Critical damping provides the quickest approach to zero amplitude

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

Critical damping is the optimal condition for a damped oscillator to reach zero amplitude in the shortest time. In contrast, underdamping results in oscillations around zero, while overdamping slows the approach to zero. In unforced physical systems, oscillators theoretically approach zero amplitude but do not reach it due to the exponential nature of decay. Energy input alters this behavior, leading to steady state errors that prevent the system from decaying to zero.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of damped oscillators
  • Familiarity with the concepts of underdamping, overdamping, and critical damping
  • Knowledge of exponential decay in physical systems
  • Basic principles of forced versus unforced oscillations
NEXT STEPS
  • Research the mathematical modeling of damped oscillators
  • Explore the implications of steady state errors in forced oscillations
  • Study the differences between theoretical and practical damping behaviors
  • Learn about applications of damping in engineering systems
USEFUL FOR

Students of physics, engineers working with oscillatory systems, and anyone interested in the dynamics of damping in mechanical systems.

linyen416
Messages
20
Reaction score
0
Critical damping provides the quickest approach to zero amplitude for a damped oscillator. With less damping (underdamping) it approaches zero displacement faster, but oscillates around it. With more damping (overdamping), the approach to zero is slower.

I got this from hyperphysics
but I am not sure aout the last sentence
with more damping shouldn't the approach to zero be even faster
 
Physics news on Phys.org


No, why should it?
 


cyrus, i thought damping brings it down to zero faster.

also another thing that's troubling me is : for underdamping, overdamping, adn critical damping, do the amplitudes eventually REACH zero IN THEORY or is it that theoretically they only APPROACH zero? thanks
 


Well, I would rethink how you came to that conclusion. No where in what you copied from hyperphysics did it says 'damping brings it down to zero faster'.

No, they actually reach zero in physical systems if the system is unforced (meaning there is no energy being supplied). I.e. I give it an intial energy and watch it decay back down to zero - a transient.

If energy is supplied via forcing, its a totally different story. The exact why and how of that is beyond the scope of this thread. For now, just know that if there is an energy input, steady state errors can and do occur in the system. Meaning it won't decay back down exactly to zero -not in theory or in real life.
 
Last edited:


So for an unforced underdamped oscillation, due to steady state errors that occur in real life, won't decay to zero?
 


linyen416 said:
So for an unforced underdamped oscillation, due to steady state errors that occur in real life, won't decay to zero?

No, re-read what I wrote. I never said any of that. I gave you two clear examples (a) unforced and (b) forced. I have no idea why you took my answer for (a) and applied it to (b)...you need to pay closer attention to what you're reading (both my post and hyperphysics) because you are reading into things that are not being said.

Take a step back and read things for what they are.
 


cyrus, i was asking abotu unforced underdamped oscillation... so in actual physical systems they do reach zero and but theoretically they dont
 


wouldn't there be steady state errors in underdamped oscillation that is unforced?
 


linyen416 said:
cyrus, i was asking abotu unforced underdamped oscillation... so in actual physical systems they do reach zero and but theoretically they dont

...I never said that.

Maybe you are not familiar with the term "physical systems" - that means a real system. Its physical.
 
  • #10


linyen416 said:
wouldn't there be steady state errors in underdamped oscillation that is unforced?

No, there is no energy being supplied to keep it at a nonzero value. So how could it?
 
  • #11


theoretically it never reaches zero because of the exponential nature of decay, right?
 
  • #12


linyen416 said:
theoretically it never reaches zero because of the exponential nature of decay, right?

Yes, that's correct-good observation. :smile:
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
7K
  • · Replies 131 ·
5
Replies
131
Views
8K
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
7K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
3K
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
6K
Replies
1
Views
2K