A Hamilton's principle and virtual work by constraint forces

AI Thread Summary
The discussion revolves around the confusion regarding Hamilton's principle and the concept of virtual work done by constraint forces. Goldstein's assertion that the virtual work done by constraints is zero is linked to the assumption of ideal constraints, which do not appear in the equation referenced (2.34). There is criticism of others in the forum for misunderstanding the D'Alembert-Lagrange principle and incorrectly labeling constraints as nonideal. The conversation highlights a need for clarity on the definitions and implications of ideal versus nonideal constraints in the context of Hamilton's principle. Overall, the participants seek a better understanding of these concepts and their applications in mechanics.
Kashmir
Messages
466
Reaction score
74
Found a question on another website, I have the exact same question. Please help me

Goldstein says :
1631703142815.png


I do not understand how (2.34) shows that the virtual work done by forces of constraint is zero. How does the fact that "the same Hamilton's principle holds for both holonomic and semiholonomic systems" show that the additional forces of semiholonomic constraint do no work in the
##\delta q_k##

 
Physics news on Phys.org
Contraints that do zero net virtual work are sometimes called ideal constraints. Not all constraints are ideal (https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01399622/document)

Here Goldstein is asuming ideal constraints (the work of the forces of constraint do not appear in the right hand side of 2.34).
 
andresB said:
aints that do zero net virtual work are sometimes called ideal constraints. Not all constraints are ideal (https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-01399622/document)
these guys completely do not understand what the D'Alembert-Lagrange is.
They think that they invented "nonideal constraints" but actually they consider systems with ideal constraints and given active forces applied. Some people begin to write articles before reading textbooks :)
 
Last edited:
wrobel said:
these guys completely do not understand what the D'Alembert-Lagrange is.
They think that they invented "nonideal constraints" but actually they consider systems with ideal constraints and given active forces applied. Some people begin to write articles before reading textbooks :)
So what does the author mean? I still didn't get it
 
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...
Let there be a person in a not yet optimally designed sled at h meters in height. Let this sled free fall but user can steer by tilting their body weight in the sled or by optimal sled shape design point it in some horizontal direction where it is wanted to go - in any horizontal direction but once picked fixed. How to calculate horizontal distance d achievable as function of height h. Thus what is f(h) = d. Put another way, imagine a helicopter rises to a height h, but then shuts off all...
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?
Back
Top