Statics and Dynamics Quiz: Undamped Free Vibration
9 questions · exam conditions
0:00
Undamped Free VibrationQuestion 1 of 9

A uniform slender rod of mass mm and length LL is pinned at one end and hangs vertically in static equilibrium. The rod is displaced by a small angle and released from rest.

Which expression correctly gives the natural frequency of small oscillation for this system?

ωn=3g2L\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{3g}{2L}}, derived by treating the rod as a physical pendulum with moment of inertia 13mL2\frac{1}{3}mL^2 about the pin and restoring moment arm L2\frac{L}{2}.
ωn=gL\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{g}{L}}, derived by treating the system as a simple (point-mass) pendulum of length LL with the full rod length used as the effective pendulum length.
ωn=2gL\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{2g}{L}}, derived by using the moment of inertia 12mL2\frac{1}{2}mL^2 about the pin, which applies to a thin disk rather than a slender rod rotating about its end.
ωn=g2L\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{g}{2L}}, derived by treating the center of mass as the pivot point with moment of inertia 112mL2\frac{1}{12}mL^2 and restoring moment arm equal to the full rod length LL.
← Back to quizzes

Statics and Dynamics Quiz

Statics and Dynamics Quiz: Undamped Free Vibration

Practice Undamped Free Vibration in Statics and Dynamics with focused quiz questions that help you check what you know, review explanations, and build confidence with test-style prompts.

What this quiz covers

This quiz focuses on Undamped Free Vibration, giving you a quick way to practice the rules, question types, and explanations that matter most for Statics and Dynamics.

How to use this quiz

Try each quiz question before looking at the correct answer. Use the explanations to review missed ideas, then come back to similar questions until the pattern feels familiar.

All questions

Question 1

A uniform slender rod of mass mm and length LL is pinned at one end and hangs vertically in static equilibrium. The rod is displaced by a small angle and released from rest.

Which expression correctly gives the natural frequency of small oscillation for this system?

  1. ωn=3g2L\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{3g}{2L}}, derived by treating the rod as a physical pendulum with moment of inertia 13mL2\frac{1}{3}mL^2 about the pin and restoring moment arm L2\frac{L}{2}. (correct answer)
  2. ωn=gL\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{g}{L}}, derived by treating the system as a simple (point-mass) pendulum of length LL with the full rod length used as the effective pendulum length.
  3. ωn=2gL\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{2g}{L}}, derived by using the moment of inertia 12mL2\frac{1}{2}mL^2 about the pin, which applies to a thin disk rather than a slender rod rotating about its end.
  4. ωn=g2L\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{g}{2L}}, derived by treating the center of mass as the pivot point with moment of inertia 112mL2\frac{1}{12}mL^2 and restoring moment arm equal to the full rod length LL.
Explanation: When a rigid body swings about a fixed pivot, you're dealing with a physical pendulum, not a simple one. The key equation is the rotational form of Newton's second law: the net restoring torque equals the moment of inertia times angular acceleration. For small angles, this gives ωn=mgdIO\omega_n = \sqrt{\frac{mgd}{I_O}}, where dd is the distance from the pivot to the center of mass, and IOI_O is the moment of inertia about the pivot. For a uniform slender rod pinned at one end, the center of mass sits at L/2L/2, so the restoring torque arm is d=L/2d = L/2. The moment of inertia about the pin (using the parallel axis theorem or standard result) is IO=13mL2I_O = \frac{1}{3}mL^2. Plugging in: ωn=mg(L/2)13mL2=3g2L\omega_n = \sqrt{\frac{mg(L/2)}{\frac{1}{3}mL^2}} = \sqrt{\frac{3g}{2L}}. That's exactly answer A, confirming it as correct. Answer B applies the simple pendulum formula g/L\sqrt{g/L}, which assumes all mass is concentrated at the tip — ignoring how the rod's distributed mass actually behaves rotationally. Answer C uses I=12mL2I = \frac{1}{2}mL^2, which is the moment of inertia for a thin disk about its central axis — a completely wrong geometry. Answer D incorrectly places the pivot at the center of mass; you can't generate a gravitational restoring torque about the center of mass itself, and mixing 112mL2\frac{1}{12}mL^2 with a full-length moment arm is physically inconsistent. Your go-to study tip: whenever you see a rigid body swinging about a pin, immediately write down IOI_O and dd before doing anything else — getting those two quantities right is the entire problem.

Question 2

A water tower is idealized as a lumped mass MM atop a massless elastic column of lateral stiffness kk. The tower undergoes undamped free lateral vibration. An engineer proposes to lower the natural frequency by 50% (i.e., achieve ωn,new=0.5ωn,old\omega_{n,new} = 0.5\,\omega_{n,old}) to avoid resonance with a nearby excitation source.

If only the mass MM can be modified (the column stiffness is fixed), by what factor must MM be multiplied to achieve the desired reduction in natural frequency?

  1. The mass must be multiplied by a factor of 2, since natural frequency is inversely proportional to the square root of mass, so halving the frequency requires doubling the mass: ωn1/M\omega_n \propto 1/\sqrt{M} implies Mnew=4MoldM_{new} = 4M_{old}... but only a factor of 2 is needed for a 50% change in M\sqrt{M}.
  2. The mass must be multiplied by a factor of 4, since ωn=k/M\omega_n = \sqrt{k/M} and halving ωn\omega_n requires ωn,new2=k/Mnew=(ωn,old/2)2=ωn,old2/4\omega_{n,new}^2 = k/M_{new} = (\omega_{n,old}/2)^2 = \omega_{n,old}^2/4, which gives Mnew=4MoldM_{new} = 4M_{old}. (correct answer)
  3. The mass must be multiplied by a factor of 2\sqrt{2}, since a 50% reduction in frequency corresponds to a 50% reduction in ωn2\omega_n^2, and Mnew/Mold=ωn,old2/ωn,new2=1/0.5=2M_{new}/M_{old} = \omega_{n,old}^2/\omega_{n,new}^2 = 1/0.5 = \sqrt{2} after taking the square root of the frequency ratio.
  4. The mass must be multiplied by a factor of 2, since ωn1/M\omega_n \propto 1/\sqrt{M} and a 50% reduction in frequency means ωn,new/ωn,old=0.5\omega_{n,new}/\omega_{n,old} = 0.5, which directly gives Mnew/Mold=1/0.5=2M_{new}/M_{old} = 1/0.5 = 2 by simple proportionality without squaring.
Explanation: Whenever you see a vibration question asking how a parameter change affects natural frequency, your first instinct should be to write the governing formula and manipulate it algebraically — never reason by "direct proportionality" without tracking the exponents carefully. For a lumped-mass system, the natural frequency is ωn=k/M\omega_n = \sqrt{k/M}. If you want ωn,new=0.5ωn,old\omega_{n,new} = 0.5\,\omega_{n,old}, square both sides of the ratio: ωn,new2ωn,old2=k/Mnewk/Mold=MoldMnew=(0.5)2=0.25\frac{\omega_{n,new}^2}{\omega_{n,old}^2} = \frac{k/M_{new}}{k/M_{old}} = \frac{M_{old}}{M_{new}} = (0.5)^2 = 0.25 Solving gives Mnew=4MoldM_{new} = 4\,M_{old}, a factor of 4. That confirms B is correct. Choice A starts with the right formula but then contradicts itself — it states the factor is 2 while simultaneously deriving Mnew=4MoldM_{new} = 4M_{old}. The internal inconsistency should be a red flag; always trust the algebra over a verbal shortcut. Choice C makes a critical error by claiming a 50% reduction in ωn\omega_n means a 50% reduction in ωn2\omega_n^2. In reality, (0.5)2=0.25(0.5)^2 = 0.25, not 0.5 — squaring the frequency ratio is essential, and this distractor skips that step entirely. Choice D treats the relationship as linear: ωn1/M\omega_n \propto 1/M instead of ωn1/M\omega_n \propto 1/\sqrt{M}. Dropping the square root is one of the most common algebra errors in dynamics problems and always leads to an answer that is too small. Study tip: Any time you adjust a parameter to hit a target frequency, square the frequency ratio first, then solve for the unknown. The squaring step is where most mistakes happen.

Question 3

An engineer models a machine component as a block of mass m=2 kgm = 2\text{ kg} on a frictionless surface, attached to a spring of stiffness k=200 N/mk = 200\text{ N/m}. The free vibration response is measured and the position is recorded as x(t)=0.03cos(10t)+0.04sin(10t)x(t) = 0.03\cos(10t) + 0.04\sin(10t) meters, where tt is in seconds.

What is the maximum speed of the block during vibration?

  1. vmax=0.40 m/sv_{max} = 0.40\text{ m/s}, computed by differentiating the sine term only, since x˙=0.03(10)sin(10t)+0.04(10)cos(10t)\dot{x} = -0.03(10)\sin(10t) + 0.04(10)\cos(10t) and the maximum of the cosine term 0.04×10=0.40 m/s0.04 \times 10 = 0.40\text{ m/s} dominates at t=0t = 0.
  2. vmax=0.70 m/sv_{max} = 0.70\text{ m/s}, computed as ωn\omega_n times the sum of the individual amplitudes (0.03+0.04)=0.07 m(0.03 + 0.04) = 0.07\text{ m}, since both cosine and sine components reach their maxima and the speeds add directly at the instant of maximum velocity.
  3. vmax=0.50 m/sv_{max} = 0.50\text{ m/s}, computed as ωnA\omega_n \cdot A where the amplitude A=(0.03)2+(0.04)2=0.05 mA = \sqrt{(0.03)^2 + (0.04)^2} = 0.05\text{ m} and ωn=10 rad/s\omega_n = 10\text{ rad/s}, giving 10×0.05=0.50 m/s10 \times 0.05 = 0.50\text{ m/s}. (correct answer)
  4. vmax=0.30 m/sv_{max} = 0.30\text{ m/s}, computed as ωn\omega_n times the cosine amplitude alone (0.03 m)(0.03\text{ m}), since the cosine term represents the displacement-driven component and the sine term represents the velocity-driven component which does not contribute to the speed envelope.
Explanation: When a vibration problem gives you a response like x(t)=C1cos(ωnt)+C2sin(ωnt)x(t) = C_1\cos(\omega_n t) + C_2\sin(\omega_n t), your first move should be to recognize that this is a single harmonic oscillation written in two-component form. The true amplitude isn't found by adding or cherry-picking the individual coefficients — it's found using the Pythagorean combination: A=C12+C22A = \sqrt{C_1^2 + C_2^2}. Once you have AA, the maximum speed is simply vmax=ωnAv_{max} = \omega_n A, because velocity is x˙(t)=ωn(C1sin(ωnt)+C2cos(ωnt))\dot{x}(t) = \omega_n(-C_1\sin(\omega_n t) + C_2\cos(\omega_n t)), which is itself a sinusoid with amplitude ωnC12+C22\omega_n\sqrt{C_1^2 + C_2^2}. Here, A=(0.03)2+(0.04)2=0.0009+0.0016=0.0025=0.05 mA = \sqrt{(0.03)^2 + (0.04)^2} = \sqrt{0.0009 + 0.0016} = \sqrt{0.0025} = 0.05\text{ m}, and with ωn=10 rad/s\omega_n = 10\text{ rad/s}, you get vmax=10×0.05=0.50 m/sv_{max} = 10 \times 0.05 = 0.50\text{ m/s}, confirming C. A is wrong because it evaluates the velocity expression only at t=0t = 0, which happens to zero out the sine term — that's one specific instant, not the maximum. B adds the amplitudes linearly (0.03+0.04=0.070.03 + 0.04 = 0.07), which would only be valid if both components peaked simultaneously, but two sinusoids 90° out of phase never do — their combined peak follows the Pythagorean rule. D uses only the cosine coefficient and ignores the sine term entirely, discarding half the motion's energy with no physical justification. Study tip: Any time you see Acos(ωt)+Bsin(ωt)A\cos(\omega t) + B\sin(\omega t), immediately think "Pythagorean amplitude" — A2+B2\sqrt{A^2 + B^2}. This pattern appears everywhere in vibrations and AC circuits, and linearly adding or ignoring terms is one of the most common traps on dynamics exams.

Question 4

A mass mm hangs from a spring of stiffness kk in a standard vertical spring-mass system. The mass is given an initial upward velocity v0v_0 from the static equilibrium position and released. A student writes the solution as x(t)=v0ωnsin(ωnt)x(t) = \frac{v_0}{\omega_n}\sin(\omega_n t), where xx is measured positive downward from the static equilibrium position.

The student's solution correctly predicts the natural frequency but may contain an error in the initial condition application. Which statement is most accurate?

  1. The solution is fully correct, because the amplitude of oscillation is v0/ωnv_0/\omega_n regardless of the sign of the initial velocity, and the direction of the first quarter-cycle does not affect the amplitude expression for undamped free vibration.
  2. The solution is correct in form but uses the wrong frequency, because for a vertical spring-mass system the effective natural frequency includes the gravitational acceleration: ωn,eff=(k+mg)/m\omega_{n,eff} = \sqrt{(k + mg)/m}, and the corrected solution replaces ωn\omega_n with ωn,eff\omega_{n,eff}.
  3. The solution is incorrect in both sign and form, because measuring from static equilibrium in the vertical direction requires gravity to appear explicitly in the equation of motion, adding a particular solution term gωn2(1cos(ωnt))\frac{g}{\omega_n^2}(1 - \cos(\omega_n t)) to the response.
  4. The solution has an incorrect sign. With xx positive downward, an initial upward velocity means x˙(0)=v0\dot{x}(0) = -v_0. The correct solution is x(t)=v0ωnsin(ωnt)x(t) = -\frac{v_0}{\omega_n}\sin(\omega_n t), which has the same amplitude but correctly predicts that the mass initially moves upward (negative xx). (correct answer)
Explanation: When a question gives you a coordinate system and an initial condition, your first job is to translate the physical description into math using that coordinate system — sign and all. Here, xx is defined as positive downward. An initial upward velocity is physically in the negative xx-direction, so the correct initial condition is x˙(0)=v0\dot{x}(0) = -v_0, not +v0+v_0. For undamped free vibration starting from equilibrium, the general solution is x(t)=Asin(ωnt)+Bcos(ωnt)x(t) = A\sin(\omega_n t) + B\cos(\omega_n t). Applying x(0)=0x(0) = 0 gives B=0B = 0, and applying x˙(0)=v0\dot{x}(0) = -v_0 gives A=v0/ωnA = -v_0/\omega_n. The correct solution is therefore x(t)=v0ωnsin(ωnt)x(t) = -\frac{v_0}{\omega_n}\sin(\omega_n t), confirming D. This predicts the mass initially moves in the negative xx direction (upward), which is physically sensible. A is wrong because the sign of the initial velocity absolutely matters for predicting the direction of motion. Amplitude is always positive, but the signed coefficient AA encodes which way the mass moves first — dropping that sign gives you a solution that's a mirror image in time of the true motion. B is wrong because gravity does not alter the natural frequency when you measure from the static equilibrium position. At static equilibrium, the spring is already pre-loaded by mg/kmg/k, so gravity cancels out of the equation of motion entirely. ωn=k/m\omega_n = \sqrt{k/m} remains unchanged. C is wrong for the same reason as B. When you measure from static equilibrium, there is no explicit gravity term or particular solution — the equation of motion is simply x¨+ωn2x=0\ddot{x} + \omega_n^2 x = 0. Study tip: Always write out the sign of every initial condition explicitly before substituting. A single sign error here flips the entire trajectory.

Question 5

A solid disk of mass mm and radius RR rolls without slipping on a flat horizontal surface. The center of the disk is connected to a fixed wall by a horizontal spring of stiffness kk. The disk is displaced horizontally and released from rest.

What is the natural frequency of the resulting undamped free vibration, accounting for the rolling constraint?

  1. ωn=km\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{k}{m}}, since the spring force acts at the center of mass and the rolling constraint does not affect the translational equation of motion when the contact point is frictionless.
  2. ωn=2k3m\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{2k}{3m}}, since rolling without slipping introduces a rotational kinetic energy term that increases the effective inertia. The disk's moment of inertia 12mR2\frac{1}{2}mR^2 and rolling constraint θ˙=x˙/R\dot{\theta} = \dot{x}/R yield an effective mass of 32m\frac{3}{2}m, giving ωn=k/(3m/2)\omega_n = \sqrt{k/(3m/2)}. (correct answer)
  3. ωn=k2m\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{k}{2m}}, since the rolling constraint causes the effective inertia to equal 2m2m, because the disk's moment of inertia about the contact point is 32mR2\frac{3}{2}mR^2 and the rotational equation about the contact point replaces the translational one, doubling the apparent mass.
  4. ωn=2km\omega_n = \sqrt{\dfrac{2k}{m}}, since the no-slip condition at the contact point means the spring is effectively twice as stiff — the contact point is momentarily fixed, so the disk behaves as if attached to a spring of stiffness 2k2k while its full mass mm provides the only inertia.
Explanation: When a disk rolls without slipping, you must account for both translational and rotational kinetic energy — the rolling constraint couples them together, effectively increasing the system's inertia and lowering the natural frequency compared to a simple mass-spring system. To derive the equation of motion, apply the Lagrangian (or Newton's laws with the rolling constraint θ˙=x˙/R\dot{\theta} = \dot{x}/R). The total kinetic energy is: T=12mx˙2+12Iθ˙2=12mx˙2+12(12mR2)x˙2R2=34mx˙2T = \frac{1}{2}m\dot{x}^2 + \frac{1}{2}I\dot{\theta}^2 = \frac{1}{2}m\dot{x}^2 + \frac{1}{2}\left(\frac{1}{2}mR^2\right)\frac{\dot{x}^2}{R^2} = \frac{3}{4}m\dot{x}^2 This gives an effective mass of 32m\frac{3}{2}m. With potential energy V=12kx2V = \frac{1}{2}kx^2, the equation of motion becomes 32mx¨+kx=0\frac{3}{2}m\ddot{x} + kx = 0, yielding: ωn=k3m/2=2k3m\omega_n = \sqrt{\frac{k}{3m/2}} = \sqrt{\frac{2k}{3m}} This confirms B is correct. A is wrong because it ignores rotational inertia entirely — the rolling constraint absolutely affects dynamics by adding the 12Iθ˙2\frac{1}{2}I\dot{\theta}^2 term, even if friction does no work. C is wrong due to an incorrect moment of inertia. The parallel-axis theorem gives Icontact=32mR2I_{contact} = \frac{3}{2}mR^2, but using torques about the contact point still yields the same equation of motion as above — not an effective mass of 2m2m. D is wrong because the no-slip condition constrains kinematics, not spring stiffness. The spring stretches by xx, so its effective stiffness remains kk. Study tip: Whenever you see "rolls without slipping," immediately write out the full kinetic energy including rotation. The effective mass for a solid disk is always 32m\frac{3}{2}m — memorize this result.

Question 6

A mass mm is suspended from the ceiling by two identical springs, each of stiffness kk, arranged in parallel (both attached between the ceiling and the mass side by side). The system undergoes undamped free vibration in the vertical direction.

If the two springs are then rearranged into a series configuration (one spring connects ceiling to an intermediate point, and the second spring connects that point to the mass), by what factor does the natural frequency change?

  1. The natural frequency decreases by a factor of 2, since the series equivalent stiffness keq=k/2k_{eq} = k/2 is one-quarter of the parallel equivalent stiffness keq=2kk_{eq} = 2k, and frequency scales as the square root of stiffness, giving 1/4=1/2\sqrt{1/4} = 1/2. (correct answer)
  2. The natural frequency decreases by a factor of 4, since the equivalent stiffness changes from 2k2k (parallel) to k/2k/2 (series), and natural frequency is directly proportional to equivalent stiffness, so the ratio is k/2÷2k=1/4k/2 \div 2k = 1/4.
  3. The natural frequency decreases by a factor of 2\sqrt{2}, since the series stiffness k/2k/2 is half the individual spring stiffness kk, and comparing only to the single-spring baseline gives a factor of 1/21/\sqrt{2}, ignoring the parallel configuration's effect.
  4. The natural frequency decreases by a factor of 2\sqrt{2}, since going from parallel to series halves the equivalent stiffness from 2k2k to kk, and a halving of stiffness reduces frequency by 1/2=1/2\sqrt{1/2} = 1/\sqrt{2}, because the series stiffness is mistakenly taken as kk rather than k/2k/2.
Explanation: When you encounter spring combination problems, always work through two distinct steps: find the equivalent stiffness for each configuration, then apply the natural frequency formula ωn=keq/m\omega_n = \sqrt{k_{eq}/m}. The key insight is that frequency scales as the square root of stiffness, not linearly. Start with the two configurations. Springs in parallel add directly: kparallel=k+k=2kk_{parallel} = k + k = 2k. Springs in series combine as reciprocals: 1kseries=1k+1k=2k\frac{1}{k_{series}} = \frac{1}{k} + \frac{1}{k} = \frac{2}{k}, giving kseries=k/2k_{series} = k/2. The ratio of stiffnesses is k/22k=14\frac{k/2}{2k} = \frac{1}{4}. Since ωnkeq\omega_n \propto \sqrt{k_{eq}}, the frequency ratio is 1/4=12\sqrt{1/4} = \frac{1}{2}. The natural frequency is cut in half — confirming answer A is correct. Answer B makes the classic mistake of treating natural frequency as directly proportional to stiffness rather than proportional to its square root. The stiffness ratio of 1/41/4 does not mean the frequency drops by a factor of 4. Answer C compares the series stiffness only to a single spring's stiffness kk, completely ignoring the parallel configuration. You must compare kseriesk_{series} to kparallelk_{parallel}, not to an arbitrary baseline. Answer D correctly identifies the frequency-stiffness relationship but miscalculates the series stiffness as kk instead of k/2k/2, making the stiffness ratio 1/21/2 rather than the correct 1/41/4. Always recompute series stiffness carefully using the reciprocal formula. Study tip: Memorize the "square root rule" — whenever stiffness changes by a factor of nn, frequency changes by n\sqrt{n}. This catches both the B-type and D-type errors in one shot.

Question 7

A block of mass m=4 kgm = 4\text{ kg} rests on a frictionless horizontal surface and is connected to a wall by a linear spring of stiffness k=400 N/mk = 400\text{ N/m}. The block is given an initial displacement of x0=0.05 mx_0 = 0.05\text{ m} from equilibrium and simultaneously an initial velocity of v0=1 m/sv_0 = 1\text{ m/s} directed away from the wall.

What is the amplitude of the resulting undamped free vibration?

  1. A=0.05 mA = 0.05\text{ m}, since only the initial displacement contributes to amplitude when the initial velocity is in the direction that increases displacement, and the velocity term cancels in the amplitude formula.
  2. A=0.10 mA = 0.10\text{ m}, since the amplitude is the algebraic sum of the initial displacement and the ratio of initial velocity to natural frequency, giving 0.05+0.05=0.10 m0.05 + 0.05 = 0.10\text{ m}.
  3. A0.0707 mA \approx 0.0707\text{ m}, since the amplitude is found from A=x02+(v0/ωn)2A = \sqrt{x_0^2 + (v_0/\omega_n)^2} with ωn=10 rad/s\omega_n = 10\text{ rad/s}, yielding (0.05)2+(0.10)20.1118 m\sqrt{(0.05)^2 + (0.10)^2} \approx 0.1118\text{ m}, which rounds to 0.0707 m0.0707\text{ m} after adjusting units.
  4. A0.1118 mA \approx 0.1118\text{ m}, since the amplitude is A=x02+(v0/ωn)2A = \sqrt{x_0^2 + (v_0/\omega_n)^2} with ωn=k/m=10 rad/s\omega_n = \sqrt{k/m} = 10\text{ rad/s}, giving (0.05)2+(1/10)2=0.0025+0.01=0.0125 m\sqrt{(0.05)^2 + (1/10)^2} = \sqrt{0.0025 + 0.01} = \sqrt{0.0125}\text{ m}. (correct answer)
Explanation: Whenever you encounter undamped free vibration problems, your first instinct should be to find the natural frequency, then apply the amplitude formula — these two steps unlock everything else. Start with the natural frequency: ωn=k/m=400/4=10 rad/s\omega_n = \sqrt{k/m} = \sqrt{400/4} = 10 \text{ rad/s}. For undamped free vibration, the general solution is x(t)=x0cos(ωnt)+v0ωnsin(ωnt)x(t) = x_0\cos(\omega_n t) + \frac{v_0}{\omega_n}\sin(\omega_n t). The amplitude of a sum of a sine and cosine with the same frequency is found using the Pythagorean relationship — not simple addition — giving A=x02+(v0/ωn)2A = \sqrt{x_0^2 + (v_0/\omega_n)^2}. Plugging in: A=(0.05)2+(1/10)2=0.0025+0.01=0.01250.1118 mA = \sqrt{(0.05)^2 + (1/10)^2} = \sqrt{0.0025 + 0.01} = \sqrt{0.0125} \approx 0.1118 \text{ m}. That confirms D. A contains a fundamental misconception — the velocity term does not cancel regardless of its direction. Both initial conditions independently contribute to amplitude through the sine and cosine components respectively. B makes the critical error of adding x0x_0 and v0/ωnv_0/\omega_n algebraically (0.05+0.10=0.100.05 + 0.10 = 0.10... note it even gets the arithmetic wrong, since 1/10=0.101/10 = 0.10, making the sum 0.150.15, not 0.100.10). Amplitude comes from vector addition of orthogonal components, not scalar addition. C uses the correct formula but then bizarrely claims (0.05)2+(0.10)20.0707\sqrt{(0.05)^2 + (0.10)^2} \approx 0.0707, which is actually 0.1118\approx 0.1118. The 0.07070.0707 figure comes from 0.12\frac{0.1}{\sqrt{2}}, suggesting a unit-conversion error was invented to manufacture a wrong answer. Remember: whenever two sinusoidal components are combined, amplitude is always the square root of the sum of squares, never the direct sum.

Question 8

A block of mass mm is attached to a spring of stiffness kk and rests on a frictionless inclined plane at angle θ\theta to the horizontal. The spring connects the block to a fixed support along the direction of the incline. The block is displaced along the incline from its static equilibrium position and released.

Which statement correctly describes the natural frequency of the resulting undamped vibration and the role of gravity in the equation of motion?

  1. The natural frequency is ωn=kcosθ/m\omega_n = \sqrt{k\cos\theta/m}, because only the component of spring force perpendicular to the gravitational vector contributes to the restoring mechanism, and the full stiffness kk must be projected by cosθ\cos\theta.
  2. The natural frequency is ωn=(k+mgsinθ)/m\omega_n = \sqrt{(k + mg\sin\theta)/m}, because the gravitational component along the incline acts as an additional restoring force that adds to the spring stiffness and increases the effective stiffness of the system.
  3. The natural frequency is ωn=k/m\omega_n = \sqrt{k/m}, and gravity does not appear in the equation of motion for small oscillations because the gravitational component mgsinθmg\sin\theta along the incline is a constant force that shifts the equilibrium position but cancels out when the equation is written in terms of displacement from static equilibrium. (correct answer)
  4. The natural frequency is ωn=(kmgsinθ)/m\omega_n = \sqrt{(k - mg\sin\theta)/m}, because gravity acts opposite to the spring force along the incline and reduces the effective restoring stiffness, causing the system to vibrate more slowly than a horizontal spring-mass system.
Explanation: Whenever you see a spring-mass system on an inclined plane, your first instinct should be to ask: where is the equilibrium position, and what happens when I measure displacement from there? Start by writing Newton's second law along the incline. Let xx be displacement measured from the unstretched spring position. The spring force is kx-kx (up the incline) and gravity contributes mgsinθ-mg\sin\theta (down the incline), giving: mx¨=kxmgsinθm\ddot{x} = -kx - mg\sin\theta Now shift to a new coordinate u=xxequ = x - x_{eq}, where the static equilibrium point xeq=mgsinθ/kx_{eq} = -mg\sin\theta / k satisfies the equilibrium condition. Substituting, the constant gravity term cancels exactly, leaving: mu¨=ku    ωn=k/mm\ddot{u} = -ku \implies \omega_n = \sqrt{k/m} This confirms C: gravity shifts the equilibrium position but vanishes from the dynamic equation, so the natural frequency is identical to a horizontal spring-mass system. A is wrong because there is no reason to project the spring stiffness by cosθ\cos\theta. The spring acts along the incline, so its full stiffness kk already operates in the direction of motion — no projection needed. B is wrong because gravity is a constant force, not a stiffness. It doesn't grow with displacement, so it cannot add to the effective spring constant. Only displacement-dependent forces alter ωn\omega_n. D makes the same category error as B, treating gravity as if it subtracts from stiffness. Gravity has no xx-dependence, so it contributes nothing to the restoring force dynamics. The key study tip: constant forces shift equilibrium; they never change natural frequency. This principle applies to gravity on any incline, pre-tension in cables, or buoyancy in fluid problems.

Question 9

Two undamped spring-mass systems, System I and System II, are in free vibration. System I has mass mm and spring stiffness kk. System II has mass 4m4m and spring stiffness k/4k/4. Both systems are started with the same initial displacement x0x_0 and zero initial velocity.

How does the period of System II compare to that of System I, and how does the maximum kinetic energy of System II compare to that of System I?

  1. The period of System II is 4 times that of System I, and the maximum kinetic energy of System II is equal to that of System I, since both systems are given the same initial displacement and total mechanical energy is identical regardless of spring stiffness.
  2. The period of System II is 4 times that of System I, and the maximum kinetic energy of System II is 1/4 times that of System I, since the softer spring in System II stores less initial potential energy 12(k/4)x02\frac{1}{2}(k/4)x_0^2 at the same displacement, and all of that energy converts to kinetic energy at equilibrium. (correct answer)
  3. The period of System II is 16 times that of System I, and the maximum kinetic energy of System II is 1/4 times that of System I, since the period scales with the ratio m/km/k directly (not its square root) and potential energy scales linearly with stiffness.
  4. The period of System II is 4 times that of System I, and the maximum kinetic energy of System II is 4 times that of System I, since the heavier mass of System II reaches greater kinetic energy at the equilibrium position due to greater inertia driving the motion.
Explanation: When you encounter a spring-mass vibration problem, anchor yourself to two formulas: the natural period T=2πm/kT = 2\pi\sqrt{m/k} and the initial potential energy PE=12kx02PE = \frac{1}{2}kx_0^2. These two expressions govern everything here. For System II, the period becomes TII=2π4m/(k/4)=2π16m/k=42πm/k=4TIT_{II} = 2\pi\sqrt{4m/(k/4)} = 2\pi\sqrt{16m/k} = 4 \cdot 2\pi\sqrt{m/k} = 4T_I. The period quadruples because you're taking the square root of a ratio that increased by a factor of 16. Now for energy: the initial potential energy stored in System I is 12kx02\frac{1}{2}kx_0^2, while System II stores 12(k/4)x02=1412kx02\frac{1}{2}(k/4)x_0^2 = \frac{1}{4} \cdot \frac{1}{2}kx_0^2. Since both systems are undamped, all initial potential energy converts to kinetic energy at equilibrium. System II therefore reaches only 1/4 the maximum kinetic energy of System I. That confirms B is correct. Choice A fails on energy: it wrongly assumes both systems store identical potential energy at the same displacement, ignoring that softer springs store less energy (PEkPE \propto k). Choice C gets the energy comparison right but makes a critical error on the period, claiming it scales with m/km/k directly rather than m/k\sqrt{m/k}—that ratio is 16, but the period only quadruples after taking the square root. Choice D inverts the energy logic; greater inertia does not generate extra energy—energy is set entirely by the initial conditions and stiffness, not mass alone. A useful habit: always write out T=2πm/kT = 2\pi\sqrt{m/k} explicitly before computing ratios, and track potential energy through 12kx02\frac{1}{2}kx_0^2 rather than intuition about "heavier" systems.