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...
Autores principales: | , , , , |
---|---|
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 |