acknowledges the mistake in deriving Eq. (4) and suggests that the Lagrangian equation may need modification to account for constraint forces.
  • Another participant points out that the problem involves a holonomous constraint and discusses the use of Lagrange multipliers as an alternative approach to incorporate constraints.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach consensus on the correctness of the derived equations or the approach to take regarding the constraints. There are competing views on the necessity of force analysis versus relying solely on the Lagrangian framework.

Contextual Notes

There are unresolved assumptions regarding the application of forces and constraints, as well as the implications of modifying the Lagrangian equation. The discussion reflects uncertainty about the correct approach to take in this context.

zhouhao
Messages
35
Reaction score
0
1107_1.jpg
There is waterpipe with smooth interior wall as shown in the figure.The curve of waterpipe could be describe as function ##q_y=f(q_x)##.
A ball going through this pipe was put at ##O## point with zero initial speed.At the point ##(q_x,q_y)##,the speed of the ball could be decomposed as ##(\dot{q_x},\dot{q_y})##.What's more,$${\dot{q}_y}=\tan{\theta}{\dot{q}_x}=f'(q_x)\dot{q}_x \text{ } {(1)}$$.Motion energy function is $$T=\frac{1}{2}m{{\dot{q}}_x}^2+{\frac{1}{2}}m{{\dot{q}}_y}^2$$Potential function is $$V=-mg{q_x}$$ Lagrange function $$L=T-V={\frac{1}{2}}m{{\dot{q}}_x}^2+{\frac{1}{2}}m{\dot{q_y}}^2+mg{q_x} \text{ } {(2)}$$ Substituting equation (1) into equation (2),we get$$L=\frac{1}{2}m\{1+[f'(q_x)]^2\}{{\dot{q}}_x}^2+mg{q_x}$$Now,we calculate lagrange equation$$\frac{d}{dt}(\frac{{\partial}L}{{\partial}q_x})-\frac{{\partial}L}{{\partial}{q_x}}=0$$It could be get $$m\{1+[f'(q_x)]^2\}{\ddot{q}}_x+m{\dot{q}_x}^2{f'(q_x)}{f''(q_x)}-mg=0 {(3)}$$As shown in right part of figure,at point##(q_x,q_y)## of curve,the force taking effect is ##mg\cos{\theta}##,then decomposing this force at ##q_x## direction,we get$$m{\ddot{q}_x}=mg{{\cos}^2{\theta}}=mg(1+{\tan}^2{\theta})=\frac{mg}{1+[f'(q_x)]^2} \text{ }{(4)}$$Substitubing equation (4) into equation (3),we get $$m{\dot{q}_x}^2{f'(q_x)}{f''(q_x)}=0$$
This is not reasonable.
I have no idea how to explain the last equation.Is there something wrong with my force analysis?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I've no clue, how you come to Eq. (4). The Lagrangian contains everything you need to derive the equation of motion. Also note that energy is conserved, because the Lagrangian is no explicitly time dependent. That should be sufficient to solve the equation of motion up to integrations.
 
vanhees71 said:
I've no clue, how you come to Eq. (4). The Lagrangian contains everything you need to derive the equation of motion. Also note that energy is conserved, because the Lagrangian is no explicitly time dependent. That should be sufficient to solve the equation of motion up to integrations.

Thank you.I get equation (4) in this way(equation (4) is not right,which I just find):

Decomposing Gravity into two directions parallel and perpendicular with the curve,perpendicular force would be eliminated and only force parallel to the curve left.The parallel force is the total force,if decomposing the total force into ##q_x## direction,I got equation (4).-------------This is not correct,I have mistaken the total force.
I guess Lagrangian equation should be modified as $$\frac{d}{dt}(\frac{{\partial}L}{{\partial}{\dot{q}_x}})-\frac{{\partial}L}{\partial{q}}=Q_{q_x}$$$$Q_{q_x}\text{is the constrain force decomposed into }q_x \text{ direction}$$

However,how to make the Hamilton's principle take effect here,if we modified the Lagrangian equation?
My aim is not just solve an example,but to find how to through Hamilton's principle{##L(q,\dot{q},t)##} and Fermat's principle{##t(q,\frac{dq}{dq'},q')##} to describe a electron's action or nuclear action.
Thank you.
 
Last edited:
You have a holonomous constraint, ##q_y=f(q_x)##, and thus you can write down the Lagrangian you did. Then there's one equation of motion
$$\frac{\mathrm{d}}{\mathrm{d}t} \frac{\partial L}{\partial \dot{q}_x}-\frac{\partial L}{\partial q_x}=0.$$
Alternatively you could use the Lagrangian (2) together with the constraint and use the method of Lagrange multipliers (in this case of course there's only one Lagrange multiplier since there's only one constraint). Then you also get the constrain forces.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 24 ·
Replies
24
Views
2K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K