Transverse Oscillation of horizontal Mass-Springs system

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on analyzing the transverse oscillation of a mass-spring system, where a mass connected to two springs is displaced. Participants clarify the equations governing the restoring force and the role of the variable x, which represents the additional extension of the springs due to the displacement y. They emphasize the importance of small displacement approximations to simplify the equations, leading to the conclusion that the restoring force can be approximated as ky. The conversation highlights the need for careful consideration of terms in the equations when making approximations. Overall, the participants reach a clearer understanding of the mathematical relationships involved in the system's behavior.
omegasquared
Messages
13
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement



Mass M is supported by a smooth table and connected by two light horizontal springs to two fixed blocks. Each spring is of natural length L. Both springs are initially extended by L to get a total width between blocks of 4L. The spring constant of both springs is k.

When the mass is given a small transverse displacement, y, show that the restoring force is approximately ky.

See photo below:

Photo on 11-11-2015 at 15.54.jpg


Homework Equations



F = kx
sinθ = o/h[/B]

The Attempt at a Solution



Restoring force, Fr = 2kxsinθ
sinθ = y / (2L + x)
x = (y / sinθ) - 2L
 
Physics news on Phys.org
First you should draw a diagram showing a small transverse displacement y of the ball, and draw a coordinate system. Then write your equations. For example, I don't understand why there is an x in your equations at all.
 
Chandra Prayaga said:
First you should draw a diagram showing a small transverse displacement y of the ball, and draw a coordinate system. Then write your equations. For example, I don't understand why there is an x in your equations at all.

The x is to do with the extension of the spring which will occur when you displace the ball by y upwards.
 
omegasquared said:
Restoring force, Fr = 2kxsinθ
sinθ = y / (2L + x)
Are you being consistent about the meaning of x? Is it the total extension of the spring, or the additional extension beyond its extension when y=0?
 
haruspex said:
Are you being consistent about the meaning of x? Is it the total extension of the spring, or the additional extension beyond its extension when y=0?

Additional extension beyond what it was (L) at y=0.
 
omegasquared said:
Additional extension beyond what it was (L) at y=0.
Then reconsider your equation for Fr.
 
haruspex said:
Then reconsider your equation for Fr.

Ah, good point.

So it should be: Fr = 2k(L+x)sinθ

Which would then be: = 2ky(L+x) / (2L+x)

Agreed?
 
omegasquared said:
Ah, good point.

So it should be: Fr = 2k(L+x)sinθ

Which would then be: = 2ky(L+x) / (2L+x)

Agreed?
Yes.
 
haruspex said:
Yes.

I'm still unsure how to get from there to simply ky however.
 
  • #10
omegasquared said:
I'm still unsure how to get from there to simply ky however.
It says small displacements. If y is small, x is very small. What approximations does that allow you to make?
 
  • #11
haruspex said:
It says small displacements. If y is small, x is very small. What approximations does that allow you to make?

Expanding previously, Fr = (2kL+2kx)y / (2L+x), so if x is small then 2kx ≈ 0 and 2L + x ≈ 2L? Which would leave 2kLy/2L = ky but then surely the y on the top would make the whole thing ≈ 0?
 
  • #12
omegasquared said:
Expanding previously, Fr = (2kL+2kx)y / (2L+x), so if x is small then 2kx ≈ 0 and 2L + x ≈ 2L? Which would leave 2kLy/2L = ky but then surely the y on the top would make the whole thing ≈ 0?
What we're doing here is finding the first order approximation. You can think of it as writing the full form as the sum of a series of terms in which, as the displacement tends to zero, each term tends to zero faster than the one before it: a power series, say. The first order approximation throws away all except the first term.
 
  • Like
Likes omegasquared
  • #13
Well, certainly, if you put y = 0, then you don't have to do anything. There are no oscillations! You are making an approximation, where y, and x are small compared to L. So expressions like L + x, where L is large, and x is small, are nearly equal to L. e.g., 1000 + 1 ~ 1000. If you look at the y on top, you cannot neglect it because you don't have anything to compare it with. After all, while 1 << 1000, 1 is not small compared to 0.
 
  • Like
Likes omegasquared
  • #14
haruspex said:
What we're doing here is finding the first order approximation. You can think of it as writing the full form as the sum of a series of terms in which, as the displacement tends to zero, each term tends to zero faster than the one before it: a power series, say. The first order approximation throws away all except the first term.

Chandra Prayaga said:
Well, certainly, if you put y = 0, then you don't have to do anything. There are no oscillations! You are making an approximation, where y, and x are small compared to L. So expressions like L + x, where L is large, and x is small, are nearly equal to L. e.g., 1000 + 1 ~ 1000. If you look at the y on top, you cannot neglect it because you don't have anything to compare it with. After all, while 1 << 1000, 1 is not small compared to 0.

Thank you both for your help, in combination I believe I understand this much better now but I'll continue to ponder this idea of approximations (in terms of power series) over. Much appreciated!
 
Back
Top