0 Voti positivi0 Voti negativi

14 visualizzazioni27 pagineAug 11, 2018

© © All Rights Reserved

PDF, TXT o leggi online da Scribd

© All Rights Reserved

14 visualizzazioni

© All Rights Reserved

Sei sulla pagina 1di 27

Constraints and

Generalized Coordinates

2

Constraints

Problem Statement:

In solving mechanical problems, we start with the 2nd law

Fj

ji Fi

(e)

miri (*)

In principle, one can solve for ri(t) (trajectory) for the ith particle by

specifying all the external and internal forces acting on it .

general are NOT known.

know how to handle them.

3

Holonomic Constraints

Holonomic constraints can be expressed as a function in terms of the

coordinates and time,

f r1 , r2 ,; t 0

r r

2

e.g. (a rigid body) i j cij2 0

-Object rolling on a rough surface without

slipping… more later

- Scleronomous: not explicitly depend on time

4

Difficulties involving constraints:

no longer independent

(not independent)

as additional unknowns

Generalized Coordinates

(with Lagrange multipliers)

5

Generalized Coordinates

• Without constraints, a system of N particles has 3N dof

• With K constraint equations, the # dof reduces to 3N-K

• With holonomic constraints, one can introduce (3N-K) independent

(proper) generalized coordinates q1 , q2 , , q3 N K such that:

r1 r1 q1 , q2 , , q3 N K , t

a point transformation

rN rN q1 , q2 , , q3 N K , t

Generalized coordinates can be anything: angles, energy units, momentum

units, or even amplitudes in the Fourier expansion of ri

No specific rule in finding the most “suitable” (resulting in simplest EOM)

6

Generalized Coordinates

Example: In regular Cartesian coord ri :

O

x1 , y1 , x2 , y2 4 dof

x

1 l x12 y12 l 2 0

2 constraints:

(x1, y1)

2 2

2 1

x x y 2 y1 l2 0

2 l

But, there are only 2 indep dof…

y

In generalized coord q : j

(x2, y2)

1 , 2 2 indep dof

(Double Plane Pendulum)

Coord Transformation:

encoded here) 2 tan 1 x2 x1 y2 y1

7

Non-Holonomic Constraints

- can’t use constraint equations to eliminate dependent coordinates

- in general, solution is problem specific.

z y

a Described by 4 coordinates:

(x, y) of the contact point

v : orientation of disk-

angle of disk axis with x-axis

: angle of rotation of the disk

O x

8

1. No-slip condition:

s a v a

y top view

2. Disk rolling vertically

v disk axis see graph v sin

v -v cos

x v sin

y v cos x

9

Putting them together, gives the following differential equations of constraint,

dx d

dt a sin a sin dt dx a sin d 0

or

dy a cos a cos d dy a cos d 0

dt dt

Upon completion of the circle, x, y and will have returned to their original

values but, will depend on R (can’t be specified by x, y, )

10

Principle of Virtual Work

Consider a system in equilibrium first,

- The net force on each particle vanishes: Fi 0 (note: i labels the particles)

forces and constraints do not change.

- These changes are done consistent with the constraints (we will be

more specific later).

i

i i

(virtual work)

11

(a)

Separating the forces into applied Fi and constraint forces fi ,

Fi Fi( a ) fi

Then, i ri fi ri 0

F

i

(a)

i

12

For virtual displacements to be consistent with the constraints means that

the virtual work done by the constraint forces along the virtual displacement

must be zero.

fi

ri For N particles with K constraints, motion is

restricted on a (3N-K)-D surface and the

fi ri or fi ri 0 constraint forces fi must be to that surface.

For ri to be consistent with constraints means that the net virtual work

of the forces of constraints is zero !

f r 0

i

i i

13

Back to our original equation for a constrained system in equilibrium,

i ri fi ri 0

F

i

(a)

i ri 0

F

i

(a)

14

i ri 0

F

i

(a)

Note: Since the coordinates (and the virtual variations) are not necessary

independent. They are linked through the constraint equations. The

Principle of Virtual Work does not implies,

generalized coordinates. Then, we can rewrite the equation as,

?

j

j

q j 0

see, this will give us expressions which will lead to the solution of the problem.

15

D’Alembert’s Principle

Now, we consider the more general case when the system is not necessary in

equilibrium so that the net force on the particles is NOT zero. We

continue to assume the constraints forces to be unknown a priori…

reformulate the mechanical problem to include the constraint forces such

that they “disappear” you solve the “new” problem using only the

(given) applied forces.

This is the basis for the D’Alembert’s Principle and by choosing a set of

proper generalized coordinates, it will result in the Euler-

Lagrange’s Equations.

16

D’Alembert’s Principle

the given constraint. Since we have Fi p

i 0 for all particles,

We have, F p r 0

i

i i i

This gives, F

i

i

(a)

p i ri fi ri 0

i

17

D’Alembert’s Principle

consistent with constraints, i.e, f r 0

i i

(no virtual work for fi)

F p i ri 0

i

(a)

We can write down, i

i

Again, since the coordinates (and the virtual variations) are not necessary

independent. This does NOT implies, Fi (a)

p i 0 for the individual i.

coordinates so that we have ? j

q j 0 with the coefficients

in the sum independently equal to zero, i.e., ? 0

j

j

18

z

r F(a) f

equation of motion: m

r ( x, y , z ) equation of constraint: g (r, t ) 0

Here,

m

- F(a) is the known applied force

r (t)

- And, we model the unknown

y

constraint force by the vector f.

x

Note: r(t) has 3 unknown trajectory (red) is constraint to move in

components + 1 constraint a 3-1=2 dimensional surface (blue).

19

- There are three unknown components to the constraint force f. A scalar

constraint does not specify the vector f completely.

- There are multiple choices for f which satisfy g(r, t)=0 BUT there is an

additional physical restriction on f that we should consider…

z z

f f

y y

x x

Observation: For a given f, adding a component // to the surface will still

keep the particle on the surface (satisfying g(r, t)=0) but will result with an

additional acceleration along the surface).

20

A reasonable physical argument is to restrict the choice of f so that:

z constraint surface and

g (r, t ) surface

f

y

g (r, t ) 0 f g (r, t ) where can depend on t

x

m

This gives, 4 equations

g (r, t ) 0

21

r F ( a ) g (r, t )

m 4 unknowns r and

4 equations

g (r, t ) 0

This system is solvable but now we would like to solve the system w/o knowing

the constraint forces explicitly …

Note that g is to the surface of constraint and we can project the dynamical

equation onto the tangent plane of the constraint surface at (r, t):

mr F e

(a)

a g (r, t ) ea 0 where e a and eb are two basis

vectors spanning the tangent

mr F e

(a)

b g (r, t ) eb 0 plane to the constraint surface at

(r, t).

22

Together with the constraint equation itself, we then have 3 eqs for the 3

unknown components of r.

mr F e

(a)

0

a ,b 3 unknowns r

3 equations

g (r, t ) 0

So, now, in principle, we can solve for the dynamical equation (EOM), r(t),

without knowing the constraint forces f explicitly.

mr F e

(a)

a ,b 0

23

(Holonomic):

Note: The virtual ri

mi (a)

ri Fi e k 0 displacements consistent

i with the constraints are

i

p i Fi

(a)

ri 0

in the tangent space

spanned by the basis e k

Geometric Interpretation:

The K constraints restrict the system to a (3N-K)-D surface within the 3N-D

space. There are (3N-K) ek vectors spanning that tangent plane to the

constraint surface so that the above expression gives (3N-K) equations that the

problem can be solved without knowing the constraint forces explicitly.

24

D’Alembert’s Principle

F

i

i

(a)

p i ri 0

coordinates so that we have

?

j

j

q j 0

to zero. The Euler-Lagrange equation will give an explicit expression for

the EOM as:

d T T

? j 0

dt q j

q j

Qj 0

25

Recall that we have from the EOM: r F ( a ) g (r, t )

m

Dotting r into both sides,

d 1 2 dT

r r

m mr U r g r

dt 2 dt

Consider the last term, from chain rule, we have,

dg g x g y g z g g

g

r

dt x t y t z t t t

26

g

0 and, g r

dg

So,

dt t

dU U

dt t

Putting everything together,

r r U r g r

m

With E=T+U,

dT dU U g dE U g

dt dt t t dt t t

27

dE U g

dt t t

So, either U or g explicitly depends on time, the total energy changes with time.

So, we can make the following assertions:

g

g r 0 and constraint force won’t do work!

t

Rheonomous (g explicitly depends on t) Holonomic Constraints:

g

g r 0 and constraint force can do work!

t

## Molto più che documenti.

Scopri tutto ciò che Scribd ha da offrire, inclusi libri e audiolibri dei maggiori editori.

Annulla in qualsiasi momento.