Hamiltonian of a pendulum constrained to move on a parabola

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The problem involves deriving a Hamiltonian for a simple pendulum whose point of suspension is constrained to move along a parabolic path in a vertical plane. The challenge lies in correctly applying the constraints related to both the suspension point and the pendulum bob.

Discussion Character

  • Mixed

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the correct application of constraints for both the pendulum's point of support and the bob. There are attempts to express the coordinates of the bob in terms of the support coordinates, and questions arise regarding the implications of these constraints on the Hamiltonian formulation.

Discussion Status

Some participants have provided guidance on how to properly set up the coordinates for both the support and the bob, suggesting that the constraint can be simplified. There is an ongoing exploration of different approaches to expressing the relationship between the coordinates and applying the constraints effectively.

Contextual Notes

Participants note the complexity of the algebra involved in applying the constraints and the need for clarity in distinguishing between the coordinates of the support and the bob. There is an emphasis on ensuring that the constraints are satisfied without unnecessary complications.

Wavefunction
Messages
99
Reaction score
4

Homework Statement



The point of suspension of a simple pendulum of length l and mass m is constrained to move on
a parabola z = ax^2 in the vertical plane. Derive a Hamiltonian governing the motion of the
pendulum and its point of suspension. This is a two-dimensional problem.


Homework Equations



eq(1) H=T+U

The Attempt at a Solution



T=\frac{m}{2}[\dot{x}^2+\dot{z}^2]

U=mgz

eq(2) H = \frac{m}{2}[\dot{x}^2+\dot{z}^2]+mgz

Applying the constraint z=ax^2, \dot{z} = 2ax\dot{x}

H = \frac{m}{2}[\dot{x}^2+4a^2x^2\dot{x}^2]+mgax^2

The resulting Hamilton's equations I got were:

eq(3) \dot{p_x} = -(4ma^2x\dot{x}^2+2mgax) = -\frac{∂H}{∂x}

eq(4) \dot{x} = \frac{p_x}{m(1+4a^2x^2)} = \frac{∂H}{∂p_x}

and p_x = \frac{∂L}{∂\dot{x}} = m(1+4a^2x^2)\dot{x}

This problem seemed uncharacteristically easy, so I definitely appreciate anybody who checks it over (: Thank you in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The constraint you implemented is for the point of suspension for the pendulum. The pendulum bob need not move on that parabola.

What you have there is the solution to a point mass constrained to move on a parabola, when instead you want to solve for a pendulum whose point of support is on a parabola.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
Wavefunction said:

Homework Statement



The point of suspension of a simple pendulum of length l and mass m is constrained to move on
a parabola z = ax^2 in the vertical plane. Derive a Hamiltonian governing the motion of the
pendulum and its point of suspension. This is a two-dimensional problem.

Homework Equations



eq(1) H=T+U

The Attempt at a Solution



T=\frac{m}{2}[\dot{x}^2+\dot{z}^2]

U=mgz

let x= lsin(θ) and z = lcos(θ)

eq(2) H = \frac{m}{2}[\dot{x}^2+\dot{z}^2]+mgz

H = \frac{m}{2}[l^2\dot{θ}^2]+mglcos(θ)

Applying the constraint z=ax^2 → lcos(θ) = al^2sin^2(θ)

H = \frac{m}{2}[l^2\dot{θ}^2]+mgal^2sin^2(θ)<br />

Okay how does it look now?
 
You've still just applied the constraint to the bob itself, and not the point of support...all you've done is make a change of variables.

You need a set of coordinates for the pendulum support, and then a set of coordinates for the bob. There should be two constraints, one for where the support may go, and one for where the bob may go since the pendulum is fixed to the support.

For example, I should have the point of support at coordinates:

(x_s,z_s)

The bob would then have coordinates:

(x_b,z_b)

I should express the bob coordinates in terms of the support coordinates. And then implement the constraint on my support coordinates!
 
Matterwave said:
You've still just applied the constraint to the bob itself, and not the point of support...all you've done is make a change of variables.

You need a set of coordinates for the pendulum support, and then a set of coordinates for the bob. There should be two constraints, one for where the support may go, and one for where the bob may go since the pendulum is fixed to the support.

For example, I should have the point of support at coordinates:

(x_s,z_s)

The bob would then have coordinates:

(x_b,z_b)

I should express the bob coordinates in terms of the support coordinates. And then implement the constraint on my support coordinates!

then constraint I should apply should be (x_s-x_b)^2+(z_s-z_b)^2=l^2 ?
 
Yes, but there's a much simpler way of applying that constraint, which you sort of did from your previous attempt, by using lcos(theta) and lsin(theta)
 
Matterwave said:
Yes, but there's a much simpler way of applying that constraint, which you sort of did from your previous attempt, by using lcos(theta) and lsin(theta)

Okay I'm going to try to resolve it using this new information. Thanks for pointing that out by the way.(:
 
Okay so far I think I've managed to express the bob coordinates in terms of the support coordinates

x_b=x_s+x and z_b = z_s+z such that x^2+z^2 = l^2 but I'm not exactly sure whether this is helpful.
 
That would work except the algebra will get very annoying very quickly. Try this:

x_b=x_s+l\sin (\theta)

and

z_b=z_s-l\cos (\theta)

Draw a picture to see how these coordinates work.

Notice that your constraint is automatically satisfied with these coordinates.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #10
Matterwave said:
That would work except the algebra will get very annoying very quickly. Try this:

x_b=x_s+l\sin (\theta)

and

z_b=z_s-l\cos (\theta)

Draw a picture to see how these coordinates work.

Notice that your constraint is automatically satisfied with these coordinates.

I actually just had that thought and doing it that would also mean that I end up 2 canonical coordinates which is exactly what I want. Thank you for your help you are a life saver! (:
 

Similar threads

Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
12
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
763
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 16 ·
Replies
16
Views
3K