Simple horizontal harmonic oscillator with spring that has a mass.

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the dynamics of a mass M connected to a spring of mass m on a frictionless table, focusing on how the spring's mass influences the oscillation of the block. While the application of Newton's second law appears to exclude the spring's mass, it is clarified that the inertia of the spring must be considered for a complete analysis. The equation F = -kx is valid under the assumption of uniform stretching, but neglects the spring's inertia, which complicates the system's behavior. Including the spring's mass leads to a more complex model requiring differential equations, resulting in multiple frequencies of motion rather than simple harmonic motion. Ultimately, the mass of the spring does affect the motion of the block, necessitating a more nuanced approach to the problem.
bgq
Messages
162
Reaction score
0
Hi,

Consider a block of mass M connected to a spring of mass m and stiffness k horizontally on a frictionless table. We elongate the block some distance, and then release it so that it now oscillates.

According to the theoretical study using energy methods, we see that the mass of the spring affects the motion of the block.

But if we apply Newton's 2nd law to the system formed of the block alone, the mass of the spring do not appear in the equation!

Here it is: F = Ma then -kx = Ma then a=(-k/M)x where the weight and the normal reaction cancel each other.

As we see the mass of the spring does not appear in the equation.

My question is: Does the mass of the spring affect the motion of the block? and if yes, what is wrong in the way I have applied Newton's second law above?

Thanks in advance.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
The mass of the spring will affect the force applied by the spring, as it requires a force to accelerate this mass. There is nothing wrong with your formula, it is just not sufficient to evaluate the motion of the system.
 
The equation "F = -kx" assumes that the spring is stretched uniformly along its length at all times. That is consistent with the assumption that it has no inertia.

It would be more correct to say the force depends on the axial strain at the end of the spring. But if you ignore the inertia of the spring, the strain is uniform along the length, and is measured by x/L where L is the unstretched length of the spring. So the OP's equation F = -kx is correct if you ignore the inertia, and include the effect of the length L as part of the spring constant k.

If you include the inertia of the spring in the model, the spring is not uniformly stretched along its length. To model this you need to set up a differential equation describing the motion of all points along the spring, and the "mass on the end" then becomes part of the boundary conditions for the solution of that equation.

If you include the inertia of the spring, the solution of the equations of motion include vibrations in simple harmonic motion at more than one frequency (in fact, at an infinite number of different frequences), and any linear combination os those solutions - including solutions that will not look like "simple harmonic motion" and may not even be periodic, because the different frequencies for harmonic vibrations might not be in simple integer ratios like 2:1 or 3:2.
 
Thank you very much
 
The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'
Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
Back
Top