What is a nonholonomic constraint?

  • Context: Graduate 
  • Thread starter Thread starter maburne2
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Constraint
Click For Summary

Discussion Overview

The discussion revolves around the concept of nonholonomic constraints in mechanics, particularly in the context of Lagrangian mechanics. Participants explore the implications of these constraints on system behavior and motion, comparing them to holonomic constraints and discussing their role in problem-solving within mechanics.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory
  • Technical explanation
  • Debate/contested

Main Points Raised

  • One participant seeks clarification on the nature of nonholonomic constraints, questioning whether they specify system behavior or lead to unbound motion.
  • Another participant describes nonholonomic constraints as those that cannot be expressed as functional relationships between coordinates, typically involving velocities.
  • A participant discusses the complexity introduced by nonholonomic constraints, emphasizing the necessity of using redundant coordinates and Lagrange multipliers.
  • There is a query about whether a conservation law, such as that of energy in a simple harmonic oscillator, could be considered a nonholonomic constraint, prompting further discussion.
  • One participant argues that conservation laws are not constraints but rather results of the dynamics of the system.
  • A comment highlights the potential impact of nonholonomic constraints on system dynamics and stability.

Areas of Agreement / Disagreement

Participants express differing views on the classification of conservation laws in relation to nonholonomic constraints, indicating a lack of consensus on this aspect. The discussion remains unresolved regarding the interpretation and implications of nonholonomic constraints.

Contextual Notes

Some participants reference specific examples and mathematical formulations, but there is no consensus on the implications of these examples for the broader understanding of nonholonomic constraints.

maburne2
Messages
12
Reaction score
0
Hey guys,
What exactly does a nonholonomic constraint tell about a system. For instance I am working on a goldstein problem and it has raised the importance of interpreting what a constraint really does. I understand what a holonomic constraint is and what it tells me-for one the motion is bound-but I really do not know how to interpret the nonholonomic constraints. Are they criteria that specify how the system behaves, or what causes the system to have unbound motion? Any help would be greatly appreciated.

Thanks
 
Physics news on Phys.org
maburne2 said:
What exactly does a nonholonomic constraint tell about a system. For instance I am working on a goldstein problem and it has raised the importance of interpreting what a constraint really does. I understand what a holonomic constraint is and what it tells me-for one the motion is bound-but I really do not know how to interpret the nonholonomic constraints. Are they criteria that specify how the system behaves, or what causes the system to have unbound motion? Any help would be greatly appreciated.
http://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Nonholonomic
 
Nonholonomic. Don't you just love these terms they use in Mechanics? How about scleronomous and rheonomous. Or the polhode. Whose only role in life it seems to roll without slipping on the herpolhode. I used to wonder: what horrible thing would happen if the polhode ever slipped? Nonholonomic constraints are what make Lagrangian Mechanics worth doing: they're hard to understand, but make it possible to solve difficult and interesting problems.

First, a holonomic constraint is one that can be expressed as a functional relationship between the coordinates: f(q1, q2,... ) = 0. The nice thing about such a constraint is that by simple substitution you can use it to eliminate one of the coordinates. However you're not required to: you can work a Mechanics problem using more coordinates than are strictly needed. For example take a point mass moving freely in a circle. You can work it the easy way using one coordinate Θ, or you can work it the hard way using two coordinates x and y, with the constraint that x2 + y2 = constant. Such a constraint is handled by introducing a Lagrange multiplier λ. And even that step is counterintuitive because now instead of solving a system with one variable, or even two variables you must solve a system with three: x, y and λ.

Well, a nonholonomic constraint is the other case: one that cannot be expressed as a functional relationship between the coordinates. Usually the velocities are involved. If you've understood the above paragraph, the only difference is that now you have no choice: you are forced to use redundant coordinates and introduce the Lagrange multiplier.
 
Bill_K said:
Well, a nonholonomic constraint is the other case: one that cannot be expressed as a functional relationship between the coordinates. Usually the velocities are involved. If you've understood the above paragraph, the only difference is that now you have no choice: you are forced to use redundant coordinates and introduce the Lagrange multiplier.

Would a conservation law be regarded as a nonholonomic constraint? For example, take the simple harmonic oscillator: \mathcal L= .5(\dot{x}^2-x^2) which would have the following relationship between velocities and coordinates: E=\mbox{constant}=.5(\dot{x}^2+x^2). It doesn't seem you can solve the latter equation for the position or velocity and substitute it back into the former equation and use Lagrange's equation. So would one have to use Lagrange multipliers with E as the constraint equation?
 
Instead of being fully fixed or constrainted relative to something (holonomic), this variable can move, but only in a specific way. For example, ice skates can move relative to ice, but only in the direction of the blades (unless shredding occurs).
 
A conservation law wouldn't be regarded as a constraint at all, because it's really a consequence of the dynamics. You don't need to enforce conservation of energy, it just falls right out of the dynamics as long as the Lagrangian doesn't have any explicit time dependence.
 
Amen brotha. But your non-holonomic constraint may have a fundamental effect on system dynamics and stability.
 

Similar threads

  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
14K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K