Two Spring System Homework: Find Distance & Max Velocity

  • Thread starter Thread starter CAF123
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Spring System
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around a two-spring system where a mass is released from rest, and participants are exploring the distance the mass falls before rebounding and the maximum velocity it achieves. The problem involves concepts from mechanics, specifically Hooke's law and gravitational forces.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning, Problem interpretation

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • Participants discuss the equilibrium conditions of the system, the relationship between the extensions of the two springs, and the application of energy conservation principles. Some suggest using trigonometric functions to express displacement, while others explore the implications of defining coordinates relative to different reference points.

Discussion Status

The discussion is active, with participants providing insights and alternative approaches to the problem. Some have noted the correctness of previous calculations while others are exploring different methods to analyze the system, including energy approaches and coordinate transformations.

Contextual Notes

There are mentions of specific assumptions regarding the spring constants and the gravitational field, as well as the need to clarify the definitions of equilibrium positions in different contexts. Some participants express uncertainty about the implications of their setups and seek further clarification on the relationships between variables.

CAF123
Gold Member
Messages
2,918
Reaction score
87

Homework Statement


A box of mass m is released from rest at ##x_o = 0## with the two springs ##k## and ##2k## unstretched. Find the distance that the mass falls before rebounding. What maximum velocity does it obtain?

Homework Equations


Hookes law, gravitational force.

The Attempt at a Solution


Suppose the distance the top spring is stretched is ##x_1## and that of the lower spring, ##x_2##. Then define ##z = x_1 + x_2##. At equilibrium, ##mg - 2kx_2 = 0## and ##2kx_2 = kx_1##. (There is an upwards force of ##kx_1## from the displacement of the upper spring and a downwards force of ##kx_2## since the extension of the lower spring causes a pull on the upper spring and by virtue of NIII, there is a corresponding reaction force). This means ##x_1 = 2x_2## so that ##z = 3x_2## and finally ##mg - 2/3 k z = 0## at equilibrium. So the system is equivalent to one with a spring constant of 2/3 and a displacement of the mass a distance z at equilibrium. In general, we can then write that the mass satisfies ##mg - (2/3) k Z = m dv/dt##, where Z is some extension of the equivalent system with constant 2/3. Write this as $$g - \frac{2}{3} \frac{k}{m} Z = v\frac{dv}{dZ} \Rightarrow Zg - \frac{2}{3}\frac{k}{m} \frac{Z^2}{2} = \frac{v^2}{2}$$ so that $$v = \sqrt{2gZ - \frac{2}{3}\frac{k}{m}Z^2}$$ The distance the mass falls before rebounding is given by the first instant (other than at the point of release) when the velocity is zero. This implies ##Z_{\text{before rebound}} = 3mg/k## while maximum velocity is obtained from ##dv/dZ = 0 \rightarrow Z = 3/2 (mg/k ).##. Is this correct?
 

Attachments

  • spring2.png
    spring2.png
    583 bytes · Views: 476
Physics news on Phys.org
It is correct, but you need to give the maximum speed, too.

ehild
 
Hi ehild :)
ehild said:
It is correct, but you need to give the maximum speed, too.

ehild
Okay, so I evaluate v when Z = 3/2 mg/k. I was wondering if we could also solve this problem by writing explicit expressions for the displacement using a sin function for example. E.g writing Z = Asin(ωt) for example, but I am not really sure where to start with this analysis.
 
It will be a cosine function about the equilibrium position Ze=3/2mg/k.
If Z is the change of length of the two-spring system, and K is the equivalent force constant, ##m\ddot Z = mg-KZ## with the initial condition Z(0)=0. What is Z(t)?

ehild
 
If two springs are in series, with spring constants k1 and k2, then, if they are supporting a force F, the total elongation is

Δx=\frac{F}{k_1}+\frac{F}{k_2}

So the overall spring constant, k=F/Δx is given by:

\frac{1}{k}=\frac{1}{k_1}+\frac{1}{k_2}

Chet
 
Chet, that was explained and used in the solution in post #1.

ehild
 
You can use an energy approach to solve the velocity. You know the potential of both springs (##U=\frac{1}{2}kx^2##) and the mass. Just set ##E= K + U##. When ##V=0## then ##K=0## and ##E=U## and when ##V=max## then ##U=0## and ##E=K##.
 
@Gil: you forgot the gravitational potential energy.

Notice that the problem has been solved by the OP.

ehild
 
ehild said:
Chet, that was explained and used in the solution in post #1.

ehild
Thanks ehild. I just wanted to show the relation in a more general way, and not just customized to this specific problem.

Chet
 
  • #10
Thanks ehild, I got it.

I solved this problem relative to the relaxed length of the spring. How would I do the same problem but with the analysis relative to the equilibrium length of the spring? For sure, ##Z_{\text{equil}} = mg/K## and I want to introduce a new coordinate ##\tilde z## such that this measures the extension of the spring from the point of equilibrium, mg/K. But I am having a bit trouble relating it to my initial coordinate ##Z##, the coordinate from the relaxed length of the spring.

Many thanks.
 
  • #11
Zequil is the stretching at equilibrium. You previous variable Z is
##Z=\tilde z+Z_{equil}##.
##\ddot Z = \ddot {\tilde z}=mg-K(\tilde z+Z_{equil})##
but ##Z_{equil}=mg/K##, it cancels and you are left with
## \ddot {\tilde z}=-K\tilde z##.

ehild
 
  • Like
Likes   Reactions: 1 person
  • #12
Thank you.

I am trying to apply this to another related question. It is an example in some notes, so I have the solution in front of me but I am just trying to understand the step where they rewrite the motion relative to the point of equilibrium.

The description is 'A car moves with constant speed u along a road with vertical profile h(x), where h'(x) is small. The car is modeled by a chassis which keeps contact with the ground, connected to an upper mass m by a spring and a damper.' (see sketch)

From the notes: Let us denote by ##Y(t)## the vertical position of the mass relative to the ground and ##\ell_o## the natural length of the spring. Then the position of the mass is ##Y = h + \ell_o + y## so that the E.o.M of the mass relative to the ground is ##m\ddot{Y} = -mg - k(Y-h-\ell_o)- \mu(\dot{Y} - \dot{h})##. This makes sense so far. Measuring ##\tilde y## from the equilibrium point, ##-mg - k(Y-h-\ell_o) = -k(\tilde y-h)##. How was this derived?

I believe the set up is exactly analogous to that in the previous question, but with redefining the coordinate system so that the origin coincides with the ceiling for example. Analogously to what you wrote in the previous post, I write ##Y = h + \ell_o + Y_{\text{equil}} + \tilde y##, where now I have the additional terms ##h## and ##\ell_o## since in this problem the origin is at the ground and not at the relaxed length as in the previous problem.

Then ##\ddot{Y} = \ddot{\tilde y}## (since h'(x) is small, ignore h''(x(t))) and ##Y_{\text{equil}} = -mg/k + h + \ell_o## Inputting this ##Y, Y_{\text{equil}}## back into the equation does not seem to give me the correct result. Any comments?
 

Attachments

  • chassis.png
    chassis.png
    936 bytes · Views: 480
Last edited:
  • #13
I can not follow you. I think the term with μ corresponds to damping, does it not?

Y(t) means the height of the mass measured from the ground. You got the equation m\ddot{Y} = -mg - k(Y-h-\ell_o)- \mu(\dot{Y} - \dot{h}).As h also changes, do not include it into Yequil. The book defines it as ##Y_{equil}=\ell_o-\frac{mg}{k}## and ##\tilde y = Y- Y_{equil}##.
Then -mg - k(Y-h-\ell_o) =-mg - k(Y_{equil}+\tilde y-h-\ell_o)=-mg - k(\ell_o-\frac{mg}{k}+\tilde y-h-\ell_o) =-k(\tilde y-h) and the differential equation becomes

m\ddot{\tilde y}=-k(\tilde y-h)-\mu(\dot{\tilde y}-\dot h)

ehild
 
  • #14
ehild said:
I can not follow you. I think the term with μ corresponds to damping, does it not?
Yes, sorry I see that wasn't made clear.

The book defines it as ##Y_{equil}=\ell_o-\frac{mg}{k}## ...

Why is this the case? I see that it solves the problem, but from the original eqn ##m\ddot{Y} = ...##, when I set ##\ddot{Y}=0## and solve for ##Y_{\text{equil}}##, I obtain ##\ell_o - mg/k + h##.

Thanks.
 
  • #15
They can define Yequil this way. It is just the equilibrium length of the spring in gravitational field. It would have been better to name it something else.
h(x) (x is the horizontal coordinate) is given and it changes as the car moves, and the motion of the mass will depend on h(x) . I think the problem goes forward by assuming that the car travels with some speed and find its vertical motion.

ehild
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 18 ·
Replies
18
Views
2K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
998
Replies
7
Views
1K
  • · Replies 14 ·
Replies
14
Views
2K
Replies
24
Views
4K
  • · Replies 6 ·
Replies
6
Views
1K
  • · Replies 8 ·
Replies
8
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 58 ·
2
Replies
58
Views
3K