Simple Harmonic Motion of a Block on a Spring

Click For Summary
SUMMARY

The discussion focuses on calculating the frequency of a block attached to a spring undergoing simple harmonic motion on a frictionless surface. At t=0, the potential energy is 25% of the maximum potential energy, leading to the conclusion that the position x is equal to 1/2A. The phase angle φ is determined to be π/3. The user encounters a problem when calculating the period, resulting in a negative value, which is impossible. A suggestion is made to use -π/3 instead of π/3 to achieve a valid frequency calculation.

PREREQUISITES
  • Understanding of simple harmonic motion principles
  • Familiarity with potential and kinetic energy equations
  • Knowledge of trigonometric functions and their properties
  • Ability to manipulate equations involving angular frequency (ω) and period (T)
NEXT STEPS
  • Study the derivation of the simple harmonic motion equations
  • Learn about the significance of phase angles in oscillatory motion
  • Explore the relationship between frequency and period in harmonic systems
  • Investigate common mistakes in calculating energy in oscillatory systems
USEFUL FOR

Students studying physics, particularly those focusing on mechanics and oscillations, as well as educators seeking to clarify concepts related to simple harmonic motion.

Neodudeman
Messages
2
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


There's a block attached to a spring on a frictionless surface that oscillates back and forth. (Assume no damping).
At t=0, the potential energy in the spring is 25% of the maximum potential energy.
Kinetic energy decreases with time at t=0, and at t=2, the kinetic energy becomes 0 for the first time.

Determine the frequency of this motion.

Homework Equations


[tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]mv2 + [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]kx2 = Enet
x(t) = Acos([tex]\omega[/tex]*t+[tex]\phi[/tex]o)

The Attempt at a Solution


Ok. In order to get Frequency, we need the Period. To get the period, we solve for [tex]\omega[/tex] by using the position function.
To use the position function, we must first find [tex]\phi[/tex].

So, according to the data, at t=0, the PE is 25% of the maximum potential energy. We know that the maximum potential energy is actually equal to [tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]kA2. Thus, 25% of the maximum potential energy is equal to [tex]\frac{1}{4}[/tex]*[tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]*kA2.
Therefore, at t=0, [tex]\frac{1}{4}[/tex]*[tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]*kA2=[tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]kx2.

Solving for x, we get that x=[tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]A.

Putting that into the position function,
@t=0
[tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]A=Acos([tex]\omega[/tex]*0+[tex]\phi[/tex])
[tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]=cos([tex]\phi[/tex])
acos([tex]\frac{1}{2}[/tex]=[tex]\phi[/tex])

[tex]\phi[/tex]=[tex]\pi[/tex]/3

Now, solving for [tex]\omega[/tex] and the period.

And this is where I have a problem...

x(t)=A*cos([tex]\omega[/tex]*t+[tex]\phi[/tex])
At t=2, the potential energy is max, meaning the kinetic energy is 0. Thus, the position x is equal to the amplitude A.

A=A*cos([tex]\omega[/tex]*2+[tex]\pi[/tex]/3)
Divide by A, and [tex]\omega[/tex] = 2[tex]\pi[/tex]/T
1=cos(4[tex]\pi[/tex]/T+[tex]\pi[/tex]/3)
Acos(1) = 0
0 = 4[tex]\pi[/tex]/T+[tex]\pi[/tex]/3
Subtracting by [tex]\pi[/tex]/3
-[tex]\pi[/tex]/3 = 4[tex]\pi[/tex]/T
-1/3=4/T
This gives us:
T=-12

Which, I'm 90% sure, we cannot have.
A negative period gives a negative frequency. Where did I mess up in this problem? :/
 
Physics news on Phys.org
I had a look at your solution .. maybe I can't be helpful .. but you know that cos(60)=cos(-60)=0.5 .. if you use the -60 instead of 60 (pi/3) you will end up with the right sign , since it is impossible (100%) to have a negative frequency or period they alwaye positive ..
 
thebigstar25 said:
I had a look at your solution .. maybe I can't be helpful .. but you know that cos(60)=cos(-60)=0.5 .. if you use the -60 instead of 60 (pi/3) you will end up with the right sign , since it is impossible (100%) to have a negative frequency or period they alwaye positive ..

I think, expanding from this idea, it's possible to use, instead of
0=4[tex]\pi[/tex]/3+[tex]\pi[/tex]/3
you can do
2[tex]\pi[/tex]=4[tex]\pi[/tex]/3+[tex]\pi[/tex]/3

This gives f=5/12

With a -[tex]\pi[/tex]/3, it gives a f=1/12

Which is correct then? Hmm... Maybe someone can comment on the theories behind each of these approaches?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
Replies
4
Views
1K
Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 13 ·
Replies
13
Views
1K
Replies
16
Views
2K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
2K
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 10 ·
Replies
10
Views
2K