Constraint force using Lagrangian Multipliers

  • #1
deuteron
57
13
Homework Statement
The bead can glide freely along the rod rotating with constant angular velocity on the xy-plane. What is the constraint force exerted by the rod?
Relevant Equations
##\dot\varphi=\omega##
Consider the following setup

1694444352368.png


where the bead can glide along the rod without friction, and the rod rotates with a constant angular velocity ##\omega##, and we want to find the constraint force using Lagrange multipliers.
I chose the generalized coordinates ##q=\{r,\varphi\}## and the constraint equation ##f## to be ##\varphi=\omega t##

We get the Lagrangian to be

$$\mathcal L= \frac 12m (\dot s^2 +s^2 \dot\varphi^2)- mgs\sin\varphi.$$

For the equation of motion, I got:

$$\begin{align}
\frac {\partial\mathcal L}{\partial \varphi}&= -mgs\cos\varphi\\
\frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial\dot\varphi}&= ms^2\dot \varphi\\
\frac d{dt}\frac {\partial\mathcal L}{\partial\dot\varphi}&= 2ms\dot s\dot \varphi +ms^2\ddot\varphi\\
\Rightarrow\ 2ms\dot s \omega + mgs\cos(\omega t)&=\lambda\frac {\partial f}{\partial\varphi} = \lambda\\
\frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial s}&= ms\dot\varphi^2 -mg\sin\varphi\\
\frac d{dt}\frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial\dot s}&= m\ddot s\\
\Rightarrow\ m\ddot s &= ms\dot \varphi^2 =ms\dot\omega^2\ \Rightarrow\ s(t)=s_0 \cos(\omega t)
\end{align}$$

and substituting $s(t)=s_0 \cos(\omega t)$ back to the equation for ##\varphi## results in:

$$-2ms_0^2\omega^2\cos(\omega t)\sin(\omega t) +mgs_0\cos^2(\omega t)=\lambda$$

and the constraint force is ##C=\lambda\frac {\partial f}{\partial\varphi}+\lambda \frac{\partial f}{\partial s} = -2ms_0^2\omega^2\cos(\omega t)\sin(\omega t) +mgs_0\cos^2(\omega t)##

However, this is not true and the force is supposed to be ##C= 2m\omega^2 s_0 \sinh(\omega t)##, what am I doing wrong?
 
Last edited:
  • Like
Likes curious_mind
Physics news on Phys.org
  • #2
deuteron said:
Homework Statement: The bead can glide freely along the rod rotating with constant angular velocity on the xy-plane. What is the constraint force exerted by the rod?
Relevant Equations: ##\dot\varphi=\omega##

Consider the following setup

View attachment 331816

where the bead can glide along the rod without friction, and the rod rotates with a constant angular velocity ##\omega##, and we want to find the constraint force using Lagrange multipliers.
I chose the generalized coordinates ##q=\{r,\varphi\}## and the constraint equation ##f## to be ##\varphi=\omega t##

We get the Lagrangian to be

$$\mathcal L= \frac 12m (\dot s^2 +s^2 \dot\varphi^2)- mgs\sin\varphi.$$

I think you should include the constraint explicitly in the Lagrangian: [tex]
\mathcal{L} = \tfrac12m(\dot s^2 + s^2 \dot \varphi^2) - mgs\sin \varphi + m\lambda(\varphi - \omega t).[/tex]

For the equation of motion, I got:

$$\begin{align}
\frac {\partial\mathcal L}{\partial \varphi}&= -mgs\cos\varphi\\
\frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial\dot\varphi}&= ms^2\dot \varphi\\
\frac d{dt}\frac {\partial\mathcal L}{\partial\dot\varphi}&= 2ms\dot s\dot \varphi +ms^2\ddot\varphi\\
\Rightarrow\ 2ms\dot s \omega + mgs\cos(\omega t)&=\lambda\frac {\partial f}{\partial\varphi} = \lambda\\
\frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial s}&= ms\dot\varphi^2 -mg\sin\varphi\\
\frac d{dt}\frac{\partial\mathcal L}{\partial\dot s}&= m\ddot s\\
\Rightarrow\ m\ddot s &= ms\dot \varphi^2 =ms\dot\omega^2\ \Rightarrow\ s(t)=s_0 \cos(\omega t)
\end{align}$$

How do you justify the last line? You correctly found the derivatives of the Lagrangian, but you didn't put them together to form the EOM correctly. I get [tex]\begin{split}
\ddot s - s \dot\varphi^2 &= -g\sin\varphi \\
\frac{d}{dt}(s^2\dot\varphi) &= -gs\cos \varphi + \lambda \\
\varphi &= \omega t \end{split}[/tex] After setting [itex]\varphi = \omega t[/itex] the equation for [itex]s[/itex] is [tex]
\ddot s - \omega^2 s = -g\sin(\omega t).[/tex]
 
  • #3
pasmith said:
I think you should include the constraint explicitly in the Lagrangian: [tex]
\mathcal{L} = \tfrac12m(\dot s^2 + s^2 \dot \varphi^2) - mgs\sin \varphi + m\lambda(\varphi - \omega t).[/tex]
How do you justify the last line? You correctly found the derivatives of the Lagrangian, but you didn't put them together to form the EOM correctly. I get [tex]\begin{split}
\ddot s - s \dot\varphi^2 &= -g\sin\varphi \\
\frac{d}{dt}(s^2\dot\varphi) &= -gs\cos \varphi + \lambda \\
\varphi &= \omega t \end{split}[/tex] After setting [itex]\varphi = \omega t[/itex] the equation for [itex]s[/itex] is [tex]
\ddot s - \omega^2 s = -g\sin(\omega t).[/tex]
Thank you... I can't believe I have been missing that...
 
  • Like
Likes curious_mind
  • #4
Why only constraint is phi = omega.t?Isn't there also a radial constant along the rod, idk something like r(t) is constant or between 0 and L. ca you tell ne more how we write constraints how to be sure that here is only one
 
  • #5
I don't think you are supposed to include the force of gravity in this problem. So, you can set g = 0 in your equations. Thus, equation (4) becomes $$ 2ms\dot s \omega =\lambda\frac {\partial f}{\partial\varphi} = \lambda \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,(4)$$
For the differential equation for ##s##, you wrote $$
m\ddot s = ms\dot \varphi^2 =ms\dot\omega^2\ \Rightarrow\ s(t)=s_0 \cos(\omega t) \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, (7)$$ The differential equation is correct, except ##\dot \varphi## equals ##\omega## instead of ##\dot \omega##. But the solution ##s(t)=s_0 \cos(\omega t)## is not correct. ##\cos(\omega t)## would be a solution to the equation ##\ddot s = - \omega^2 s## (note the negative sign).

Your approach to finding ##\lambda## is correct, but of course you'll need the correct solution for ##s(t)##.

However, ##\lambda## is the ##\varphi## component of the "generalized" constraint force ##Q_{\varphi}##, not the ##\varphi## component of the actual, physical constraint force ##F_{\varphi}## that you are asked to find. ##Q_{\varphi}## does not have the correct dimensions of an actual force.

##Q_{\varphi}## is defined such that the work done by the constraint force when ##\varphi## changes by ##d\varphi## is $$dW = Q_{\varphi} d\varphi.$$ In terms of the actual force ##F_{\varphi}##, this work would be $$dW = F_{\varphi} {r d\varphi}.$$ Note that ##r d\varphi## is the actual physical distance associated with the movement of a point of the rod located at radial distance ##r## when ##\varphi## changes by ##d \varphi##. Comparing the two expressions for ##dW##, you can see the relation between ##Q_{\varphi}## and ##F_{\varphi}##.

[EDIT: I just noticed that this thread is 8 months old! My reply is directed to the OP (@deuteron), who probably is no longer interested.]
 
Last edited:
  • #6
TSny said:
I don't think you are supposed to include the force of gravity in this problem. So, you can set g = 0 in your equations. Thus, equation (4) becomes $$ 2ms\dot s \omega =\lambda\frac {\partial f}{\partial\varphi} = \lambda \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,(4)$$
For the differential equation for ##s##, you wrote $$
m\ddot s = ms\dot \varphi^2 =ms\dot\omega^2\ \Rightarrow\ s(t)=s_0 \cos(\omega t) \,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\,\, (7)$$ The differential equation is correct, except ##\dot \varphi## equals ##\omega## instead of ##\dot \omega##. But the solution ##s(t)=s_0 \cos(\omega t)## is not correct. ##\cos(\omega t)## would be a solution to the equation ##\ddot s = - \omega^2 s## (note the negative sign).

Your approach to finding ##\lambda## is correct, but of course you'll need the correct solution for ##s(t)##.

However, ##\lambda## is the ##\varphi## component of the "generalized" constraint force ##Q_{\varphi}##, not the ##\varphi## component of the actual, physical constraint force ##F_{\varphi}## that you are asked to find. ##Q_{\varphi}## does not have the correct dimensions of an actual force.

##Q_{\varphi}## is defined such that the work done by the constraint force when ##\varphi## changes by ##d\varphi## is $$dW = Q_{\varphi} d\varphi.$$ In terms of the actual force ##F_{\varphi}##, this work would be $$dW = F_{\varphi} {r d\varphi}.$$ Note that ##r d\varphi## is the actual physical distance associated with the movement of a point of the rod located at radial distance ##r## when ##\varphi## changes by ##d \varphi##. Comparing the two expressions for ##dW##, you can see the relation between ##Q_{\varphi}## and ##F_{\varphi}##.

[EDIT: I just noticed that this thread is 8 months old! My reply is directed to the OP (@deuteron), who probably is no longer interested.]
how about the constraint equation. when we write lagrangian do we implicitly use the constraint phi - w.t = 0. i dont get what this constraint give us. we have r dot squared as well as omega times r squared as kinetic energies. suppose there is no pptential. what does lambda times constraint equation in the lagrangian give us physically. also why angle part is the only constraint. dont we have also r constraint that is some sort of perhaps an inequality btw 0 and L. i ll be appriciated if you can say some stuff about constraints in general
 
  • #7
francisavenir said:
dont we have also r constraint that is some sort of perhaps an inequality btw 0 and L. i ll be appriciated if you can say some stuff about constraints in general
In this problem, the only force acting on the bead is the time-dependent normal force from the rod. This force acts perpendicularly to the rod. The bead slides freely on the rod, so there is no constraint force acting parallel to the rod. The normal force is the only constraint force.

It is easy to find the normal force without using Lagrangian mechanics. In polar coordinates##(r, \varphi)##, the acceleration components are well-known to be

##a_r = \ddot r - r^2 \dot \varphi^2##
and
##a_{\varphi} = r \ddot \varphi + 2 \dot r \dot \varphi##.

Since there is no force in the ##r## direction, ##a_r = 0##. Thus, ##\ddot r - r^2 \dot \varphi^2= 0##.
From the constraint ##\varphi = \omega t##, we get the differential equation for ##r##: ##\,\,\,\, \ddot r - \omega^2r = 0##

With initial conditions ##r(0) = r_0## and ##\dot r(0) = 0##, the solution for ##r(t)## is ##r(t) = r_0\cosh(\omega t)##

The normal force (constraint force) is obtained from ##\sum F_{\varphi} = m a_{\varphi} \,## :

##N = m(r \ddot \varphi + 2 \dot r \dot \varphi)= m(0 + 2 \dot r \omega) = 2m\omega^2 r_0 \sinh(\omega t)##

francisavenir said:
how about the constraint equation. when we write lagrangian do we implicitly use the constraint phi - w.t = 0. i dont get what this constraint give us. we have r dot squared as well as omega times r squared as kinetic energies. suppose there is no pptential. what does lambda times constraint equation in the lagrangian give us physically.

The topic of finding constraint forces using Lagrangian mechanics and Lagrange multipliers is covered in standard textbooks. This video might be helpful. Constraints and Lagrange multipliers are introduced at approximately time 9:10 and the physical interpretation of the Lagrange multiplier starts around 17:30. There is a follow-up video that works through a nice example.
 
  • Like
Likes PhDeezNutz and deuteron

FAQ: Constraint force using Lagrangian Multipliers

What are Lagrangian multipliers and how are they used in constraint forces?

Lagrangian multipliers are a mathematical tool used in optimization problems to find the local maxima and minima of a function subject to equality constraints. In the context of mechanics, they help to incorporate constraints into the Lagrangian formulation of motion. By introducing a multiplier for each constraint, the equations of motion can be derived while ensuring that the constraints are satisfied, allowing for the calculation of constraint forces acting on a system.

How do you formulate the Lagrangian with constraints?

To formulate the Lagrangian with constraints, you start with the standard Lagrangian, which is the difference between the kinetic and potential energy of the system. If there are constraints, these can be incorporated by adding terms that represent the constraints multiplied by their respective Lagrangian multipliers. The modified Lagrangian becomes L = T - V + Σ(λ_i * g_i(q, t)), where T is kinetic energy, V is potential energy, λ_i are the Lagrangian multipliers, and g_i are the constraint equations.

How do you derive the equations of motion using Lagrangian multipliers?

To derive the equations of motion using Lagrangian multipliers, you apply the Euler-Lagrange equation to the modified Lagrangian that includes the constraints. This involves taking the partial derivatives of the Lagrangian with respect to the generalized coordinates and velocities, as well as the Lagrange multipliers. By setting up the resulting equations, you can solve for the motion of the system while ensuring that the constraints are satisfied.

What is the physical interpretation of the constraint force?

The constraint force is the force that acts on a system to maintain the constraints imposed on it. Physically, it can be thought of as the reaction force that ensures that the motion of the system adheres to the defined constraints, such as maintaining a fixed distance between two objects or preventing an object from moving outside a certain boundary. These forces are not always explicitly present in the system but are necessary for the constraints to hold true.

Can Lagrangian multipliers be applied to non-conservative systems?

Yes, Lagrangian multipliers can be applied to non-conservative systems, but the treatment may be more complex. In non-conservative systems, additional forces such as friction or external driving forces may need to be included in the Lagrangian formulation. The Lagrangian multipliers can still be used to handle constraints, but one must carefully consider how non-conservative forces interact with the constraints and adjust the equations of motion accordingly.

Back
Top