Harmonic Oscilator (driven-and-damped) problem

  • Thread starter Thread starter Redsummers
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Harmonic Oscilator
Redsummers
Messages
162
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



An Oscillator with free oscillation period \tau is critically damped and subjected to a periodic force with the 'saw-tooth' form:

F(t)=c(t-n\tau) , (n-1/2)\tau<t<(n+1/2)\tau

for integer n with c constant. Find the ratios of the amplitudes of oscillations at the angular frequencies:

\frac{2\pi n}{\tau}

Homework Equations


Basically for the critically damped thing, we have that

\gamma = \omega_0.

the other formulas are just the ones used with oscillator under forces. (i.e. driven and damped oscillators.)

The Attempt at a Solution



Okay, so first I took the Fourier series (or at least tried to) of the force that is driving the oscillator:

F_n=1/\tau \int_{-\frac{\tau}{2}}^{\frac{\tau}{2}} c(t-n\tau)e^{(inwt)}dt

then, what I did was to plug the

\frac{2\pi n}{\tau}

into the omega above.

Then I got,

F_n= \frac{c\tau}{i2\pi n^2}

According to this, now my equation of motion (ordinary linear differential non-homogeneous eq.form) is:

mz'' +\lambda z' + kz = \frac{c\tau}{i2\pi n^2} e^{(i\omega t)}

where I use here z just because the complex force. Also, note that

\omega_0^2 = k/m

and,

\gamma=\lambda/2m

Trouble now is that I would need a general solution for that, and I don't really know if it's the good way to think, if I assume that the equation of motion will look like this:

x(t)= Ae^{(i\omega t)}

with A being,

A= \frac{F_n/m}{\sqrt((\omega_0^2-\omega^2)^2+(2\gamma\omega)^2)}

And if that is the case, is really the A what the question is asking for? Because they ask for the ratio of amplitudes, and that's just the amplitude.. Not quite sure.

I haven't tried plugging my F_n and other values because I don't think it will give me any substantial result, and I assume I must have done something wrong behind.

(I know that the answer should be:

a_n= c/m\omega^2 n(1+n^2).

according to Kibble.)

If you could spot what am I missing in my assumptions I would much appreciate.

P.S.: I always seem to have problems when previewing the post... as it seems now, none of my latex scripts are well written (according to the preview post), but I am pretty sure that they are... just that the preview is acting weirdly. So if there are flaws in my latex I will try to fix it asap.
 
Last edited:
Physics news on Phys.org
Okay, I have figured something out, but it is without using Fourier series. I guess I should've considered going through the easier path first.

But anyway, I am still interested on solving this problem on Fourier Series, if anyone has got any ideas on what am I doing wrong or what should I do next, I would appreciate.
 
Now, trouble is to actually compute the ordinary linear differential non-homogeneous equation.

One guess would be

(-mn^2 \omega^2 + i\lambda n \omega + k)A_n=F_n

You may as well see above what is A_n. (Note that I am precisely looking for a_n.)

I also know now that the solution should somehow look like this:

z = z (t) = A_n e^{i n \omega t}

With

A_n = a_n e^{-i \theta_n \omega}.

Any thoughts??

P.S. Sorry for the double-triple post.
 
Thread 'Need help understanding this figure on energy levels'
This figure is from "Introduction to Quantum Mechanics" by Griffiths (3rd edition). It is available to download. It is from page 142. I am hoping the usual people on this site will give me a hand understanding what is going on in the figure. After the equation (4.50) it says "It is customary to introduce the principal quantum number, ##n##, which simply orders the allowed energies, starting with 1 for the ground state. (see the figure)" I still don't understand the figure :( Here is...
Thread 'Understanding how to "tack on" the time wiggle factor'
The last problem I posted on QM made it into advanced homework help, that is why I am putting it here. I am sorry for any hassle imposed on the moderators by myself. Part (a) is quite easy. We get $$\sigma_1 = 2\lambda, \mathbf{v}_1 = \begin{pmatrix} 0 \\ 0 \\ 1 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_2 = \lambda, \mathbf{v}_2 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} \sigma_3 = -\lambda, \mathbf{v}_3 = \begin{pmatrix} 1/\sqrt{2} \\ -1/\sqrt{2} \\ 0 \end{pmatrix} $$ There are two ways...
Back
Top