Natural frequency of a mass spring system

Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the natural frequency of a mass-spring system, particularly in the context of a mass on a slope and the effects of gravity on oscillation. Participants explore the relationship between gravitational forces and the oscillatory motion of the system, considering both theoretical and practical implications.

Discussion Character

  • Homework-related
  • Conceptual clarification
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant expresses uncertainty about how to approach the problem and suggests that gravity affects the system by compressing and elongating springs.
  • Another participant points out that the natural frequency equation for a mass-spring oscillator does not include gravitational acceleration (g).
  • Some participants argue that while the frequency formula does not explicitly include gravity, the consistent acceleration due to gravity could influence the oscillation frequency, especially in a tilted configuration.
  • A participant explains that the gravitational force can be broken into components, with only the parallel component affecting the system's displacement and equilibrium position.
  • One participant proposes a formula for angular frequency (ω) based on equivalent spring constant (keq) and mass (m), indicating a relationship between them.
  • Another participant asserts that knowledge of the forces acting on the system is unnecessary for determining ω, as the necessary components are already provided in the equation.
  • A later reply suggests that the gravitational force component parallel to the slope is analogous to the mg term in a vertical spring scenario.
  • One participant questions the relevance of gravity in the context of the problem, prompting a reflection on simpler cases.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants do not reach a consensus on the role of gravity in the oscillatory motion of the mass-spring system. While some argue that gravity is not needed for the frequency calculation, others contend that it influences the system's behavior in a tilted configuration.

Contextual Notes

Participants express varying assumptions about the influence of gravity, the configuration of the system, and the necessity of certain parameters in the equations. The discussion highlights the complexity of analyzing oscillatory motion in non-horizontal setups.

whitejac
Messages
169
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


Problem 2.9 vibrations.JPG


Homework Equations


T = 2π√(m/k)
mx'' + kx = 0
F = ma

The Attempt at a Solution


I don't honestly know where to start with this. I'm really out of my league in this class, and I'm trying my best to catch up with the things I didn't quite master in Dynamics and Physics...
As far as I can tell, gravity pushes the mass down at a rate of:
m(9.8)(sinθ)

This then compresses k2 and elongates k1. So I should combine them into getting a keq because they are combined and he displacement is the same for each due to the mass moving linearly?

keq = (1/k1 + 1/k2)-1

That doesn't seem quite like i have enough because gravity is at play. If this were perfectly horizontal, there'd be nothing left but to plug keq back into the equation for T.

So I need to derive the relationship between gravity and the k coefficient because T doesn't imply any need for gravity to affect it, but it should. That's where I think I'm lost, though I probably went off track way earlier...
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Take a look at the natural frequency equation for a simple mass-spring oscillator. Does it involve g in any way?
 
It doesn't, but wouldn't the consistent acceleration of gravity affect the frequency with which it would oscillate? If this were level, normal to gravity, and we neglected friction, a movement would oscillate it left and right. However, since it is tilted, it would also oscillate with the added pressing of its weight. I know the frequency formula shows no forced, but that just seems a bit too simple
 
With the cart on a slope as shown you can break the gravitational force into two components, one parallel to the slope and one perpendicular (normal). The normal component does not affect the motion of the system. The component parallel to the slope will produce a displacement 'bias', essentially a new equilibrium position for the cart. This is entirely equivalent to the case where a spring is stretched by a hanging mass so that the equilibrium point is below the natural length of the spring.
 
So... if I'm understanding this correctly then, it's plainly:
ω = √(keq / m)
Where keq = (1/k1 + 1/k2)-1
 
The reason we don't need to know any of the forces acting on it is because we already know the necessary components for ω = √(k/m).
If we had other components (like the length of the ramp and the position of the mass) then we would have to derive back towards that equation, but in this instance we do not have to because it was given.
 
Yup.

You might want to take a look at the short derivation on this page: Mass on Spring Resonance . The component of the gravitational force that parallels the slope in your problem is the analog of the mg term there.
 
That doesn't seem quite like i have enough because gravity is at play.
Check your intuition: does gravity matter?
Use a simpler situation with one mass and one spring... you know the answer when the spring is vertical right?
 

Similar threads

Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K
  • · Replies 19 ·
Replies
19
Views
3K
Replies
3
Views
3K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
6K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
3K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
Replies
39
Views
5K