Harmonic Motion Lecture: Deriving Equations

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on deriving equations related to harmonic motion, specifically for pendulum motion involving extended objects. The key equation presented is a second-order differential equation that describes the motion as simple harmonic motion (SHM). Participants express confusion about the term ω(initial)/Ω and its relevance to the solution of the equation. There is debate over whether the derived equation truly represents SHM, as it suggests a frequency that may change with amplitude, indicating potential non-linearity in the restoring force. Clarification is sought on the meaning of the ωi term and its implications for the model being discussed.
tonykoh1116
Messages
5
Reaction score
0
I had a lecture regarding harmonic motion.
he also derived equation related to pendulum motion with extended object and equation is following.(motion is a simple harmonic motion)
d^2θ/dt^2+(RcmMg)θ/I=0

θ(t) = θcos(Ωt)+(ω/Ω)sin(Ωt) where Ω is defined angular frequency oscillation for all types of pendulums and ω is defined angular frequency for all linear motion such as mass and spring system.

I don't get how he derived ω(initial)/Ω...
can anyone explain to me?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Welcome to PF;
Have you found the general solution to:$$\frac{d^2\theta}{dt^2}+\frac{MgR_{cm}}{I} \theta = 0$$...in a form that does not have that ##\frac{\omega_{i}}{\Omega}## in it?

But that does not look like SHM to me.
In SHM - the frequency does not change.
 
are you talking about

\vartheta(t)=Acos(\omegat+\phi)?
 
I don't know - was I?
That would be SHM all right.

You wanted to know about: θ(t) = θ cos(Ωt)+(ω/Ω)sin(Ωt)
Looking at it properly I see that the the equation seems to be saying:$$\theta(t)=\frac{\frac{\omega}{\Omega}\sin(\Omega t)}{1-\cos(\Omega t)}$$... which is nothing like SHM right?
 
What was it attempting to model? That equation of motion and boundary conditions must have come from somewhere. We need to know what the ωi term is supposed to represent. Is it an attempt to take into account the non-linearity of the restoring force in a pendulum (the frequency is amplitude dependent and, hence it is time dependent if it is decaying, for instance)
 
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