Initial Velocity and Changes in SHM Formulae

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on how initial velocity affects simple harmonic motion (SHM) when a particle is subjected to a force field. The equilibrium position remains where the restoring force is zero, independent of initial velocity. The amplitude of oscillation can be determined using conservation of energy, with potential energy reaching a maximum at specific displacements. If the initial amplitude exceeds certain limits, the motion transitions from SHM to parabolic motion, resulting in a distorted oscillation pattern. Ultimately, the equilibrium position is identified as -10, with the nature of the motion depending on the amplitude of the oscillations.
rbn251
Messages
19
Reaction score
0
Does anyone know how the mathematics/formulae of SHM (say a particle in a force field, with the standard a=-d) changes when the particle is given an initial velocity independent of the force causing SHM?

For example in 1D say we have a graph of acceleration-displacement in the standard form y=-x for x from -inf to +inf, but this force is turned off. A particle is then accelerated, and arrives at point (10,-10) with an initial velocity of -200. Then the SHM causing force is turned on, and the other off.

How big would the osciallations be, and which point would be the equilibrium position?

Many Thanks,
 
Physics news on Phys.org
rbn251 said:
How big would the osciallations be, and which point would be the equilibrium position?
The equilibrium position is where the restoring force is zero; that is independent of initial velocity.

You can figure out the amplitude using conservation of energy. Find the point where all the energy is potential and that's the amplitude of the oscillation.
 
Regardless of the initial conditions, you will get SHM about the same equilibrium as Doc Al mentioned. If you are at rest at position x0 at t0 then the solution is ##x_0 \; \cos(\omega(t-t_0))##. If you are at the equilibrium position with some velocity v0 at t0 then the solution is ##v_0/\omega \; \sin(\omega(t-t_0))##. If you have a position x0 and a velocity v0 at t0 then you just add up those two solutions.
 
Kl, thanks

So for initial speed of √200 and mass=1, k=1,

KE=1/2*1*200 = 100J.

From the position (I assume we need to shift to -10 and not use 0)

PE=1/2*k*(-10)^2 = 50J

So total is always 150J and PE on its own is 150J when x=+/- 17.3

However, the specific question this is from is attached, where infact the linear force always remains. So does the particle venture back into the linear force area, and undergo a slightly distorted SHM?
 

Attachments

  • graph.png
    graph.png
    1.1 KB · Views: 581
This would not be simple harmonic motion in general. The equilibrium position will be -10, and it will undergo SHM only if the amplitude is small (10 or less). If the amplitude is large then large displacements will go from SHM to parabolic motion. So it would be something like a cosine with the tops chopped off and replaced with parabolas.
 
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...
Hello everyone, Consider the problem in which a car is told to travel at 30 km/h for L kilometers and then at 60 km/h for another L kilometers. Next, you are asked to determine the average speed. My question is: although we know that the average speed in this case is the harmonic mean of the two speeds, is it also possible to state that the average speed over this 2L-kilometer stretch can be obtained as a weighted average of the two speeds? Best regards, DaTario
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