Simple problem: logarithmic decrement

  • Thread starter Thread starter joriarty
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Logarithmic
Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the logarithmic decrement for a lightly damped harmonic oscillator with a frequency of 10 kHz, where the amplitude decays by 25% over 300 oscillations. The calculated logarithmic decrement is 9.59x10-4, leading to the expression for amplitude as a function of time, A(t)=A0e-9.59t. A participant questions a discrepancy in course notes that suggest A(t)=e-9.59t, arguing that this omits the initial amplitude A0, which is essential for the calculation. Another participant confirms that the course notes contain an error, as the units would not match without A0. The conversation emphasizes the importance of including the initial amplitude in the amplitude decay formula.
joriarty
Messages
61
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Note this is exam revision rather than actual course work worth marks, so there is no need to be deliberately vague :)

The question comes in two parts, regarding a lightly damped harmonic oscillator with frequency 10 kHz and an amplitude that decays by 25% over 300 oscillations. First I am asked to calculate the logarithmic decrement, and then to make an expression that allows the amplitude to be calculated as a function of time elapsed.

Homework Equations



δ=(1/N)ln(A0/AN)

The Attempt at a Solution



The log decrement is 9.59x10-4. Easy. For the second part, simply rearranging the log decrement formula gives AN=A0e-Nδ. Knowing that N = 10,000*t, I get A(t)=A0e-9.59t.

What I do not understand is why my course notes give A(t)=e-9.59t. Why is this answer not multiplied by A0? Mathematically and physically, this does not make sense to me - the amplitude as a function of time definitely does depend on the initial amplitude! Am I right in thinking that is a mistake?

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Yes, you're right. If nothing else, the units don't match, that tells you the formula in your notes can't be correct.
 
Ah good, thanks for confirming that!
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
1K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
5K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
3K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
4K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
6K
Replies
5
Views
5K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
4K