Coupled Oscillations: Understanding the Equations

  • Thread starter Thread starter Lagrange53110
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Coupled Oscillation
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around coupled oscillations and the derivation of equations of motion for a system of masses connected by springs. Participants are exploring the physical interpretation of these equations and the reasoning behind their formulations.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants are attempting to understand the physical implications of the equations of motion they have derived. Questions are raised about the correctness of their analysis and the physical reasoning behind the forces acting on the masses.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided alternative formulations of the equations, suggesting possible sign errors in the original equations. There is an ongoing exploration of how to derive the equations for endpoint masses and the impact of boundary conditions on these equations.

Contextual Notes

Participants express confusion regarding the conventions used in their derivations and seek clarification on the physical interpretation of the equations. There is a mention of an inability to view an image that likely contains important context for the problem.

Lagrange53110
Messages
3
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



[URL]http://imgur.com/2KIhk[/URL]

Hi!

If you please look at the image. I have already determined the equations of motion.
They are as follows:

Ma1 = 2kx1+kx2
Ma2 = -2kx2+kx1+kx3
Mx3 = -2x3 +kx2

Now... what I don't understand is how does this physically happen?

If you look at say mass m1. Then when the spring is oscillating it pulls the mass to the left
on the left side of m1 which is I suppose: -kx1 and the spring on the right is also doing that at x1 so then also -kx1 and then when it oscillates further at x2 the right spring goes +kx2 which gives us: ma1 = -2kx1+kx2.

I just want to is this the correct analysis for determining the equations?
I'm just stomped and wish I knew a perfect 100% method on finding these equations.
I just "know" they're right... I just don't know why... sadly
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Physics news on Phys.org
Lagrange53110 said:

Homework Statement



[URL]http://imgur.com/2KIhk[/URL]

Hi!

If you please look at the image. I have already determined the equations of motion.
They are as follows:

Ma1 = 2kx1+kx2
Ma2 = -2kx2+kx1+kx3
Mx3 = -2x3 +kx2

Now... what I don't understand is how does this physically happen?

If you look at say mass m1. Then when the spring is oscillating it pulls the mass to the left
on the left side of m1 which is I suppose: -kx1 and the spring on the right is also doing that at x1 so then also -kx1 and then when it oscillates further at x2 the right spring goes +kx2 which gives us: ma1 = -2kx1+kx2.

I just want to is this the correct analysis for determining the equations?
I'm just stomped and wish I knew a perfect 100% method on finding these equations.
I just "know" they're right... I just don't know why... sadly

Can't see your picture, but I think you have a sign error. It probably should be:
M \ddot{x}_1 = - 2 k x_1 + k x_2 = k(x_2 - x_1) - k x_1
M \ddot{x}_2 = - 2 k x_2 + k x_1 + k x_3 = k(x_3 - x2) + k(x_1 - x_2)
M \ddot{x}_3 = - 2 k x_3 + k x_2 = k (x_2 - x_3) - k x_3

In general, if you have N mass, the equation of motion on the j-th one (if j is not the first or last one) that's connected to two neighbors is:

M \ddot{x}_j = k x_{j+1} + k x_{j-1} - 2 k x_{j}
 
Last edited by a moderator:
mathfeel said:
Can't see your picture, but I think you have a sign error. It probably should be:
M \ddot{x}_1 = - 2 k x_1 + k x_2 = k(x_2 - x_1) - k x_1
M \ddot{x}_2 = - 2 k x_2 + k x_1 + k x_3 = k(x_3 - x2) + k(x_1 - x_2)
M \ddot{x}_3 = - 2 k x_3 + k x_2 = k (x_2 - x_3) - k x_3

In general, if you have N mass, the equation of motion on the j-th one (if j is not the first or last one) that's connected to two neighbors is:

M \ddot{x}_j = k x_{j+1} + k x_{j-1} - 2 k x_{j}

Okay that makes sense! That is the same conclusion I came up with the 3 masses scenario. Because the two xvalues to the left and the right cause positive "tugs" if you will.
What is the equation in general for the endpoint masses.

Would be in your case -2x(j) +2x(j+1)? for the left? and -2x(j)+2x(j-1)?
 
Lagrange53110 said:
Okay that makes sense! That is the same conclusion I came up with the 3 masses scenario. Because the two xvalues to the left and the right cause positive "tugs" if you will.
What is the equation in general for the endpoint masses.

Would be in your case -2x(j) +2x(j+1)? for the left? and -2x(j)+2x(j-1)?

For the end point, it depends on boundary condition. Since I can't see your picture, I am going to assume the j=1 and j=N mass is connected to fix wall by a spring, then

m \ddot{x}_1 = k (x_2 - x_1) - k x_1 = k x_2 - 2 k x_1
m \ddot{x}_N = k (x_{N-1} - x_{N}) - k x_{N} = k x_{N-1} - 2 k x_{N}
 
mathfeel said:
For the end point, it depends on boundary condition. Since I can't see your picture, I am going to assume the j=1 and j=N mass is connected to fix wall by a spring, then

m \ddot{x}_1 = k (x_2 - x_1) - k x_1 = k x_2 - 2 k x_1
m \ddot{x}_N = k (x_{N-1} - x_{N}) - k x_{N} = k x_{N-1} - 2 k x_{N}

but why?

I am confused how these equations are derived.

I have derived the middle mass equation.

But I am unsure about some conventions I have used...

please can you show me... what happens physically?
 

Similar threads

Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
3K
  • · Replies 22 ·
Replies
22
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
3K
Replies
6
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
6K