Modeling
Oscillatory Systems: Physics Component
Building the
Other Models
Teacher Notes
After students have built, manipulated and discussed
the model of the horizontal spring, there are several other models the
instructor can choose from to extend the concept. The idea is to have the students recognize that certain key
components of the model stay the same and the feedback loop is always present
and connected to the same icons. This
is what produces the oscillating motion.
In addition, in all these models, the restoring force has a linear
dependence on the displacement away from equilibrium, the velocity and
acceleration vectors are never pointed in the same direction and the force is
constantly changing.
The Vertical Spring
The easiest model to build after the horizontal
spring is that of the vertical spring.
It can be deceiving. If the only
purpose is to show oscillating motion, then very few changes are needed.

There are only three additions to the model: net
force, weight and acceleration due to gravity.
Net force is equal to the sum of weight and the restoring force. The
initial position is set to zero. The
model will oscillate with the correct period.
This is equivalent to the physical case of hanging a weight on a spring
and immediately releasing it. The only
drawback to this approach is that the position oscillates between a negative
number and zero. Zero being the rest
length of the spring before the mass was added. This is not a major flaw, but it could confuse those students who
will be asked to perform Hooke’s law calculations in the future. In addition, if energy calculations are
added to the model, it can give unsettling results, such as negative
gravitational potential energy.
It is not particularly hard to adjust the model for
oscillation around zero. One additional term is added which calculates the
initial displacement from rest length (weight/spring constant). This resets the zero point to the rest
length with the mass hanging on the spring.
The restoring force equation is now
-spring
constant*(displacement from rest length + position from equilibrium)

Of course, for the vertical spring, the period is
still equal to 2*p* the * square root of (m/k).
This relationship could be used as one check of the validity of the model.
Hydrometer
The restoring force for a floating object is the
buoyant force which is equal to
-g*r*A**y, where g is the acceleration due to gravity, r is the density of the liquid, A is the cross sectional area and y is the
distance above or below the normal floating layer. There is the additional force of weight acting on the mass. The
period is proportional to 2* p * the square root of (m/(g*r*A).

Under Time Specs, the model should run for 3 sec with
a DT of 0.05 and Runge-Kutta-4 as the integration method. This model is very close conceptually to the
vertical spring and makes a nice extension from that system.
Vibrating Bar
A bar attached at one end, with the
other end free to oscillate is another example of a vibrating mechanical
system. This system makes an excellent
simple physical model of the tuning fork. Students will be able to see the
vibrations and can adjust the amplitude in a physical laboratory, neither of
which is easily done with a tuning fork.

The restoring force of an
oscillating metal bar is:

The YM (Young’s Modulus) for aluminum is 7x10^10
N/m^2. Thickness is measured in the
direction of oscillation in m. Width is measured perpendicular to the direction
of oscillation in m. Length is measured
from oscillating end to clamped end of the bar. Under TimeSpecs, the model should run for 0.06 sec with a DT of
1E-6 and an integration method of Runge-Kutta 4.
The period of the vibrating bar is 2 * p * the square root of ((density *
length^4)/(12.4 * Y * K^2)) where K is the radius of gyration and is equal to
the thickness/ sqrt(12).
The Tuning Fork
This model is identical to that of the vibrating
bar. The only difference is in the
choice of physical parameters. Students
will need to measure the dimensions of the tuning fork. The length of the tine from the bend up is
the length that is entered, but students might be allowed to discover
this. They should also determine the
density of a tuning fork using water displacement. In addition, tuning forks are usually made of alloys, so
students should start with the Young’s modulus for aluminum and adjust this
value until the model gives the right frequency. The best use of this model is to put an entire octave of tuning
forks in using SensiSpecs and compare the graphs at the same time. It is easy to see the full and half steps of
the musical scale.
The restoring force of a struck
tuning fork is:

The YM (Young’s Modulus) for aluminum is 7x10^10
N/m^2. Thickness is measured in the
direction of oscillation in m. Width is measured perpendicular to the direction
of oscillation in m. Length is measured
from top to bottom of tine not the entire length of the fork. Under TimeSpecs, the model should
run for 0.005 sec with a DT of 1E-6 and an integration method of Runge-Kutta 4.
The formula for the period of the tuning fork is the same as that of the
vibrating bar.
Marble in a Bowl
A nice introductory model to the pendulum, is that of
a marble rolling back and forth in a bowl.
The restoring force comes from the Normal force acting on the
marble. However the direction of the
Normal force changes as the marble oscillates.
The motion can be modeled if you find the x-component of the Normal
force. Hence the restoring force will
be equivalent to the Normal force * sin(q). Where q is the angle between the extension of the normal force and a
radius of the circle that goes through the bottom of the bowl. Furthermore sin(q) equals opposite/hypotenuse which
is equivalent to x-position/ radius of the bowl. Under
TimeSpecs, the model should run for 6 sec with a DT of 0.1 and an integration
method of Runge-Kutta 4. Period = 2 * p * the square root of(r/g) where r is the radius of the
bowl and g is the acceleration due to gravity.

The Pendulum
The model for the pendulum
can be approached in one of two ways.
As an analogy to the marble in the bowl, a model can be built which only
concerns itself with the x-component of the force. The x-component of the force is the restoring force. The y-component is not a restoring force and
does not affect the period. Treating
the model this way allows the students to stay in the Cartesian coordinate
system and makes the model very analogous to the marble in the bowl.
The restoring force comes
from the Tension in the string. However
the direction of the Tension changes as the pendulum swings. The motion can be modeled if you find the
x-component of the Tension. Hence the
restoring force will be equivalent to the Tension * sin(q). Where q is the angle
between the pendulum string and the equilibrium position. Furthermore sin(q) equals opposite/hypotenuse which is equivalent to
x-position/length of string. Under TimeSpecs, the model should run for 6 sec
with a DT of 0.1 and an integration method of Runge-Kutta 4.

Alternatively, the pendulum
can be modeled by using angle instead of position, as well as angular velocity
and acceleration. Students do not need
to be knowledgeable about polar coordinates, since they are still working in
one plane. In addition, this model uses the variables which they will be
measuring in lab – angle and length.
There is one more concern when using this approach. Most textbooks state that the period is
independent of the angle. This is true
only for small angles. To be accurate,
the restoring force is proportional to sin(q),
specifically F = -mgsin(q)/l. The instructor should try to guide the students through the model
structure to insure they understand that this is NOT the function producing the
oscillating motion. Under TimeSpecs,
the model should run for 5 sec with a DT of 0.05 and an integration method of
Runge-Kutta 4.

The period of the pendulum
is equal to 2 * p * the square root of(l/g).