Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Dynamics

1 / 53

# Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Dynamics - PowerPoint PPT Presentation

Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Dynamics. Chapter 7 Claude Pruneau Physics and Astronomy. Minimal Principles in Physics. Hero of Alexandria 2nd century BC. Law governing light reflection minimizes the path length. Fermat’s Principle

I am the owner, or an agent authorized to act on behalf of the owner, of the copyrighted work described.

## PowerPoint Slideshow about 'Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Dynamics' - jacob

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation

Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author.While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server.

- - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - E N D - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - - -
Presentation Transcript

### Lagrangian and Hamiltonian Dynamics

Chapter 7

Claude Pruneau

Physics and Astronomy

Minimal Principles in Physics
• Hero of Alexandria 2nd century BC.
• Law governing light reflection minimizes the path length.
• Fermat’s Principle
• Refraction can be understood as the path that minimizes the time - and Snell’s law.
• Maupertui’s (1747)
• Principle of least action.
• Hamilton (1834, 1835)
Hamilton’s Principle

Of all possible paths along which a dynamical system may move from one point to another within a specified time interval (consistent with any constraints), the actual path followed is that which minimizes the time integral of the difference between the kinetic and potential energy.

Hamilton’s Principle
• In terms of calculus of variations:
• The d is a shorthand notation which represents a variation as discussed in Chap 6.
• The kinetic energy of a particle in fixed, rectangular coordinates is of function of 1st order time derivatives of the position
• The potential energy may in general be a function of both positions and velocities. However if the particle moves in a conservative force field, it is a function of the xi only.
Hamilton’s Principle (cont’d)
• Define the difference of T and U as the Lagrange function or Lagrangian of the particle.
• The minimization principle (Hamilton’s) may thus be written:
Derivation of Euler-Lagrange Equations
• Establish by transformation…
Lagrange Equations of Motion
• L is called Lagrange function or Lagrangian for the particle.
• L is a function of xi and dxi/dt but not t explicitly (at this point…)
Example 1: Harmonic Oscillator

Problem: Obtain the Lagrange Equation of motion for the one-dimensional harmonic oscillator.

Solution:

• Write the usual expression for T and U to determine L.
• Calculate derivatives.
Example 2: Plane Pendulum

Problem: Obtain the Lagrange Equation of motion for the plane pendulum of mass “m”.

l

• Solution:
• Write the expressions for T and U to determine L.
Example 2: Plane Pendulum (cont’d)
• Calculate derivatives of L by treating as if it were a rectangular coordinate.
• Combine...
Remarks
• Example 2 was solved by assuming that  could be treated as a rectangular coordinate and we obtain the same result as one obtains through Newton’s equations.
• The problem was solved by involving kinetic energy, and potential energy. We did not use the concept of force explicitly.
Generalized Coordinates
• Seek generalization of coordinates.
• Consider mechanical systems consisting of a collection of n discrete point particles.
• Rigid bodies will be discussed later…
• We need n position vectors, I.e. 3n quantities.
• If there are m constraint equations that limit the motion of particle by for instance relating some of coordinates, then the number of independent coordinates is limited to 3n-m.
• One then describes the system as having 3n-m degrees of freedom.
Generalized Coordinates (cont’d)
• Important note: if s=3n-m coordinates are required to describe a system, it is NOT necessary these s coordinates be rectangular or curvilinear coordinates.
• One can choose any combination of independent parameters as long as they completely specify the system.
• Note further that these coordinates (parameters) need not even have the dimension of length (e.g. q in our previous example).
• We use the term generalized coordinates to describe any set of coordinates that completely specify the state of a system.
• Generalized coordinates will be noted: q1, q2, …, qn.
Generalized Coordinates (cont’d)
• A set of generalized coordinates whose number equals the number s of degrees of freedom of the system, and not restricted by the constraints is called a proper set of generalized coordinates.
• In some cases, it may be useful/convenient to use generalized coordinates whose number exceeds the number of degrees of freedom, and to explicitly use constraints through Lagrange multipliers.
• Useful e.g. if one wishes to calculate forces due to constraints.
• The choice of a set of generalized coordinates is obviously not unique.
• They are in general (infinitely) many possibilities.
• In addition to generalized coordinates, we shall also consider time derivatives of the generalized coordinates called generalized velocities.
Transformation
• Transformation: The “normal” coordinates can be expressed as functions of the generalized coordinates - and vice-versa.
Transformation (cont’d)
• Rectangular components of the velocties depend on the generalized coordinates, the generalized velocities, and the time.
• Inverse transformations are noted:
• There are m=3n-s equations of constraint…
Example: Generalized coordinates
• Question: Find a suitable set of generalized coordinates for a point particle moving on the surface of a hemisphere of radius R whose center is at the origin.
• Solution: Motion on a spherical surface implies:
• Choose cosines as generalized coordinates.
Example: Generalized coordinates (cont’d)
• q1,q2,q3 do not constitute a proper set of generalized of coordinates because they are not independent.
• One may however choose e.g. q1, q2, and the constraint equation
Lagrange Eqs in Gen’d Coordinates
• Of all possible paths along which a dynamical system may move from one point to another in configuration space within a specified time interval, the actual path followed is that which minimizes the time integral of the Lagrangian for the system.
Remarks
• Lagrangian defined as the difference between kinetic and potential energies.
• Energy is a scalar quantity (at least in Galilean relativity).
• Lagrangian is a scalar function.
• Implies the lagrangian must be invariant with respect to coordinate transformations.
• Certain transformations that change the Lagrangian but leave the Eqs of motion unchanged are allowed.
• E.G. if L is replaced by L+d/dt f(qi,t), for a function with continuous 2nd partial derivatives. (Fixed end points)
• The choice of reference for U is also irrelevant, one can add a constant to L.
Lagrange’s Eqs
• The choice of specific coordinates is therefore immaterial
• Hamilton’s principle becomes
Lagrange’s Eqs

“s” equations

“m” constraint equations

Applicability:

Force derivable from one/many potential

Constraint Eqs connect coordinates, may be fct(t)

Lagrange Eqs (cont’d)
• Holonomic constraints
• Scleronomic constraints
• Independent of time
• Rheonomic
• Dependent on time
Example: Projectile in 2D
• Question: Consider the motion of a projectile under gravity in two dimensions. Find equations of motion in Cartesian and polar coordinates.
• Solution in Cartesian coordinates:
Example: Motion in a cone
• Question: A particle of mass “m” is constrained to move on the inside surface of a smooth cone of hal-angle a. The particle is subject to a gravitational force. Determine a set of generalized coordinates and determine the constraints. Find Lagrange’s Eqs of motion.

z

Solution:

Constraint:

2 degrees of freedom only!

2 generalized coordinates.

y

x

Example: Motion in a cone (cont’d)
• Choose to eliminate “z”.

L is independent of q.

is the angular momentum relative to the axis of the cone.

Lagrange’s Eqs with underdetermined multipliers
• Constraints that can be expressed as algebraic equations among the coordinates are holonomic constraints.
• If a system is subject to such equations, one can always find a set of generalized coordinates in terms of which Eqs of motion are independent of these constraints.
• Constraints which depend on the velocities have the form

Non holonomic constraints unless eqs can be integrated to yield constrains among the coordinates.

Consider
• Generally non-integrable, unless
• One thus has:
• Or…
• Which yields…
• So the constraints are actually holonomic…
Constraints…
• We therefore conclude that if constraints can be expressed
• Constraints Eqs given in differential form can be integrated in Lagrange Eqs using undetermined multipliers.
• For:
• One gets:
Forces of Constraint
• The underdetermined multipliers are the forces of constraint:
7.6 Equivalence of Lagrange’s and Newton’s Equations
• Lagrange and Newton formulations of mechanic are equivalent
• Different view point, same eqs of motion.
• Explicit demonstration…
Generalized momentum

Generalized force defined through virtual work dW

7.10 Canonical Equations of Motion – Hamilton Dynamics

Whenever the potential energy is velocity independent:

Result extended to define the Generalized Momenta:

Given Euler-Lagrange Eqs:

One also finds:

The Hamiltonian may then be considered a function of the generalized coordinates, qj, and momenta pj:

… whereas the Lagrangian is considered a function of the generalized coordinates, qj, and their time derivative.

To “convert” from the Lagrange formulation to the Hamiltonian formulation, we consider:

But given:

One can also write:

That must also equal:

We then conclude:

Hamilton Equations

Let’s now rewrite:

And calculate:

Finally conclude:

If :

H is a constant of motion

If, additionally, H=U+T=E, then E is a conserved quantity.:

Some remarks
• The Hamiltonian formulation requires, in general, more work than the Lagrange formulation to derive the equations of motion.
• The Hamiltonian formulation simplifies the solution of problems whenever cyclic variables are encountered.
• Cyclic variables are generalized coordinates that do not appear explicitly in the Hamiltonian.
• The Hamiltonian formulation forms the basis to powerful extensions of classical mechanics to other fields e.g. Beam physics, statistical mechanics, etc.
• The generalized coordinates and momenta are said to be canonically conjugates – because of the symmetric nature of Hamilton’s equations.
More remarks
• If qk is cyclic, I.e. does not appear in the Hamiltonian, then
• And pk is then a constant of motion.
• A coordinate cyclic in H is also cyclic in L.
• Note: if qk is cyclic, its time derivative “q-dot” appears explicitly in L.
• No reduction of the number of degrees of freedom in the Lagrange formulation: still “s” 2nd order equations of motion.
• Reduction by 2 of the number of equations to be solved in the Hamiltonian formulation – since 2 become trivial…
where k is possibly a function of t.

One thus get the simple (trivial) solution:

The solution for a cyclic variable is thus reduced to a simple integral as above.

The simplest solution to a system would occur if one could choose the generalized coordinates in a way they are ALL cyclic. One would then have “s” equations of the form :

Such a choice is possible by applying appropriate transformations – this is known as Hamilton-Jacobi Theory.

Where dqk and are not independent!

Some remarks on the calculus of variation

Hamilton’s Principle:

Evaluated:

The above integral becomes after integration by parts:

Which gives rise to Euler-Lagrange equations:

Alternatively, Hamilton’s Principle can be written:

Which evaluates to:

Consider:

Integrate by parts:

The variation may then be written: