The Steady-state motion of a forced oscillator

  • Thread starter Thread starter RJLiberator
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Motion Oscillator
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around the steady-state motion of a forced oscillator with a forcing function of F_0*sin(wt). Participants explore the implications of using complex representations in the context of differential equations governing oscillatory motion.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Assumption checking

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants examine the transformation of the forcing function from F_0*cos(wt) to F_0*sin(wt) using complex numbers. There are discussions about the correct form of the solution, whether to use the real or imaginary part of the complex representation, and the implications of these choices on the resulting equations.

Discussion Status

There is an active exploration of the mathematical steps involved in solving the differential equation. Some participants express uncertainty about their approaches, while others provide insights into the relationship between the complex solution and the real-world interpretation of the motion. Multiple interpretations of the problem are being discussed, particularly regarding the use of sine versus cosine functions in the context of the solution.

Contextual Notes

Participants note that the problem specifically states the forcing function as F_0*sin(wt), which raises questions about assumptions made in the transformation process. There is also mention of the potential complexity of the amplitude in the solution.

RJLiberator
Gold Member
Messages
1,094
Reaction score
63

Homework Statement


Solve for the steady-statem otion of a forced oscillator if the forcing is F_0*sin(wt) instead of F_0*cos(wt). Use complex representations.

Homework Equations


e^(i*x) = cos(x)+isin(x)

The Attempt at a Solution



I assume, First, steady-state means without damping.
Next, we have the equation
m*x'' = -kx + F_0*sin(wt)
where x'' is the second derivative of x position with respect to time. Also known as acceleration.

So, we have:

z'' + w_0^2*z = F_0/m * (-i*e^(iwt)) where Re(z) = x

So far so good? I think I changed it correctly, normally when you do F_0*cos(wt) as forcing, you just switch it to e^(iwt)

Now, if everything is looking good up to here, we take z = A*(-ie^[i(wt-φ)])

After taking the second derivative of this and inputting it into our equation, our equation looks like:

i*w^2*A*e^[i(wt-φ)]-w_0^2*A*i*e^[i(wt-φ)] = F_0/m * (-i*e^(iwt))

dividing through by -i*e^(iwt) nets us

F_0/m = A(w_0^2 - w^2)*e^(-iφ)
Simplifying: F_0/m *e^(iφ) = A(w_0^2-w^2)

But now I seem to have run into a problem. The real part of this is F_0/m*cos(φ)
But this is the exact same solution to the forcing with F_0*cos(wt).
I thought the problem wants me to reach Re(z) = F_0*sin(wt)

Any help? Did I go wrong somewhere?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Wait,

Did I reach the answer here:

i*w^2*A*e^[i(wt-φ)]-w_0^2*A*i*e^[i(wt-φ)] = F_0/m * (-i*e^(iwt))

I think that's all the question is looking for.
 
Hey guys, sorry to bump this with an extra post.
But only 2 hours until class starts and was interested in if my answer was looking good, as it is a hard problem for me to understand fully.
 
RJLiberator said:
Hey guys, sorry to bump this with an extra post.
But only 2 hours until class starts and was interested in if my answer was looking good, as it is a hard problem for me to understand fully.
If you take the imaginary part of the solution, the driving function is Fo sin(wt)
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RJLiberator
I'm not sure what you mean by that.

The problem states:
if the forcing is F_0*sin(wt) instead of F_0*cos(wt).

So, isn't that already assumed.
 
You solve the differential equation for the case F=F0eiwt, and you get the steady-state solution as z=Aeiwt. In principle, the amplitude can be complex, but you get that A=F0/(w02-w2), which is real. Taking the imaginary part, the real-life solution is

y=F0/(w02-w2)sin(wt). sine function instead of cosine.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RJLiberator
Hm.
Few concerns:

The forcing part of it is F_0*sin(wt)

so we have
m*a = -kx + F_0*sin(wt)

If we are to convert this to complex numbers we have
m*d^2z/dt^2 +kz = F_0 * (-i*e^(iwt))

Why do you say z = Ae^(iwt) and not what I think should be (-i*e^(iwt)) as my part seems to provide a real part of sin(wt) instead of an imaginary part.
 
RJLiberator said:
Hm.
Few concerns:

The forcing part of it is F_0*sin(wt)

so we have
m*a = -kx + F_0*sin(wt)

If we are to convert this to complex numbers we have
m*d^2z/dt^2 +kz = F_0 * (-i*e^(iwt))

Why do you say z = Ae^(iwt) and not what I think should be (-i*e^(iwt)) as my part seems to provide a real part of sin(wt) instead of an imaginary part.
F_0*sin(wt) is not the same as F_0 * (-i*e^(iwt)), but F_0*sin(wt)=Im(F_0 e^(iwt))
 
Okay, thatttt makes a lot of sense to me.

So using z = Ae^[i(wt-Φ)] is the correct choice, but instead of Re(z) =x we let Im(z) = x.

Solution would be then:
(iw)^2*A*e^[i(wt-Φ)]+w_0^2*A*e^[i(wt-Φ)] = F_0/m * e^(iwt)

With Im(z) = x.

Would that be the correct way to display the solution (I guess here I am getting lost on what the problem actually wants.)
It seems like this would be the steady-state motion of a forced oscillator. But this is still the same equation as with cos(wt) just where cos(wt) is with Re(z).

Or, do I input for z = sin(wt) and solve?
 
  • #10
RJLiberator said:
Okay, thatttt makes a lot of sense to me.

So using z = Ae^[i(wt-Φ)] is the correct choice, but instead of Re(z) =x we let Im(z) = x.

Solution would be then:
(iw)^2*A*e^[i(wt-Φ)]+w_0^2*A*e^[i(wt-Φ)] = F_0/m * e^(iwt)
Solve this equation for A, and then give the solution as A*sin(wt-Φ)
But you get the same solution if you just input x=Asin(wt-Φ). Φ will be 0 or pi.
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: RJLiberator
  • #11
A = (F_0/m) * (1/(w^2-w_0^2) * sin(Φ)

:D ?
 
  • #12
RJLiberator said:
A = (F_0/m) * (1/(w^2-w_0^2) * sin(Φ)

:D ?
And what is Φ?
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
1K
Replies
17
Views
3K
Replies
4
Views
3K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
2K
  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
884
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K