Lagrange equation (2 masses, 3 springs)

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion centers on deriving the Lagrange function for a system involving two masses and three springs under constant gravitational acceleration. The kinetic energy is expressed as T = (1/2) m₁ ẋ₁² + (1/2) m₂ ẋ₂², while the potential energy is given by V = (1/2) k₁ r₁² + (1/2) k₂ r₂² + m₁ g y₁ + m₂ g y₂ + (1/2) k₃ (r₁ - r₂)². The Euler-Lagrange equations of motion derived are m₁ ẋ₁ = -k₁ r₁ + k₃ (r₁ - r₂) - m₁ g and m₂ ẋ₂ = -k₂ r₂ - k₃ (r₂ - r₁) - m₂ g. Corrections were made regarding the terms involving k₃, confirming the accuracy of the derived equations.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of Lagrangian mechanics
  • Familiarity with Euler-Lagrange equations
  • Knowledge of potential and kinetic energy formulations
  • Basic concepts of equilibrium in mechanical systems
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the Euler-Lagrange equation in detail
  • Explore the concept of equilibrium points in mechanical systems
  • Learn about the implications of multiple equations of motion in a coupled system
  • Investigate the stability analysis of equilibrium points in dynamic systems
USEFUL FOR

Students and professionals in physics, particularly those studying classical mechanics, as well as engineers working with dynamic systems involving multiple degrees of freedom.

Lindsayyyy
Messages
215
Reaction score
0
Hi

Homework Statement


Look at the drawing. Furthermore I have a constant acceleration \vec g = -g \hat y

I shall find the Lagrange function and find the equation of motion afterwards.

Homework Equations



Lagrange/ Euler function and eqauation

The Attempt at a Solution



I found out the following for the kinetic energy and the potential energy:

T=\frac {1} {2} m_{1} \dot{\vec r_{1}}^{2} + \frac {1} {2} m_{2} \dot{\vec r_{2}}^{2}

and for the potential energy:

V=\frac 1 2 k_{1}{\vec r_{1}}^{2}+\frac 1 2 k_{2} {\vec r_{2}}^{2}+m_{1}gy_{1}+m_{2}gy_{2}+\frac 1 2 k_{3}({\vec r_{1}}-{\vec r_{2}})^{2}
Now I used the Euler- Lagrange equation of motion and found out that:

m_{1}\ddot{\vec r_{1}}=-k_{1}{\vec r_{1}}+k_{3}{\vec r_{1}}-m_{1}g\hat y

and
m_{2}\ddot{\vec r_{2}}=-k_{2}{\vec r_{2}}-k_{3}{\vec r_{2}}-m_{2}g\hat y

Can anyone confirm this? Or did I do any mistakes?

Thanks for your help
 

Attachments

  • 97.JPG
    97.JPG
    7.2 KB · Views: 593
Physics news on Phys.org
Hi Lindsayyyy! :smile:

You did not take the derivative of the k3 term correctly.

Btw, is it given that the springs have length zero in equilibrium?
 
yes, sorry. I forgot to type that, length zero in equilibrium is right. I trying to derive it correctly tomorrow, as I have to go out now. Thanks for help so far.

edit: It should be r2-r1 in my first post at k3. I don't know if that makes my solution right then. Am I only wrong concerning the algebraic signs? If not, I have to do it tomorrow, I'm not able to this qucik now ^^
 
By coincidence I noticed your edit.

Yes, it should be r2-r1 in both equations, which leaves which sign it should have exactly.
With that correction your solution is right.
 
Ok, thank you very much. To sum them in up to one differential equation, am I just allowed to add up both? Because I want to find the stationary points (I don't know if that's the right translation). I guess it means I have to find the points where the system is in equilibrium. I haven't tried it yet, but I would solve the differential equation, derive it two times to find the acceleration and find the zeros of the function.
 
I don't understand you.

Effectively you have 4 equations (one for each of x1, y1, x2, y2).
In equilibrium each acceleration would be zero, meaning each equation equals zero.
Solve the set of equations to find the coordinates for equilibrium.
No derivatives necessary.
 
Hm. The task say I shall find the equation of motion (so I guessed it only should be one). But I still have two ?! ^^ And I was wondering if I just add/subduct them to get "the one" equation of motion.
 
No, you should not add or subtract them.
I suspect they intended the equations of motion (plural).

If you really want one equation, you can define for instance:
\vec r = (x1, y1, x2, y2)
and express the equation using that.

In effect you would still have 4 equations (1 for each coordinate).
 
Thanks again:)

I hope you'are right they made a mistake ^^ because I have no idea if they really just want one equation
 

Similar threads

Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 12 ·
Replies
12
Views
2K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
4K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
2K