1. Not finding help here? Sign up for a free 30min tutor trial with Chegg Tutors
    Dismiss Notice
Dismiss Notice
Join Physics Forums Today!
The friendliest, high quality science and math community on the planet! Everyone who loves science is here!

Simple Harmonic Motion homework

  1. Apr 18, 2007 #1
    I came across a physics problem for homework that I was able to work out on my own, however when I got to class, my teacher said that my numbers were not what the book had calculated, but couldn't tell if there was a flaw in my logic that would prevent me from getting the correct phi and therefore the correct answers.

    The question:

    A simple harmonic oscillator consists of a block of mass 4.20 kg attached to a spring of spring constant 200 N/m. When t = 4.00 s, the position and velocity of the block are x = 0.129 m and v = 3.415 m/s.

    My approach

    a.) What is the amplitude of the oscillations?

    I used conservation of mechanical energy to solve this part of the problem, and got the correct amplitude this way:

    (1/2)kx^2 + (1/2)mv^2 = (1/2)k(amplitude)^2

    amplitude = .5114 m

    b.) What was the position of the mass at t = 0 s?

    For this part, I plugged the position I was given and the time I was given as well as the amplitude and omega, which I solved for, into this formula:

    x(t) = amplitude * cos(omega * t + phi)

    I solved for omega:

    omega = (k/m)^(1/2)
    omega = 6.9 rad/s

    and used the amplitude from part a) and the given x and t to solve for phi

    .129 = .5114 * cos(6.9 * 4 + phi)
    .252 = cos(27.6 + phi)
    1.316 = 27.6 + phi
    phi = -26.28 rad

    then I use this phi in the x(t) function to solve for x at t = 0:

    x(0) = .5114 * cos(-26.28)
    x(0) = .21 m

    c.) What was the velocity of the mass at t = 0 s?

    I use the same phi, amp, and omega from before, except in the equation:

    v(t) = -omega * amplitude * sin(omega * t + phi)
    v(0) = -(6.9) * (.5114) * sin(-26.28)
    v(0) = 3.217 m/s

    When my teacher does the problem another way, however, he got a phi that was different from mine.

    Teacher's Approach

    v(4)/x(4) = [-omega * amplitude * sin(omega * t + phi)] / [amplitude * cos(omega * t + phi)]
    v(4)/x(4) = -omega * tan(omega * t + phi)
    26.473 = -6.9 * tan(6.9 * 4 + phi)
    -3.837 = tan(27.6 + phi)
    -1.316 = 27.6 + phi
    phi = -28.916 rad

    He then proceeded to solve for the amplitude using x(t) = amplitude * cos(omega * t + phi) and x(0) and v(0) in pretty much the same way that I did.

    My question is, why did using his method get the equation:

    -1.316 = 27.6 + phi
    phi = -28.916 rad

    when my way instead gave me:

    1.316 = 27.6 + phi
    phi = -26.28 rad

    In order to get the phi that my teacher got, I would have to alter the formula that I used to solve for phi to:

    x(t) = amplitude * cos(-omega * t - phi)

    which I don't think is correct. I would greatly appreciate any insight into this matter.
    Last edited: Apr 18, 2007
  2. jcsd
  3. Apr 18, 2007 #2
    very nice post. What I think happened, is in your soln, amplitude could be
    Assume you chose the negative root,
    then -.252=cos(27.6+phi) which is same as since cos(pi-x)=-cos(x)
    hence .252=cos(pi-27.6-phi)
  4. Apr 18, 2007 #3
    Thanks for the clarification denverdoc, I guess neither me nor my teacher realized that by taking the sqrt we had a +/- .5114. For my approach, and not knowing the answer that my teacher got, is there any other way to tell that I should have used the negative amplitude instead of the positive one?
  5. Apr 18, 2007 #4
    maybe a wave guru can help out, technically speaking the teachers approach was the more rigorous approach since it used d(y(t)/y(t) along with a snap shot of conditions at t=4, but yours would have worked as well just from knowing the argument is usually given as wt+/-phi, and then testing the soln to make sure of the sign. Overall I think you get an A+ for creative approach. Again, very nice job.
Know someone interested in this topic? Share this thread via Reddit, Google+, Twitter, or Facebook

Have something to add?