Skip to content

Generalised Coordinates and Constraints

2.1 Generalised Coordinates

A system with nn degrees of freedom can be described by nn generalised coordinates q1,q2,,qnq_1, q_2, \ldots, q_nWhich may be angles, arc lengths, or any other set of parameters that Uniquely determines the configuration.

The Cartesian coordinates are functions of the generalised coordinates (and possibly time):

ri=ri(q1,q2,,qn,t),i=1,,N\mathbf{r}_i = \mathbf{r}_i(q_1, q_2, \ldots, q_n, t), \quad i = 1, \ldots, N

The velocities are:

r˙i=j=1nriqjq˙j+rit\dot{\mathbf{r}}_i = \sum_{j=1}^n \frac{\partial \mathbf{r}_i}{\partial q_j}\dot{q}_j + \frac{\partial \mathbf{r}_i}{\partial t}

Example. A simple pendulum has one degree of freedom. We can use the angle θ\theta from the Vertical as the generalised coordinate, rather than the Cartesian coordinates (x,y)(x, y) of the bob.

2.2 Constraints

Holonomic constraints relate the coordinates by equations:

f(r1,r2,,rN,t)=0f(\mathbf{r}_1, \mathbf{r}_2, \ldots, \mathbf{r}_N, t) = 0

A holonomic constraint reduces the number of degrees of freedom.

Non-holonomic constraints involve inequalities or non-integrable differential relations:

jaj(q,t)dqj+at(q,t)dt=0\sum_j a_j(q, t)\, dq_j + a_t(q, t)\, dt = 0

Which cannot be integrated to yield a relation among the qjq_j alone.

Scleronomic constraints do not depend explicitly on time. Rheonomic constraints do.

Example. A bead sliding on a fixed wire: the constraint f(x,y)=0f(x,y) = 0 is holonomic and scleronomic. A bead on a wire that moves with time: holonomic and rheonomic.

2.3 Worked Example: Classifying Constraints

Problem. Classify the following constraints: (a) a particle on the surface of a sphere of radius RR(b) a rolling disk (vertical), (c) a particle constrained to z0z \geq 0(d) a pendulum whose pivot oscillates as x0(t)=Acos(ωt)x_0(t) = A\cos(\omega t).

Solution

(a) Constraint: x2+y2+z2R2=0x^2 + y^2 + z^2 - R^2 = 0. Holonomic (an equation relating coordinates), scleronomic (no explicit time dependence).

(b) A vertical disk of radius aa rolling without slipping on a horizontal plane. The rolling condition gives dxadθ=0dx - a\, d\theta = 0 and dyasinϕdθ=0dy - a\sin\phi\, d\theta = 0. These cannot be integrated to eliminate the angles, so they are non-holonomic, scleronomic.

(c) Constraint: z0z \geq 0. This is a non-holonomic constraint (an inequality, not an equation).

(d) The constraint is x=Acos(ωt)+lsinθx = A\cos(\omega t) + l\sin\thetaWhich depends explicitly on tt. Holonomic (can be written as an equation), rheonomic (explicit time dependence).

\blacksquare

2.4 Worked Example: Finding Generalised Coordinates

Problem. A rod of length ll and negligible mass has masses m1m_1 and m2m_2 at its ends. The rod slides on a frictionless horizontal table. Find suitable generalised coordinates.

Solution

The rod is in a plane, and the two masses have four Cartesian coordinates (x1,y1,x2,y2)(x_1, y_1, x_2, y_2). The constraint is the fixed distance: (x2x1)2+(y2y1)2=l2(x_2 - x_1)^2 + (y_2 - y_1)^2 = l^2. This is one holonomic scleronomic constraint, reducing the four coordinates to three degrees of freedom.

We can choose the centre of mass (X,Y)(X, Y) and the angle θ\theta the rod makes with the xx-axis:

X=m1x1+m2x2m1+m2,Y=m1y1+m2y2m1+m2,θ=arctany2y1x2x1X = \frac{m_1 x_1 + m_2 x_2}{m_1 + m_2}, \quad Y = \frac{m_1 y_1 + m_2 y_2}{m_1 + m_2}, \quad \theta = \arctan\frac{y_2 - y_1}{x_2 - x_1}

Then:

x1=Xm2lm1+m2cosθ,y1=Ym2lm1+m2sinθx_1 = X - \frac{m_2 l}{m_1 + m_2}\cos\theta, \quad y_1 = Y - \frac{m_2 l}{m_1 + m_2}\sin\theta

x2=X+m1lm1+m2cosθ,y2=Y+m1lm1+m2sinθx_2 = X + \frac{m_1 l}{m_1 + m_2}\cos\theta, \quad y_2 = Y + \frac{m_1 l}{m_1 + m_2}\sin\theta

\blacksquare

2.5 Virtual Work and D”Alembert’s Principle

A virtual displacement δri\delta \mathbf{r}_i is an infinitesimal change in position consistent with The constraints at a fixed instant in time (δt=0\delta t = 0).

Definition (Virtual Work). The virtual work of the forces is:

δW=i=1NFiδri\delta W = \sum_{i=1}^N \mathbf{F}_i \cdot \delta \mathbf{r}_i

Definition (Ideal Constraints). Constraints are ideal if the virtual work of the constraint forces is zero:

i=1NCiδri=0\sum_{i=1}^N \mathbf{C}_i \cdot \delta \mathbf{r}_i = 0

Where Ci\mathbf{C}_i is the constraint force on particle ii.

Theorem 2.1 (Principle of Virtual Work). A system is in static equilibrium if and only if the virtual work of the applied forces vanishes for all virtual displacements consistent with the constraints.

Proof. In static equilibrium, Fi+Ci=0\mathbf{F}_i + \mathbf{C}_i = \mathbf{0} for each particle. Therefore:

i(Fi+Ci)δri=0\sum_i (\mathbf{F}_i + \mathbf{C}_i) \cdot \delta\mathbf{r}_i = 0

For ideal constraints, iCiδri=0\sum_i \mathbf{C}_i \cdot \delta\mathbf{r}_i = 0So iFiδri=0\sum_i \mathbf{F}_i \cdot \delta\mathbf{r}_i = 0. Conversely, if the virtual work of applied forces vanishes for all admissible virtual displacements, the system must be in equilibrium (otherwise one could choose a virtual displacement in the direction of net force to get non-zero work). \blacksquare

Theorem 2.2 (D’Alembert’s Principle). For a system of NN particles:

i=1N(Fimir¨i)δri=0\sum_{i=1}^N (\mathbf{F}_i - m_i \ddot{\mathbf{r}}_i) \cdot \delta \mathbf{r}_i = 0

Where Fi\mathbf{F}_i includes both applied and constraint forces. For ideal constraints, the Constraint forces do no virtual work, so only the applied forces contribute.

Proof. D’Alembert’s principle extends the principle of virtual work to dynamics by treating mir¨i-m_i \ddot{\mathbf{r}}_i as a “fictitious force” (the inertia force). Starting from Newton’s second law Fi+Ci=mir¨i\mathbf{F}_i + \mathbf{C}_i = m_i \ddot{\mathbf{r}}_i:

i(Fi+Cimir¨i)δri=0\sum_i (\mathbf{F}_i + \mathbf{C}_i - m_i\ddot{\mathbf{r}}_i) \cdot \delta\mathbf{r}_i = 0

This is true. For ideal constraints iCiδri=0\sum_i \mathbf{C}_i \cdot \delta\mathbf{r}_i = 0Giving:

i(Fimir¨i)δri=0\sum_i (\mathbf{F}_i - m_i\ddot{\mathbf{r}}_i) \cdot \delta\mathbf{r}_i = 0

\blacksquare