Normal modes and system's energy

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The energy of a system equals the sum of the energies of its normal modes due to the orthogonality of mode shapes. This principle is illustrated through the example of a guitar string, where complex motion can be decomposed into sinusoidal displacements using Fourier decomposition. The mathematical proof relies on linear algebra, demonstrating that for different modes, the mass and stiffness matrices yield zero when multiplied, confirming the orthogonality. This result is crucial for understanding system dynamics in engineering applications.

PREREQUISITES
  • Linear algebra fundamentals, particularly matrix operations
  • Understanding of normal modes in mechanical systems
  • Fourier decomposition techniques
  • Basic principles of dynamics and system energy
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the orthogonality of eigenvectors in linear algebra
  • Learn about normal mode analysis in mechanical systems
  • Explore Fourier series and their applications in system dynamics
  • Investigate the derivation of kinetic and potential energy in multi-degree-of-freedom systems
USEFUL FOR

Mechanical engineers, physicists, and students studying dynamics who seek to deepen their understanding of system energy and normal mode analysis.

Tosh5457
Messages
130
Reaction score
28
Hi, why does the energy of the system equals the sum of the energy of the modes? The book I'm reading only states it, it doesn't prove it.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The motion/excitation/configuration of a system, whatever it is (you don't say), can always be expressed as a sum of normal modes. An example: lift a guitar string at one point so the string displacement is triangular, and let go. Subsequent motion is extremely complicated, but it can be expressed as a sum of sinusoidal displacements at the fundamental and harmonic frequencies that are relatively easy to predict from a Fourier decomposition of the initial triangular excitation. Since the normal mode expansion describes the "actual" displacement, the sum of its energies equals the total energy of the system.
 
The matiematical reason is that the mode shapes are orthogonal. If ##x_i## amd ##x_j## are two different modes (## i \ne j##), then ##x_i^TMx_j = 0## and ##x_i^TKx_j = 0## where ##M## and ##K## are the system mass and stiffness matrices.

You can express any motion of the system as a linear combination of all the modes, i.e.
$$x = \sum_i a_i x_i.$$ So the total strain energy of the system is
$$x^T K x/2 = (\sum_i a_ix_i)^T K (\sum_j a_j x_j)/2
= \sum_i\sum_j (a_ia_jx_i^T K x_j)/2 = \sum_i (a^2_i x_i^T K x_i)/2$$because the only non-zero terms are when ##i = j##. The same is true for the kinetic energy.

The math proof that the modes are orthogonal requires quite a bit of linear algebra, and may be just assumed, or demonstrated by a numerical example, in a first course in dynamics. For practical engineering work, knowing the result is true is a lot more important than knowing how to prove it!
 
AlephZero said:
The math proof that the modes are orthogonal requires quite a bit of linear algebra...

It's easy to show this for the special case of two modes with different frequencies, if you assume the mass and stiffness matrices are symmetric. (None of those assumptions are necessary, but the proof without them is much harder).

For the two modes we have ##Mx_i + \omega_i^2Kx_i = 0## and ##Mx_j + \omega_j^2Kx_j = 0##.

Multiply the first equation by ##x_j^T## and the second by ##x_i^T##:
##x_j^TMx_i + \omega_i^2x_j^TKx_i = 0## and ##x_i^TMx_j + \omega_j^2x_i^TKx_j = 0##.
If M and K are symmetric, ## x_j^TMx_i = x_i^TMx_j ## and ## x_j^TKx_i = x_i^TKx_j ##.
So by subtracting the two equations we get ##(\omega_i^2 - \omega_j^2)x_i^TKx_j =0##.

If the two frequencies are different, this means that ##x_i^TKx_j = 0##, and back substituting, ##x_i^TMx_j = 0##.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
1K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
3K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K