Energy in damped harmonic motion

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on the energy equation for a damped harmonic oscillator, expressed as E = (1/2)mv^2 + (1/2)kx^2. The author questions the derivation of the rate of energy dissipation, dE/dt, which is stated to equal -cv^2, where c represents the damping coefficient. They clarify that the differential equation of motion, ma + kx = -cv, is derived from Newton's second law, incorporating both spring and damping forces. The confusion arises from connecting the energy dissipation with the damping force. Ultimately, the discussion emphasizes the relationship between energy dissipation and the damping force in the context of damped harmonic motion.
PsychonautQQ
Messages
781
Reaction score
10
Hey PF,
my book either got sloppy in a derivation or I am not connecting two very obvious dots.
It gives the energy of the damped harmonic oscillator as
E = (1/2)mv^2 + (1/2)kx^2
then takes the derivative with respect to time to get dE/dt.

then it gives the differential equation of motion as
ma + kx = -cv

okay cool I'm following so far...
then it says with this equation of motion we know that
dE/dt = -cv^2

what am I missing here?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ff= -cv is the damping (friction) force.
dE/dt is the rate of dissipation of the mechanical energy.
Or the power dissipated due to the action of the friction force.
 
PsychonautQQ said:
Hey PF,
my book either got sloppy in a derivation or I am not connecting two very obvious dots.
It gives the energy of the damped harmonic oscillator as
E = (1/2)mv^2 + (1/2)kx^2
then takes the derivative with respect to time to get dE/dt.
Which your text should have as ##\dot E = v(ma + kx)##.

then it gives the differential equation of motion as
ma + kx = -cv
That's just a rearrangement of Newton's second law, with the external forces being the spring, linearly directed against displacement, and drag, linearly directed against motion. Mathematically, ##F=ma = -kx - cv##. Adding ##kx## to both sides yields ##ma+kx=-cv##. Substituting that result back into the expression for the time derivative of energy yields ##\dot E = -cv^2##.
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top