Damped oscillator consecutive amplitude ratio

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the ratio of consecutive maximum amplitudes for a damped oscillator, given its angular frequency and the period of an undamped oscillator. The user calculates the damped angular frequency and attempts to derive the ratio using the equation for damped motion, focusing on maximum amplitudes while disregarding the sine function. They express uncertainty about the values of the damping constant and the maximum amplitudes, seeking clarification and assistance. The user references the logarithmic decrement formula and arrives at an approximate value of 0.243, but questions its accuracy compared to a provided answer of 0.21. The thread highlights the complexities of damped oscillation calculations and the need for precise parameters.
Uniquebum
Messages
53
Reaction score
1

Homework Statement


Undamped oscillator's period T_0 = 12s. Damped oscillator's angular frequency \omega_1 = \omega_0 * 97\% where \omega_0 is the angular frequency of the undamped oscillator's. What is the ratio of consecutive maximum amplitudes?

Homework Equations


Equation of damped oscillator's motion:
x = e^{-\alpha t}A_0sin(\omega_1 t + \phi)
where \alpha = \frac{b}{2m} where b =damping constant.


The Attempt at a Solution


Firstly, were' talking about maximums so we can disregard the sin() function.
Calculating \omega_1 = \omega_0 * 0.97 = \frac{2\pi}{T_0}0.97.
Thus for the damped oscillator T_1 = \frac{T_0}{0.97}

Then we could write something as follows:
\frac{x_0}{x_1} = \frac{e^{-\alpha t_0}A_0}{e^{-\alpha t_1}A_0}
but we have no clue of alpha nor about x_0 and x_1... Any help appreciated.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I ended up using the formula

\zeta = \sqrt{1-(\frac{\omega_1}{\omega_0})^2}
And got approx 0.243 out of it. In my answer spreadsheet they claim the answer to be 0.21 however. Now I'm wondering whether i got it right or not... heh :) Thanks for the help either way.
 
I multiplied the values first without the error limit. Got 19.38. rounded it off to 2 significant figures since the given data has 2 significant figures. So = 19. For error I used the above formula. It comes out about 1.48. Now my question is. Should I write the answer as 19±1.5 (rounding 1.48 to 2 significant figures) OR should I write it as 19±1. So in short, should the error have same number of significant figures as the mean value or should it have the same number of decimal places as...
Thread 'A cylinder connected to a hanging mass'
Let's declare that for the cylinder, mass = M = 10 kg Radius = R = 4 m For the wall and the floor, Friction coeff = ##\mu## = 0.5 For the hanging mass, mass = m = 11 kg First, we divide the force according to their respective plane (x and y thing, correct me if I'm wrong) and according to which, cylinder or the hanging mass, they're working on. Force on the hanging mass $$mg - T = ma$$ Force(Cylinder) on y $$N_f + f_w - Mg = 0$$ Force(Cylinder) on x $$T + f_f - N_w = Ma$$ There's also...
Back
Top