Cargando…

Comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning

Approximate analytical methods, such as the multiple scales (MS) and direct normal form (DNF) techniques, have been used extensively for investigating nonlinear mechanical structures, due to their ability to offer insight into the system dynamics. A comparison of their accuracy has not previously be...

Descripción completa

Detalles Bibliográficos
Autores principales: Elliott, A. J., Cammarano, A., Neild, S. A., Hill, T. L., Wagg, D. J.
Formato: Online Artículo Texto
Lenguaje:English
Publicado: Springer Netherlands 2018
Materias:
Acceso en línea:https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6404644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30930539
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11071-018-4534-1
_version_ 1783400930247442432
author Elliott, A. J.
Cammarano, A.
Neild, S. A.
Hill, T. L.
Wagg, D. J.
author_facet Elliott, A. J.
Cammarano, A.
Neild, S. A.
Hill, T. L.
Wagg, D. J.
author_sort Elliott, A. J.
collection PubMed
description Approximate analytical methods, such as the multiple scales (MS) and direct normal form (DNF) techniques, have been used extensively for investigating nonlinear mechanical structures, due to their ability to offer insight into the system dynamics. A comparison of their accuracy has not previously been undertaken, so is addressed in this paper. This is achieved by computing the backbone curves of two systems: the single-degree-of-freedom Duffing oscillator and a non-symmetric, two-degree-of-freedom oscillator. The DNF method includes an inherent detuning, which can be physically interpreted as a series expansion about the natural frequencies of the underlying linear system and has previously been shown to increase its accuracy. In contrast, there is no such inbuilt detuning for MS, although one may be, and usually is, included. This paper investigates the use of the DNF detuning as the chosen detuning in the MS method as a way of equating the two techniques, demonstrating that the two can be made to give identical results up to [Formula: see text] order. For the examples considered here, the resulting predictions are more accurate than those provided by the standard MS technique. Wolfram Mathematica scripts implementing these methods have been provided to be used in conjunction with this paper to illustrate their practicality. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11071-018-4534-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users.
format Online
Article
Text
id pubmed-6404644
institution National Center for Biotechnology Information
language English
publishDate 2018
publisher Springer Netherlands
record_format MEDLINE/PubMed
spelling pubmed-64046442019-03-27 Comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning Elliott, A. J. Cammarano, A. Neild, S. A. Hill, T. L. Wagg, D. J. Nonlinear Dyn Original Paper Approximate analytical methods, such as the multiple scales (MS) and direct normal form (DNF) techniques, have been used extensively for investigating nonlinear mechanical structures, due to their ability to offer insight into the system dynamics. A comparison of their accuracy has not previously been undertaken, so is addressed in this paper. This is achieved by computing the backbone curves of two systems: the single-degree-of-freedom Duffing oscillator and a non-symmetric, two-degree-of-freedom oscillator. The DNF method includes an inherent detuning, which can be physically interpreted as a series expansion about the natural frequencies of the underlying linear system and has previously been shown to increase its accuracy. In contrast, there is no such inbuilt detuning for MS, although one may be, and usually is, included. This paper investigates the use of the DNF detuning as the chosen detuning in the MS method as a way of equating the two techniques, demonstrating that the two can be made to give identical results up to [Formula: see text] order. For the examples considered here, the resulting predictions are more accurate than those provided by the standard MS technique. Wolfram Mathematica scripts implementing these methods have been provided to be used in conjunction with this paper to illustrate their practicality. ELECTRONIC SUPPLEMENTARY MATERIAL: The online version of this article (10.1007/s11071-018-4534-1) contains supplementary material, which is available to authorized users. Springer Netherlands 2018-09-14 2018 /pmc/articles/PMC6404644/ /pubmed/30930539 http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11071-018-4534-1 Text en © The Author(s) 2018 Open AccessThis article is distributed under the terms of the Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/), which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided you give appropriate credit to the original author(s) and the source, provide a link to the Creative Commons license, and indicate if changes were made.
spellingShingle Original Paper
Elliott, A. J.
Cammarano, A.
Neild, S. A.
Hill, T. L.
Wagg, D. J.
Comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning
title Comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning
title_full Comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning
title_fullStr Comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning
title_full_unstemmed Comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning
title_short Comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning
title_sort comparing the direct normal form and multiple scales methods through frequency detuning
topic Original Paper
url https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pmc/articles/PMC6404644/
https://www.ncbi.nlm.nih.gov/pubmed/30930539
http://dx.doi.org/10.1007/s11071-018-4534-1
work_keys_str_mv AT elliottaj comparingthedirectnormalformandmultiplescalesmethodsthroughfrequencydetuning
AT cammaranoa comparingthedirectnormalformandmultiplescalesmethodsthroughfrequencydetuning
AT neildsa comparingthedirectnormalformandmultiplescalesmethodsthroughfrequencydetuning
AT hilltl comparingthedirectnormalformandmultiplescalesmethodsthroughfrequencydetuning
AT waggdj comparingthedirectnormalformandmultiplescalesmethodsthroughfrequencydetuning