Forced vibration on mass between two pull springs

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion centers on the dynamics of a mass subjected to forced vibrations between two prestressed pull springs. Participants explore the equations of motion, equilibrium positions, and the effects of spring constants on the system's behavior. The scope includes theoretical analysis and mathematical reasoning related to oscillatory motion.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes an equation of motion for the mass and asks whether it is correct, specifically questioning the relationship between the spring constants k1 and k2.
  • Another participant seeks clarification on the resting equilibrium position of the springs, noting the ambiguity related to the prestressed condition.
  • A participant reiterates the need for prestressing the pull springs, explaining that they exert force in only one direction and would be pressed together at x=0 without prestressing.
  • One participant asserts that the forces from the prestressed springs cancel each other out at all times, suggesting that the equilibrium positions may not significantly affect the analysis.
  • A correction is proposed regarding the equation of motion, with a participant stating it should involve the sum of the spring constants rather than their difference, and references the Euler-Lagrange equation for justification.
  • A question is raised about the sign of the energy associated with the springs, with one participant noting the direction of the forces exerted by the springs.
  • A later reply acknowledges an error regarding the direction of the restoring force of the second spring and resolves the question about the negative energy of the springs.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the correct formulation of the equations of motion and the implications of prestressing the springs. There is no consensus on the correct interpretation of the equilibrium positions or the energy dynamics of the system.

Contextual Notes

Participants highlight limitations in the clarity of the equilibrium positions and the assumptions regarding the prestressed condition of the springs. The discussion also reflects unresolved mathematical steps related to the equations of motion.

Kurt Couffez
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
Consider a mass m with a prestressed pull spring on either end, each attached to a wall. Let k1 and k2 be the pull spring constants of the springs. A displacement of the mass by a distance x results in the first spring k1 lengthening by a distance x(and pulling in the - direction), while the second spring k2 is abbreviating by a distance x (and pulls in the positive direction).
upload_2016-10-19_19-57-6.png


The equation of motion then becomes:
upload_2016-10-19_19-57-38.png


Three questions:

1. Is it correct that
upload_2016-10-19_19-58-18.png


2. If the answer on question (1) is yes, what is ω if k2>k1

3. Is is possible to resonate with a force F=A.cos(ωt) en what would be the amplitude of this force.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What is the resting equilibrium position for each spring individually?
The way you have it written is at x=0, but you say something about prestressed in your description so it isn't clear.
 
Lets say the resting equilibrium position for the springs are x1 and x2. The reason why they have to be prestressed is because they are pull springs. They can only have a force in one direction. They both are pulling at any time at the mass. When they are not prestressed then, at the position x=0 (with the springs attached) they would be pressed together.
upload_2016-10-19_21-42-52.png
 
Kurt Couffez said:
Lets say the resting equilibrium position for the springs are x1 and x2. The reason why they have to be prestressed is because they are pull springs. They can only have a force in one direction. They both are pulling at any time at the mass. When they are not prestressed then, at the position x=0 (with the springs attached) they would be pressed together.
View attachment 107716

I do not think it even matters. The forces of pre-stretched springs eliminate each other at all times.
 
It should be
##ma = (k_1+k_2)x##
not
##ma = (k_1-k_2)x##

You can show it using the Euler-Lagrange equation.
##L = \frac{1}{2}m v^2 - \frac{1}{2}k_2 (x_2-x)^2 - \frac{1}{2} k_1 (x-x_1)^2##
##\frac{\partial L}{\partial x} = k_2 (x_2-x) - k_1 (x-x_1) = x (k_1 + k_2) + k_1 x_1 + k_2 x_2##
If x=0 is the equilibrium position, then ##k_1 x_1 + k_2 x_2 = 0##
 
Why is in this the enegery of both springs negative? Spring 1 is pulling upwards, spring 2 is pulling downwards.
 
Ok, I have discovered the error. The restoring force F2 should also be upwards. Spring 2 also wants to bring the mass to its equilibrium position even if it is a pull spring.
The question around the negative energy of the spring is also solved.

Thanks.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 20 ·
Replies
20
Views
4K