Why is the natural frequency of a column at the buckling load?

AI Thread Summary
The natural frequency of a uniform column at the buckling load is theoretically zero when the axial load equals the critical buckling load. This occurs because, at this point, less energy is required to initiate vibration due to lower kinetic energy associated with reduced velocity. The concept implies that once the frequency reaches zero, no additional energy is needed to start the "vibration," albeit at an infinitely slow rate. However, real-world factors like geometrical tolerances and off-center loads introduce destabilizing forces that can initiate motion. The behavior of the column becomes nonlinear once buckling occurs, contradicting the initial assumption of infinitely slow motion.
theBEAST
Messages
361
Reaction score
0
So apparently the natural frequency is zero for uniform column with axial load when P is equal to the critical buckling load. Could anyone please explain theoretically why this is the case.
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ignoring any damping forces acting on the column, when it is vibrating at its natural frequency, the total energy (kinetic energy + internal strain energy) is constant.

As you increase the compressive force and the natural frequency gets lower, you need less energy to make it vibrate with a given amplitude, because the velocity is smaller and therefore the KE is smaller.

When the frequency reaches zero, in theory you don't have to supply extra energy to start it "vibrating" with "infinite" amplitude (but infinitely slowly, of course!).

In practice, there is always some destabilizing force (caused by geometrical tolerances, off-center loads, etc) that can do work (force x distance) to start the "vibration".

Note, the above only applies to starting the "vibration" (or buckling). Once it has started, the behaviour is nonlinear and the motion is not "infinitely slow", as is obvious in real life when things buckle!
 
Last edited by a moderator:
Thread 'Motional EMF in Faraday disc, co-rotating magnet axial mean flux'
So here is the motional EMF formula. Now I understand the standard Faraday paradox that an axis symmetric field source (like a speaker motor ring magnet) has a magnetic field that is frame invariant under rotation around axis of symmetry. The field is static whether you rotate the magnet or not. So far so good. What puzzles me is this , there is a term average magnetic flux or "azimuthal mean" , this term describes the average magnetic field through the area swept by the rotating Faraday...
Back
Top