Finding the ratio ω/ωo of an underdamped oscillator

  • Thread starter Thread starter HiggsBrozon
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Oscillator Ratio
AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on finding the ratio ω/ω0 for an underdamped oscillator, where the amplitude decreases to 1/e of its initial value after m oscillations. The relevant equations include the motion equation x'' + 2βx' + ω0²x = 0 and the amplitude function x(t) = Ae^(-βt)cos(ω1t). The key insight is that after m periods, the relationship βmT = 1 leads to the conclusion that β = 1/(mT). The final expression for the ratio ω1/ω0 is derived as 1 - β²/(2ω0²), indicating how the damping affects the frequency ratio. This analysis clarifies the connection between damping and oscillation properties in underdamped systems.
HiggsBrozon
Messages
7
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



The amplitude of an underdamped oscillator decreases to 1/e of its initial value
after m complete oscillations. Find an approximate value for the ratio ω/ω0.

Homework Equations



x''+2βx'+ω02x = 0 where β=b/2m and ω0=√(k/m)

x(t) = Ae-βtcos(ω1t-δ) where ω1 has been defined as ω022

The Attempt at a Solution



The initial amplitude is equal to A0 = Ae-βt
and the final amplitude after m oscillations is equal to A0(1/e) = Af = Ae-(βt+1)

After this I honestly don't know where to go. I tried plugging in my Af into the underdamped motion equation and solving for ω but that didn't seem to make any sense. I'm assuming that ω0 will be equal to just √(k/m)?
Also, I thought that the frequency of an underdamped oscillator didn't change over time. So why would the angular frequency change?
If anyone could give me a push in the right direction that would be very helpful. I've been working on this for a quite while now.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Normally, I think we'd have w^{2} = w_{0}^{2} - \beta ^{2}. I'm actually more accustomed to writing w^{2} = w_{0}^{2} - \frac{\gamma ^{2}}{4} , but regardless, you've goofed up your amplitude relationships.

After m periods, t = Tm where T is the period of oscillation in seconds. This also means the cosine term will have the same value as it does at t=0.

Thus, your equation should be A(t=Tm) = A_{0} e^{-1} = A_{0} e^{-\beta T m} \Rightarrow \beta T m = 1

See if you can go from there.
 
Also, what makes you think the angular frequency is changing? Even with your incorrect equation, I don't see how you would make that deduction.
 
HiggsBrozon said:

Homework Statement



The amplitude of an underdamped oscillator decreases to 1/e of its initial value
after m complete oscillations. Find an approximate value for the ratio ω1/ω0.

Homework Equations



x''+2βx'+ω02x = 0 where β=b/2m and ω0=√(k/m)

x(t) = Ae-βtcos(ω1t-δ) where ω12 has been defined as ω022.

First, without loss of generality, let δ = 0 since this is related to initial conditions & you weren't given any.

So the 1st (initial) amplitude is Aexp(-βt) with t=0.
And at the end of 1 cycle, which lasts t = ? seconds, what is the amplitude in terms of A, β and ω1? And so on 'till at the end of 5 cycles?

And what did the problem say the amplitude after 5 cycles was as a % of the first amplitude?
So how about an equation in β and ω1 plus the equation I corrected for you above (in red)?
 
Last edited:
My apologies on the late reply guys. It was a late night and I ended up finishing the problem the following morning. Thanks for your help!

For my equation of motion I used x(t) = Ae-βtcos(ω1t) = Ae-βmTcos(ω1mT)
where ω1 = √(ω022) (and yes my original formula was missing a square root.)
and T = 2pi/ω1

The cosine term is always equal to 1 so
x(t) = Ae-βmT = A/e
Therefore, βmT = 1
→ β = 1/(mT) = ω1/(2pim)

ω10 = √(ω022)/ω0 = √(1-β202) = 1 - β2/(2ω02) = 1 - 1/(8pi2m2)
 
Kindly see the attached pdf. My attempt to solve it, is in it. I'm wondering if my solution is right. My idea is this: At any point of time, the ball may be assumed to be at an incline which is at an angle of θ(kindly see both the pics in the pdf file). The value of θ will continuously change and so will the value of friction. I'm not able to figure out, why my solution is wrong, if it is wrong .
TL;DR Summary: I came across this question from a Sri Lankan A-level textbook. Question - An ice cube with a length of 10 cm is immersed in water at 0 °C. An observer observes the ice cube from the water, and it seems to be 7.75 cm long. If the refractive index of water is 4/3, find the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. I could not understand how the apparent height of the ice cube in the water depends on the height of the ice cube immersed in the water. Does anyone have an...
Back
Top