MHB Double pendulum: energy function

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving the energy function for a double pendulum under two conditions: motion restricted to a vertical plane and motion in three-dimensional space. The energy function is expressed as the sum of potential energy (PE) and kinetic energy (KE), with PE defined as the gravitational potential energy of the masses involved. For motion in a vertical plane, KE incorporates only two coordinates, while for motion in space, it includes a third vertical coordinate, resulting in different formulations for KE. The potential energy remains consistent across both scenarios, highlighting the uniformity of gravitational effects. Understanding these distinctions is crucial for analyzing the dynamics of the double pendulum system.
mathmari
Gold Member
MHB
Messages
4,984
Reaction score
7
Hey! :o

I am looking at the following:

Find the energy function for the double pendulum, with vertical constant and uniform gravity field
  • for motion restricted at vertical plane
  • for motion in space
We have that the energy function is the sum of the potential and the kinetic energy, right?

The potential energy of the system is given by $PE=m_1gy_1+m_2gy_2$.

The kinetic energy is given by $KE=\frac{1}{2}m_1v_1^2+\frac{1}{2}m_2v_2^2$.

Therefore, the energy function is equal to $$E=PE+KE=m_1gy_1+m_2gy_2+\frac{1}{2}m_1v_1^2+\frac{1}{2}m_2v_2^2$$ Is this correct?

How can we distinct between motion restricted at vertical plane and motion in space? And what does a uniform gravitational field imply?

(Wondering)
 
Mathematics news on Phys.org
mathmari said:
How can we distinct between motion restricted at vertical plane and motion in space?

Hey mathmari! (Smile)

In a vertical plane we only have $x$ and $y$.
So $v_1^2 = \dot x_1^2 + \dot y_1^2$.

For motion in space we also have a 3rd coordinate (perhaps we should pick the vertical coordinate to be $z$ instead of $y$ to avoid confusion.) (Thinking)

mathmari said:
And what does a uniform gravitational field imply?

That we have constant vertical acceleration by gravity $g$, which is what you already have.
That is as opposed to how gravity actually works, which is $\frac{GM}{r^2}$, where $M$ is the mass of the earth, and $r$ is the distance to the center of the earth. At the surface we can treat it as a uniform field though. (Thinking)
 
I like Serena said:
Hey mathmari! (Smile)

In a vertical plane we only have $x$ and $y$.
So $v_1^2 = \dot x_1^2 + \dot y_1^2$.

For motion in space we also have a 3rd coordinate (perhaps we should pick the vertical coordinate to be $z$ instead of $y$ to avoid confusion.) (Thinking)

So, to difference between the two motions is at the kinetic energy?

Do we get for the first case:

The potential energy of the system is given by $PE=m_1gy_1+m_2gy_2$.
The kinetic energy is given by $KE=\frac{1}{2}m_1v_1^2+\frac{1}{2}m_2v_2^2=\frac{1}{2}m_1\left (\dot x_1^2 + \dot y_1^2\right )+\frac{1}{2}m_2\left (\dot x_2^2 + \dot y_2^2\right )$.

and for the second case:

The potential energy of the system is given by $PE=m_1gy_1+m_2gy_2$.
Here do we have to use also $z_1,z_2$ ? But how?
The kinetic energy is given by $KE=\frac{1}{2}m_1v_1^2+\frac{1}{2}m_2v_2^2=\frac{1}{2}m_1\left (\dot x_1^2 + \dot y_1^2+\dot z_1^2\right )+\frac{1}{2}m_2\left (\dot x_2^2 + \dot y_2^2+\dot z_2^2\right )$.

? Or do we have to use for example polar coordinates? (Wondering)
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Yep. (Nod)

We can write the same thing in polar coordinates, but there is no need.
The only reason to do so, is if it helps us to solve a follow up question, and we can do it then.
 
I like Serena said:
Yep. (Nod)

So, we do we get the following energy function?

  1. for motion restricted at vertical plane

    The potential energy of the system is given by $PE=m_1gy_1+m_2gy_2$.
    The kinetic energy is given by $KE=\frac{1}{2}m_1v_1^2+\frac{1}{2}m_2v_2^2=\frac{1}{2}m_1\left (\dot x_1^2 + \dot y_1^2\right )+\frac{1}{2}m_2\left (\dot x_2^2 + \dot y_2^2\right )$.

    So, the total energy is given by $$E=PE+KE=m_1gy_1+m_2gy_2+\frac{1}{2}m_1\left (\dot x_1^2 + \dot y_1^2\right )+\frac{1}{2}m_2\left (\dot x_2^2 + \dot y_2^2\right )$$
  2. for motion in space

    The potential energy of the system is given by $PE=m_1gy_1+m_2gy_2$.
    The kinetic energy is given by $KE=\frac{1}{2}m_1v_1^2+\frac{1}{2}m_2v_2^2=\frac{1}{2}m_1\left (\dot x_1^2 + \dot y_1^2+\dot z_1^2\right )+\frac{1}{2}m_2\left (\dot x_2^2 + \dot y_2^2+\dot z_2^2\right )$.

    So, the total energy is given by $$E=PE+KE=m_1gy_1+m_2gy_2+\frac{1}{2}m_1\left (\dot x_1^2 + \dot y_1^2+\dot z_1^2\right )+\frac{1}{2}m_2\left (\dot x_2^2 + \dot y_2^2+\dot z_2^2\right )$$
Is the potential energy in both cases the same? (Wondering)
 
Yes and yes. (Mmm)
 
I like Serena said:
Yes and yes. (Mmm)

Ok! Thank you very much! (Smile)
 

Similar threads

Back
Top