Why is the motion of a piston considered to be simple harmonic motion?

AI Thread Summary
The motion of a piston is considered simple harmonic motion (SHM) because it can exhibit oscillatory behavior similar to that of a pendulum, particularly under ideal conditions. The mass of the piston and connecting rod does influence the system, primarily affecting the time period of the motion rather than disqualifying it from being SHM. In an idealized scenario with negligible damping forces, the piston can oscillate back and forth in a manner consistent with SHM. The discussion highlights that while pistons can have various motions, they can still demonstrate SHM characteristics under specific conditions. Understanding these principles is essential for analyzing piston dynamics in mechanical systems.
SonicBoomxxx
Messages
2
Reaction score
1
I know this is simple, but I don't fully understand why the motion of a piston is considered to be simple harmonic? Wouldn't the piston and connecting rod have mass?
 
Physics news on Phys.org
With an infinitely long connecting rod, you would have comparable acceleration and velocity values for the piston and crank pin.
 
A piston can have any motion you want. Are you talking about some very specific application of a piston?
 
Simple harmonic motion is for small vibrations in an isolated system(free from damping forces). If you have a pendulum of mass 20g it can also undergo shm. Mass just affects it's time period. A piston can also undergo shm.
 

Thread '1:1 versus 2:1 Mechanical Advantage debate'

The rope is tied into the person (the load of 200 pounds) and the rope goes up from the person to a fixed pulley and back down to his hands. He hauls the rope to suspend himself in the air. What is the mechanical advantage of the system? The person will indeed only have to lift half of his body weight (roughly 100 pounds) because he now lessened the load by that same amount. This APPEARS to be a 2:1 because he can hold himself with half the force, but my question is: is that mechanical...
View full post »

Thread 'Newton's first law?'

Some physics textbook writer told me that Newton's first law applies only on bodies that feel no interactions at all. He said that if a body is on rest or moves in constant velocity, there is no external force acting on it. But I have heard another form of the law that says the net force acting on a body must be zero. This means there is interactions involved after all. So which one is correct?
View full post »
Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Thread 'Beam on an inclined plane'

Hello! I have a question regarding a beam on an inclined plane. I was considering a beam resting on two supports attached to an inclined plane. I was almost sure that the lower support must be more loaded. My imagination about this problem is shown in the picture below. Here is how I wrote the condition of equilibrium forces: $$ \begin{cases} F_{g\parallel}=F_{t1}+F_{t2}, \\ F_{g\perp}=F_{r1}+F_{r2} \end{cases}. $$ On the other hand...
View full post »

Similar threads

B Is simple harmonic motion also a pure translatory motion?
Replies
21
Views
2K
I The speed of a waves on a string in Simple harmonic motion
Replies
8
Views
2K
I Solutions to Simple Harmonic Motion second order differential equation
Replies
1
Views
1K
Is this Simple Harmonic Motion?
Replies
5
Views
10K
I How to interpret complex solutions to simple harmonic oscillator?
Replies
4
Views
2K
Angular Velocity in Simple Harmonic Motion
Replies
11
Views
15K
Simple harmonic motion>Origin?
Replies
19
Views
3K
Simple Harmonic Motion: conceptual idea of angular frequency
Replies
2
Views
2K
Simple harmonic motion and circular motion
Replies
3
Views
2K
I Change of coordinates in a potential energy field
Replies
2
Views
1K

Hot Threads

Recent Insights

Back
Top