How Do You Determine Normal Modes in a Coupled Spring System?

Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around determining the normal modes of oscillation in a coupled spring system with two horizontal masses and springs. The setup includes a wall, a spring with stiffness k₁, a mass, another spring with stiffness k₂, and a second mass. The relationship k₁ = 2k₂ is specified.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the equations of motion for the masses and the resulting characteristic equation for eigenvalues. There are attempts to simplify and solve for λ, with some participants questioning the dimensional consistency of their results.

Discussion Status

The discussion is ongoing, with participants sharing their attempts to derive the eigenvalues and normal modes. Some have identified errors in their calculations and are revisiting their steps. There is a focus on ensuring the dimensional correctness of the expressions derived.

Contextual Notes

Participants are working under the constraints of homework rules, which may limit the information they can share or the methods they can use. There is an emphasis on understanding the mathematical relationships rather than arriving at a final solution.

ckelly94
Messages
12
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



So I'm given two horizontal masses coupled by two springs; on the left there is a wall, then a spring with k_{1}, then a mass, then a spring with k_{2}, and finally another mass, not attached to anything on the right. The masses are equal and move to the right with x_{1} and x_{2}, respectively. I'm trying to find the normal modes of oscillation where k_{1}=2k_{2}.


Homework Equations



As usual, we write the equations of motion for each of the masses, i.e.

\frac{d^{2}x_{1}}{dt^{2}}+(\omega_{1}^{2}+\omega_{2}^{2})x_{1}-\omega_{2}^{2}x_{2}=0

and

\frac{d^{2}x_{2}}{dt^{2}}-(\omega_{2}^{2})x_{1}+(\omega_{2}^{2})x_{2}=0

The Attempt at a Solution



The eigenvalues for this matrix are given by
(\omega_{1}^{2}+\omega_{2}^{2}-\lambda)(\omega_{2}^{2}-\lambda)-\omega_{2}^{4}=0

At this point, I plugged k_{1}=2k_{2} into this mess and determined that \lambda_{1,2}=-2\omega_{2}^{4}\pm(\omega_{2}^{2}\sqrt{8\omega_{2}^{2}+2})

So did I do something wrong algebraically, or are the eigenvectors, and thus the normal modes of oscillation simply \lambda \propto

( \stackrel{\omega_{2}^{2}}{3\omega_{2}^{2}+2\omega_{2}^{4}+\omega_{2}^{2}\sqrt{8\omega_{2}^{2}+2}} ) ?

PS: Sorry about the formatting. I wasn't sure how to make a matrix, but the last line should be a matrix.

Thanks in advance!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yeah, but it's just 2 X 1 anyway, so it's not *too* important, I don't think.
 
ckelly94 said:
(\omega_{1}^{2}+\omega_{2}^{2}-\lambda)(\omega_{2}^{2}-\lambda)-\omega_{2}^{4}=0

I believe this equation is correct. Note that you can determine the dimensions of λ from this equation.

At this point, I plugged k_{1}=2k_{2} into this mess and determined that \lambda_{1,2}=-2\omega_{2}^{4}\pm(\omega_{2}^{2}\sqrt{8\omega_{2}^{2}+2})

This expression cannot be correct because the dimensions are off. For example, the two terms inside the square root have different dimensions.

Can you show the steps you took to get to this result?
 
So I solved for \lambda by multiplying that first equation in your reply:

\omega_{1}^{2}\omega_{2}^{2}+\omega_{2}^{4}-\omega_{2}^{2}\lambda-\omega_{1}^{2}\lambda-\omega_{2}^{2}\lambda-\lambda^{2}-\omega_{2}^{4}=0

Which simplifies to

\lambda^{2}+\lambda(2\omega_{2}^{2}+\omega_{1}^{2})-\omega_{1}^{2}\omega_{2}^{2}=0

Using the quadratic formula, I arrived at

\lambda=CRAP

^This is the point where I realized my error. I'm going to keep going though, just for closure.

\lambda=-2\omega_{2}^{2}-\omega_{1}^{2}±√(8\omega_{2}^{4}(4\omega_{2}^{2}+1))/2

Which becomes -\omega_{2}^{2}-(\omega_{1}^{2}/2)±\omega_{2}^{2}√(8\omega_{2}^{2}+2)

...which is still really gross and has the wrong dimensions, I believe.

EDIT: No, that's actually not where I ran into problems, because I forgot that I wrote it in terms of \omega_{2}^{2} in my notes.
 
Okay so I tried it over, first by doing the quadratic equation, then writing the result in terms of \omega_{2}^{2}

I got \lambda=-2\omega_{2}^{2}\pm\sqrt{\omega_{2}^{2}+3\omega_{2}^{2}}

Still though, not sure why the dimensions won't work.
 
Got it! For some reason I forgot to properly square the first-order term.

Solution should read \lambda_{1,2}=-2\omega_{2}^{2}\pm\sqrt{10}\omega_{2}^{2}
 
Normal modes of oscillation are therefore -\omega_{2}^{2} and (5+\sqrt{10})\omega_{2}^{2}
 
I got that last result by just plugging the first (positive) eigenvalue into the first row of the matrix, setting it equal to zero.

Just curious, how would you go about using, say \lambda_{2} if \lambda_{1} is positive? Do you plug that into the second row, or can you plug it into the first row? I guess if it's a 3 X 3 matrix (i.e. there are more masses), you would have to use multiple rows, so \lambda_{1} and \lambda_{2} are both used (and the row doesn't matter/you'd have to use all or multiple rows). In that case, would you have to use \lambda_{2} independently to describe another phase of motion?
 
  • #10
You have the equation

(\omega_{1}^{2}+\omega_{2}^{2}-\lambda)(\omega_{2}^{2}-\lambda)-\omega_{2}^{4}=0

which I believe is correct.

ckelly94 said:
So I solved for \lambda by multiplying that first equation in your reply:

\omega_{1}^{2}\omega_{2}^{2}+\omega_{2}^{4}-\omega_{2}^{2}\lambda-\omega_{1}^{2}\lambda-\omega_{2}^{2}\lambda-\lambda^{2}-\omega_{2}^{4}=0

Check the sign of the λ2 term.
 
  • #11
TSny said:
Check the sign of the λ2 term.

...Yes... That's why the last term is negative.
 
  • #12
(\omega_{1}^{2}+\omega_{2}^{2}-\lambda)(\omega_{2}^{2}-\lambda)-\omega_{2}^{4}=0


When you expand this out, what will be the sign in front of ##\lambda^2##?
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #13
Goddamn.
 

Similar threads

Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 9 ·
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K