Is Power Balance a Valid Criterion for Oscillating System Stability?

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the validity of using power balance as a criterion for determining the stability of oscillating systems. Participants explore definitions of stability in the context of various systems, including passive and active materials, and the behavior of oscillating masses connected to springs.

Discussion Character

  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant proposes a definition of stability based on the average power supplied to a system being less than the average power lost, questioning its validity.
  • Another participant challenges this definition by citing examples of systems that emit more power than they absorb, arguing that such systems may not be stable and suggesting that "active" systems should not be classified as stable.
  • A clarification is made regarding the type of system under discussion, specifically focusing on oscillating systems like a mass connected to a spring subjected to an oscillating force.
  • One participant expresses the view that an oscillating system, unless the spring breaks, should not be considered unstable, even if erratic behavior occurs due to frequency mismatches.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the definition of stability and the applicability of power balance as a criterion. There is no consensus on whether the proposed definition is valid or how stability should be characterized in oscillating systems.

Contextual Notes

Limitations include the lack of clarity on what constitutes "stability" across different types of systems and the dependence on specific definitions of power absorption and emission. The discussion also highlights unresolved aspects regarding the behavior of oscillating systems under varying conditions.

micopl
Messages
2
Reaction score
0
Lets consider this definition: If the average power supplied to the system (absorbed power) is less than the average power lost by the system (emitted power) then the system is stable (during the time in which the power was averaged). Is such a definition of stability valid?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
What kind of system do you have in mind? An exploding gas tank emits more power than it it absorbs, but I would not consider it stable. When you say a system emits more power than absorbs, that word that comes to mind is "active" (as opposed to passive), not "stable". For instance, if you shine a seed laser on a slab of rubber, it is passive and absorbs the energy. This is a passive material. If you shine a seed laser at a properly prepared tank of gas, it will amplify the signal. This is an active material.

Stability is better defined as a centroid of some sort of the system staying constant, such as the combined center of mass of two orbiting masses, or the equilibrium point of an oscillating mass. Stability typically happens in potential wells, whereas unstable equilibrium happens on potential peaks of potential saddle points.
 
I mean oscillating system which can be e.g. a mass connected to a spring, and the other end of the spring is forced with an oscillating force.
 
I don't think such a system could be called unstable for any type case, unless the spring breaks. You could get erratic behavior, if the driving force oscillated slightly faster or slower than a natural frequency, but I would still consider it stable.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K