Understand Hooke's Law and Spring Dynamics

AI Thread Summary
The discussion focuses on understanding the dynamics of a spring when an object with an initial velocity collides with it, specifically regarding the time it takes for the spring to compress. It highlights that the motion becomes simple harmonic after the impact, allowing the use of simple harmonic motion (SHM) equations to determine the compression time. The effect of gravity is also emphasized, noting that it alters the energy dynamics when the object is bouncing vertically, as both kinetic and gravitational potential energy must be considered. The derived formula for the time to maximum compression indicates it is dependent solely on the mass of the object and the spring constant, not on the object's initial velocity. This analysis clarifies the relationship between Hooke's Law, energy conservation, and the behavior of springs under varying conditions.
daveed
Messages
138
Reaction score
0
allright, here is something i haven't been able to understand with just hooke's law

if i have an object traveling at velocity v, let's say, 4m/s , and hits a spring at, i don't know, k=2? so then we know how far the spring compresses and all because you just need to set the work done and kinetic energy equal, but what i have not been able to get is how long does it take for it to compress? because with a changing force(and so a changing acceleration), i don't understand how to find the time it takes to stop the thing

also, when your talking about a ball bouncing up and hitting a spring, the compression would not be the same as if it had happened on a horizontal surface, because gravity would also be doing work on the ball too, right?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
if the object comes and hits the spring again(after being pulled down by gravity) and hits the spring out of phase, will you still need to take the work done by the spring? also, what if it- let's take this with a spring vibrating up and down now- hits the spring above the equillibrium point, where the force on the end of the spring is downwards? how does the object behave then?
 
daveed said:
also, when your talking about a ball bouncing up and hitting a spring, the compression would not be the same as if it had happened on a horizontal surface, because gravity would also be doing work on the ball too, right?

YES, of course the compression will be diffrent because of the gravity's force...
In this situation you don't only have kinetic energy but you have the gravity potential energy as well. The equation will be this then .5kx^2=.5mV2+mgh (in the vertical bouncing)...
but if it ball is traveling a horizontal distance you don't have gravity's potential energy hence the x would be less...

I hope I realized your question correctly..
 
daveed said:
allright, here is something i haven't been able to understand with just hooke's law

if i have an object traveling at velocity v, let's say, 4m/s , and hits a spring at, i don't know, k=2? so then we know how far the spring compresses and all because you just need to set the work done and kinetic energy equal, but what i have not been able to get is how long does it take for it to compress? because with a changing force(and so a changing acceleration), i don't understand how to find the time it takes to stop the thing

also, when your talking about a ball bouncing up and hitting a spring, the compression would not be the same as if it had happened on a horizontal surface, because gravity would also be doing work on the ball too, right?

F=-kx(t)=m\frac{d^2x(t)}{dt^2} (Newtons second law F=ma)

This is a differential equation with the general solution:
x(t)=Asin(\omega t)+Bcos(\omega t)

With \omega=\sqrt{k/m}[/tex]. Applying initial conditions; say x(t=0)=0<br /> x(t)=Asin(\omega t)<br /> <br /> The spring is totally compressed when:<br /> sin(\omega t)=1 so t=\frac{\pi}{2 \omega}=\frac{\pi}{2} \sqrt{m/k}<br /> <br /> And thus depends only on the mass of the object and the spring constant and not on the initial velocity of the object!
 
I have recently been really interested in the derivation of Hamiltons Principle. On my research I found that with the term ##m \cdot \frac{d}{dt} (\frac{dr}{dt} \cdot \delta r) = 0## (1) one may derivate ##\delta \int (T - V) dt = 0## (2). The derivation itself I understood quiet good, but what I don't understand is where the equation (1) came from, because in my research it was just given and not derived from anywhere. Does anybody know where (1) comes from or why from it the...

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
Replies
7
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
7K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
5
Views
4K
Replies
10
Views
3K
Back
Top