How do I calculate the friction coefficient for my pendulum using Excel?

  • Context: Undergrad 
  • Thread starter Thread starter tinkeringone
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Pendulum
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around calculating the friction coefficient for a pendulum using Excel. Participants explore the mathematical formulation and the implications of using degrees versus radians in the calculations, as well as the handling of complex numbers in Excel.

Discussion Character

  • Technical explanation
  • Mathematical reasoning
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses confusion over calculating the friction coefficient using the formula μβ = ln (1+Z) − ln (1−Z) and encounters issues with negative values in the logarithm.
  • Another participant points out that the logarithm of a negative number results in a complex number and suggests checking the equations or parameter values to avoid this situation.
  • A participant emphasizes that the arguments of the logarithm must be unitless, indicating that Δθ should be in radians rather than degrees.
  • Converting Δθ from degrees to radians resolves the issue, resulting in a positive value for Z, which allows for valid logarithmic calculations.
  • One participant shares a source that discusses the friction loss in a pendulum setup, noting that the friction coefficient is derived from experimental observations.
  • There is a mention of the design of the pendulum and its classification as a compound pendulum, with a suggestion to verify the design before construction.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants generally agree on the necessity of using radians for the calculations, but there remains uncertainty regarding the initial parameters and the implications of using complex numbers in the context of the friction coefficient.

Contextual Notes

The discussion highlights the importance of ensuring that all variables are appropriately defined and unitless, as well as the potential for confusion when dealing with complex numbers in physical contexts.

tinkeringone
Messages
15
Reaction score
0
Not sure, but apparently somebody threw some LOGS in my pendulum. HELP!

Trying to create a spreadsheet for calculating the friction coefficients in the pendulums I've been making. Here's the problem I just can't figure out.

μβ = ln (1+Z) − ln (1−Z)

where
Z = Δθ(L/d)
Δθ = 0.50 degrees
L = 1 meter
d = 18 mm, i.e. .018 meters
Z = 27.7777

I'm thinking that I already know that μβ = .34, but I can't figure out how to get Excel to calculate that right side of the formula, i.e. "ln (1−Z)", because 1-Z creates a negative value. So it's like you have to create some kind of imaginary number or something like Euler's?

Can anybody tell me how I can get Excel to calculate this, so I can enter my other pendulums into it?

Thanks,
Tinkeringone
 
Physics news on Phys.org
EDIT: Ignore this post. See Bob S's explanation in Post #3.

The ln of a negative number is a complex number,

ln(x) = ln(|x|) + iπ , . . x < 0


(There is an ambiguity though, since you are free to add or subtract multiples of 2iπ to this result.)

However, I'm not aware of anything physically meaningful about a complex friction coefficient. You might want to check your equations or parameter values to see if there is an error somewhere that leads to taking the log of a negative value.

That being said, you have two choices for getting Excel to handle complex numbers. Either use two cells to store the value (1 cell each for the real and imaginary parts), or you can install the Analysis Toolpack add-in which will allow Excel to handle complex numbers.
 
Last edited:
I would like to know the source for your equations μβ and Z. The log arguments 1+Z and 1-Z have to be unitless. For this reason, the angle delta θ has to be in radians, not degrees.
Bob S
 
Bob, excellent point. If we use Δθ in radians, we get

Δθ = 0.50° = 0.0087 rad

Z = Δθ L/d = 0.0087*1/0.018 = 0.48 < 1

In that case, the log arguments are positive and there is no issue.
 
Bob – here’s the source of my information you requested. It’s a very interesting source. He’s loading up a simple pendulum with lots of mechanical friction to the point where the friction losses overwhelm the air drag losses, making it easier to calculate the friction loss coefficient.
It loses .5 degrees per half period, i.e. 1 degree per period from 30 degrees down to about 10 degrees. I think that the friction coefficient is the combined amount for the aluminum wire and the groove in the stationary 18 mm rod the wire pivots on. And I think that the combined friction coefficient he shows is .34.
The 27.7777 value I posted for Z was a value I came up with by trial and error.
The rest are based on data from the source.
The equation I initially posted was number (11 & 12) in the link. That is obviously a rearranged version of number (10) before those for the purpose of determining the friction coefficient rather than the loss in degrees per cycle.

Here’s the link:

http://www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/uploads/docs/290147.pdf
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Hi-
Looking at Eq 4 and 5 in your link, it is apparent that theta is in radians, not degrees (the small angle approx for cos(theta)). The pendulum in the link looks like a compound pendulum. Check the design before you build it.
Bob S
 
Bob S said:
Hi-
Looking at Eq 4 and 5 in your link, it is apparent that theta is in radians, not degrees (the small angle approx for cos(theta)).
Also, using radians exactly reproduces the results shown in Table 2, using their parameters:
L = 1 m
d = 18 mm
β = π
The pendulum in the link looks like a compound pendulum. Check the design before you build it.
Bob S
Looking at Fig. 3, it appears that the system behaves as a simple pendulum. Apparently the lower wire is stiff enough for this to be the case.

Bob – here’s the source of my information you requested. It’s a very interesting source. He’s loading up a simple pendulum with lots of mechanical friction to the point where the friction losses overwhelm the air drag losses, making it easier to calculate the friction loss coefficient.
.
.
.
http://www.manchesteruniversitypress.co.uk/uploads/docs/290147.pdf
Interesting article, thanks for sharing!
 
Last edited by a moderator:

Similar threads

  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
7K
  • · Replies 34 ·
2
Replies
34
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K