How Long Does It Take for a Damped Oscillator's Energy to Halve?

Click For Summary
The discussion revolves around calculating the time it takes for a damped oscillator's energy to halve, given a mass on a spring with a specific oscillation period and amplitude reduction factor. The user initially struggles to find the damping constant tau, which is defined as m/b, but lacks information on b. After exploring the relationship between oscillations and energy decay, they realize that the correct number of oscillations needed for energy to halve is approximately 7.47, leading to a total time of around 7.53 seconds. The conversation emphasizes the importance of understanding the proportional relationship between amplitude and energy decay in damped oscillators. Ultimately, the problem serves as a valuable learning experience for participants.
iamtrojan3
Messages
55
Reaction score
0

Homework Statement


A mass M is suspended from a spring and oscillates with a period of 0.880 s. Each complete oscillation results in an amplitude reduction of a factor of 0.96 due to a small velocity dependent frictional effect. Calculate the time it takes for the total energy of the oscillator to decrease to 0.50 of its initial value.


Homework Equations



N oscillations=(initial amplitude)x(factor)^N
E=Eo*e^(-t/Tau)
Tau = m/b


The Attempt at a Solution


I really have no idea on how to approach this problem. I need to find tau, which is m/b, but idk what b is. if i have tau, the E on both sides cancel and I'm left with
1/2 = e^-t/tau. t = tau ln (2)
So basicly i need to find tau.

Thanks!
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Ignore m/b. What fraction of the initial energy is left after one oscillation?
Ans. 0.962
After two oscillations?
Ans. 0.962*0.962
After n oscillations?
...
 
i got 16.97 as n. it works because .96^17 = ~ 0.499

So if that's true, 0.88 which is the period * 16.97 which gives me 14.94 seconds.

This makes sense except the answer's still wrong?
 
OK I'm retarded. n = 7.47

My friend here said not to do .96squared and woulnd't tell me why. So i blame her.

Thanks again =D
 
Your friend is correct. I got 7.53 s (close enough). Initially, I assumed linearity where there was none.

I will get you started. Assume that the rate of change of the amplitude is proportional to the amplitude. Call the proportionality constant C. Then

\frac{dA}{dt} = - c A

Solve this equation for A(t), and use the fact that A(0.88) = 0.96 A0

Once you have A(t) you can find E(t), etc. etc.

This is a good problem. I learned something from it. Thanks.
 
The book claims the answer is that all the magnitudes are the same because "the gravitational force on the penguin is the same". I'm having trouble understanding this. I thought the buoyant force was equal to the weight of the fluid displaced. Weight depends on mass which depends on density. Therefore, due to the differing densities the buoyant force will be different in each case? Is this incorrect?

Similar threads

Replies
9
Views
2K
  • · Replies 7 ·
Replies
7
Views
5K
  • · Replies 2 ·
Replies
2
Views
3K
Replies
5
Views
5K
Replies
3
Views
815
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
3K
Replies
2
Views
2K
  • · Replies 11 ·
Replies
11
Views
2K
Replies
1
Views
1K
  • · Replies 15 ·
Replies
15
Views
5K