Huygens Synchronization in Various

Dynamical Systems
- Experimental Results -

D.J. Rijlaarsdam


DCT 2008.049
June 2008


























Graduation Committee
Prof. dr. H. Nijmeijer (supervisor)
Dr. A.Yu. Pogromsky (coach)
Dr. ir. N. Van de Wouw

Master’s Thesis
Dynamics & Control Group
Eindhoven University of Technology

Eindhoven, June 2008
Things should be made as simple as possible, but not any simpler.
[Albert Einstein]
Abstract v
Abstract
Synchronization phenomena take place frequently and all around us., Synchronization of sleep
rhythms to the rhythm of day and night, for example, is familiar to everyone. Less known, but
no less important, is the synchronization in neuronal activity that allows the brain to function as
it does. Apart from biological synchronization, the electrical synchronization taking place when
turning on a radio or using a mobile phone, is also a frequent phenomenon in our everyday life.
Although it is clear that synchronization is a rather common phenomenon, the mechanisms behind
synchronizing phenomena are far from straightforward. A better understanding of these mech-
anisms is required to understand - and possibly control - the related processes such as epileptic
seizures or high-end encrypted communication. Many theoretical and experimental studies have
been performed, leading to a better understanding of these synchronization phenomena. One of
the first to notice and study such phenomena in detail was Christiaan Huygens, whos observations
are strongly related to the research presented in this thesis. This thesis aims to add to this field of
knowledge by supplying additional and new analytical, numerical and experimental results. These
results are generated by using a new experimental set-up developed at the Eindhoven University of
Technology. Using this set-up, both controlled and uncontrolled synchronization between a variety
of different oscillators can be investigated.
The main research objective of this thesis is to: Investigate, using a new experimental set-up, the
existence and stability of synchronization regimes in coupled oscillatory systems. This objective is
realized by initially focusing on the experimental set-up. This set-up, consists of two oscillators con-
nected to a common beam by leaf springs. The beam itself is supported by leaf springs as well, thus
allowing coupling between the oscillators by displacement of the beam. After a detailed discussion
of the set-up, a variety of synchronization phenomena is presented, showing synchronization taking
place in a range of dynamical systems, such as coupled Duffing oscillators and coupled rotating discs.
The first part of the thesis describes the experimental set-up and the derivation and identification
of a model for this set-up in detail. The possible synchronization regimes in the dynamics of the
set-up are investigated as well. Furthermore, a stability analysis and numerical as well as experi-
mental results are presented. These results show the attractive and stable nature of the anti-phase
synchronization manifold in the dynamics of the set-up.
The experimental set-up described in part 1 of the thesis is fully actuated. This property is used
in the second part of the thesis by designing a state feedback controller which allows the modeling
of a variety of dynamical systems. To illustrate this, experiments are conducted while modulat-
ing the set-up so as to respectively resemble a system of coupled Duffing oscillators or rotating
discs. For each dynamical system, experimental results are preceded by a stability analysis of the
synchronization manifold and simulation results. Finally, a controller similar to the one used for
the Duffing oscillators and the rotating discs, is developed in order to imitate the classical Hygens
set-up, which consists of two pendula mounted on a common frame. With the Huygens set-up no
successful experimental results are obtained, however. The most probable cause for this is that, due
to the limited actuator power in the system, the modeled coupling is weak compared to the distur-
bances. Therefore, no synchronization has been observed yet. This thesis, therefore, describes, in
detail, the theoretical analysis of Huygens’ system and gives an extensive analysis of the observed
problems as well as their possible solutions.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
vi Samenvatting
Samenvatting
Gedurende het dagelijks leven heeft iedereen regelmatig te maken met synchronisatie. Het feit dat u
bijvoorbeeld automatisch ’s ochtends wakker wordt, wordt veroorzaakt doordat het slaapritme zich
aanpast aan, oftewel synchroniseert met, het ritme het dag en nacht. Daarnaast is synchronisatie
tussen neuronen in de hersenen verantwoordelijk voor de verwerking van de tekst die u hier leest.
Naast synchronisatie in biologische systemen vindt synchronisatie plaats bij het aanzetten van een
mobiele telefoon of een radio, waaruit tevens blijkt hoe gewoon dergelijke effecten in het alledaagse
leven zijn.
Hoewel synchronisatie een breed geaccepteerd en veel benut fenomeen is zijn de onderliggende mech-
anismen lang niet zo eenvoudig als soms lijkt. Een beter begrip van de achterliggende mechanismen
kan echter leiden tot een beter begrip van de effecten zelf, zoals bijvoorbeeld epileptisch aanvallen of
geavanceerde encryptie methoden. In het verleden zijn er reeds vele theoretische en experimentele
studies aan dit onderwerp gewijd. Een van de eerste en belangrijkste observaties van synchronisatie
werd in 1665 opgetekend door Chistiaan Huygens. Zijn resultaten vormen een belangrijk deel van
de basis van het onderzoek dat in dit rapport gepresenteerd wordt. In dit afstudeerproject worden
nieuwe analytische en experimentele resultaten gepresenteerd met betrekking tot (Huygens) syn-
chronisatie. Voor dit onderzoek is gebruik gemaakt van een speciaal ontworpen opstelling bij de
faculteit Werktuigbouwkunde van de Technische Universiteit Eindhoven.
De hoofdvraag die gedurende dit afstudeertraject bestudeerd is luidt: Onderzoek, met gebruik van
een nieuwe experimentele opstelling, het bestaan en de stabiliteit van synchronisatie regimes in
gekoppelde oscillerende systemen. Om te beginnen wordt aandacht besteed aan de, speciaal voor
dit onderzoek ontworpen, opstelling. Deze opstelling bestaat uit twee oscillatoren die beide met
behulp van bladveren aan een gemeenschappelijke balk zijn gekoppeld. Deze is op zijn beurt tevens
vrij opgehangen in een set bladveren. Zodoende wordt de beweging van de oscillatoren gekoppeld
via een beweging van de balk. Na een bespreking van het ontwerp en de eigenschappen van deze
opstelling wordt nader ingegaan op de synchronisatie tussen de oscillatoren, zoals die tijdens exper-
imenten naar voren komt. Voor deze experimenten wordt de opstelling onder andere door actuatie
aangepast om naast met de natuurlijke dynamica van het systeem, ook experimenten te kunnen
uitvoeren met andere dynamische systemen. In het speciaal wordt ingegaan op de synchronisatie
tussen twee gekoppelde Duffing oscillatoren en een systeem van twee gekoppelde roterende schijven.
Het eerste deel van het afstudeerverslag beschrijft de afleiding en identificatie van een model voor de
opstelling. Een analyse van mogelijke synchronisatieregimes in de dynamica van de opstelling wordt
tevens gepresenteerd. Naast experimentele resultaten worden simulaties en analytische resultaten
gepresenteerd die de stabiliteit van de geobserveerde synchronisatieregimes onderstrepen.
In de experimentele opstelling zoals die in het eerste deel van het afstudeerverslag ge¨ıntroduceerd
wordt kan op alle graden van vrijheid geactueerd worden. Deze eigenschappen worden benut door
een state feedback controller te ontwerpen waarmee de dynamica in de opstelling aangepast kan
worden, zodat deze een ’willekeurige’ set dynamische vergelijkingen representeert. Er wordt in
detail ingegaan op drie casestudies: Ten eerste wordt synchronisatie bestudeerd in een systeem
van gekoppelde Duffing oscillatoren. Vervolgens wordt een gelijksoortige analyse gepresenteerd
van een systeem van gekoppelde roterende schijven. In beide gevallen worden de experimentele
resultaten vooraf gegaan door een stabiliteitsanalyse van de mogelijke synchronisatieregimes en
simulatie resultaten. De derde casestudie behelst die van het originele systeem zoals dat destijds
door Christiaan Huygens werd gebruikt. Tot op heden heeft deze studie helaas nog geen succesvolle
experimentele resultaten opgeleverd. De meest waarschijnlijke reden hiervoor is dat de koppeling in
het geval van deze casestudie erg klein is ten opzichte van verstoringen. Voor deze casestudie wordt
in plaats van experimentele resultaten een gedetailleerde analyse gegeven van de geobserveerde
problemen en hun mogelijke oplossingen.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
Contents vii
Contents
1 Introduction 13
I Huygens 2008 15
2 History and Motivation 15
2.1 A Brief History of Christiaan Huygens . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.2 300 Years of Synchronization . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
3 Set-up 18
3.1 Set-up Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
3.2 Technical Discussion of the Set-Up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2.1 Data Acquisition, Safety System and Software . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2.2 Tuning the Actuators and Sensor Calibration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19
3.2.3 Viscous Damping and Hysteresis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 20
4 Modeling the Set-Up 21
4.1 Equations of Motion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21
4.2 System Identification . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.2.1 Design of the Excitation Signal . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 22
4.2.2 Identification of the Individual Subsystems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 24
4.2.3 Coupling Parameters . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 26
4.2.4 Nonlinear Stiffness . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
4.3 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 28
5 Analysis and Simulation Results 30
5.1 Synchronization: Introduction and Definition . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
5.2 Stability of the Synchronization Manifold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 31
5.3 Simulation Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 32
5.4 Experimental Validation . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 34
5.5 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 35
II Experimental Results 36
6 Masking of System Dynamics 36
7 Coupled Duffing Oscillators 38
7.1 Equations of Motion and Stability Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 38
7.2 Simulation Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
7.3 Experimental Results and Controller Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 40
7.4 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41
8 Coupled Rotating Discs 43
8.1 Equations of Motion and Controller Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 43
8.2 Rotating Discs without Eccentric Masses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 44
8.2.1 Simulation and Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 45
8.2.2 Convergence Rate (Analysis and Simulation) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 46
8.3 Rotating Discs with Eccentric Masses . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 48
8.3.1 Simulation and Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 49
8.4 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 51
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
viii Contents
9 Huygens Clocks 52
9.1 Equations of Motion and Controller Design . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 52
9.2 Problems and Solutions Concerning Experimental Results . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 54
9.3 Concluding Remarks . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 56
10 Conclusions and Recommendations 57
10.1 Conclusion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 57
10.2 Recommendations . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 58
A Proofs and Derivations 63
A.1 Equations of Motion (Lagrange) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 63
A.2 Set-up: Stability of the Synchronization Manifold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 65
A.3 Rotating Discs: Stability of the Synchronization Manifold . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 67
B Additional Data: System Identification 69
B.1 Parameter Values . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
B.2 Phase Shifts Obtained by the Infinity Norm Algorithm . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 69
B.3 Nonlinear Force-Displacement Characteristics . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
B.4 Additional Figures . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 70
C Technical Specifications 71
C.1 Connection Scheme Set-Up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 72
C.2 Safety System . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 73
C.3 Masses and Eigenfrequencies of Set-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
C.4 Data Acquisition Systems . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 74
C.5 Relative Calibration of the Voice Coil . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
C.6 Damping Analysis . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
C.6.1 Viscous Damping . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 75
C.6.2 Hysteresis and Dry Friction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 78
C.7 Linear Variable Differential Transformer . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 80
C.8 Linear Motor (Voice Coil Actuators) . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 87
D Related Papers and Conferences 91
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
ix
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
x
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
Preface 11
Preface
This thesis presents the results of my graduation project at the Dynamics and Control group at
the department of Mechanical Engineering (Eindhoven University of Technology)
1
. The project
deals with the theoretical and experimental investigation of synchronization phenomena in a range
of dynamical systems using a novel set-up developed at the departement. The first part of the
project is devoted to the development of the necessary hard- and software and the identification the
dynamics present in this set-up. The second part focusses on investigating synchronizing behaviour
in a range of dynamical systems by means of analysis, simulations and experiments.
I would like to take this opportunity to thank the people who made this project possible. First of
all, I would like to thank the members of my graduation committee: prof. dr. H. Nijmeijer, dr. A.
Yu. Pogromsky and dr. ir. N. Van de Wouw for providing me with this opportunity.
Next to the people directly involved in the project I would like to thank those who contributed to
this project by their support throughout the years. I would like to thank the following people in
particular: My parents, Anne and Henri¨ette for your continuing love, support and believe in me.
Martin and Anne Fleur for you are always there for me. My grandfather Jan Muntendam, for the
inspiration that helped me choose mechanical engineering. Mieneke, for your helpfull efforts in the
final phase of this thesis. And finally, Sonja, for everything.
D.J. Rijlaarsdam, June 2, 2008
1
This work was partially supported by the Dutch-Russian program on interdisciplinary mathematics ’Dynamics
and Control of Hybrid Mechanical Systems’ (NWO grant 047.017.018).
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
12
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
1 Introduction 13
1 Introduction
This morning, you were most probably woken up by your alarm clock. Let’s assume for a moment,
that there is no such thing as work or obligations. You are free to stay in bed for as long as you
wish. You’ll probably sleep late and wake up a few hours later. But your body will tell you to
wake up in the morning anyway. How does your body know that it is time to wake up? And why
does it tell you to wake up at this specific moment of the day? The reason for this is that your
body synchronizes itself to the rhythm of day and night as perceived by your senses. This simple
example shows how synchronization takes place at least once a day in everybody’s life.
Apart from synchronizing sleep rhythms, numerous examples of biological synchrony exist. Syn-
chronizing dynamics, for example, have been recorded between neurons in the brain playing a role
in the storage of memory. And, for example, synchronization between neurons plays an important
role in the comprehension of these very words you are reading. Apart from natural synchroniza-
tion, man made synchronization occurs frequently and all around us. Turning on a radio or using
a mobile phone will initiate a sequence of synchronized processes, allowing the device to function
correctly. Perhaps the most famous example of man made synchronization, is the construction of
the ’leap year’, making sure that mans’ calendar stays in synch with the cosmic one.
Although it is clear that synchronization is a rather common phenomenon, the mechanisms be-
hind these synchronizing phenomena are far from straightforward. A better understanding of these
mechanisms is required to understand - and possibly control - the related processes such as epileptic
seizures or high end encrypted communication. Many theoretical and experimental studies have,
therefore, been performed, leading to a better understanding of these phenomena. This thesis aims
to add to this field of knowledge by supplying additional and new analytical, numerical and experi-
mental results generated by using a new experimental set-up developed at the Eindhoven University
of Technology. These findings are also presented at ENOC 2008 (Rijlaarsdam et al., 2008).
The main research objective of the project described in this thesis is to: Investigate, using a new
experimental set-up, the existence and stability of synchronization regimes in coupled oscillatory
systems. This main research objective is split up into four sub-objectives aiming to:
1. Construct soft- and hardware that enables effective and accurate operation of the experimental
set-up.
2. Develop a model which accurately describes the dynamics of the experimental set-up.
3. Develop a closed loop system that facilitates a wide range of experimental studies, using
the experimental set-up as a platform to resemble different types of dynamical systems for
demonstration and research purposes.
4. Obtain experimental results, identifying possible synchronization regimes within the coupled
dynamical systems under consideration and compare these results to theoretical as well as
numerical results.
The thesis consists of two main parts. The first part focuses on the description of the experimental
set-up. In Chapter 2 the concept of synchronization is discussed from a historical point of view,
including a detailed discussion of one of the first recordings of synchronization by Chistiaan Huy-
gens in 1665, and a literature overview is presented. Chapters 3 and 4 respectively describe the
experimental set-up and the derivation and identification of a model of the set-up. Finally, Chapter
5 concludes the first part of the thesis by analyzing the stability of possible synchronization regimes
within the set-up and presenting numerical and experimental results that support this analysis.
The second part of this thesis describes different case studies of synchronizing dynamical systems.
A so called ’masking dynamics’ approach is introduced that enables experiments to be conducted
with a set of user specified dynamics rather than those inherit to the set-up. Chapter 6 explores this
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
14 1 Introduction
approach in detail. In Chapter 7 this same ’masking dynamics’ approach is used to model a system
of coupled Duffing oscillators. In Chapter 8 the same procedure is followed to imitate a system
of rotating discs. Both chapters provide analytical, numerical and experimental results confirming
the presence and stability of synchronization regimes within the systems. In Chapter 9 preliminary
results are presented showing the current state of events in modeling the classical Huygens set-up
(two pendula mounted on a common frame). For the Huygens set-up, no experimental results are
available yet. Chapter 9, however, describes the theoretical analysis of this system and an extensive
analysis of the observed problems and their possible solutions. Finally, in Chapter 10 conclusions
and recommendations for further research are provided.
Nomenclature and Preliminaries
This section introduces the notation standards that are used throughout this report.
Mathematical Notation
• Matrices and vectors are denoted by bold typeface. Matrices are denoted by capitals, while
vectors are denoted by non-capital typeface.
• The
·
symbol on top of any parameter denotes differentiation with respect to time, i.e. ˙ x =
dx
dt
=

dx1
dt
,
dx2
dt
, . . . ,
dxn
dt

T
.
Experimental and Simulation Results
• Blue and red lines in any plot correspond to the corresponding oscillator color in the set-up
or the subscript number 1 and 2 in the models. Black lines correspond to the motion of the
beam / frame or the subscript 3 in the model.
• Measurements are depicted by bold lines, while simulation results are depicted by thin lines.
• Unless specified otherwise the measurement frequency equals 1 [kHz] in experiments.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
2 History and Motivation 15
Part I
Huygens 2008
The world is my country, science is my religion.
[C. Huygens]
In the first part of this report the project and the experimental set-up are introduced. Starting
with a literature overview and providing a historical overview of synchronization in Chapter 2 the
set-up is introduced in Chapter 3. Chapter 4 continues with the derivation and identification of a
model for the systems’ dynamics. Finally, this part is concluded by Chapter 5 which introduces the
notion and definition of synchronization and applies this definition to simulation and experimental
results. Apart from showing the validity of the derived model it provides a kick-off for the second
part of this report, which deals with experimental results in more detail.
2 History and Motivation
2.1 A Brief History of Christiaan Huygens
Figure 2.1: Christiaan Huygens by
Pierre Bourguignon, 1688. (Andriesse,
1993)
In a time when the followers of Aristoteles could
no longer stop the upcoming tide of the free think-
ing society, a time when science started to emerge
in a form that relied on experiments rather than
religion, Christiaan Huygens was born on April
14
th
1629 (†July 8
th
1695). This was the time when
Galileo Galilei unraveled the mystery of kinemat-
ics and the heliocentric view gained ground over
the ancient way of viewing humanity as the cen-
ter of the universe. It was the age of great
minds like Ren´e Decartes, Isaac Newton, Blaise Pas-
cal, Henry Briggs and Pierre de Fermat. In
this thrilling time, Huygens started his education
in Leiden (The Netherlands), at age 16 (Andriesse,
1993).
Originally Christiaan Huygens set out to study law, but
his interest soon shifted towards mathematics and later
physics. In mathematics he published ’De iis quae liquido supernatant ’, about the laws that govern
floating bodies and wrote his unpublished work ’De circuli magnitudine inventa’, about the circle
perimeter. Among his greater works appeared ’De motu corporum ex percussione’ in 1652, which
describes the motion of coliding objects and ’De vi cetrifuga’ in which Huygens investigates the
centripetal force.
Huygens had a practically motivated interest in the dynamics of pendula clocks. Galilei had already
suggested the usage of such mechanism for timekeeping, but the realization of the pendulum clock
came from Huygens. His fascination with pendulum clocks lead to discoveries that are used till this
very day and were published in his masterpiece ’Horologium oscillatorium’ in 1673 (Huygens, 1934).
During his research into the design of pendulum clocks, Huygens aimed to make the frequency of
the pendulum independent of its amplitude. In his search for this isochronous motion he discovered
the cyclo¨ıd path that the pendulum blob should follow in this case. Moreover, he aimed to find a
better description for the pendulum than a massless rod with a point mass at its end. Therefore,
he introduced the notion of the ’instantaneous point of zero velocity’ and in doing so he set the first
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
16 2.2 300 Years of Synchronization
step in describing the kinematics of a rigid body. Finally, he set out to use the pendulum clock to
provide a solution for the problem of finding the longitude coordinate at sea. This quest lead to the
invention of the spring driven escapement mechanism that allows a pendulum clock to run. But,
more importantly, it lead to his observation of synchronization (’sympathie des horloges’), which
resulted in more than 300 years of research and ultimately laid the foundation for this thesis.
2.2 300 Years of Synchronization
In 1657 Salomon Coster built the first pendulum clock after Huygens’ design (Huygens, 1986). Due
to the excellent properties of these clocks Huygens figured this could be the solution to the ’longi-
tude problem’ put forward by The Royal Society of London.
Intermezzo: The Longitude Problem
The Royal Society of London presented the challenge to solve the problem of finding the longitude coordinate
at sea. One solution for this problem is to use the time difference between the last departed harbor and the
present location. In order to determine this time difference, one needs an accurate clock that provides the
time at the reference location and use this find the time difference between the present location and the last
departed harbor (for example at mid-day, when the sun is at its highest point in the sky). Since the total
time difference around the globe is 24 hours and the total number of degrees longitude for a complete circle
around the earth is 360

, the time difference can be converted to the number of degrees longitude East or
West with respect to the last departed harbor.
The application of Huygens’ clock design for this purpose was investigated in cooperation with
Alexander Bruce (2
nd
Earl of Kincardine) and tested from 1662 till 1665. In 1669 Huygens sug-
gested the use of two pendulum clocks on a ship (Huygens, 1669), since one clock should be able
to provide timekeeping while the second clock is being cleaned or repaired.
During a time of illness Huygens was bound to stay in bed and two such pendulum clocks, mounted
on a common frame were located in his bedroom (see Figure 2.2). When observing the motion of
these clocks he perceived ’an odd kind of sympathy between these watches suspended by the side of
the other’. He observed that the motion of the clocks converged to an anti-phase synchronized state
and reported his findings in 1665 (Huygens, 1932, 1983a,b).
Figure 2.2: A drawing of the set-up in which Christiaan Huygens observed synchronization (Huy-
gens, 1932).
Although Huygens thought his findings added to the value of his design for timekeeping at sea (Yo-
der, 1990), the Royal Society thought otherwise (Birch, 1756) and discarded the use of pendulum
clocks for solving the longitude problem.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
2.2 300 Years of Synchronization 17
We will not dwell on the solution of the longitude problem, since the invention of the global po-
sitioning system has solved this problem once and for all. Instead, attention is focussed on the
synchronization phenomenon or ’sympathie des horloges’ that was observed by Huygens. This phe-
nomenon has inspired many scientists over the next three centuries.
In the beginning of the 20
th
century Korteweg studied Huygens- or frequency synchronization us-
ing normal mode analysis (Korteweg, 1906). He was the first to suggest that friction would make
anti-phase synchronization the most favorable mode for Huygens system. But the escapement
mechanism was disregarded in this analysis. In (Bennett et al., 2002) the authors include the es-
capement mechanism and study the influence of the mass ratio between the oscillators and the
connecting frame. By studying a Poincar´e map of the systems’ trajectories they show that the
limiting behavior will result in anti-phase synchronization, quasiperiodic motion or ’beating death’
(one of the oscillators comes to a standstill). The quasiperiodic motion is only observed for largely
non-identical oscillators and ’beating death’ is caused by the escapement mechanism used. There-
fore, their findings largely correspond to the original findings reported by Huygens.
In (Pantaleone, 2002; Blekhman, 1988; Kuznetsov et al., 2007; Belykh et al., 2008) the authors
provide an analysis of Huygens synchronization, using Van der Pol type oscillators. These studies
report coexisting anti-phase and in-phase synchronization regimes. Pantaleone also reports exper-
imental verification of the in-phase regime, but is able to reproduce Huygens original findings by
adding damping to the system (see Kortewegs original suggestion). In (Oud et al., 2006) the au-
thors present an extensive experimental analysis of the Huygens phenomenon and find both in- and
anti-phase synchronization. A recent overview and analysis of Huygens synchronization is presented
in (Senator, 2006).
Apart from uncontrolled synchronization, studies of controlled synchronization are presented in
(Pogromsky et al., 2003, 2006; Ananyevskiy et al., 2008). The authors present analysis of closed
loop Huygens-like systems where control input is applied to either the oscillators or the connecting
frame (Ananyevskiy et al., 2008). They show that by applying control, one can control both the
type of synchronization that occurs and the final energy (amplitude) of the oscillators completely
or at least to a certain extend (Ananyevskiy et al., 2008).
The general interest in synchronization has increased significantly over time, since examples of this
type of phenomena appear in a variety of fields, such as electrical engineering and biology. In
electrical engineering the studies of Appleton (Appleton, 1922) laid the foundations for early radio
communication. Moreover, the principles of synchronization emerge each time a mobile phone is
used or a radio is tuned to a specific frequency. A well known report of biological synchronization
is published in (Buck, 1988), where the author describes synchronization of rhythmic flashing of a
large population of fireflies. In (Gray et al., 1989) the authors report measuring synchronization
of neuronal activity in a cat brain and (Oud et al., 2004; Rijlaarsdam et al., 2007) investigate the
mechanism behind such synchronization in more detail. In (Michaels et al., 1987) the authors report
synchronization in population of pacemaker cells and (Strogatz and Stewart, 1993) investigates the
role of synchronization in biology as well. Moreover, in (Strogatz, 2003) the role of synchronization
in sleep rhythms is investigated.
Summarizing, Huygens’ observation of synchronization of two pendulum clocks in the 17
th
century
lead to an impressive number of studies and has been investigated from both analytical and exper-
imental perspective. This thesis aims to add to this field by supplying additional analytical and
experimental results, based on a novel set up that has been developed at the department of Me-
chanical Engineering of the Eindhoven University of Technology (Tillaart, 2006). This set-up allows
to study both controlled and uncontrolled synchronization. Moreover, it is possible to modify this
system to represent different types of dynamical systems and the systems’ parameters can easily be
modified between and during experiments. Therefore, this set-up allows for the study of (Huygens)
synchronization in an accurate and divers way.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
18 3 Set-up
3 Set-up
A novel set-up, designed to investigate Huygens-like synchronization phenomena, has been devel-
oped at the Eindhoven University of Technology (Tillaart, 2006). This set-up was built to continue
and expand the efforts of Oud (Oud et al., 2006), who studied Huygens synchronization intensively
in 2006, using a less sophisticated set-up. Therefore, the majority of the recommendations provided
by Oud in his thesis are taken into account in the new design. The realization of the set-up was
completed in May 2007 and the final result is depicted in Figure 3.1.
Figure 3.1: Photograph of the set-up.
3.1 Set-up Design
The set-up consists of two oscillators of mass m
i
, i = 1, 2, mounted on a common frame of mass m
3
(see Figure 3.2) and is equipped with three actuators and position sensors on all degrees of freedom.
The parameters of primary interest in this set-up are presented in Table 3.1 and will be discussed
in more detail in Chapter 4. Furthermore, although the masses of the oscillators are fixed, the mass
of the connecting beam (m
3
) may be varied by a factor 10. This allows for mechanical adjustment
of the coupling strength.
x
1
x
2
x
3
κ
1
κ
2
κ
3
β
1
β
2
β
3
m
1
m
2
m
3
F
1
F
2
F
3
Figure 3.2: Schematic representation of the set-up at the Dynamics and Control laboratory (Dept.
of Mechanical Engineering, Eindhoven University of Technology).
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
3.2 Technical Discussion of the Set-Up 19
Table 3.1: Parameters of interest in the experimental set-up.
Oscillator 1 Oscillator 2 Frame / beam (3)
Mass m
1
m
2
M
Stiffness κ
1
() κ
2
() κ
3
()
Damping β
1
() β
2
() β
3
()
The set-up design, although closely related to Huygens original set-up (see Figure 2.2), is designed
to allow easy modification of the systems dynamics by actuation and to provide a set of equations
of motion that are as simple as possible, in order to simplify theoretical analysis. Before continuing
with the identification of a model for this set-up and the analytical, numerical and experimental
results, the introduction of the set-up will be completed by briefly discussing the most important
technical issues related to this project.
3.2 Technical Discussion of the Set-Up
This section briefly introduces the practical implementation of the set-up. However, details are
not provided in the main text. The reader is referred to Appendix C for more information and to
(Tillaart, 2006) for details related to the design of the set-up.
First of all, the choice of the Data Acquisition System (DACS) will be motivated and the safety
system that has been designed to allow experiments without human presence will be discussed.
Next, the issue of tuning the actuators and calibrating the sensors will be introduced. Finally,
when performing experiments, damping and hysteresis proved to be an issue. The identification of
these problems and their solution will be discussed in the last paragraph of this chapter.
3.2.1 Data Acquisition, Safety System and Software
After the initial assembly, the set-up already contained both the actuators and the sensors, but
no data acquisition system was selected. A complete overview of the considered possibilities and
their main advantages and drawbacks is provided in Appendix C.4. The choice for the TU/e’s
MicroGiant system appeared to be the most suitable.
Furthermore, no emergency brake system was present in the original design. In order to make sure
the system will automatically shut down if excessive motion (resonance phenomena) occurs or if the
power running through the actuators exceeds the maximum allowed value of 8W a safety system has
been designed and realized. This system consists of a set of (mico-) switches and fuses that control
both the motion and the heat production of the system. A diagram showing the configuration of
the complete system of DACs, set-up, amplifiers and set-up as a whole is provided in Appendix
C.1, while the details of the safety system are provided in Appendix C.2.
Finally, software (see the accompanying CD) was designed to allow easy and completely autonomous
operation of the set-up. The software allows for multiple experiments with different parameters and
will automatically detect synchronization before switching to a new experiment. This feature allows
for conducting large amounts of experiments, or very long tests without the need of human presence.
3.2.2 Tuning the Actuators and Sensor Calibration
The set-up consists of three position sensors (Linear Variable Differential Transformers) and three
voice coil actuators. In Appendix C.7 the specifications of the sensors are supplied and the spec-
ifications of the actuators are supplied in Appendix C.8. The sensors are calibrated such that
1 [V ] ∼ 5 [mm]. However, the calibration of the actuators yielded that the actuator / amplifier
combinations are significantly non-identical. Therefore, the difference in actuator response to an
identical signal, has been identified. The details of this experiment are supplied in Appendix C.5.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
20 3.2 Technical Discussion of the Set-Up
The difference in actuator strength has been compensated by multiplying the outgoing signals with
an appropriate gain.
3.2.3 Viscous Damping and Hysteresis
During the process of identifying the set-up viscous damping influences as well as hysteresis and
stick-slip behavior have been identified. A thorough analysis of these effects is provided in Appendix
C.6.1 (viscous damping influences) and C.6.2 (hysteresis and dry friction). Using analytical as well
as experimental results the main cause for viscous-like friction has been identified to be the back
emf in the voice coils. Furthermore, hysteresis has been identified, but these influences are small
and will not be compensated for at this point. The location of the dry friction element has also
been identified and will be avoided during experiments, since removal of this element proved to be
too time consuming for now.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
4 Modeling the Set-Up 21
4 Modeling the Set-Up
In order to correctly design and develop experiments, an accurate model of the experimental set-up
is necessary. In this chapter such model is derived and identified. A linear model is derived using
the Lagrange formalism and written in the appropriate dimensionless form. Next, the parameters
of the system are systematically identified using a specially designed input signal and Kalman filter.
Finally, attention is paid to the role of nonlinearities present in the system.
4.1 Equations of Motion
In this section the equations of motion of the set-up are derived and written in dimensionless form.
A schematic representation of the set-up is depicted in Figure 4.1.
x
1
x
2
x
3
κ
1
κ
2
κ
3
β
1
β
2
β
3
m
1
m
2
m
3
u
1
u
2
u
3
Figure 4.1: Schematic representation of the set-up.
Here m
i
∈ R
>0
, x
i
∈ R, i = 1, 2, 3, are the masses and displacements of the oscillators and the
beam respectively. Functions κ
i
: R → R, β
i
: R → R describe the stiffness and damping in the
system. Finally, u
i
are the actuator inputs.
First of all, the equations of motion for the system depicted in Figure 4.1 will be derived using the
Lagrange formalism. A detailed derivation is provided in Appendix A.1. Although this approach
allows the derivation of the equations of motion for nonlinear springs κ
i
() and damping β
i
(), a
linear model appears to be sufficiently accurate and therefore linear springs κ
i
= k
i
and linear
viscous damping β
i
= b
i
are assumed. Under these assumptions the equations of motion expressed
in absolute coordinates x = [x
1
x
2
x
3
]
T
are:
¨ x
1
= −ω
2
1
∆x
1
− 2ζ
1
ω
1
∆˙ x
1
+ c
1
u
1
(t) (4.1)
¨ x
2
= −ω
2
2
∆x
2
− 2ζ
2
ω
2
∆˙ x
2
+ c
2
u
2
(t) (4.2)
¨ x
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

ω
2
i
∆x
i
+ 2ζ
i
ω
i
∆˙ x
i

−ω
2
3
x
3
−2ζ
3
ω
3
˙ x
3
+ c
3
˜ u
3
(t), (4.3)
where ∆x
i
= x
i
− x
3
and ω
i
=

ki
mi
[rad s
−1
], ζ
i
=
bi
2miωi
[−] the undamped eigenfrequency and
the dimensionless damping of the i
th
subsystem respectively. Furthermore, µ
i
=
mi
m3
[−] is the
dimensionless coupling strength, ˜ u
3
(t) = u
3
(t) −u
2
(t) −u
1
(t) [V ] the nett input signal to the beam
and c
i
[ms
−2
V
−1
] accounts for the amplifier / motor constants.
In order to write the system of equations (4.1) - (4.3) in dimensionless form, define the following
set of dimensionless parameters:
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
22 4.2 System Identification
Table 4.1: Dimensionless parameters.
τ

= ¯ ωt ω
i
= ¯ ω̟

i
x
i
= ℓξ

i
u
i
(¯ ωt) = νv

i


) λ

i
= (ν¯ ω
2
/ℓ)c
i
Here

indicates a dimensionless parameter (this notation will be omitted in the sequel to increase
readability), ¯ ω =
1
2

1

2
) [rad s
−1
] is the mean eigenfrequency of the oscillators, ℓ = 5 [mm] the
stroke of the oscillators and ν = 0.42 [V ] the maximum input that can be applied to the actuators.
In dimensionless form the system of equations (4.1) - (4.3) now becomes:
ξ
′′
1
= −̟
2
1
∆ξ
1
−2ζ
1
̟
1
∆ξ

1
+ λ
1
v
1
(τ) (4.4)
ξ
′′
2
= −̟
2
2
∆ξ
2
−2ζ
2
̟
2
∆ξ

2
+ λ
2
v
2
(τ) (4.5)
ξ
′′
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

̟
2
i
∆ξ
i
+ 2ζ
i
̟
i
∆ξ

i

−̟
2
3
ξ
3
−2ζ
3
̟
3
ξ

3
+ λ
3
v
3
(τ), (4.6)
where ∆ξ
i
= ξ
i
− ξ
3
and

denotes differentiation with respect to the dimensionless time τ. The
following part of this section will deal with the identification of the parameters present in the model
and the experimental validation of this model.
4.2 System Identification
This section deals with the identification of the model (4.4) - (4.6) proposed in the previous para-
graph. First, a suitable excitation signal for identification procedure will be designed. The iden-
tification of the model will then proceed in two main steps. First the individual subsystems will
be treated as decoupled oscillators, each governed by the dynamics as described by corresponding
equation in the complete model, but without the coupling and difference terms. The identification
results are validated by comparison between the measured and model response and quantified by an
error penalty function. After the identification of the nine oscillator-specific parameters the identi-
fication is completed by determining the two remaining coupling parameters. Finally, nonlinearities
in the systems’ stiffness characteristics are identified for use in the second part of this report. These
results are then compared to the linear approximation that is present in the identified models.
4.2.1 Design of the Excitation Signal
A very important part of identifying a dynamical system is the design of the excitation signal. A
signal with sufficient frequency content and a maximal fraction of input power used for identification
is to be designed. In order to quantify these statements the following signal properties are proposed:
Definition 4.1 (Crest Factor (Pintelon and Schoukens, 2001)).
The crest factor Cr(u) of a signal u(t) is given by the ratio between the (absolute) peak value u
peak
and its Root Mean Square (RMS) value u
rms
in the frequency band of interest:
Cr(u) =
max
t∈T
[u(t)[
|u(t)|
2
, (4.7)
where T is the set of relevant time instances. The crest factor is a measure for the compactness of
an excitation signal.
Definition 4.2 (Time Factor (Pintelon and Schoukens, 2001)).
The time factor Tf(u) of a signal u(t) is given by:
Tf(u) = max
k∈F
¸
1
2
Cr
2
(u(t))
U
2
rms
[U(k)[

, (4.8)
where F is the frequency band of interest and U(k) the frequency spectrum of the signal u(t) over
this spectrum. The time factor provides an estimate of the minimal measurement time needed to
obtain a good FRF measurement over a frequency band F using the input signal u(t).
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
4.2 System Identification 23
For the identification of the system a signal is selected with a frequency content between 0.01 Hz
and 25 Hz, since previous experiments showed that the systems dynamics are located within this
frequency band. The signal is constructed as a multisine with 25 sines, according to:
v(t, φ) =
N
f
¸
k=1
A
k
cos (2πf
k
t + φ
k
) (4.9)
with N
f
= 25, f
k
linearly spaced between 0.01 Hz and 25 Hz and a flat spectrum A
k
= 1. The
phase shifts φ
k
are selected such that the crest factor is minimized. This minimization is performed
according to the infinity norm algorithm introduced in (Pintelon and Schoukens, 2001) which solves
the following optimization problem:
min
φ
¸
lim
p→∞
|v(t, φ)|
2p

(4.10)
where the 2p-norm (p ∈ Z
>0
) is defined as:
|v(t, φ)|
2p
=

1
T
0
T0

0
v
2p
(t, φ) dt
¸
¸
1
2p
, (4.11)
and T
0
is the period time of the signal v(t, φ). By minimizing the 2p-norm using a constraint
minimization algorithm, the optimal phase shift vector φ = [φ
1
, φ
2
, . . . , φ
N
f
]
T
, with respect to
minimization of the crest factor is approximated. Increasing p results in a converging algorithm
that provides a signal with the required frequency spectrum and a minimum crest factor. Such
signal provides the most effective use of the input power for identification, as opposed to a signal
containing large peaks.
The optimization problem specified by (4.10) has been solved for the specified spectrum up to p = 10
and the resulting phase shifts are presented in Appendix B.2 (Table: B.2). This optimization has
also been performed for the same spectrum but with N
f
= 50. However, computational limits only
allowed for convergence up to p = 2 within reasonable calculation time. Results are presented in
Appendix B.2 (Table: B.3). A sample of the resulting signal v(t) for N
f
= 25 is presented in Figure
4.2.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
−1
−0.8
−0.6
−0.4
−0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
τ [−]
v
(
t
)
[

]
Figure 4.2: Optimized multisine, using the infinity norm algorithm.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
24 4.2 System Identification
The signal presented in Figure 4.2 has a crest factor of Cr(v(t)) = 1.4838 which is close to that
of a single sine (

2). The time factor equals approximately Tf(v(t)) = 200 [s]. Therefore a
measurement of length 200 s suffices to obtain a good measurement for all frequencies in the
frequency band F = [0.01 25] [Hz].
4.2.2 Identification of the Individual Subsystems
The model in (4.4) - (4.6) is validated in two steps. First of all, attention is focussed on the individual
oscillators: blue (1), red (2) and the connecting frame / beam (3) separately. Then, after identifying
the parameters for each oscillator, the coupling parameters are identified. In order to quantify how
well the model corresponds to the measured dynamics the following penalty parameter is defined:
Definition 4.3 (RMS Error Parameter (RmsEP)).
Define a measurement y
m
(t) defined on an set of time instances t ∈ T ⊂ R
≥0
and obtained by
supplying the system with an input input w
m
(t). Furthermore, define a model M, that results in
an output y
s
(t) when provided with the same input w
m
(t). Next define the error between the output
of the model y
s
(t) and the measured signal y
m
(t) as e(t) = y
m
(t) − y
s
(t). The Root Mean Square
(RMS) Error Parameter is defined as the ratio between the RMS value of the measured signal and
that of the the error signal:
χ(w
m
) =
|e(t)|
2
|y
m
(t)|
2
(4.12)
The RmsEP provides a measure for the effectiveness of the fit over the measured interval T , for a
given input w
m
(t).
The model for the individual oscillators is easily obtained from (4.4) - (4.6) and equals:
M
i

i
) :
¨
ξ
i
= −θ
2
1,i
ξ
i
+ 2θ
2,i
θ
1,i
˙
ξ
i
+ θ
3,i
v
i
(t), (4.13)
with θ
i
= [̟
i
ζ
i
λ
i
]
T
the parameter vector for the i
th
oscillator. The identification of the nine
oscillator specific parameters is performed by exciting each oscillator with the signal v(t) (length
200 [s]) that was derived in the previous paragraph, while the position of the other two oscillators
remains fixed. Next, an extended Kalman filter (Gelb, 1996) is used to estimate the parameters
(three at a time). The (initial) parameters of the filter are chosen as follows:
Covariance Matrices in the Kalman Filter
Assuming that all uncertainties in the model are uncorrelated and the noise-distorted measured
states are uncorrelated as well, both the measurement noise covariance R and the process noise
covariance Q are diagonal matrices. Since, det(R) = 0 to avoid singularity of the algorithm the di-
agonal elements of R are chosen non-zero. These are chosen according to the a priori knowledge of
the measurement uncertainties. These uncertainties are measured to be in the order or magnitude
of 10
−6
when the system is in rest. In order to allow for larger dynamic errors the elements of R
are chosen R
j
= 10
−4
.
The proces noise covariance matrix is divided on two parts. First of all, the part corresponding to
the measured states is chosen as a block matrix which elements equal Q
j
= 10
−4
. The remaining
diagonal elements of Q are chosen 0 since the parameters are assumed to be constant in time.
The initial covariance matrix P
0
is also chosen as a diagonal matrix as well, since the parameters
are assumed to be independent and states are assumed to be independent as well. The diagonal
elements of P
0
again represent two parts. The first block of P
0
represents the initial error between
the measured and estimated state. These elements can be small, since the initial conditions are
well known. However, note that these elements should be non-zero, since P
0
> 0 in order for
the algorithm to function correctly. The second set of diagonal elements of P
0
corresponds to the
initial error between the actual and estimated parameters. These are unknown and therefore these
elements should be chosen larger. Since experience shows that P
0
adapts very quickly to the correct
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
4.2 System Identification 25
estimate during the iterative proces the diagonal elements are chosen as P
0,j
= 10
−2
.
The results of the Kalman filter provide a basis for manual fine-tuning. The necessity for manual
fine-tuning is twofold. Firstly, the results provided by the Kalman filter clearly leave room for
improvement. Secondly, the parameter estimates for the beam are derived from a measurement
during which the red and blue oscillator were fixed to the beam. Therefore the mass of the beam is
overestimated. Using the parameters obtained from the identification of the two oscillators (red and
blue) this was corrected. After fine-tuning the parameters presented in Table 4.2 were obtained.
Where ¯ ω =
1
2

1
+ ω
2
) = 13.2929 [rad s
−1
] and the related parameters for equations (4.1) - (4.3)
are provided in Table B.1, in Appendix B.1.
Table 4.2: Dimensionless parameters in equations (4.4) - (4.6).
Oscillator 1 Oscillator 2 Frame / Beam (3)
̟
i
0.9443 1.0557 0.7325
ζ
i
0.3362 0.4296 0.0409
λ
i
3.1054 10
5
3.4505 10
5
1.8686 10
4
A sample of the response of the blue oscillator and the beam to the input signal v(t) is compared
to simulation results in Figure 4.3. A similar figure is provided for the red oscillator in Appendix
B.4 (Figure B.2a). Furthermore, since the proposed model is linear, a step response provides good
means of judging the degree up to which the proposed model models the systems’ dynamics. The
measured response of the system to a step signal with increasing amplitude (to yield nonlinearities)
is provided in Figure 4.4 and B.2b.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−0.6
−0.4
−0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6


Measurement Simulation
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−0.06
−0.04
−0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
τ [−]
ξ
1
[

]
e
1
[

]
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−0.5
0
0.5
1


Measurement Simulation
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−0.2
−0.1
0
0.1
0.2
τ [−]
ξ
3
[

]
e
3
[

]
(a) (b)
Figure 4.3: Measured and simulated response (samples) to the input signal v(t). (a) Blue oscillator
(b) Beam / frame, (Top) Response, (Bottom) Error: e
i
= ξ
i,s
−ξ
i,m
, where ξ
i,s
denotes simulation
results and ξ
i,m
the corresponding measured response.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
26 4.2 System Identification
0 500 1000 1500
−1.5
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5


Measurement Simulation
0 500 1000 1500
−0.3
−0.2
−0.1
0
0.1
τ [−]
ξ
1
[

]
e
1
[

]
0 500 1000 1500
−1.5
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
1.5


Measurement Simulation
0 500 1000 1500
−0.5
0
0.5
τ [−]
ξ
3
[

]
e
3
[

]
(a) (b)
Figure 4.4: Measured and simulated response to a step signal with increasing amplitude. (a) Blue
oscillator (b) Beam / frame, (Top) Response, (Bottom) Error: e
i
= ξ
i,s
− ξ
i,m
, where ξ
i,s
denotes
simulation results and ξ
i,m
the corresponding measured response.
Both the step response experiment and the experiment in which the oscillators were excited with the
signal v(t) yield that the proposed model and the identified parameters fit the measured response
well. From these experiments it is observed that both the red and the blue oscillator respond in a
linear manner while the beam / frame inhibits nonlinear behavior. In the step-response experiment
this becomes clear from the fact that the simulated (linear) model fits the measured data worse as the
amplitude increases. In order to quantify this observation the RmsEP has been calculated according
to Definition 4.3. The results are provided in Table 4.3 and correspond the observation that the
linear model, models the oscillators better than the beam / frame. The estimated parameters
for the beam are however sufficient for our purposes and can easily be refined for specific use by
re-estimating the parameters for a specific frequency band, amplitude and / or nonlinear fit. In
Section 4.2.4 the nonlinearity in the stiffness of the beam / frame is identified for later purposes.
Table 4.3: RMS Error Parameter for the three subsystems, where w
f
resembles the experiment
with the multisine and w
s
refers to the step-response experiment.
Oscillator 1 Oscillator 2 Frame / Beam (3)
χ(w
f
) 0.0649 0.1025 0.2267
χ(w
s
) 0.0666 0.0628 0.2796
4.2.3 Coupling Parameters
In addition to the previously derived nine parameters for the three individual oscillators, two
coupling parameters µ
1
and µ
2
remain unknown. Since nine out of eleven parameters are known
the remaining two may be estimated using an extended Kalman filter (Gelb, 1996) applied to the
complete, coupled model (4.4) - (4.6), using the same covariance matrices as for the individual
oscillators.. The estimate has been performed on the free motion of the system, i.e. v
i
(t) = 0
because this way, parameter uncertainties in λ
i
will not translate into increased uncertainty in the
estimate of µ
i
∀ i = 1, 2. However, uncertainties in ω
i
and ζ
i
∀ 1 = 1, 2, 3 will inevitably influence
the quality of the estimate of µ
i
. The resulting parameters are presented in Table 4.4.
Table 4.4: Estimated coupling parameters.
µ
1
= 0.0411 µ
2
= 0.0578
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
4.2 System Identification 27
Figure 4.5 shows the obtained measurement and the simulation results. As with the identification of
the first nine parameters, the RmsEP has been calculated for this experiment to provide a measure
of model accuracy. The obtained values for χ(0) are provided in Table 4.5. As becomes clear from
these results, the fit yields the most accurate result for the blue oscillator and the beam. The red
oscillator however also follows the predicted trajectory rather well, as can be seen in Figure 4.5.
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−1
−0.5
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−0.8
−0.6
−0.4
−0.2
0
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−0.1
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
τ [−]
ξ
1
[

]
ξ
2
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
−0.1
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5
−0.04
−0.02
0
0.02
τ [−]
e
1
[

]
e
2
[

]
e
3
[

]
(a) (b)
Figure 4.5: Simulation and experimental response of the complete system (a)− measurement, −
simulation (b) Error: e
i
= ξ
i,s
−ξ
i,m
, where ξ
i,s
denotes simulation results and ξ
i,m
the correspond-
ing measured response.
Table 4.5: RMS Error Parameter for different subsystems.
Oscillator 1 Oscillator 2 Frame / Beam (3)
χ(0) 0.05448 0.1307 0.0869
4.2.4 Nonlinear Stiffness
In the second part of this report detailed knowledge concerning the stiffness present in the system
is required. By measuring the displacement of each of the oscillators and the beam in response to a
very slow (60 [s]) ramp signal the spring characteristics of the three subsystems are obtained. The
results are depicted in Figure 4.6 in combination with force-displacement curves predicted by the
model.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
28 4.3 Concluding Remarks
−1 −0.8 −0.6 −0.4 −0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
−1
−0.8
−0.6
−0.4
−0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1


Blue oscillator (measurement)
Red oscillator (measurement)
Beam (measurement)
Blue oscillator (model)
Red oscillator (model)
Beam (model)
∆ξ
i
[−]
v
(
t
)
[

]
Figure 4.6: Spring characteristics for both oscillators and the beam. − Measured stiffness, − Linear
approximation (used in the derived model).
As becomes clear from Figure 4.6 the blue and red oscillator inhibit very linear and nearly identical
stiffness characteristics. The force-displacement curves predicted by the derived model are almost
indistinguishable from the measurements in this case. The stiffness of the beam / frame however,
is much more nonlinear, as may be expected from te construction. The beam is connected to an
S-shaped spring that causes the observed nonlinearity. Such springs where originally also present
in the oscillators, but these have been removed to improve the performance of the set-up. The
estimated value for the model appears to provide a good average and will clearly serve as a good
estimate.
In order to quantify the nonlinearities in the stiffness the measured force-displacement curves have
been fitted by a 5
th
order polynomial. The least square approximation of these stiffness functions
is given by:
̺
i
(∆ξ
i
) =
5
¸
j=0
ρ
ij
(∆ξ
i
)
j
(4.14)
where, ∆ξ
i
= ξ
i
−ξ
3
, i = 1, 2, ∆ξ
3
= ξ
3
and ̺
i
(∆ξ
i
) is the force-displacement characteristic belong-
ing to the i
th
oscillator and the coefficients ρ
ij
are provided in Appendix B.3. These approximations
will be used to adjust the stiffness characteristics in the second part of this report.
4.3 Concluding Remarks
The preceding chapter deals with the identification of a linear model for a system that is only
linear to a certain extend. Therefore, it is not to be expected to find an ’exact’ match between the
measurements and the model. The results presented in this chapter show that the proposed model
with the identified parameters models the dynamics of the system very well. However, as shown in
paragraph 4.2.4, nonlinearities in the stiffness of the system do exist. This model uncertainty may
be coped with at a later stage, since (nonlinear) identification or parameter estimation for a specific
use (amplitude / frequency band) can be performed easily. Within the scope of this assignment
the obtained model models the system well enough, since the beam is only expected to move with
small amplitude, such that the linear approximation is sufficient.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
4.3 Concluding Remarks 29
Another cause for deviating behavior of the experimental set-up may be nonlinear damping influ-
ences. Although the role of hysteresis and dry friction has been discussed briefly in Section 3.2.3
and these phenomena have been recognized and identified, they are not part of the model.
Concluding, although nonlinearities in both damping and stiffness are present their influence is
small, as shown by the fact that the systems’ dynamics may be modeled by a linear model up to a
large extend. The derived linear model is thus judged to be a suitable model for the experimental
set-up and will be used throughout the sequel to predict and analyze the systems’ dynamics.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
30 5 Analysis and Simulation Results
5 Analysis and Simulation Results
This chapter presents an analysis of the dynamical behavior of the set-up. More specifically, it
deals with the possibility of synchronized dynamics between the oscillators. Based on the derived
model the system’s limiting behavior is analyzed, using on a set of definitions that is introduced at
the start of this chapter. Next, analytical results are compared to simulations and the influence of
non-identical oscillator parameters is investigated. Finally, experimental results are presented and
compared to the analytical and simulation results.
5.1 Synchronization: Introduction and Definition
Before continuing with the analytical, simulation and experimental results the notion of synchro-
nization should be defined in more detail. Due to the large amount of phenomena that is gathered
under the term ’synchronization’ it is often difficult to correctly define synchronization. In (Pikovsky
et al., 2001) the authors introduce the concept of synchronization as:
’Synchronization is the adjustment of rhythms of oscillating objects due to their weak interaction.’
Although the above concept provides an insightful idea of synchronization a more rigorous definition
is provided in (Blekhman et al., 1997):
Definition 5.1 (Asymptotic Synchronization (Blekhman et al., 1997)).
Given k systems with state ξ
i
∈ X
i
and output y
i
∈ Y
i
, i = 1, . . . , k and given ℓ functionals
g
j
: \
1
. . . \
k
T → R
1
, where T is a set of common time instances for all k systems and
\
i
are the sets of all functions from T into the outputs Y
i
. Furthermore, defining a shift operator
σ
τ
such that (σ
τ
y)(t) = y(t + τ), call the solutions ξ
1
(), . . . , ξ
k
() of systems Σ
1
, . . . , Σ
k
with
initial conditions ξ
10
, . . . , ξ
k0
are called asymptotically synchronized with respect to the functionals
g
1
, . . . , g

if:
g
j

τ1
y
1
(), . . . , σ
τ
k
y
k
(), t) ≡ 0 ∀ j = 1, . . . , ℓ (5.1)
is valid for t → ∞ and some σ
τi
∈ T.
Since exact (asymptotic) synchronization (of whatever type) is not expected to be observed in real
life systems, because of non-identical oscillator properties and disturbances, a definition of approx-
imate (asymptotic) synchronization is provided. This allows effective handling of synchronization
phenomena observed from measurements.
Definition 5.2 (Approximate Asymptotic Synchronization (Blekhman et al., 1997)).
Using the notations introduced in Definition 5.1, systems Σ
1
, . . . , Σ
k
are called approximately asymp-
totically synchronized with respect to to the functionals g
1
, . . . , g

if for some sufficiently small ε > 0:
[g
j

τ1
y
1
(), . . . , σ
τ
k
y
k
(), t)[ ε ∀ j = 1, 2, . . . , ℓ (5.2)
is valid for t → ∞ and some σ
τi
∈ T.
Finally, a specific type of synchronization, so called (approximate asymptotic) ’anti-phase’ synchro-
nization’ will be of primary interest in the sequel. Using the preceding definitions of synchroniza-
tion, a rigorous definition of anti-phase synchronization is provided. Again a definition is supplied
that allows for (theoretical) anti-phase synchronization and more realistic, non-exact anti-phase
synchronization.
Definition 5.3 ((Approximate) Asymptotic Anti-phase Synchronization).
Consider two systems Σ
1
and Σ
2
with initial conditions ξ
10
and ξ
20
and corresponding solutions
ξ
1

10
, t) and ξ
2

20
, t). Furthermore, assume that both ξ
1

10
, t) and ξ
2

20
, t) are periodic in time
with period T . The solutions of ξ
1

10
, t) and ξ
2

20
, t) is called (approximately) asymptotically
synchronized in anti-phase if they are (approximately) asymptotically synchronized according to
Definition 5.1 or 5.2, with:
g() = ξ
1
() −ασ
(
T
2
)
ξ
2
(), (5.3)
with α ∈ R
>0
a scale factor and σ
(
T
2
)
a shift operator over half an oscillation period.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
5.2 Stability of the Synchronization Manifold 31
Remark. In case of anti-phase, equal amplitude oscillations, the definition of anti-phase synchro-
nization presented in Definition 5.3 reduces to the condition that ξ
1

2
→ 0 as t → ∞for ’complete’
asymptotic anti-phase synchronization. Correspondingly this yields the condition that ξ
1
+ ξ
2
ε
is valid for t → ∞ for approximate asymptotic anti-phase synchronization.
In the sequel Definition 5.1 till 5.3 will be used to define (approximate) asymptotic (anti-phase)
synchronization.
5.2 Stability of the Synchronization Manifold
Now that synchronization has been defined in a rigorous manner, attention is focussed on the sta-
bility of possible synchronization regimes in the dynamics of the set-up. In order to make sure that
the following analysis is robust with respect to the presence of nonlinearities in the system, the
notion of shape functions is introduced.
The model (4.4) - (4.6) that has been derived, and identified contains linear approximations of the
stiffness and damping present in the system. Although it has been shown that these approximations
are sufficiently accurate to meet our needs, an analysis that takes into account the presence of
possible nonlinearities is preferred. Therefore, consider the system of equations (5.4) - (5.6) which
is identical to the model presented in equations (4.4) - (4.6), except for the introduction of the shape
functions η
i
(∆ξ
i
) i = 1, 2 η
3

3
) and σ
3


3
), which allow for the introduction of nonlinearities in the
stiffness and damping respectively. Note that the damping of the oscillators 1 and 2 may be altered
in a similar way. However, these shape functions are omitted since only undamped oscillators are
considered and such shape functions would vanish in the analysis.
ξ
′′
1
= −̟
2
1
η
1
(∆ξ
1
) ∆ξ
1
−2ζ
1
̟
1
∆ξ

1
+ λ
1
v
1
(t) (5.4)
ξ
′′
2
= −̟
2
2
η
2
(∆ξ
2
) ∆ξ
2
−2ζ
2
̟
2
∆ξ

2
+ λ
2
v
2
(t) (5.5)
ξ
′′
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

̟
2
i
η
i
(∆ξ
i
)∆ξ
i
+ 2ζ
i
̟
i
∆ξ

i

−̟
2
3
η
3

3
), ξ
3
−2ζ
3
̟
3
σ
3


3
) ξ

3
+ λ
3
v
3
(t), (5.6)
For the system of (nonlinear) differential equations (5.4) - (5.6) the stability of the anti-phase syn-
chronization manifold (as defined in Definition 5.3) is investigated using Lyapunov’s direct method.
In order to proceed the oscillators are assumed to be undamped, i.e. ζ
1
= ζ
2
= 0 and no input is
provided to the system, i.e. v
i
= 0 i = 1, 2, 3. Finally, define η
i
(∆ξ
i
) i = 1, 2 and η
3

3
) to be odd,
one to one, continuous shape functions, such that ∆ξ
i
η
i
(∆ξ
i
) has a zero only at ∆ξ
i
= 0 or ξ
3
= 0
and define a shape function σ(ξ

3
), such that ξ

3
σ(ξ

3
) > 0 ξ

3
= 0 and σ(0) = 0. The result of this
analysis is provided in Theorem 5.1, while the complete analysis is provided in Appendix A.2.
Theorem 5.1 (Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold).
Consider the system of nonlinear differential equations (5.4) - (5.6) and define the manifold o ⊆ R
6
as the set o = ¦[ξ
˙
ξ]
T
∈ R
6

1
= −ξ
2
, ξ

1
= −ξ

2
, ξ

3
= ξ
3
= 0¦. Next assume that the oscillators
are undamped and no input is provided to the system, i.e.
1. v
i
(t) = 0 ∀ i = 1, 2, 3
2. ζ
1
= ζ
2
= 0.
Assume, furthermore, odd, one to one, continuous shape functions η
i
(∆ξ
i
) ∀ i = 1, 2 and η
3

3
),
such that ∆ξ
i
η
i
(∆ξ
i
) has a zero only at ∆ξ
i
= 0 or ξ
3
= 0 and a shape function σ(ξ

3
) such that
ξ

3
σ(ξ

3
) > 0 ∀ ξ

3
= 0 and σ(0) = 0. Finally, assume the following oscillator properties:
1. η
1
() = η
2
()
2. η
i
() such that
x

0
s η
i
(s) ds → ∞ if [x[ → ∞ i = 1, 2, 3
3. ̟
1
= ̟
2
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
32 5.3 Simulation Results
4. µ
1
= µ
2
.
Then the system (5.4) - (5.6) will converge to o as t → ∞ for all initial conditions,
Proof. The proof is provided in Appendix A.2
As shown in Theorem 5.1 the anti-phase synchronization manifold is globally asymptotically stable,
where the anti-phase synchronization manifold defined in Theorem 5.1 corresponds to asymptotic
anti-phase synchronization according to Definition 5.3, with α = 1. The following sections will
present simulations and experimental results that show how this result translates into practical
results.
5.3 Simulation Results
In this section the theoretical results from the preceding paragraphs are investigated in a simulation
environment and using experimentally obtained results. Both the case of identical, undamped oscil-
lators and the influence of non-identical oscillator properties are investigated. In order to gradually
move from the theoretical model of identical, undamped, linear oscillators, towards the more real-
istic non-identical case, the section starts with simulations concerning identical oscillators. Next,
attention is focussed on the case of non-identical, but still linear oscillators. Finally, the experi-
mental results are presented, where nonlinear influences are small, but inevitably present.
First of all, consider the system of equations (5.4) - (5.6) with linear, undamped oscillators and
zero actuator input, i.e. ζ
1
= ζ
2
= 0, η
i
() = σ() = 1 and v
i
= 0 ∀ i = 1, 2, 3. Furthermore,
the parameters in the simulation are chosen as identified for the model in Chapter 4, except that
̟
1
= ̟
2
= 1 and µ
1
= µ
2
=
1
2

1
+ µ
2
) are identical for both oscillators. A simulation of such
system, released from initial conditions ξ
0
= [−1 − 0.8]
T
, is shown in Figure 5.1a. Although the
system is released from an initial position close to the in-phase synchronized state, the trajectories
of the system converge towards anti-phase synchronization. The system synchronizes according
to Definition 5.3 (α = 0.9730 ε = 0.0243). Furthermore, the the phase difference between the
oscillators, obtained by calculating the Hilbert transform of the measured signals, is shown in
Figure 5.1b. After transient behavior this value converges to ∆φ
1,2
→ π as follows from Theorem
5.1.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
τ [−]
ξ
i
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 5.1: Synchronization between two identical undamped oscillators (simulation results). The
system is released close to the in-phase synchronized mode (ξ
0
= [−1 − 0.8]
T
) and converges to
the anti-phase synchronized (stable) mode. (a) Transient behavior. (Top: red and blue oscillator,
Bottom: beam) (b) Phase difference between the oscillators.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
5.3 Simulation Results 33
Figures 5.2 and 5.3 show simulation results for the same situation as the previous example. However,
instead of identical oscillators, non-identical oscillators have been used, i.e. ̟
1
= ̟
2
and µ
1
= µ
2
.
All parameters are chosen as identified in Chapter 4, except that the oscillators remain undamped,
i.e. ζ
1
= ζ
2
= 0. Figure 5.2 shows such simulation without energy input from the actuators. As one
might expect the motion of all subsystems dies out eventually, since no stable mode of anti-phase
synchronization can be sustained. In this case the synchronization manifold reduces to a single
point ξ = 0.
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
τ [−]
ξ
i
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
Figure 5.2: Synchronization between non-identical oscillators. No energy is supplied by the actua-
tors. Top: red and blue oscillator, Bottom: beam.
By supplying energy (velocity dependent feed forward) to the oscillators to compensate for the
energy dissipation due to the non-zero limiting motion of the beam, the result presented in Figure 5.3
is obtained. It follows that in this case the limiting behavior of the system differs from the anti-phase
synchronized mode that was observed for identical oscillators. First of all, non-identical oscillator
properties result in a limiting phase difference ∆φ
1,2
= 0.91π. Furthermore, the steady state
amplitudes of the oscillators differ significantly. In terms of Theorem 5.3 approximate asymptotic
anti-phase synchronization is however still observed (α = 2.9345 ε = 0.1544).
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
34 5.4 Experimental Validation
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450 500
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
τ [−]
ξ
i
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 200 400 600 800 1000
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 5.3: Synchronization between non identical undamped oscillators (simulation results). The
system is released close to the in-phase synchronized mode (ξ
0
= [−1 −0.8]
T
) and energy is supplied
by the actuators to overcome the effects of non-identical oscillators (a) Transient behavior (Top:
red and blue oscillator, Bottom: beam) (b) Phase difference between the oscillators.
5.4 Experimental Validation
In the preceding analysis and simulation results it has been shown that it is to be expected that
anti-phase synchronization between the two oscillators in the experimental set-up wil be observed if
no external force, other than damping compensation, is applied to the subsystems. To resemble the
undamped oscillators used in the analysis and simulations as close as possible, a velocity depended
feed forward is applied canceling the 2ζ
i
̟
i

˙
ξ
i
∀ i = 1, 2 term in the equations of motion of the
oscillators. Note that since the actual damping in the system is not linear viscous and the oscillators
are non-identical the only way to achieve a sustainable mode of motion is to slightly overcompensate
the damping. The results of such experiment with initial condition ξ
0
= [−1 −0.8]
T
are presented
in Figure 5.4.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
5.5 Concluding Remarks 35
0 50 100 150 200 250
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
0 50 100 150 200 250
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
τ [−]
ξ
i
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 5.4: Synchronization between two non identical oscillators (experimental results). Damping
in the oscillators is (over-) compensated by means of velocity dependent feed forward. The system is
released close to the in-phase synchronized mode (ξ
0
= [−1 −0.8]
T
) and converges to the anti-phase
synchronized (stable) mode. (a) Transient behavior (Top: red and blue oscillator, Bottom: beam)
(b) Phase difference between the oscillators.
The experimental results closely resemble the situation depicted in Figure 5.3 (except for the
presence of nonlinearities in the set-up). The limiting phase difference follows from Figure 5.4b
and equals approximately ∆φ
1,2
≈ 1.065π. Furthermore, the steady state amplitude difference
that was observed in the simulations is also obtained in the experiment. However, the experi-
ment shows that approximate asymptotic anti-phase synchronization according to Definition 5.3
(α = 1.2927 ε = 0.1241) is indeed achieved. Note that the amplitude difference predicted by simu-
lations (Figure 5.3) is about 2.3 times larger than observed in experiments. However, the measured
and simulated phase difference only differ 2.5 % with respect to exact anti-phase synchronization
or ∆φ
12
= π
5.5 Concluding Remarks
In this section the definition of synchronization has been introduced. Global asymptotic stability
of the synchronization manifold in case of identical oscillators has been proven and shown in simu-
lations. Furthermore, the more realistic situation of non-identical oscillators has been investigated
from both simulation and experimental perspective. The simulations and experimental results agree
to a large extend and both indicate that approximate anti-phase synchronization (Definition 5.3)
is achieved.
This concludes the first part of this report. In the preceding part the set-up was introduced and
both the modeling and analysis of the set-up have been presented. Attention has been focussed
on identifying a correct (linear) model of the set-up and discussing the degree up to which such
approximating model models the actual nonlinear system. Next, the properties of the derived
model were analyzed with respect to synchronizing behavior and supported this analysis by both
simulations and experimental arguments. The next part of this report will discuss and analyze
more complex examples of synchronizing dynamical systems. Again analytical, simulation and
experimental results are provided.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
36
Part II
Experimental Results
Theory guides. Experiment decides.
[Multiple authors]
In the previous part, experimental synchronization has been observed between the system of coupled
oscillators (4.4) - (4.6). These equations are repeated here for the readers convenience:
ξ
′′
1
= −̟
2
1
∆ξ
1
−2ζ
1
̟
1
∆ξ

1
+ λ
1
v
1
(τ)
ξ
′′
2
= −̟
2
2
∆ξ
2
−2ζ
2
̟
2
∆ξ

2
+ λ
2
v
2
(τ)
ξ
′′
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

̟
2
i
∆ξ
i
+ 2ζ
i
̟
i
∆ξ

i

−̟
2
3
ξ
3
−2ζ
3
̟
3
ξ

3
+ λ
3
v
3
(τ).
The observed synchronizing behaviour in this dynamical system is in accordance with analytical
results and simulations. This part continues the investigation of synchronization phenomena by
using the potential of the experimental set-up to experimentally analyze synchronizing behaviour
in different kinds of dynamical systems.
Chapter 6 introduces the ’masking dynamics’ approach that is used in the sequel to modify the
dynamics of the set-up. In Chapter 7 and 8 examples concerning a system of coupled Duffing
oscillators and a system of rotating discs are discussed. Analytical and simulation results as well
as experimental results are presented. Finally, Chapter 9 presents preliminary results for the case
where the set-up is modified to model the classical Huygens set-up.
6 Masking of System Dynamics
In order to experimentally investigate synchronization phenomena in other types of dynamical
systems than the experimental set-up, the notion of virtual dynamics is introduced. The virtual
dynamics are the dynamics of the closed loop system consisting of the experimental set-up and a
feedback controller that will be designed in the sequel.
s(τ) w(ξ, ξ

, τ) = w
M
(ξ, ξ

) +w
e
(τ)
ξ
′′
= f(ξ, ξ

, v)
ξ, ξ


T η
′′
= D(η, η

)
T
−1
G
d
ξ
′′
= L(ξ, ξ

)
+ + + + +
+
v
Figure 6.1: Schematic depiction of the feedback loop.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
6 Masking of System Dynamics 37
Consider the system depicted in Figure 6.1. Here, ξ
′′
= f(ξ, ξ

, v) are the dynamics of the set-up
as approximated by the model (4.4) - (4.6) with input v and nonlinear stiffness characteristics
(4.14). Next, s(τ) represents input disturbances and the disturbance w(ξ, ξ

, τ) represents both
the model uncertainties w
M
(ξ, ξ

) and output disturbances w
e
(τ). Furthermore, ξ
′′
= L(ξ, ξ

) and
η
′′
= D(η, η

) are control dynamics that are yet to be defined. The operators T and T
−1
allow for
a coordinate transformation from and to the coordinate system of the experimental set-up to a new
set of coordinates η in which the virtual dynamics are specified. The gain G scales the feedback
with respect to the mass and motor constants in the set-up. Next, the control goal is formulated
as follows:
Definition 6.1 (Control Goal). Design a controller such that the closed loop dynamics of the system
depicted in Figure 6.1 match a set of user specified open loop dynamics η
′′
= F(η, η

).
In order to fulfill the control goal, specified in Definition 6.1, the following relations are specified
with respect to the feedback loop in Figure 6.1:
L(ξ, ξ

) = −f(ξ, ξ

, v = 0) Λ
−1
(6.1)
D(η, η

) = F(η, η

) (6.2)
G = Λ
−1
, (6.3)
where Λ = diag[λ
1
λ
2
λ
3
] contains the gains from (4.4) - (4.6). The block ξ
′′
= L(ξ, ξ

) =
−f(ξ, ξ

, v = 0) Λ
−1
cancels the set-ups’ dynamics ξ
′′
= f(ξ, ξ

, v). The resulting closed loop
dynamics of the inner loop in Figure 6.1 (assuming s() = w() = 0) therefore equal ξ
′′
= Λd.
The block η
′′
= D(η, η

) = F(η, η

), finally, assures that the closed loop dynamics of the com-
plete system equal those of the user specified open loop dynamics η
′′
= F(η, η

). The process of
masking the actual dynamics ξ
′′
= f(ξ, η

) with a set of new dynamics η
′′
= F(η, η

), by means of
state feedback, leads to a virtual system that allows for a wide range of synchronization experiments.
The results presented in the preceding paragraphs will be used in the remaining part of this report
to model a number of different dynamical systems. However, before continuing with these results,
please note the following potential drawbacks of the masking approach:
Disturbance influences Although this project does not deal with disturbances in particular the
role of model uncertainties and input and output noise should be considered. These distur-
bances influence the closed loop dynamics in two distinct ways. First of all, the feedback
linearizing loop (inner loop) will not cancel dynamics that are not captured by the model,
resulting in an unknown, unwanted part of the closed loop virtual dynamics. Furthermore,
external noise will influence the amount up to which the desired dynamics are mimicked.
Limited Actuator Power As in any controlled system the amount up to which the control goal is
achieved depends (among other aspects) on the speed of calculation, measurement frequency
and the actuator power that is present in the system. Especially the limited actuator power
is expected to be a bottleneck since it directly influences the acceleration of the system and
as such determines the fasted time scale in the virtual dynamics. It limits both the type of
dynamical system that may be modeled and the parameter range that can be explored.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
38 7 Coupled Duffing Oscillators
7 Coupled Duffing Oscillators
This chapter presents analytical and numerical results as well as experimental results concerning
synchronization between a pair of coupled Duffing oscillators. After the introduction of the dy-
namical system and the derivation of the equations of motion, a controller is proposed to allow
experimental investigation of possible synchronization phenomena in the system. Next, attention is
focussed on the stability of possible synchronization regimes in the set up. Finally, both numerical
and experimental results are presented to investigate the existence of synchronization regimes from
an experimental point of view.
7.1 Equations of Motion and Stability Analysis
x
1
x
2
x
3
κ
d,1
κ
d,2
k
3
b
3
m
1
m
2
m
3
Figure 7.1: Schematic representation of the set-up modeling two coupled Duffing oscillators.
Consider the dynamical system depicted in Figure 7.1, where x
i
∈ R, m
i
∈ R
>0
and κ
d
: R → R
is designed to resemble the cubic stiffness profile of the classical Duffing oscillator. For the sake of
clarity some of the previously used notation is used in a new context in the remaining sections of
this report.
κ
d,i
(∆x
i
)
m
i
= ω
2
i
∆x
i
+ β
i
∆x
3
i
(7.1)
where ∆x
i
= x
i
− x
3
, ω
i
=

ki
mi
, β
i
=

k
β,i
mi
and k
i
, k
β,i
are coefficients of the cubic stiffness
profiles that characterize the Duffing nonlinearity. The equations of motion of the system depicted
in Figure 7.1 are:
¨ x
1
= −ω
2
1
∆x
1
−β
1
∆x
3
1
(7.2)
¨ x
2
= −ω
2
2
∆x
2
−β
2
∆x
3
2
(7.3)
¨ x
3
=
3
¸
i=1
µ
i

ω
2
i
∆x
i
+ β
i
∆x
3
i

−ω
2
3
x
3
−2ζ
3
ω
3
˙ x
3
, (7.4)
where ζ
3
=
b3
2ω3m3
is the dimensionless damping of the beam and µ
i
=
mi
m3
the mass ratio between
the oscillators and the beam. In order to write the system (7.2) - (7.4) in dimensionless form, the
following set of dimensionless parameters is introduced.
Table 7.1: Dimensionless parameters, duffing oscillators.
τ

= ¯ ωt ω
i
= ¯ ω̟

i
x = ℓξ

β =

¯ ω

2
ϑ

Here

indicates a dimensionless parameter and will be omitted in the sequel for the sake of read-
ability, ¯ ω =
1
2

1
+ ω
2
) and ℓ = 5 mm. The system of equations in dimensionless form now
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
7.2 Simulation Results 39
becomes:
ξ
′′
1
= −̟
2
1
∆ξ
1
−ϑ
1
∆ξ
3
1
(7.5)
ξ
′′
2
= −̟
2
2
∆ξ
2
−ϑ
2
∆ξ
3
2
(7.6)
ξ
′′
3
=
3
¸
i=1
µ
i

̟
2
i
∆ξ
i
+ ϑ
i
∆ξ
3
i

−̟
2
3
ξ
3
−2ζ
3
̟
3
ξ

3
, (7.7)
where

indicates differentiation with respect to the dimensionless time τ.
The possibilities of synchronizing dynamics in system (7.5) - (7.7) is first investigated from an
analytical point of view. Using Lyapunovs direct method and LaSalles invariance principle, it is
shown that anti-phase synchronization as defined by Definition 5.3 is globally asymptotically stable.
These results are formalized in Theorem 7.1.
Theorem 7.1 (Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold: Duffing Oscillators).
Consider the system of nonlinear differential equations (7.5) - (7.7) and define the manifold o ⊆ R
6
as the set o = ¦[ξ ξ

]
T
∈ R
6

1
= −ξ
2
, ξ

1
= −ξ

2
, ξ

3
= ξ
3
= 0¦. Assume, furthermore, identical
oscillator properties:
1. ̟
1
= ̟
2
.
2. ϑ
1
= ϑ
2
.
3. µ
1
= µ
2
Then the system (7.5) - (7.7) will converge to o as t → ∞ for all initial conditions.
Proof. The proof provided in Appendix A.2 applies with η
i
(q
i
) = 1 +
βi
ω
2
i
q
2
i
, i = 1, 2 and η
3
(q
3
) =
σ( ˙ q
3
) = 1.
7.2 Simulation Results
Consider the dynamics prescribed by (7.5) - (7.7) with the set of parameters presented in Table 7.2
(provided in both non-dimensionless and dimensionless form for convenience).
Table 7.2: Simulation parameters, Duffing oscillators. (µ
1,exp
= 0.0411 [−] and µ
2,exp
= 0.0578 [−]
as in the original set-up.)
Non Dimensionless Dimensionless
ω
1
= ω
2
= 18.3157 [rad s
−1
] ̟
1
= ̟
2
= 1
β
1
= β
2
= 4.4728 10
6
[rad s
−2
m
−2
] ϑ
1
= ϑ
2
= 7.4524 10
−7
µ
1
= µ
2
=
1
2

i,exp
+ µ
2,exp
) = 0.0495 [−] µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.0495
Figure 7.2a presents an example of the time response of the system of Duffing coupled oscillators
and Figure 7.2b presents the phase difference ∆φ
1,2
= ([φ
1
− φ
2
[ mod 2π) as a function of time.
As becomes clear from these results, the system gradually moves from the approximate in-phase
synchronized initial condition towards anti-phase synchronized motion. Note that the apparent
jump results from the fact that ∆φ
1,2
is defined on a compact manifold ∆φ
1,2
∈ [0 2π]. After
approximately τ ≈ 2500 [−] the system is in the (approximate) synchronized state as predicted by
Theorem 7.1.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
40 7.3 Experimental Results and Controller Design
0 500 1000 1500 2000
−0.4
−0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0 500 1000 1500 2000
−0.1
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
τ [−]
ξ
1
,
ξ
2
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 500 1000 1500 2000
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 7.2: Synchronization between two Duffing oscillators (simulation results) ξ
0
=

10
ξ

10
ξ
20
ξ

20
ξ
30
ξ

30
]
T
= [−0.6 0 − 0.5 0 0 0]
T
(a) Transient behavior (Top: red and blue
oscillator, Bottom: beam) (b) Phase difference between the oscillators.
7.3 Experimental Results and Controller Design
Experimental verification of the preceding results may be obtained by applying the ’masking dy-
namics’ approach introduced in Chapter 6. After the controller identities are defined, an example
of such experiment is presented that relates to the previously discussed simulation results.
Controller Design
In order to assure that the dynamics of the virtual closed loop system mimic those described by
(7.5) - (7.7) the following relations are defined in the masking approach that was introduced in
chapter 6:
L
D
(ξ, ξ

) = −f(ξ, ξ

, v = 0) Λ
−1
(7.8)
D
D
(η, η

) = F(η, η

) (7.9)
G
D
= Λ
−1
, (7.10)
where Λ = diag[λ
1
λ
2
λ
3
] contains the gains from (4.4) - (4.6). The block ξ
′′
= L
D
(ξ, ξ

) =
−f(ξ, ξ

, v = 0) Λ
−1
cancels the set-ups’ dynamics ξ
′′
= f(ξ, ξ

, v). The block η
′′
= D
D
(η, η

) =
F
D
(η, η

), furthermore, assures that the closed loop dynamics of the complete system equal those
of the user specified open loop dynamics η
′′
= F
D
(η, η

) which are specified by (7.5) - (7.7). Finally
the virtual coordinate system η = [ξ
1
ξ
2
ξ
3
]
T
is equal that of the original set up, which yields a
transformation matrix T
D
= I, where I is the identity matrix of appropriate dimensions.
Experimental Results
In order to experimentally investigate synchronization behaviour in the system of coupled Duffing
oscillators the controller identities that were designed in the previous paragraph are implemented
and experiments are conducted using the parameter set provided in Table 7.3.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
7.4 Concluding Remarks 41
Table 7.3: Experimental parameters, Duffing oscillators.
Non Dimensionless Dimensionless
ω
1
= ω
2
= 18.3157 [rad s
−1
] ̟
1
= ̟
2
= 1
β
1
= β
2
= 4.4728 10
6
[rad s
−2
m
−2
] ϑ
1
= ϑ
2
= 7.4524 10
−7
µ
1
= µ
1,exp
= 0.0411 [−] µ
1
= µ
1,exp
= 0.0411
µ
2
= µ
2,exp
= 0.0578 [−] µ
2
= µ
2,exp
= 0.0578
Figure 7.3 shows that anti-phase synchronization, according to Definition 5.3 (α = 2.2200, ε =
5 10
−4
), does indeed occur in the experiment. After τ ≈ 600 [−] the system has approximately
synchronized. However, the experimental results differ from the analysis and the simulations in two
important ways.
First, the final approximate anti-phase synchronized state is reached much faster in the experiments
than in the simulations. A possible explanation for this is that (external) disturbances push the
system away from the approximate in-phase synchronized state in the experiment, thus resulting in a
faster convergence than observed in the simulations. Secondly, the final amplitude of the oscillators
is not equal and the beam does not come to a complete standstill. In order to understand this effect
note that analysis shows that for non-identical oscillators the synchronization manifold reduces to
a single point (the origin). In order to retain a non-zero steady state response, external energy
has to be added to the system. Furthermore, non-exact compensation of the friction in the system
also causes a non-zero nett energy input to the system. Combining these two effects with the
non-identical nature of the oscillators in the set-up leads to unequal amplitude oscillations and a
remaining oscillation of the beam. This remaining motion of the beam is necessary to dissipate the
energy overflow which in turn is required to sustain a non-zero steady state response.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
−0.4
−0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
−0.2
−0.1
0
0.1
0.2
τ [−]
ξ
1
,
ξ
2
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 7.3: Synchronization between two Duffing oscillators (experimental results) ξ
0
=

10
ξ

10
ξ
20
ξ

20
ξ
30
ξ

30
]
T
= [−0.6 0 − 0.5 0 0 0]
T
(a) Transient behavior (Top: red and blue
oscillator, Bottom: beam) (b) Phase difference between the oscillators.
7.4 Concluding Remarks
It is shown that in a system of Huygens-like coupled Duffing oscillators the anti-phase synchro-
nized mode is globally asymptotically stable. Analytical as well as simulation results are presented
and the ’masking dynamics’ approach is utilized to experimentally investigate this phenomenon.
This approach allows the alteration of the set-up dynamics to model the system of coupled Duff-
ing oscillators. The experimental results support the results found in the preceding analysis and
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
42 7.4 Concluding Remarks
simulations. However, although the systems steady state response in the experiments is very close
to anti-phase synchronized motion, the oscillators have different steady state amplitudes and the
beam does not come to a complete standstill. The explanation for these observation is found in the
non-identical oscillators in the experimental set-up.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
8 Coupled Rotating Discs 43
8 Coupled Rotating Discs
After the analysis of the system of coupled Duffing oscillators in the previous chapter this chapter
aims to analyze synchronization phenomena in a system of coupled rotating discs. Starting with
the derivation of the equations of motion of such system, the chapter continues with the design
of the appropriate controller to guarantee the required closed loop dynamics in order to allow for
experiments. Apart from the features that have been explored in the previous chapter, the current
modulation shows the potential of the ’masking dynamics’ approach to allow the virtual dynamics
to be defined in a different coordinate system than the dynamics of the set-up.
With the definition of the dynamics as well as the appropriate controller completed, the chapter
splits in two main parts. First, a simplified system is discussed. The stability of the anti-phase
synchronization manifold is discussed from analytical as well as from simulation / experimental
perspective. Moreover, the convergence rate of the system towards the stable anti-phase mode is
discussed by supplying analytical as well as numerical arguments. Finally, the last part of this
chapter supplies an analysis of the complete system. Again analytical, numerical and experimental
results are supplied, investigating the existence of possible synchronization regimes in the system.
8.1 Equations of Motion and Controller Design
θ
1
θ
2
θ
3

1

2

3
m
e,1
m
e,2
m
e,3
J
1
J
2
J
3
k
1
k
2
k
3
b
1 3 2
g
Figure 8.1: Schematic representation of the set-up modeling two coupled rotating elements.
Consider the dynamical system schematically depicted in Figure 8.1 where θ
i
∈ S
1
are the rotation
angles, with respect to the world, m
e,i
∈ R
>0
possible eccentric masses and J
i
∈ R
>0
the moments
of inertia of the discs. The equations of motions of the system under consideration are:
¨
θ
1
= −ω
2
1
∆θ
1
−ω
2
e,1
sin(θ
1
) (8.1)
¨
θ
2
= −ω
2
2
∆θ
2
−ω
2
e,2
sin(θ
2
) (8.2)
¨
θ
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

ω
2
i
∆θ
i

−ω
2
3
θ
3
−2ζ
3
ω
3
˙
θ
3
−ω
2
e,3
sin(θ
3
), (8.3)
where ∆θ
i
= θ
i
− θ
3
, ω
i
=

ki
Ji
, ω
e,i
=

me,igℓi
Ji
, ζ
3
=
b3
2ω3Ji
and µ
i
=
Ji
J3
, where .
i
= m
e,i

i
+ J
i
the inertia of the disc / eccentric mass combination.
In order to write the system of equations (8.1) - (8.3) in dimensionless form, the following set of
dimensionless parameters is defined:
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
44 8.2 Rotating Discs without Eccentric Masses
Table 8.1: Dimensionless parameters, rotating discs.
τ

= ¯ ωt ω
i
= ¯ ω̟

i
ω
e,i
= ¯ ων

i
Here, ¯ ω =
1
2

1
+ ω
2
) and

indicates a dimensionless parameter and will be omitted in the sequel
for the sake of readability. The resulting dimensionless equations of motion are:
θ
′′
1
= −̟
2
1
∆θ
1
−ν
2
1
sin(θ
1
) (8.4)
θ
′′
2
= −̟
2
2
∆θ
2
−ν
2
2
sin(θ
2
) (8.5)
θ
′′
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

̟
2
i
∆θ
i

−̟
2
3
θ
3
−2ζ
3
̟
3
θ

3
−ν
2
3
sin(θ
3
), (8.6)
where

indicates differentiation with respect to the dimensionless time τ.
Controller Design
Realizing a virtual dynamical system that mimics the dynamics prescribed by (8.4) - (8.6) requires
the application of the masking approach discussed in Chapter 6 with the following identities:
L
R
(ξ, ξ

) = −f(ξ, ξ

, v = 0) Λ
−1
(8.7)
D
R
(η, η

) = F(η, η

) (8.8)
G
R
= Λ
−1
, (8.9)
where Λ = diag[λ
1
λ
2
λ
3
] contains the gains from (4.4) - (4.6). The block ξ
′′
= L
R
(ξ, ξ

) =
−f(ξ, ξ

, v = 0) Λ
−1
cancels the set-ups’ dynamics ξ
′′
= f(ξ, ξ

, v). The block η
′′
= D
R
(η, η

) =
F
R
(η, η

), furthermore, assures that the closed loop dynamics of the complete system equal those
of the user specified open loop dynamics η
′′
= F
R
(η, η

) which are specified by (8.4) - (8.6). The
virtual coordinate system η = [θ
1
θ
2
θ
3
]
T
is then obtained by choosing the appropriate coordinate
transformation T
R
= diag[θ
m
θ
m
θ
m,3
]. Note that θ
m
and θ
m,3
are the angles of rotation corre-
sponding to the strokes of the oscillators and the beam respectively. Although θ
m
and θ
m,3
may be
chosen arbitrarily, θ
m
=
s
ri
i = 1, 2 and θ
m,3
=
s
r3
are used in the sequel, where s is the stroke of
the oscillators / beam and r
i
the radius of the corresponding disc. This assures that the distance
traveled by the oscillators and beam in the set-up equals the arc traveled by a point on the outer
perimeter of the corresponding disc.
8.2 Rotating Discs without Eccentric Masses
With the dynamics and the appropriate controller relations identified a slightly simplified version of
the dynamics (8.4) - (8.6) is discussed first. Consider the system (8.4) - (8.6) with ν
i
= 0 i = 1, 2, 3,
i.e. in absence of the eccentric masses m
e,i
. After analyzing the stability of possible synchroniza-
tion regimes within this system both numerical and experimental results are presented that show
the presence of synchronizing dynamics in the system. Finally, the convergence rate of the system
dynamics towards the synchronization manifold is discussed in more detail.
Since the system (8.4) - (8.6) with ν
i
= 0 i = 1, 2, 3 is linear, one might originally aim to approach the
study of possible synchronization regimes using a coordinate transformation to a system describing
the dynamics of the sum of θ
1
and θ
2
. An analysis of the eigenvalues of such system should yield
the presence of possible (anti-phase) synchronization regimes. Although this approach is utilized
in the last paragraph to investigate the convergence rate of the system towards the synchronization
manifold, analytical eigenvalue placement has proved unsuccessful for now. Instead, Lyapunovs
direct method and LaSalles’ invariance principle have been used to investigate the stability of the
synchronization manifold. The results are summarized in Theorem 8.1.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
8.2 Rotating Discs without Eccentric Masses 45
Theorem 8.1 (Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold: Rotating Discs (no
eccentric masses)).
Consider the system of nonlinear differential equations (8.4) - (8.6) with ν
i
= 0 i = 1, 2, 3 and
define the manifold o ⊆ S S S RRR as the set o = ¦[θ θ

]
T
∈ S S S RRR[θ
1
=
−θ
2
, θ

1
= −θ

2
, θ

3
= θ
3
= 0¦. Assume, furthermore, identical oscillator properties and no eccentric
masses:
1. ̟
1
= ̟
2
.
2. µ
1
= µ
2
.
3. ν
1
= ν
2
= 0.
Then the system (8.4) - (8.6) will converge to o as t → ∞ for all initial conditions.
Proof. The proof is provided in Appendix A.3.
8.2.1 Simulation and Experimental Results
Figure 8.2 shows an example of simulation results yielding the synchronizing dynamics of (8.4) -
(8.6) with ν
i
= 0 i = 1, 2, 3 and using the parameter set provided in Table 8.2. As becomes clear
from Figure 8.2 the oscillators are locked in anti-phase synchronized motion after τ ≈ 450 [−] and
the oscillators move with equal amplitudes, while the beam comes to a complete standstill.
Table 8.2: Simulation and experimental parameters, rotating discs (without eccentric masses).
Non Dimensionless Dimensionless
ω
1
= ω
2
= 7.0711 [rad s
−1
] ̟
1
= ω
2
= 1
ω
3
= 3.1623 [rad s
−1
] ̟
3
= 0.4472
ω
e,i
= 0, i = 1, 2, 3 ν
e,i
= 0, i = 1, 2, 3
µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.1000 [−] µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.1000
ζ
3
= 0.0707 [−] ζ
3
= 0.0707
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
−0.04
−0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
−0.01
−0.005
0
0.005
0.01
τ [−]
ξ
1
,
ξ
2
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 8.2: Synchronization between two rotating discs (simulation results) θ
0
=

10
θ

10
θ
20
θ

20
θ
30
θ

30
]
T
= [−0.05 0 − 0.04 0 0 0]
T
(a) Transient behavior (Top: left and right
disc, Bottom: center disc) (b) Phase difference between the left and right disc.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
46 8.2 Rotating Discs without Eccentric Masses
Next, an experiment is conducted with the same parameter set and initial conditions. The results
are depicted in Figure 8.3. Again synchronizing dynamics are observed, according to Definition 5.3
(α = 1.3333, ε = 3.5 10
−3
). However, the steady state amplitudes of the oscillators are no longer
equal and the steady state phase difference is not exactly equal to π nor does it converge to one
value. Instead it oscillates around approximately 0.95π. In the next paragraph, these observations
are discussed in more detail.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
−0.1
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
−0.02
−0.01
0
0.01
0.02
τ [−]
ξ
1
,
ξ
2
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 8.3: Synchronization between two rotating discs (experimental results) θ
0
=

10
θ

10
θ
20
θ

20
θ
30
θ

30
]
T
= [−0.05 0 − 0.04 0 0 0]
T
(a) Transient behavior (Top: left and right
disc, Bottom: center disc) (b) Phase difference between the left and right disc.
Comparing the simulation results in Figure 8.2 and the experimental results in Figure 8.3 the
following is observed. First, both numerical and experimental results show the same qualitative
steady state behaviour. However, as in the case of coupled Duffing oscillators the (approximate)
anti-phase synchronized state is reached faster in experiments (τ ≈ 200 [−]) than in simulations. A
possible explanation is again the fact that disturbances might push the trajectory of the system away
from the initial (approximately in-phase) mode in the experiments. Furthermore, compensating for
the difference in dynamics of the oscillators in the set-up and finding the appropriate damping
compensation proves rather challenging. Correspondingly, the initial increase in amplitude that is
observed in Figure 8.3 shows that a nett energy input to the oscillators is still present. The fact
that the oscillator amplitudes are not identical (due to non-identical oscillators) and the necessity
to dissipate the energy overflow through the beam leads to a non-zero steady state motion of the
beam. Finally, the steady state phase difference oscillates around approximately 0.95π. This is
most likely caused by the combined influence of the non-zero motion of the beam and the non-
identical dynamics of the oscillators. Another possibility is that the (small) mismatches between
the feedback linearizing controller L
R
(ξ, ξ

) and the actual dynamics f(ξ, ξ

) cause interference in
the closed loop dynamics and thus influence the virtual dynamics. Such mismatches are likely to
be different for each oscillator and might therefore add to the observed results.
8.2.2 Convergence Rate (Analysis and Simulation)
In this paragraph the synchronizing behaviour observed in both the experiments and simulations is
explored in more detail. Attention is focussed on the synchronization time (defined in more detail
later). Since the system (8.4) - (8.6) with ν
i
= 0 i = 1, 2, 3 is linear, dependence of synchronization
time can be explored by examination of the eigenvalues of the system after a suitable coordinate
transformation.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
8.2 Rotating Discs without Eccentric Masses 47
Consider the system (8.4) - (8.6) and define the sum variable δ = θ
1

2
. The system is written in
a new set of state space coordinates δ = [δ δ

θ
3
θ

3
]
T
:
δ

= Aδ, (8.10)
where
A=

0 1 0 0
−̟
2
0 2̟
2
0
0 0 1 0
µ̟
2
0 −(2µ̟
2
+ ̟
2
3
) −2ζ
3
ω
3
¸
¸
¸
¸
. (8.11)
In theory even a perfect system (identical oscillators and no disturbances) does not reach a complete
synchronized state in finite time, when started from an initial condition that is not exactly in anti-
phase. In order to be able to define such a thing as synchronization time it is therefore necessary
to define a measure of sufficient synchronization. This also allows the study of systems that do not
synchronize completely, such as any experimental system.
Definition 8.1 (Synchronization time). The synchronization time τ
s
of a system is defined such
that for any τ > τ
s
:
δ(τ) < ε. (8.12)
In the sequel ε = 10
−4
, since simulations show that the phase difference between the oscillators has
converged to sufficiently towards π if δ(τ) < 10
−4
.
From Theorem 8.1 it is known that the anti-phase synchronization manifold is globally asymptoti-
cally stable. I.e. in system (8.10) the origin is globally asymptotically stable, hence A is Hurwitz
for positive parameter value. A direct proof that A is Hurwitz has not been acquired yet, since
attempts to directly calculate the eigenvalues failed and more conservative conditions like Gers-
gorins’ circle theorem cannot be used either. The convergence rate of the system is expected to be
inversely proportional to the real part of the slowest eigenvalue λ

δ
. This is the eigenvalue of A
with the smallest real part in absolute sense (closest to zero).
In this report only a single study of parameter dependence of the convergence rate is presented by
means of simulation. More extensive studies and experimental verification is left to future studies.
In the following, the dependence of the synchronization time τ
s
on the damping of the beam ζ
3
is
investigated.
In order to study this dependence, the parameter set provided in Table 8.3 has been selected. Using
these parameters the eigenvalues of the system matrix A are calculated for ζ
3
∈ (0 2.5]. Now define
the inverse of the real part, of the slowest eigenvalue as:
υ =

[ℜ
¸
λ

δ
¸
[

−1
, (8.13)
Solving the system (8.4) - (8.6) numerically for the same parameter set and a range of ζ
3
allows
the calculation of τ
s
according to Definition 8.1. Scaling both the simulation and the eigenvalue
analysis results between 0 and 1 yields Figure 8.4.
Table 8.3: Parameters for simulations and eigenvalue analysis concerning the dependence of syn-
chronization time on the dimensionless damping of the beam.
Non Dimensionless Dimensionless
ω
1
= ω
2
= 6.2832 [rad s
−1
] ̟
1
= ω
2
= 1
ω
3
= 4.5564 [rad s
−1
] ̟
3
= 0.7252
ω
e,i
= 0, i = 1, 2, 3 ν
e,i
= 0, i = 1, 2, 3
µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.0256 [−] µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.0256
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
48 8.3 Rotating Discs with Eccentric Masses
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
10
−1
10
0


υ
Simulation
τ

s
[

]
ζ
3
[−]
Figure 8.4: Comparison between analytical and simulation results with respect to the dependence
of scaled synchronization time τ

s
on the dimensionless damping of the beam ζ
3
.
The behaviour observed from Figure 8.4 may be understood as follows. For the theoretical situation
that ζ
3
= 0 no synchronization will occur since every initial condition results in an unique trajectory
and the system will stay on that torus in state space for all time and any initial mode is stable.
As ζ
3
increases the system will synchronize faster since the energy dissipation is the driving force
behind synchronization. However, for large values ζ
3
, synchronization will tend to take longer again
since the interaction between the oscillators starts to be limited by the heavily damped motion of
the beam. Combining the reasoning for small and large ζ
3
it becomes clear that there is an optimal
value of ζ
3
for which synchronization occurs the fastest. For the given parameter set both the
analysis and the simulation show that this value is given by ζ
3
≈ 0.39. The difference between
the simulations and the eigenvalue analysis is most probably caused by difference between the
numerical definition of approximate synchronization versus the semi-analytical calculation of the
systems’ slowest timescale.
8.3 Rotating Discs with Eccentric Masses
To conclude the discussion of the system (8.4) - (8.6) this paragraph discusses the dynamics of the
complete system, i.e. ν
i
= 0. Starting with a preliminary analysis of the stability of the synchro-
nization manifold, attention is focussed on numerical and experimental results. The chapter is then
concluded with a short summary and some remarks.
The analytical results obtained for this system do not allow a rigorous proof of the existence and
stability of synchronization regimes. Although this type of analysis proved successful for different
types of systems and the case where ν
i
= 0 it proved unsuccessful to apply LaSalles invariance
principle for the case where ν
i
= 0 till now. These results are summarized in conjecture 8.1.
Conjecture 8.1 (Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold: Rotating Discs
(with eccentric masses)).
Consider the system of nonlinear differential equations (8.4) - (8.6) and define the manifold o ⊆
SSSRRR as the set o = ¦[θ θ

]
T
∈ SSSRRR[θ
1
= −θ
2
, θ

1
= −θ

2
, θ

3
= θ
3
= 0¦.
Assume, furthermore, identical oscillator properties:
1. ̟
1
= ̟
2
.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
8.3 Rotating Discs with Eccentric Masses 49
2. ν
1
= ν
2
.
3. µ
1
= µ
2
.
Then the system (8.4) - (8.6) will converge to o as t → ∞ for all initial conditions.
Argumenation. Consider the system (8.1) - (8.3). To analyze the limit behaviour of this system,
consider the total energy as a candidate Lyapunov function:
1 =
1
2
3
¸
i=1
.
i
˙
θ
2
i
+
3
¸
i=1
m
e
gℓ(1 −cos(θ
i
) +
3
¸
i=1
∆θi

0
k
i
s ds (8.14)
Calculating the derivative of 1 along the solutions of the system (A.27) - (A.29) yields:
˙
1 =
3
¸
i=1
.
i
¨
θ
2
i
˙
θ
i
+
3
¸
i=1
m
e
gℓ sin(θ
i
) +
3
¸
i=1
k
i

˙
θ
i
∆θ
i
= −2ζ
3
ω
3
˙
θ
2
3
. (8.15)
Hence,
˙
1 ≤ 0 and the system may be analyzed using LaSalles invariance principle.
This far, the reasoning is identical to the proof in Appendix A.3 for the case where ν
i
= 0, i = 1, 2, 3.
However, in the case where ν
i
= 0 the arguments used guarantee anti-phase synchronized motion
on the subset where
˙
1 = 0, fail.
The conjecture is however, supported by both experimental and numerical results. Furthermore, it
is based on previous experience with similar dynamical systems where it was possible to provide
rigorous proof of global asymptotic stability of the anti-phase synchronization manifold. Especially
the proof in Appendix A.3 for the case where ν
i
= 0 supports this conjecture.
Although no rigorous proof has been found yet, conjecture 8.1 suggest that anti-phase synchro-
nization is globally attractive for the system (8.4) - (8.6). In order to make the conjecture more
plausible the final part of this chapter supplies both numerical and experimental results that indeed
suggest anti-phase synchronized motion to be a stable and attractive mode of the system.
8.3.1 Simulation and Experimental Results
In order to show that the behaviour of (8.4) - (8.6) does converge to anti-phase synchronized
motion both numerical and experimental results are provided. It is not the objective to proof
conjecture 8.1 this way. However, the results add to the validity of the conjecture. The experiments
and simulations are conducted using the parameters provided in Table 8.4. Figure 8.5 shows the
simulation results, while Figure 8.6 shows the corresponding experimental results.
Table 8.4: Simulation and experimental parameters, rotating discs with eccentric masses.
Non Dimensionless Dimensionless
ω
1
= ω
2
= 6.6667 [rad s
−1
] ̟
1
= ω
2
= 1
ω
3
= 3.0455 [rad s
−1
] ̟
3
= 0.4568
ω
e,1
= ω
e.,2
= 4.6690 [rad s
−1
] ν
e,1
= ν
e,2
= 0.7004
ω
e,3
= 2.3847 [rad s
−1
] ν
e,3
= 0.3577
µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.1043 [−] µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.1043
ζ
3
= 0.1523 [−] ζ
3
= 0.1523
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
50 8.3 Rotating Discs with Eccentric Masses
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
−0.04
−0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
−0.01
−0.005
0
0.005
0.01
τ [−]
ξ
1
,
ξ
2
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 8.5: Synchronization between two rotating (eccentric) discs (simulation results) θ
0
=

10
θ

10
θ
20
θ

20
θ
30
θ

30
]
T
= [−0.05 0 − 0.04 0 0 0]
T
(a) Transient behavior (Top: left and right
disc, Bottom: center disc) (b) Phase difference between the left and right disc.
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
−0.1
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
−0.02
−0.01
0
0.01
0.02
τ [−]
ξ
1
,
ξ
2
[

]
ξ
3
[

]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 8.6: Synchronization between two rotating (eccentric) discs (experimental results) θ
0
=

10
θ

10
θ
20
θ

20
θ
30
θ

30
]
T
= [−0.05 0 −0.04 0 0 0]
T
(a) Transient behavior (Top: left and right disc,
Bottom: center disc) (b) Phase difference between the left and right disc.
When analyzing the data provided 8.5 and 8.6 it becomes clear that although the simulations
respond as expected the experiments deviate from the response that one might expect initially.
Note that both the simulation and experiment converge to a phase locked mode as time evolves.
The final phase difference in the simulations is close to anti-phase, i.e. ∆φ
1,2
≈ π. However,
the experiment converges to a state where ∆φ
1,2
≈ 0.8π (approximate anti-phase synchronization
according to Definition 5.3 with α = 1.4068 and ε = 5.910
−3
). The explanation for this discrepancy
may (as in previous results) be found in the fact that during the experiment it proved very hard
to find the correct energy input for the system. The trade-off between a positive energy input to
account for the non identical oscillators and to compensate for damping on the one hand, and the
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
8.4 Concluding Remarks 51
fact that any nett energy input will result in a non-zero steady state motion of the beam on the
other hand, does not allow the experimental system to approach the anti-phase synchronization
manifold as close as the simulations. The reason that the difference is larger in this case than in
previous experiments is not clear. However, tuning the energy input for the system even finer might
yield better results. The difference in amplitude between the oscillators is again caused by the fact
that the oscillators are not identical. Finally, in the simulations approximate synchronization is
reached after τ ≈ 900 [−] while the experiments show a much faster convergence and reach the
phase locked state after τ ≈ 60 [−]. As in the previous examples this difference might be explained
by the fact that external disturbances push the system away from the approximate in-phase initial
conditions in the experiments, while these disturbances are not present in the simulations.
8.4 Concluding Remarks
In the this chapter a system of coupled rotating discs has been analyzed. First, a simplified version
of the dynamics has been considered in the absence of eccentric masses. This allowed for the analysis
of the stability of the synchronization manifold. Next to the analytical results, both numerical and
experimental results are provided. Moreover, the simplified system has been used to demonstrate a
preliminary study of the parameter dependence of the convergence rate of the system. Finally, the
complete system has been considered and a conjecture about the stability of the synchronization
manifold has been put forward. Supporting this conjecture, numerical as well as experimental
results have been presented.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
52 9 Huygens Clocks
9 Huygens Clocks
This final chapter of the report discusses preliminary results with respect to modeling the classical
Huygens set-up. Starting with the introduction of the dynamical system and a theoretical study
of the stability of the synchronization manifold, the chapter continues with simulation results.
Unlike the preceding chapters no experimental results are provided since it has not been possible
to successfully conduct experiments within the time frame of this project. Instead a discussion of
the observed problems and their most probable causes is provided. Naturally, this leads to a set of
suggestions for future study in order to allow successful modeling of the Huygens set-up.
9.1 Equations of Motion and Controller Design
x
k
b
M
e
x
e
y
e
z
e
1
n
e
1
t
e
2
n
e
2
t
m
1
m
2
θ
1
θ
2
g

1

2
Figure 9.1: Schematic representation of Huygens set-up.
Figure 9.1 depicts the classical Huygens set-up as discussed from a historical perspective in Chapter
2. The systems consist of two pendula mounted on a common frame. The beam has one degree of
freedom in horizontal direction and its motion is constrained by a linear spring and damper. The
equations of motion of this system are:
¨
θ
1
= −
¨ x

1
cos(θ
1
) −ω
2
1
sin(θ
1
) (9.1)
¨
θ
2
= −
¨ x

2
cos(θ
2
) −ω
2
2
sin(θ
2
) (9.2)
¨ x = −
2
¸
i=1
µ
i
3

i

¨
θ
i
cos(θ
i
) −
˙
θ
2
i
sin(θ
i
)

−ω
2
3
x −2ζω
3
˙ x, (9.3)
where ω
i
=

g
ℓi
i = 1, 2 the eigenfrequency of the pendula, ω
3
=

k
m1+m2+M
the eigenfrequency
of the beam/pendula combination, ζ =
b3
2(m1+m2+M)ω3
the dimensionless damping of the beam and
µ
i
= 3
mi
m1+m2+M
the mass ratio between the beam and the pendula, scaled such that µ ∈ [0 1], as
in the previously discussed case studies.
In order to write the system of equations (9.1) - (9.3) in dimensionless form, the following set of
dimensionless parameters is defined:
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
9.1 Equations of Motion and Controller Design 53
Table 9.1: Dimensionless parameters, Huygens clocks.
τ

= ¯ ωt ω
i
= ¯ ω̟

i
, i = 1, 2
x = ℓξ =
g
¯ ω
2
ξ

ω
3
= ¯ ωΩ

Here, ¯ ω =
1
2

1

2
) and

indicates a dimensionless parameter which will be omitted in the sequel
for the sake of readability. The resulting dimensionless equations of motion are:
θ
′′
1
= −̟
2
1

′′
cos(θ
1
) + sin(θ
1
)) (9.4)
θ
′′
2
= −̟
2
2

′′
cos(θ
2
) + sin(θ
2
)) (9.5)
ξ
′′
= −
2
¸
i=1
µ
i
3
̟
−2

θ
′′
i
cos(θ
i
) −θ
′ 2
i
sin(θ
i
)

−Ω
2
ξ −2ζΩξ

, (9.6)
An analysis of the stability of possible synchronization regimes in the system (9.4) - (9.6) is provided
in (Pogromsky et al., 2003). In order to make this report self contained these results are repeated
in Theorem 9.1.
Theorem 9.1 (Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold: Huygens Clocks).
Consider the system of nonlinear differential equations (9.4) - (9.6) and define the manifold o ⊆
S RS RRR as the set o = ¦[θ
1
θ

1
θ
2
θ

2
ξ ξ

]
T
∈ S RS RRR[θ
1
= −θ
2
, θ

1
=
−θ

2
, ξ

= ξ
3
= 0¦. Assume, furthermore, identical oscillator properties:
1. ̟
1
= ̟
2
.
2. µ
1
= µ
2
.
Then the system (9.4) - (9.6) will converge to o as t → ∞ for all initial conditions.
Proof. The proof is provided in (Pogromsky et al., 2003) and is obtained along the same lines as
the proofs provided in Appendix A.2 and A.3.
Now that the dynamics of the Huygens system have been introduced and the existence of a globally
asymptotically stable synchronization manifold has been shown, simulation results are provided
that illustrate the synchronizing dynamics of the system. The simulations are conducted using the
parameter set provided in Table 9.2. Figure 9.2a shows the response of the system, while Figure
9.2b shows the evolution of the phase difference between the oscillators.
Table 9.2: Simulation parameters, Huygens clocks.
Non Dimensionless Dimensionless
ω
1
= ω
2
= 3.1321 [rad s
−1
] ̟
1
= ̟
2
= 1
ω
3
= 4.0825 [rad s
−1
] Ω = 1.3034
ζ
3
= 0.2041 ζ
3
= 0.2041
µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.2500 µ
1
= µ
2
= 0.2500
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
54 9.2 Problems and Solutions Concerning Experimental Results
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
−0.5
0
0.5
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
−0.1
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
0.15
τ [−]
θ
i
[
r
a
d
]
ξ
i
[

]
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
τ [−]

φ
1
,
2
(

π
)
[
r
a
d
]
(a) (b)
Figure 9.2: Synchronization between two pendula in the Huygens set-up (simulation results)

1
θ

1
θ
2
θ

2
θ
3
ξ ξ

]
T
= [−
π
4
0 −

π
4
+ ǫ

0 0 0]
T
with ǫ = 0.1
π
4
(a) Transient behavior
(Top: red and blue oscillator, Bottom: beam) (b) Phase difference between the oscillators.
As predicted by Theorem 9.1 the dynamics of (9.4) - (9.6) converge to a state of anti-phase syn-
chronized motion and reach a state of approximate anti-phase synchronization after τ ≈ 350 [−]. In
this mode the beam comes to a complete standstill and the oscillators move with equal amplitude
and frequency.
9.2 Problems and Solutions Concerning Experimental Results
This paragraph discusses the current state of events of this part of the project. Although, it
proved unsuccessful to conduct synchronization experiments with the modification to the set-up,
the developed controller is derived for future reference. The chapter concludes with discussion of the
current understanding of the problems observed and suggestions for possible causes and solutions.
Controller Design
In order to realize a virtual dynamical system that mimics the dynamics prescribed by (9.4) - (9.6)
the masking dynamics approach discussed in Chapter 6 is applied. The following identities are
proposed to realize the required dynamics:
L
H
(ξ, ξ

) = −f(ξ, ξ

, v = 0) Λ
−1
(9.7)
D
H
(η, η

) = F(η, η

) (9.8)
G
H
= Λ
−1
, (9.9)
where Λ = diag[λ
1
λ
2
λ
3
] contains the gains from (4.4) - (4.6). The block ξ
′′
= L
H
(ξ, ξ

) =
−f(ξ, ξ

, v = 0) Λ
−1
cancels the set-ups’ dynamics ξ
′′
= f(ξ, ξ

, v). The block η
′′
= D
H
(η, η

) =
F
H
(η, η

), furthermore, assures that the closed loop dynamics of the complete system equal those
of the user specified open loop dynamics η
′′
= F
H
(η, η

) which are specified by (9.4) - (9.6). The
virtual coordinate system η = [θ
1
θ
2
ξ]
T
is obtained from choosing the appropriate coordinate
transformation T
H
= diag[θ
m
θ
m
1], where θ
m
is the angle of rotation corresponding to the stroke
of the set-up.
Note that the dynamics η
′′
= D
H
(η, η

) = F
H
(η, η

) are specified by (9.4) - (9.6) which is are
directly and indirectly dependent on the states [θ
1
θ

1
θ
2
θ

2
ξ ξ

]
T
of the system. The equations
depend directly on the accelerations of both the beam and the oscillators. Determining these
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
9.2 Problems and Solutions Concerning Experimental Results 55
accelerations numerically during the experiment is highly sensitive to noise and results in barely
usable results. Instead it is possible to derive a direct relation between the states and the acceleration
of the beam ξ
′′
from (9.4) - (9.6). After substitution and some trigiometry this yields:
ξ
′′

i
, θ

i
, ξ, ξ

) =
µ
3
2
¸
i=1

1
2
sin(2θ
i
) + ̟
−2
i
θ
′ 2
i
sin(θ
i
)

−2ζΩξ

−Ω
2
ξ
1 −
µ
3
2
¸
i=1
cos
2

i
)
. (9.10)
Given (9.10) the acceleration of the pendula follows directly from (9.4) - (9.5). Since no successful
synchronization experiments have been conducted yet, the chapter is concluded by a discussion of
the observed problems and suggestions for improvements in future research.
Discussion
Problem Analysis
At this point the derived controller dynamics have successfully been implemented in Simulink and
it is possible to conduct experiments like the ones discussed in the preceding chapters using the
virtual system. The results are however, not as expected. For those parameter sets where it was
possible to obtain regular oscillating motion, the oscillators appear to move completely independent
of each other. In short, the controller seems to work but no synchronization is observed, even if the
system is started very close to the anti-phase synchronization manifold.
Based on the results, a number of possible explanations may be put forward. A very straightforward
option is that the controllers are not correct, or not correctly implemented. Given the successful
experience with the Duffing oscillators and the rotating discs this does however, not seem very
plausible. Another possibility is that no suitable parameter set has been selected during the trials.
However, both analytical results and simulations show that synchronization is a very robust phe-
nomenon which makes this explanation rather unlikely as well.
The most likely causes for the problems with modeling the Huygens set-up, using the masking
approach are the following: First of all, in the Huygens set-up the oscillators and the beam are only
coupled by acceleration forces. Any deviation of the feedback linearizing controller with respect
to the actual dynamics of the set-up therefore causes a non-physical coupling between pendula
rotation and beam translation that is not possible in the Huygens set-up. The combined influence
of this coupling with that of the classical Huygens set-up which is added in the virtual dynamics
is hard to predict. The final possible cause for the deviating experimental results is the fact that
the present actuators only allow the modeling of small amplitude, slow oscillations, because their
actuator power is limited. If the frequency or amplitude of the oscillator is increased the maximum
velocity rises as well. Correspondingly, the required accelerations increase and therefore the re-
quired actuator power has to be increased. The present actuators only allow for experiments where
the maximum oscillating frequency is about 1 −3 [Hz] while the amplitude is in the order of mag-
nitude of 2 [deg]. It is believed that the coupling forces caused by these small and slow oscillations
is small compared to the disturbances and model uncertainties in the closed loop system. The fact
that these slow and small amplitude oscillations lead to synchronization in the previous chapter
can be understood by the fact that the system of rotating discs considered in that case does not
suffer from the residual non-physical coupling resulting from model uncertainties in the feedback
linearizing controller.
Solutions
As discussed in the preceding paragraph the present actuators in the set-up do not meet the require-
ments that are needed in the experiments. This chapter is concluded with a number of suggestions
that will possibly allow for successful experiments in the future. First, note that the required actu-
ator power follows directly from the experiments that need to be conducted. Therefore it is highly
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
56 9.3 Concluding Remarks
recommended to make a detailed overview of the experiments that are required and to investigated
the required actuator power by simulation before investing in a new actuator system. Focussing on
the Huygens set-up two alterations are expected to improve experimental results. First, increasing
the oscillator frequency will increase the coupling, since it is directly related to the acceleration of
the oscillators and thus the amount of interaction between the oscillators though the beam. Second,
increasing the virtual rotation angles represented by the stroke of the set-up by choosing a different
mapping also results in higher oscillator speeds. Both of these recommendations require higher
accelerations of the masses in the set-up and therefore require stronger actuators.
To get a feeling for this, consider the Huygens system with oscillator masses m
1
= m
2
= 50 [g]
and a beam of mass M = 800 [g]. With k = 70 [Nm
−1
], b = 10 [Nsm
−1
] and ℓ
i
= 0.25 [m].
Both simulations and experiments show that the required actuator power is well within the present
limits in this case. Mapping the displacement of the oscillators directly to the arc traveled by the
oscillator ends results in oscillations with an amplitude of approximately 1 [deg] with an oscillating
frequency of approximately 1 [Hz]. If the coupling is increased by lowering ℓ
i
(increasing the nat-
ural frequency of the oscillators) simulations show that in order to obtain an oscillation frequency
of 5 [Hz] the required actuator power is about 275% of the power present in the system. If instead
the pendula length is kept constant, but the the displacements of the oscillators in the set-up are
magnified, thus leading to larger virtual rotations and a stronger interaction between the oscillators,
the required actuator power to allow for the oscillations with an amplitude of approximately 45

is
250% of the current actuator power.
The previous example illustrates the problems discussed in this chapter. Note that next to the
actuator power required to ’drive’ the virtual dynamics a significant percentage of the actuator
power is required to allow for compensation of the natural stiffness and damping of the set-up.
Although the stiffness is not expected to cause any significant problems (it is bounded by the same
maximum, no matter which virtual dynamics are required), the damping increases with the speed
of the oscillators which causes an increase in actuator power as well, when considering faster or
larger amplitude oscillations. Therefore, considering a new actuator system that does not suffer
from electrical damping as severely as the present one serves two goals at once. First of all, the
actuators may be chosen at the appropriate strength and secondly, less of the actuator power is
required to cancel the system’s dynamics.
9.3 Concluding Remarks
In this chapter a number of problems that have been observed when modeling the Huygens set-up
have been discussed. The most important conclusion is that the limited actuator power in the
system causes severe limitations in experiments. Although the chapter aims to illustrate these
problems it does not provide a clear definition of the required actuator system. The reason for
this is that the required actuator power depends mainly on the required experiments and therefore
should be selected only after these have been carefully selected. Next to stronger actuators it is
important to consider actuator systems that suffer from electrical damping as little as possible since
in doing so, one increases both the portion of actuator power that can be used to model the virtual
dynamics and reduces the amount of interference that is caused by inexact damping compensation.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
10 Conclusions and Recommendations 57
10 Conclusions and Recommendations
10.1 Conclusion
This thesis aims at: ’Investigating, using a new experimental set-up, the existence and stability of
synchronization regimes in coupled oscillatory systems.’ It consists of two main parts.
In the first part of the thesis, a new experimental set-up, designed at the departement of Mechanical
Engineering of the Eindhoven University of Technology, is described. The actual development of
the necessary hard- and software, vital to getting this set-up operational, is a significant part of
the thesis research and is also described in this part. A model for the dynamics of the set-up is
developed and discussed in detail. The final part of the thesis focuses on the experimental results
obtained with the experimental set-up. These results are accompanied by analytical and numerical
results, providing a compete analysis of the observed synchronization phenomena. The following
paragraphs describe the results presented in this report in further detail.
Hard- and Software Development
The experimental set-up has been designed and constructed previous to the start of the project
described in this thesis. The hard- and software needed to operate the set-up were, however, not
yet available at that time. An important part of thesis research is, therefore, devoted to developing
these essential components. The first step has been the selection en implementation of the data
acquisition system. A safety system has, furthermore, been constructed, allowing the set-up to
run without the need of human presence. Finally, a combination of Simulink models and Matlab
code has been developed, facilitating the operation of the set-up. A fully automated calibration
routine, for example, enables fast and easy initialization of the set up. The possibility to detect
synchronization online also minimizes the efforts needed to successfully conduct experiments.
Modeling of the Set-up
This thesis describes a set of experiments specifically aiming to tune the actuator / amplifier
strengths within the experimental set-up. An experimental and theoretical study of damping and
hysteresis effects has also been carried out. Finally, a model for the systems dynamics has been
developed and described. Both the qualitative and quantitative properties of this model closely
match those of the experiments conducted specifically for this thesis. A detailed description and
a comparison with experimental results obtained using the experimental set-up, are given in the
main text of this thesis. An overview of possible nonlinear effects in the set-up is presented as well.
Development of Virtual Closed Loop Dynamics
A controller, based on a feedback linearization procedure and nonlinear state feedback, has been
developed in the course of the thesis. The purpose of this is to enable experiments with dynamics
other than those inherit to the experimental set-up. This feedback ’neutralizes’ the dynamics of
the set-up and ’replaces’ it with a set of user-specified dynamics. The result is a virtual system,
enabling experiments with a wide range of dynamical systems, using only one experimental set-up
as a platform. A number of potential drawbacks of this approach, i.e. sensitivity to distortions and
uncertainties in the model parameters, are also discussed.
Experimental Results
In the final part of this thesis, the experimental results of synchronizing dynamics in coupled dynam-
ical systems are presented. Starting with the experimental results using the uncontrolled set-up, the
thesis continues with a description of the results using a range of dynamical systems. A system of
coupled Duffing oscillators is described and analytical results are presented that show the synchro-
nization manifold to be globally asymptotically stable. Numerical and experimental results are also
presented, supporting these results. Next, two sets of experiments are described, illustrating the
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
58 10.2 Recommendations
existence of synchronization regimes in a dynamical system of coupled rotating discs. For this last
system, however, stability of the synchronization manifold has not been proven yet. A conjecture,
is formulated, predicting the anti-phase synchronization manifold to be globally asymptotically sta-
ble. For a simplified version of the rotating discs system, however, a rigorous proof of stability of
the synchronization manifold has been found. An analysis of the convergence rate of this system
is given as well. This analysis indicates that the contraction rate of the system can be maximized
in a nontrivial way by altering the damping in the system. Finally, an attempt is made to model
the classical Huygens set-up. It has thus far not been possible, unfortunately, to experimentally
show synchronization in this specific situation. A detailed overview of the encountered problems,
possible reasons and possible solutions is presented in the main text. The next section will discuss
these possibilities in more detail, while focusing on the recommendations for future research.
Huygens Synchronization
The research presented in this thesis shows that Huygens or frequency synchronization arises in a
variety of dynamical systems. These results not only yield Huygens synchronization to occurs, but
also shows that this phenomenon is very robust. Using simulations and experimental results as well
as analytical results it has been shown that this type of synchronization is robust with respect to
disturbances and non-identical oscillator properties. These results agree with studies presented in
literature and with the original findings of Christiaan Huygens himself.
10.2 Recommendations
The experiments described in this thesis are a first step in the research of synchronization phenom-
ena making use of this specific experimental set-up. The project yields important insights into both
the potential of the experimental set-up and into the (possible) weaknesses / problems that can
be encountered while working with such a set-up. This chapter concludes the thesis with a set of
recommendations for future experiments, particulary listing a number of suggestions for improving
the performance of the set-up.
Future experiments can also combine the advantages of a fully actuated system with the derived
control strategy. This facilitates the modeling of different dynamics, yielding a wide range of
potential experiments. Future studies could include a detailed analysis of parameter influences
on synchronization. The coupling strength, for example, could be altered both electrically and
mechanically, leading to very interesting results. It is expected that this parameter in particular
influences the type of behaviour found in experiments and to influence the convergence rate as
well. For which minimal coupling strength, for example, will synchronization start to occur in
practice? The influence of initial conditions of the experiment or different coupling laws could also
be investigated, using the method and experimental set-up described in this thesis. Finally, the
set-up is very suitable for experiments with controlled synchronization, opening up a completely
new potential field of research.
Modeling and Analysis
The model of the experimental set-up described in this thesis provides a good estimate of the
dynamics of this set-up. The compensation for damping / friction, however, proved to be a prob-
lem throughout the experiments. The system is very sensitive to the linear velocity feed-forward
mechanism presently used. In order to obtain better and more consistent experimental results,
an alternative escapement mechanism should be developed. If the present actuator system were
replaced, as suggested later on, part of this problem would already be solved, since a significant
part of the damping originates in the actuators. Furthermore, a rigorous proof of Conjecture 8.1 is
believed to exist, based on the results presented in this thesis. A stability analysis proving this con-
jecture should be part of future studies. Finally, the preliminary results concerning the convergence
rate of the system require experimental verification.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
59
Hardware
Removal of S-shaped Springs In the course of this research, the hardware in the experimental
set-up caused a number of problems. The S-shaped springs installed to facilitate the mechan-
ical tuning of the eigenfrequencies of the oscillators and the beam, proved to be less useful
than anticipated. The nonlinearity caused by these springs increases the complexity of the
model of the set-up and has no known significant advantages. Moreover, the presence of these
springs in the oscillators makes the oscillators less identical, leading to less precise experi-
mental results. One of the primary goals of the thesis research is to facilitate experiments
with different types of dynamical systems by means of a feedback controller. The underlying
dynamics should therefore be as simple as possible. The required nonlinearities can, however,
be added later through actuation.
The S-shaped springs have already been removed from the oscillators. In future experiments,
it is advisable to remove the S-shaped spring from the beam as well. This will further reduce
the nonlinearity present in the system. It will, moreover, reduce the required actuator power
to compensate for the stiffness in the beam.
Removal of Dry Friction Elements The red oscillator in the experimental set-up shows stick-
slip behaviour. This is almost certainly caused by contact between the actuator coil and its
casing. Another, less likely, possibility is that the contact takes place in the corresponding
Linear Variable Differential Transformer (LVDT). Replacing the actuator system, as suggested
later in this paragraph, will solve the problem of stick-slip behaviour. If this cannot be realized,
the guidance of the red oscillator should be calibrated to make sure that there is no contact
between the moving actuator elements throughout the oscillator stroke.
Replacement of the Actuator System The present actuator system has two major drawbacks.
Firstly, most of the damping observed in the system originates from back emf in the voice
coils. The compensation for this damping poses a significant problem. These problems arise
from the fact that actuator power is ’wasted’ on this compensation. Instead, the actuator
power could be used more effectively while modulating the systems’ dynamics or applying
other types of control. More importantly, damping should be minimized, since it is hard to
identify and therefore contributes significantly to the model uncertainty. The present actu-
ators have aluminum casings. These casings are the primary source of the damping in the
system. Even when the coils are not connected, significant damping takes place. A system
with polymer covers should, therefore, significantly improve the systems response.
Secondly, the actuator power in the system should be increased. The range of experiments
was significantly limited by the limited power of the present actuator system. At this moment,
it is not possible to give a specific recommendation as to which actuator system should be
used. The reason for this is that the choice of a new actuator system should be tailored to
the experiments to be carried out. There is no doubt however, about a new actuator system
needing to be significantly stronger than the present one.
To conclude: A new actuator system not suffering from electrical damping as severely as
the present one would serve two important purposes. First and foremost, the actuator could
then be tuned to the appropriate strength such that a wider range of experiments could be
conducted. Secondly, less of the actuator power would be required to cancel the system’s
dynamics, since there would be less damping needing to be compensated for, leading to a
more effective use of actuator power.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
60
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
61
Appendix
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
62
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
A Proofs and Derivations 63
A Proofs and Derivations
A.1 Equations of Motion (Lagrange)
x
1
x
2
x
3
k
1
k
2
k
3
b
1
b
2
b
3
m
1
m
2
m
3
u
1
u
2
u
3
Figure A.1: Schematic representation of the set-up.
Consider the system depicted in Figure A.1, where q
i
= q
i
(t) is the (relative) displacement of mass
m
i
, i = 1, 2, 3, k
i
is a linear spring constant and b
i
a viscous damping constant. Linearity is
assumed as a first approximation, in order to simplify the initial analysis. Furthermore u
i
= u
i
(t)
represents the input supplied by the actuators. Note that two sets of coordinates will be used. First
of all te set of relative coordinates q = [q
1
q
2
q
3
]
T
, since using these coordinates simplifies the form
in which the equations of motion appear and these coordinates correspond to the displacements
measured by the sensors in the set-up. Secondly, a set of absolute coordinates x = [x
1
x
2
x
3
]
T
will
be used to represent the displacements and velocities with respect to a fixed reference frame, i.e.
these are the motions that are observed when observing the set-up ’from the side line’. The set
of absolute coordinates x is obtained from the relative coordinates q through a linear coordinate
transformation T : R → R, which in cartesian coordinates yeilds:
T : x = Tq , T =

1 0 1
0 1 1
0 0 1
¸
¸
(A.1)
Using a Lagrangian approach (Kraker and Campen, 2001) the equations of motion for this dynamical
system will be derived. Define the following set of generalized coordinates q = [q
1
q
2
q
3
]
T
=
[x
1
−x
3
x
2
−x
3
x
3
]
T
. The total kinetic energy T( ˙ q) is then given by:
T( ˙ q) =
1
2
˙ q
T

m
1
0 m
1
0 m
2
m
2
m
1
m
2
m
1
+ m
2
+ m
3
¸
¸
˙ q =
1
2
˙ q
T
M ˙ q, (A.2)
with M is the mass matrix of the system. The potential energy stored in the springs is given by:
V (q) =
1
2
q
T

k
1
0 0
0 k
2
0
0 0 k
3
¸
¸
q =
1
2
q
T
Kq, (A.3)
with K the stiffness matrix of the system. Finally, the column of generalized non-conservative
forces is derived using the principle of virtual work.
• δq
1
= [δq
1
0 0]
T
δW
1
= (u
1
(t) −b
1
˙ q
1
) δq
1
= Q
nc
1
δq
1
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
64 A.1 Equations of Motion (Lagrange)
• δq
2
= [0 δq
2
0]
T
δW
2
= (u
2
(t) −b
2
˙ q
2
) δq
2
= Q
nc
2
δq
2
• δq
1
= [0 0 δq
3
]
T
δW
3
= (u
3
(t) + u
2
(t) −u
1
(t) −b
3
˙ q
3
) δq
3
= Q
nc
3
δq
3
Hence, the column of generalized non-conservative forces becomes:
Q
nc
=

u
1
(t) −b
1
˙ q
1
u
2
(t) −b
2
˙ q
2
u
3
(t) −u
2
(t) −u
1
(t) −b
3
˙ q
3
¸
¸
(A.4)
Furthermore, consider the following derivatives according to (Kraker and Campen, 2001):
d
dt
(T,
˙ q
) = M ¨ q (A.5)
T,
q
= 0 (A.6)
V,
q
= Kq. (A.7)
According to Lagrange the equations of motion now become:
d
dt
(T,
˙ q
) −T,
q
+V,
q
= (Q
nc
)
T
. (A.8)
Hence, using previous results the equations of motion appear in a familiar form:
M¨ q +B ˙ q +Kq = F(t), (A.9)
with M, K the mass and stiffness matrix as specified earlier, B the damping matrix and F(t) the
column of actuation forces, according to:
B =

b
1
0 0
0 b
2
0
0 0 b
3
¸
¸
F(t) =

u
1
(t)
u
2
(t)
u
3
(t) −u
2
(t) −u
1
(t)
¸
¸
(A.10)
The system of ordinary differential equations (A.9) may be written in absolute coordinates x. This
yields:
¨ x
1
= −ω
2
1
(x
1
−x
3
) −2ζ
1
ω
1
( ˙ x
1
− ˙ x
3
) + c
1
u
1
(t) (A.11)
¨ x
2
= −ω
2
2
(x
2
−x
3
) −2ζ
2
ω
2
( ˙ x
1
− ˙ x
3
) + c
2
u
2
(t) (A.12)
¨ x
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

ω
2
i
(x
i
−x
3
) + 2ζ
i
ω
i
( ˙ x
i
− ˙ x
3
)

−ω
2
3
x
3
−2ζ
3
ω
3
˙ x
3
+ c
3
˜ u
3
(t), (A.13)
where ω
i
=

ki
mi
[rad s
−1
] the undamped eigenfrequency of the i
th
subsystem, ζ
i
=
bi
2miωi
[−] the
dimensionless damping of the i
th
subsystem and µ
i
=
mi
m3
[−] the dimensionless coupling strength.
Furthermore, ˜ u
3
(t) = u
3
(t)−u
2
(t)−u
1
(t) [V ] and c
i
[ms
−2
V
−1
] accounts for the amplifier / motor
constants..
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
A.2 Set-up: Stability of the Synchronization Manifold 65
A.2 Set-up: Stability of the Synchronization Manifold
Consider the following system of (nonlinear) coupled differential equations, representing the exper-
imental set-up.
¨ x
1
= −ω
2
1
η
1
(q
1
) q
1
(A.14)
¨ x
2
= −ω
2
2
η
2
(q
2
) q
2
(A.15)
¨ x
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

ω
2
i
η
i
(q
i
) q
i

−ω
2
3
η
3
(x
3
) x
3
−2ζ
3
ω
3
σ( ˙ q
3
) ˙ q
3
, (A.16)
where, q
i
= x
i
−x
3
∀ i = 1, 2, q
3
= x
3
, ω
i
=

ki
mi
∈ R
>0
, ζ
3
∈ R
>0
, µ
i
=
mi
m3
and m
i
∈ R
>0
∀ i =
1, 2, 3. Moreover, η
i
(q
i
), σ( ˙ q
3
) are (nonlinear) shape functions. Finally, let η
i
(q
i
) be an odd, one to
one, continuous function, such that η
i
(q
i
)q
i
has a zero only at q
i
= 0 and let ˙ q
3
σ( ˙ q
3
) > 0 ∀ ˙ q
3
= 0
and σ(0) = 0.
Note that the system used here is slightly different from the system in the main text. This is
due to the fact that the proof is more comprehensible when using non-dimensionless variables.
Furthermore, the constraints of undamped oscillators and the absence of actuator input has already
been accounted for here and some notation is adapted to provide a more compact proof. However,
the equations used in the proof are only scaled with respect to those in the main text. Therefore the
results can directly be applied to the system of equations (5.4) - (5.6), which are in dimensionless
form. In the following global asymptotic stability of the synchronization manifold is investigated
using Lyapunovs direct method and LaSalles invariance principle.
Theorem A.1 (Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold (repeated in slightly
modified form, from page 31)).
Consider the system of nonlinear differential equations (A.14) - (A.16) and define o ⊆ R
6
as the
manifold o = ¦[x ˙ x]
T
∈ R
6
[x
1
= −x
2
, ˙ x
1
= −˙ x
2
, ˙ x
3
= x
3
= 0¦. Assume, furthermore, odd, one
to one, continuous functions η
i
(q
i
), such that q
i
η
i
(q
i
) has a zero only at q
i
= 0 and σ( ˙ q
3
) such that
˙ q
3
σ( ˙ q
3
) > 0 ∀ ˙ q
3
= 0 and σ(0) = 0. Finally, assume the following oscillator properties:
1. η
1
() = η
2
()
2. η
i
() such that
x

0
s η
i
(s) ds → ∞ if [x[ → ∞ i = 1, 2, 3
3. ω
1
= ω
2
4. µ
1
= µ
2
.
Then the system (A.14) - (A.16) will converge to o as t → ∞ for all initial conditions.
Proof (Theorem 5.1: Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold).
Consider the system (A.14) - (A.16). To analyze the limit behavior of this system, consider the
total energy as a candidate Lyapunov function:
1 =
1
2
3
¸
i=1
m
i
˙ x
2
i
+
3
¸
i=1
qi

0
k
i
η
i
(s) s ds (A.17)
Calculating the derivative of 1 along the solutions of the system (A.14) - (A.16) yields:
˙
1 =
3
¸
i=1
m
i
˙ x
i
¨ x
i
+
3
¸
i=1
d
dt
qi(t)

0
k
i
η
i
(s) s ds. (A.18)
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
66 A.2 Set-up: Stability of the Synchronization Manifold
The terms in the second sum may be written as:
d
dt
qi

0
k
i
η
i
(s) s ds = k
i
η
i
(q
i
) q
i
˙ q
i
. (A.19)
This yields:
˙
1 =
3
¸
i=1
m
i
˙ x
i
¨ x
i
+
3
¸
i=1
k
i
η
i
(q
i
) q
i
˙ q
i
= −2ζ
3
ω
3
˙ q
2
3
σ( ˙ q
3
). (A.20)
Hence,
˙
1 ≤ 0 and the system may be analyzed using LaSalles invariance principle.
Equation (A.20) implies that 1 is a bounded function of time. Moreover, x
i
(t) is a bounded function
of time and will converge to a limit set where
˙
1 = 0. On this limit set ˙ q
3
= ˙ x
3
= ¨ x
3
= 0, according
to (A.20) and thus q
3
= x
3
= x

3
is constant. Substituting this and (A.14) - (A.15) in (A.16) yields:
¨ x
1
+ ¨ x
2
= −
x

3
ω
3
µ
η
3
(x

3
). (A.21)
Integrating (A.21) twice with respect to time yields:
x
1
+ x
2
= −
x

3
ω
3
µ
η
3
(x

3
)t
2
+ c
1
t + c
2
, (A.22)
However, since both x
1
(t) and x
2
(t) are bounded functions of time, this yields x

3
= c
1
= c
2
= 0.
Substituting x
3
= ˙ x
3
= ¨ x
3
= 0 in (A.16) shows:
η
1
(q
1
) q
1
= −η
2
(q
2
) q
2
(A.23)
Since η
i
(q
i
) is an odd function and x
3
= 0 on the limit set, this yields:
x
1
= −x
2
, (A.24)
which, after differentiation with respect to time yields:
˙ x
2
= −˙ x
1
. (A.25)
Summarizing, it has been shown that as t → ∞ any solution will converge to the set where:
x
1
= −x
2
, ˙ x
1
= −˙ x
2
, x
3
= ˙ x
3
= 0 (A.26)
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
A.3 Rotating Discs: Stability of the Synchronization Manifold 67
A.3 Rotating Discs: Stability of the Synchronization Manifold
Consider the following system of nonlinear differential equations, representing the rotating disc
system as discussed in Chapter 8:
¨
θ
1
= −ω
2
1
∆θ
1
(A.27)
¨
θ
2
= −ω
2
2
∆θ
2
(A.28)
¨
θ
3
=
2
¸
i=1
µ
i

ω
2
i
∆θ
i

−ω
2
3
θ
3
−2ζ
3
ω
3
˙
θ
3
, (A.29)
with ∆θ
i
= θ
i
−θ
3
, ω
i
=

ki
Ji
, ζ
3
=
b3
2ω3J3
and µ
i
=
Ji
J3
, where .
i
= m
i

i
+J
i
and J
i
is the moment
of inertia of the i
th
disc.
In the following the stability of the synchronization manifold is investigated using Lyapunovs direct
method and LaSalles invariance principle. As in the proof in Section A.2 the non-dimensionless
form of the equations of motion is used since this makes the application of the total energy function
of the system as a Lyapunov candidate more straightforward.
Theorem A.2 (Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold: Rotating Discs
without Eccentric Masses (repeated in slightly modified from page 45)).
Consider the system of nonlinear differential equations (A.27) - (A.29) and define the manifold
o ⊆ S S S R R R as the set o = ¦[θ
˙
θ]
T
∈ S S S R R R[θ
1
= −θ
2
, θ

1
=
−θ

2
, θ

3
= θ
3
= 0¦. Assume, furthermore, identical oscillator properties:
1. ω
1
= ω
2
.
2. µ
1
= µ
2
.
Then the system (A.27) - (A.29) will converge to o as t → ∞ for all initial conditions.
Proof (Theorem 8.1: Global Asymptotic Stability of the Synchronization Manifold: Rotating
Discs). Consider the system (A.27) - (A.29). To analyze the limit behavior of the system, consider
the total energy as a candidate Lyapunov function:
1 =
1
2
3
¸
i=1
.
i
˙
θ
2
i
+
3
¸
i=1
1
2
k
i
∆θ
2
i
(A.30)
Calculating the derivative of 1 along the solutions of the system (A.27) - (A.29) yields:
˙
1 =
3
¸
i=1
.
i
¨
θ
2
i
˙
θ
i
+
3
¸
i=1
k
i

˙
θ
i
∆θ
i
, (A.31)
where the last term is found from direct evaluation of the integral and taking the derivative in
(A.30). This yields:
˙
1 = −2ζ
3
ω
3
˙
θ
3
2
. (A.32)
Hence,
˙
1 ≤ 0 and the system may be analyzed using LaSalles invariance principle.
Equation (A.32) implies that 1 is a bounded function of time. Moreover, θ
i
(t) is a bounded function
of time and will converge to a limit set where
˙
1 = 0. On this limit set
˙
θ
3
=
¨
θ
3
= 0, according to
(A.32) and thus θ
3
= θ

3
is constant. Substituting this and (A.27) - (A.28) in (A.29), yields:
θ
1
+ θ
2
= −
ω
3
µ
θ

3
. (A.33)
Integrating (A.33) twice with respect to time yields:
θ
1
+ θ
2
= −
ω
3
µ
θ

3
t
2
+ c
1
t + c
2
(A.34)
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
68 A.3 Rotating Discs: Stability of the Synchronization Manifold
However, both θ
1
(t) and θ
2
(t) are bounded functions of time. This yields θ

3
= c
1
= 0. Substituting
θ
3
=
˙
θ
3
=
¨
θ
3
= 0 in (A.29) shows:
θ
1
= −θ
2
, (A.35)
which, after differentiation with respect to time, yields:
˙
θ
1
= −
˙
θ
2
, (A.36)
Summarizing, it has been shown that as t → ∞ any solution will converge to the set where:
θ
1
= −θ
2
,
˙
θ
1
= −
˙
θ
2
, θ
3
=
˙
θ
3
= 0 (A.37)
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
B Additional Data: System Identification 69
B Additional Data: System Identification
B.1 Parameter Values
Table B.1: Parameter values in equations (4.1) - (4.3).
Oscillator 1 Oscillator 2 Frame / Beam (
3
)
ω
i
[rad s
−1
] 12.5521 14.0337 9.7369
ζ
i
[−] 0.3362 0.4296 0.0409
c
i
[ms
−2
V
−1
] 20.9218 23.2465 1.2589
B.2 Phase Shifts Obtained by the Infinity Norm Algorithm
2 4 6 8 10 12 14 16 18 20
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
1.6
1.8
2
2p [−]
φ
k
[

]
(

π
)
Figure B.1: Convergence of the optimal phase shifts for a 25 sine multisine with flat, equally spaced
spectrum between 0.01 [Hz] and 25 [Hz], using the infinity norm algoritm (Pintelon and Schoukens,
2001).
Table B.2: Phase shifts obtained using the infinity norm algorithm φ
k
[−] (π) with N
f
= 25 up
to p = 10.
φ
1
= 1.5706 φ
6
= 1.8201 φ
11
= 0.6606 φ
16
= 0.8378 φ
21
= 0.1689
φ
2
= 0.1425 φ
7
= 1.0641 φ
12
= 1.4765 φ
17
= 1.9196 φ
22
= 0.0000
φ
3
= 1.2977 φ
8
= 0.0000 φ
13
= 1.7126 φ
18
= 1.9680 φ
23
= 1.3600
φ
4
= 1.7042 φ
9
= 0.7113 φ
14
= 1.8925 φ
19
= 0.0724 φ
24
= 0.1597
φ
5
= 1.4277 φ
10
= 0.6608 φ
15
= 1.5232 φ
20
= 1.2242 φ
25
= 0.6171
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
70 B.3 Nonlinear Force-Displacement Characteristics
Table B.3: Phase shifts obtained using the infinity norm algorithm φ
k
[−] (π) with N
f
= 50 up
to p = 2.
φ
1
= 0.5160 φ
11
= 2.9592 φ
21
= 2.0268 φ
31
= 0.3167 φ
41
= 0.0072
φ
2
= 1.0146 φ
12
= 0.8852 φ
22
= 0.1898 φ
32
= 1.2186 φ
42
= 0.6064
φ
3
= 1.2792 φ
13
= 1.2443 φ
23
= 1.3690 φ
33
= 1.5124 φ
43
= 0.8849
φ
4
= 0.1630 φ
14
= 1.6920 φ
24
= 0.5438 φ
34
= 1.1894 φ
44
= 1.7063
φ
5
= 0.2704 φ
15
= 1.3122 φ
25
= 1.6525 φ
35
= 0.7794 φ
45
= 0.9052
φ
6
= 0.6175 φ
16
= 1.5676 φ
26
= 0.7727 φ
36
= 0.3178 φ
46
= 0.5380
φ
7
= 1.8581 φ
17
= 0.7970 φ
27
= 0.3312 φ
37
= 0.8564 φ
47
= 0.8555
φ
8
= 0.4419 φ
18
= 0.4583 φ
28
= 0.1863 φ
38
= 0.7474 φ
48
= 1.7034
φ
9
= 1.4532 φ
19
= 0.0768 φ
29
= 1.2465 φ
39
= 1.0013 φ
49
= 1.8075
φ
10
= 0.3311 φ
20
= 0.1754 φ
30
= 0.9476 φ
40
= 1.0380 φ
50
= 0.4661
B.3 Nonlinear Force-Displacement Characteristics
Table B.4: Coefficients ρ
ij
of the force-displacement characteristics in the set-up.
i = 1 i = 2 i = 3
j = 0 0.000234722612437 0.005243242423923 −0.003305403062789
j = 1 0.091796394850297 0.084268742935300 0.680504615284765
j = 2 −0.005071505003798 −0.052699540025315 0.089803957869115
j = 3 0.001755823061963 0.015739329106770 0.203236186622692
j = 4 −0.000495321921394 0.063153998888216 −0.064473933604213
j = 5 0.000455358409592 0.020271796321899 0.017105175330557
B.4 Additional Figures
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−0.5
0
0.5


Measurement Simulation
0 10 20 30 40 50 60
−0.05
0
0.05
0.1
τ [−]
ξ
2
[

]
e
2
[

]
0 500 1000 1500
−1.5
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1


Measurement Simulation
0 500 1000 1500
−0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
τ [−]
ξ
2
[

]
e
2
[

]
(a) (b)
Figure B.2: Measured and simulated response to (a) an input signal v(t) and (b) a step signal with
increasing amplitude (red oscillator), (Top) Response, (Bottom) Error: e
r
= ξ
r,s
−ξ
r,m
, where ξ
r,s
denotes simulation results and ξ
r,m
the corresponding measured response.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
C Technical Specifications 71
C Technical Specifications
This appendix discusses the main technical issues present in the set-up. First, a scheme showing
the correct configuration of the experimental set-up and additional components is introduced as
well as a detailed schematic of the emergency brake system. Next, measurements of the masses of
the components of the set-up and the measured eigenfrequencies of the different parts are provided
and the selection of at data acquisition system and the calibration of the voice coils is discussed.
Moreover, a detailed discussion of the damping phenomena that are present in the set up is presented
and finally the specifications of the sensors and linear motors are presented.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
72 C.1 Connection Scheme Set-Up
C.1 Connection Scheme Set-Up
2
3
0

V
S
T
O
P
2
3
0

V
E
m
e
r
g
e
n
c
y

S
t
o
p
[
M
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l

&

P
o
w
e
r

/

H
e
a
t
]
A
m
p
l
i
f
i
e
r
3
5
-
1
2
1
8
A
m
p
l
i
f
i
e
r
3
5
-
1
2
1
8
A
m
p
l
i
f
i
e
r
3
5
-
1
2
1
4
A
m
p
l
i
f
i
e
r
3
5
-
1
2
1
9
T
U
e
D
A
C
s
B
L
N

S
N

0
5
1
8
0
0
4
T
U
e
D
A
C
s
B
L
N

S
N

0
5
1
8
0
3
9
S
e
t
-
u
p
S
i
g
n
a
l

H
u
b
P
C
P
o
w
e
r

(
2
3
0

V
)
,

n
o

s
a
f
e
t
y
P
o
w
e
r

(
2
3
0

V
)
,

s
a
f
e
t
y

p
r
o
t
e
c
t
e
d
A
c
t
u
a
t
o
r

s
i
g
n
a
l

(
0
-
5
V

&

2
4
V
,

8
W

a
f
t
.

a
m
p
.
)
M
e
c
h
a
n
i
c
a
l

s
a
f
e
t
y

l
o
o
p

(
2
4

V
)
S
e
n
s
o
r

p
o
w
e
r

(
2
4

V
)
A
D
C
1
A
D
C
2
D
A
C
1
D
A
C
2
A
D
C
1
A
D
C
2
D
A
C
1
D
A
C
2
A
l
l

c
o
m
p
o
n
e
n
t
s

a
r
e

g
r
o
u
n
d
e
d

t
o

a

c
o
m
m
o
n

g
r
o
u
n
d
.
F r o m b l u e o s c i l l a t o r
F r o m r e d o s c i l l a t o r
F r o m b e a m
T
o

b
l
u
e

o
s
c
i
l
l
a
t
o
r
T
o

r
e
d

o
s
c
i
l
l
a
t
o
r
T
o

b
e
a
m
Figure C.1: Configuration of the experimental set-up and additional components.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
C.2 Safety System 73
C.2 Safety System
Figure C.2: Electrical scheme of the safety system accompanying the experimental set-up.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
74 C.3 Masses and Eigenfrequencies of Set-up
C.3 Masses and Eigenfrequencies of Set-up
Table C.1: Measured weight of different parts of the set-up.
Part Mass [g] Comment
Main beam 2344.75
Horizontal leaf spring (big) 341.84 50% moving mass
Vertical leaf spring 323.48 50% moving mass
Oscillator frame (top) 363.42 Moves with beam
Oscillator frame (bottom) 140.50 200% of oscillator motion
Oscillator frame (lever) 42.53 150% of the oscillator motion
Oscillator body 208.85
Negative stiffness mechanism oscillator 43.19
Actuator (house) 326.99 Moves with beam
Actuator (coil) 56.03 Moves with oscillator
Standard leaf spring 1.238
Table C.2: Measured eigenfrequencies of the beam and oscillator without actuators and sensors.
Part Eigenfrequency [Hz]
Main beam 1.92
Oscillator (no sensor and actuator) 3.64
C.4 Data Acquisition Systems
Three of the Data Acquisition System (DACS) that have been considered are D-space, Quansar-
cards and the TUeDACS. The latter is a generic term for a collection of DACS. Taking into account
the fact that the system specifications might change in the future, the main aspects considered were:
1. Measurement speed
2. Price
3. Modular applicable (in case the number of sensors / actuator changes in the future)
Both D-space and the Quansar cart are rather expensive compared to the TUeDACS. Therefore
attention is focussed on the TUeDACS, which yielded five possible options:
1. TUeDACS/1 Advanced Quadrature /analog / digital interface
2. TUeDACS/1 Quadrature /analog / digital interface
3. TUeDACS/6 Analog Signal Generator
4. TUeDACS/3 1 Mhz 12 bit Parallel Sampling ADC
5. TUeDACS/1 MicroGiant
Options 1 and 2 are still obtainable, but have been replaced by the more advanced MicroGiant sys-
tem (option 5). Therefore the combination of option 3 (for actuation control) and 4 (for sampling
sensor data) and the MicroGiant remain as final options. Although the combination of 3 and 4
provides the possibility to control four incoming and outgoing signals, this option would require the
purchase of two separate systems. The MicroGiant system, on the other hand, is already present
in the D&C laboratory and is modular applicable. Since each MicroGiant allows for two incoming
analog signals and two outgoing analog signals the present set-up requires two MicroGiant systems,
which can be connected to one PC via a standard USB hub. Futhermore, the MicroGiant system
is capable of measuring with frequencies up to 8 kHz (1 kHz without data loss, 4 kHz without
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
C.5 Relative Calibration of the Voice Coil 75
technical modification).
Summarizing, the MicroGiant is the least expensive option that has been considered. Furthermore,
the possible measurement speed meets the present needs and modular applicability allows for future
modifications to the set-up.
C.5 Relative Calibration of the Voice Coil
In order to compensate for differences between the different actuator / amplifier combinations within
the set up, each of the oscillators has been fixed to the fixed world sequentially. Next an identical ,
but sign reversed, sine wave is supplied to actuator acting on the beam and to the actuator acting
on the red or blue actuator. The resulting motion will be zero if the actuator strengths (actuator
and amplifier) are equal. By multiplying the sine wave applied to the red or blue actuator with a
gain γ ∈ [0 2] the nett force F
beam
− F
blue/red
is varied slowly. The results of these experiments
are shown in Figure C.3. As expected the amplitude of the oscillation reaches a minimum if the
blue / red and black actuator are in equilibrium. This occurs at γ
b
= 1.078 [−] and γ
r
= 1.109 [−].
Therefore, it can be concluded that the blue actuator is 7.8% ’weaker’ than the black one and the
red actuator is 10.9% weaker as well. In future experiments this discrepancy is compensated by
supplying the appropriate gain to the output signals that is supplied to the actuators.
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
−0.4
−0.3
−0.2
−0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
γ
b
[−]
ξ
1
[

]
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
−0.4
−0.3
−0.2
−0.1
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
ξ
2
[

]
γ
r
[−]
(a) (b)
Figure C.3: Results of the relative actuator calibration experiment. (a) Blue oscillator, (b) Red
oscillator.
C.6 Damping Analysis
This Section discusses the presence and possible causes for the damping that is observed in the
system. First, the possible causes for viscous damping are investigated and damping due to air
friction is specifically ruled out as a candidate for this type of friction. Finally, the effects of
hysteresis and dry friction / stick-slip are identified and methods are proposed to minimize these
influences. Please note the use of non-dimensionless parameters in this Section, in order to provide
easily applicable results.
C.6.1 Viscous Damping
One of the technical issues with the set-up is the fact that the voice coil actuators (linear motors)
appear to damp the motion of the oscillators much more than was expected. This damping appears
to be a linear function of the velocity of the coils. However, the laws of physics tell us that if a coil is
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
76 C.6 Damping Analysis
not short circuited nor connected to an amplifier there should be no force applied to the coil when
moving through a magnetic field. Therefore three possible causes for the fact that a (relatively
strong) damping force is present in the system, are suggested:
1. A partly internally short circuited coil.
2. Resistance from the air moving in and out of the coil chamber through the narrow slit.
3. Current running though parts of the linear motor, other than the coil.
The first option is highly unlikely because all three motors in the set-up show the same damping
behavior. It is therefore disregarded for now. The second option will be discussed in more detail in
the following paragraph.
Consider the schematic representation of a linear motor / voice coil in Figure C.4. The coil is
moving downwards with a velocity v
c
and air from a chamber with radius ρ is pushed out of the
chamber through a narrow slit of width t. Note that the system depicted in Figure C.4 is rotation
symmetric around the vertical axis. Next, the (approximate) drag force F
d
exerted on the coil as a
result of the air flow through the narrow slit is computed.
t
2
t
2
v
a
(ξ)

ρ
ξ
v
c
Coil
Stator
Figure C.4: Schematic representation of a voice coil actuator.
Assuming constant pressure throughout the system, the average velocity of the air in the slit ¯ v
a
is
obtained from conservation of volume:
¯ v
a
= v
c
A
chamber
A
slit
(C.1)
However, the velocity profile of the air in the slit is a Poiseuille flow and follows a parabolic profile
as depicted in Figure C.4. The Poiseuille profile may be described as a function of the spatial
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
C.6 Damping Analysis 77
coordinate ξ perpendicular to the slit walls as:
v(ξ) = αξ
2
+ βξ + γ (C.2)
The coefficients α, β, γ ∈ R are obtained from three conditions:
1. Symmetry of the Poiseuille profile:
dva

ξ=0
= 0
2. Conservation of volume (transfer):
t
2


t
2
v
a
(ξ) dξ =
t
2


t
2
¯ v
a

3. No-slip condition at the wall: v(ξ = ±
t
2
) = 0
Condition 1 immediately yields β = 0 and conditions 2 and 3 yield α = −
12
11
¯ va
t
2
and γ =
12
11
¯ v
a
. This
yields the velocity profile:
v
a
(ξ) = −¯ v
a
12
11

ξ
t

2
−1

(C.3)
The drag force exerted on the coil can now be approximated by:
F
d
= ηA
wall
∇v
a
(ξ)[
ξ=
t
2
, (C.4)
where η = 13.30 10
−6
m
2
s
−1
is the kinematic viscosity of air at room temperature (20

C) and
A
wall
is the area of the coil-wall in the slit. Furthermore:
∇v
a
(ξ)[
ξ=
t
2
=
12
11
¯ v
a
t
. (C.5)
Given that ρ = 3 10
−2
m, t = 0.5 10
−3
m, ℓ = 4.83 10
−2
m and v
c
reaches a maximum of
approximately v
c
= 0.15 ms
−1
and
A
chamber
= πρ
2
A
slit
= π

ρ +
t
2

2

ρ −
t
2

2

= 2ρt,
yielding,
¯ v
a
=
ρ
2t
v
c
= 4.5 ms
−1
, (C.6)
and
∇v
a
(ξ)[
ξ=t
=
12
11
¯ v
a
t
= 1.0 10
4
ms
−2
. (C.7)
Therefore, with A
wall
= 2πρℓ = 9.1 10
−3
m
2
:
F
d
= ηA
wall
∇v
a
(ξ)[
ξ=t
= 1.2 10
−3
N (C.8)
Given that the mass of an oscillator is approximately m
o
= 0.6 kg, this drag force will result in a
maximal deceleration of a
o
= −
1.2·10
−3
0.6
= 2 10
−3
ms
−2
, which can by no means be responsible for
the damping observed in the system.
Please note that the actual influence of air damping will be much less since the velocity used is the
maximal velocity reached by the system, which is only obtained for a small fraction of the actual
motion. Furthermore, the area used in (C.8), that is actual causing the drag, will be much smaller
during most of the motion since only a fraction of ℓ will be located in the slot. Concluding, the frac-
tion of damping that is caused by airflow through the slits in the motor is small and will be neglected.
This leaves the final option ’Current running though parts of the linear motor, other than the coil’
as the most probable cause of damping. Checking with the manufacturer of the motors support
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
78 C.6 Damping Analysis
this conclusion since the engines used in the set-up have aluminium covers that allow a current to
flow, even if the coils are disconnected. Engines with polymer covers exist, but have regretfully not
been used here. Now that the cause for the damping is known, the damping itself does not cause a
particular problem, since the damping caused by back emf is a linear function of velocity and may
easily be compensated by an appropriate feed forward.
C.6.2 Hysteresis and Dry Friction
With the main cause for the damping identified, the only remaining issue is the shift in equilibrium
position that is observed in measurements. Two candidates for the cause of this issue are:
1. Hysteresis
2. Dry friction.
Both of these effects may be observed when exiting the individual oscillators and beam by a slow
saw tooth in force. If no hysteresis is present the mass should follow the exact same trajectory
moving from left to right as moving back from right to left. Dry friction will become apparent from
jumps or steps in the measurements, rather than a smooth curve. An example of such measurement,
performed with the red oscillator is presented in Figure C.5. In this experiment the oscillator was
moved from left to right over it’s entire stroke in 60 seconds. The experiment was repeated five times.
From Figure C.5 it is observed that in this case both hysteresis and dry friction appear to be present
in the subsystem. Clearly the oscillator follows a different trajectory moving ’upwards’ then when
moving ’downwards’. Here δ represents the maximum change in equilibrium position that may be
observed as a result from both hysteresis and dry friction.
-10 -8 -6 -4 -2 0 2 4 6 8
-0.1
-0.08
-0.06
-0.04
-0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
0.08
0.1
F
[
V
]
F
[
V
]
x [mm] x [mm]
δ
stick
slip
(a) (b)
Figure C.5: Stick-slip and hysteresis in red oscillator.
Although the experiment presented in Figure C.5 indicates that friction is indeed present in the
system (and provides information about where the problem is located) it does not tell exactly what
role hysteresis plays. Experiments with smaller force maxima which make sure the dry friction is
never reached show that even then δ = 0, thus hysteresis is present in addition to the observed
friction. However δ as a result of friction is much larger than δ caused by hysteresis. To further
quantify this reasoning 10 sequential experiments have been performed on each oscillator and the
beam. In these experiments the amplitude of the saw tooth force was linearly varied between zero
and the maximal allowable force (0.42 V for the beam, and 0.105 V for the oscillators). For each
experiment δ is computed and plotted versus the distance traveled over half a saw tooth, i.e. half
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
C.6 Damping Analysis 79
the difference between the maximum and minimum measured position). The results are depicted
in Figure C.6.
0 2 4 6 8 10 12
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4


Blue Oscillator
Red Oscillator
Beam
δ
[
m
m
]
ϑ [mm]
Figure C.6: Hysteresis and friction influences as a function of the amplitude of oscillation. Here δ
represents the uncertainty in equilibrium position after traveling with an amplitude ϑ.
From Figure C.6 and the individual measurements the following may be concluded:
Red Oscillator The red oscillator contains a dry friction element at about 6 mm from its equi-
librium position. Since the cause for this friction is located in either the engine or the sensor
the problem can not be solved directly. Instead the part of the stroke of the red oscillator
that shows this behavior x ≥ 5.8 mm will no longer be used in experiments. At this position
a physical barrier has been created.
Blue Oscillator The blue oscillator only contains hysteresis, which does not cause a significant
problem at this time.
Beam The beam also contains hysteresis, but the effects are much stronger than in the oscillators
for larger movements. However, in normal operation mode the movements of the beam stay
confined to small oscillations and this hysteresis is therefore not expected to cause significant
problems.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
80 C.7 Linear Variable Differential Transformer
C.7 Linear Variable Differential Transformer
This appendix provides the manufacturers specifications regarding the LVDT position sensors (mea-
surement range (MB): 0 ... 25 mm) used in the set-up. Copyright and responsibility remain with
the manufacturer (WayCon Positionsmesstechnik GmbH, info@waycon.de).
Source: www.waycon.de
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
• Messbereiche 2...200 mm
• Linearität 0,3% (0,20% auf Anfrage)
• ø12 mm, Spann-ø 8mm h6
• Ausgang: AC, 0...10 V, 0...5 V, 4...20 mA
• Mit Extern- oder integrierter Kabelelektronik
• Wiederholgenauigkeit bis zu 1,5 µm
• Gehäuse aus vernickeltem Stahl
• Betriebstemperatur -40...+120°C (150°C optional)
• Sonderbauformen für Hydraulik- und Druckbereich
Serie
SM ø12 mm
Induktiver Miniatur Wegaufnehmer
04.05.06
Elektronik IMA Externelektronik (Schaltschrankeinbau) KAB Kabelelektronik
Ausgangssignal 0...20 mA, 4...20 mA (Last <500 Ohm) 0...20 mA, 4...20 mA (Last <100 Ohm)
0...5 V, ±5 V (Last >5 kOhm) 0...5 V, ±5 V (Last >5 kOhm)
0...10 V, ±10 V (Last >10 kOhm) 0...10 V (Last >10 kOhm)
Temperaturdrift Nullpunkt 150 ppm/°C, Endwert 400 ppm/°C 460 ppm/°C
Restwelligkeit < 20m Veff < 20m Veff
Grenzfrequenz 300 Hz/-3 dB (Butterworth 5‘ter Ordnung) -
Einstellbereich Offset ±20%, Verstärkung ±50% -
Isolationswiderstand > 1 GOhm bei 500 VDC -
Isolationsfestigkeit Versorgung <> Ausgang 500 VDC -
Spannungsversorgung 24 VDC (18..36 V) oder 15 VDC (9..18 V) 24 VDC (18..36 V) od. 15 VDC (9..18 V)
Stromaufnahme <150/80 mA mit/ohne Last (Vers. 24 VDC) 65 mA (24 VDC), 140 mA (12 VDC)
<300/100 mA mit/ohne Last (Vers. 15 VDC)
Sensorversorgung 3 Veff, 3 kHz 3,0 Veff (15...26V-Versorgung)
2,4 Veff (12...20V-Versorgung)
Betriebstemperatur 0...+60°C 0... +60°C
Lagertemperaturbereich -20...+80°C -20... +80°C
Material Gehäuse erfüllt UL94-VO Aluminium trovalisiert
Montage auf DIN EN-Tragschienen keine
Technische Daten
Sensor
Messbereiche [mm] 0...2 0...5 0...10 0...25 0...50 0...100 0...200
Linearität 0,3% (0,20% optional)
Ausführung Taster (bis MB 0...50), freier Anker, Stößel mit/ohne Lagerung
Lagerwerkstoff Phosphor-Bronze
Schutzklasse IP65 oder IP68 / 10 bar
Vibrationsfestigkeit DIN IEC68T2-6 10 G
Schockfestigkeit DIN IEC68T2-27 200 G / 2 ms
Nennspeisespannung/Frequenz 3 Veff / 3 kHz
Speise-Frequenzbereich 2...10 kHz
Temperaturbereich -40...+120°C (150° optional, H-Option)
Befestigung ø8 mm h6 Spanndurchmesser oder ø12 mm Klemmblöcke
Anschluss Kabelanschluss 4-pol. PVC-Schirm-Kabel bzw. PTFE-Kabel (Option H) oder
M12-Steckeranschluss, verschraubbar
Gehäuse Vernickelter Stahl
Kabel -PVC (standard) ø4,7 mm, 0,16 mm², 2 verdrillte PVC-isolierte Paare
-PTFE (optional) ø3,7 mm, 0,24 mm², max. Temp. 205°C
-PUR (optional) ø3,9 mm, 0,14 mm², halogenfrei, hochflexibel
max. zul. Kabellänge 100 m zwischen Sensor und Externelektronik IMA
Federtaster (bis MB ±50mm)
Federkraft typ. min./max. [N] 0,5/0,6 0,6/0,7 0,6/0,7 0,7/0,75 0,75/0,8
max. Bewegungsfrequenz d. Tastspitze 55 50 50 35 20
bei 1 mm Hub [Hz]
Federkonstante Zugfeder [N/mm] 0,016 0,011 0,007 0,004
Gewicht (ohne Kabel) [g] ca. 48 ca. 55 ca. 72 ca. 105
Lebensdauer >10 Mio. Zyklen
freier Anker / Stößel
max. Beschleunigung d. Ankers/Stößels 100 G
Lebensdauer unendlich
Gewicht (ohne Kabel) [g] ca. 36 ca. 42 ca. 47 ca. 59 ca. 85 ca. 136 ca. 238
Das Ausgangssignal bezieht sich auf den elektrischen Messbereich. Wird der
Sensor außerhalb des elektrischen Messbereiches betrieben, bzw. der
Messbereich überfahren, so befindet sich das Signal auch außerhalb des
definierten Bereiches (also >10 V/20 mA oder <0 V/4 mA,
in Zeichnung: >100% oder <0%).
Bitte beachten Sie dies z.B. bei Steuerungen mit Kabelbrucherkennung unter 4 mA
oder bei maximalen Eingangsspannungen >10 V von Messgeräten. Installieren Sie
gegebenenfalls den Sensor vor Anschluss an die Messauswertung.
Signal-Laufrichtung: Bewegt sich der Stößel in den Sensor (z.B. Federtaster
eingedrückt), so wird das Signal kleiner. Wird der Stößel herausbewegt, so
vergrößert sich das Ausgangssignal. Die Signal-Laufrichtung kann auch invertiert
werden.
0 20 40 60 80 100 -20
20
40
60
80
100
-20
120
120
Messbereich [%]
Ausgangs-
signal
[%]
elektrischer
Messbereich
Ausfahren Einfahren
(10 V/20 mA)
- 2 -
Technische Abmessung
Gehäuselänge
Kabel axial [mm]
0...2
0...5
0...10
0...25
0...50
0...100
0...200
58
64
74
104
154
254
454
Messbereich (MB)
[mm]
Ankerlänge
[mm]
Stößellänge
[mm]
22
25
30
45
70
120
220
54
60
70
100
150
250
450
Ausführung mit freiem Anker oder Stößel
Stößel gelagert
Federtaster (bis max. MB 0...50)
Bitte beachten Sie, dass der angegebene Anhub und Endhub (siehe Kreis) Richtwerte sind. Bei
Kalibrierung des Sensors vor Auslieferung wird auf maximale Linearität geachtet. Ein Abgleich
auf die exakten Werte ist jedoch möglich. Bitte geben Sie dies bei Bestellung gesondert an.
Gehäuselänge
Stecker M12
[mm]
67
73
83
113
163
263
463
68
78
84
114
164
264
464
Gehäuselänge
Kabel radial
[mm]
- 3 -
Ausgänge (optional)
Bitte beachten Sie, dass sich Nullpunkt und Verstärkung bei großen Leitungslängen zwischen Sensor und Elektronik verschieben
können. Installieren Sie daher den Sensor mit der erforderlichen Leitungslänge zur Elektronik und nehmen Sie dann die Einstellung
von Nullpunkt und Verstärkung vor.
1. Stößel in Nullage - Offset einstellen.
Verfahren Sie den Sensor in den Nullpunkt des Messbereiches
Stellen Sie das Offset-Potentiometer auf 0 mA bzw. 0 V Ausgangssignal ein.
2. Stößel in Endlage - Verstärkung einstellen.
Verfahren Sie den Sensor auf den mechanischen Endpunkt (Stößel ausgefahren).
Stellen Sie das Verstärkungs-Potentiometer auf 16 mA / 10 V / 5 V Ausgangssignal ein.
3. Offset einstellen (4...20 mA Ausgang).
Stellen Sie mit dem Offset-Potentiometer 20 mA (+4 mA) das Ausgangssignal ein.
Hinweis zur Richtungsumkehr:
Sollten Sie ein invertiertes Ausgangssignal benötigen (20...4 mA / 10...0 V / 5...0 V), so tauschen Sie die Klemmen 6 und 8
(Sekundärspule) an der Externelektronik.
Einstellung von Nullpunkt und Verstärkung der Elektronik
Kabelausgang axial
Kabelausgang radial
Steckerausgang (Kabel mit geradem oder Winkelstecker)
Geräte mit radialem Kabelausgang besitzen standardmäßig eine
Durchgangsbohrung. Bitte verwenden Sie diese Variante für die
Verwendung unter starker Schmutzeinwirkung. Durch die Bewegung des
Stößels wird die Verschmutzung aus dem Sensor nach hinten
abtransportiert. Die Standard-Kabellänge beträgt 2 m.
Für normale Anwendungen kann der Sensor auf Wunsch auch rückseitig
verschlossen geliefert werden (ohne Aufpreis). Bitte geben Sie das bei
der Bestellung gesondert an.
Die Kombination der Optionen H (150°C) und KR (Kabelausgang radial)
ist nicht möglich.
Standard optional
Geräte mit axialem Kabelausgang besitzen die kleinste Gehäuselänge.
Der Biegeradius bei Verlegung sollte den dreifachen Kabeldurchmesser
nicht unterschreiten. Die Standard-Kabellänge beträgt 2 m.
Geräte mit der Option H für Temperaturen bis 150°C besitzen eine PG-
Verschraubung mit SW14.
Für Geräte mit Steckerausgang muss das Kabel gesondert bestellt
werden. Hierbei stehen Kabel mit geradem Stecker oder mit
Winkelstecker zur Verfügung.
Der Stecker wird durch Verschraubung (M12) gegen versehentliches
Abziehen gesichert. Die Kabellängen betragen 2/5/10 m.
Die Steckverbindung hat Schutzklasse IP65.
Die gesamte Sensorlänge mit Winkelstecker beträgt:
Gehäuselänge Stecker M12 (siehe Tabelle) + 20 mm (Winkelstecker)
Gehäuselänge Stecker M12 (siehe Tabelle) + 37mm (gerader Stecker)
Folgende Sonderbauformen erhalten Sie auf Wunsch:
- Sondermessbereiche (z.B. X mm)
- Druckdichte Geräte mit Einbauflansch
- Geräte für Unterwassereinsatz
- Geräte mit verkürztem Gehäuse
Standard Option H
Steckerbelegung
- 4 -
Anschluss
Die Externelektronik IMA2-LVDT ist für den Schaltschrankeinbau
(DIN-Schienenmontage) konzipiert. Der Anschluß für den Wegauf-
nehmer ist als Stecker mit Schraubklemmen ausgeführt.
Externelektronik IMA
Bei schwierigen EMV-Bedingungen besteht die
Möglichkeit, die Elektronik bis zu 100 m entfernt in
einem Schaltschrank unterzubringen.
Für die Verdrahtung zwischen Sensor und
Externelektronik ist ein paarweise verdrilltes Kabel
(Twin-Twisted-Pair, 4-Adrig, Mindestquerschnitt 0,5
mm²) mit Einfach- oder Doppel-Abschirmung zu
verwenden. Vorzugsweise ist der Schirm im
Schaltschrank nahe der Elektronik zu erden.
Das Sensorgehäuse wird über das Maschinen-
chassis geerdet. Die Kabellänge sollte wegen der
Störbeeinflussung 100 m nicht überschreiten.
Versorgung
Signal-
ausgang
Wegaufnehmer Klemm-
kasten
Verbindungs-
kabel
Elektronik
Installation im
Schaltschrank
prim.
sek.
Schirm
Externelektronik IMA
(für DIN-Schienenmontage)
Abmessungen:
Kalbelelektronik KAB
n.c.
Primär 2
Sekundär 2
Schirm*
Sekundär 1
Primär 1
n.c.
Phase
Ampl.
Verst.
Offset
4
5
6
7
8
9
1
0
1 2 3
11 12 13
Erde*
Gnd (24 VDC)
24 VDC
Schirm*
Signalausgang
Gnd (Signal)
* Die Klemmen 1, 7 u. 13 sind geräteintern verbunden
Kabelbelegung:
braun/rot: Versorgung V+
blau: GND
schwarz/grün: Ausg. GND
weiss: Ausg. Signal
AC-Ausgang
Kabelbelegung:
weiss (5): Primär 2
grün/schwarz (6): Sekundär 2
rot/braun (9): Primär 1
blau (8):Sekundär 1
rot
weiss
blau
grün
Kabelbelegung für PTFE-Leitung:
weiss (5): Primär 2
grün (6): Sekundär 2
gelb (9): Primär 1
braun (8): Sekundär 1
Kabelbelegung für PTFE-Leitung:
gelb: Versorgung V+
braun: GND
grün: Ausg. GND
weiss: Ausg. Signal
Standardgemäss befindet sich die
Kabelelektronik 1 m vor Kabelende.
Auf Wunsch ist diese jedoch an beliebiger
Stelle konfektionierbar. Bitte bei Bestellung
angeben.
Anschlussseite Sensorseite
Kabellänge
Sensor-Elektronik
1 m, 4 m oder 9 m
Kabellänge 1 m
- 5 -
Bestellcode
Messbereich [mm]
0... 2
0....5
0...10
0...25
0...50
0...100 (nicht für Federtaster)
0...200 (nicht für Federtaster)
2
5
10
25
50
100
200
(nicht Opt. H) Stecker M12
Axialer Kabelausgang
(nicht Opt. H) Radialer Kabelausgang
SA
KA
KR
SM
IP65
IP68
(nur mit PTFE-Kabel) Temp. 150°C
verbesserte Linearität 0,20%
-
IP68
H
L20
Preise
SM5 0...5 mm 205 €
SM25 0...25 mm 243 €
SM100 0...100 mm 297 €
Optionen:
A freier Anker -
S Stößel 16 €
SG Stößel gelagert 41 €
T Federtaster 51 €
IP68 Wasserdicht bis 10 Bar 78 €
H erhöhter Temp.-Bereich 150°C 46 €
L20 verbesserte Linearität 0,20%
(auf Anfrage) 100 €
Elektronik:
KAB integrierte Kabelelektronik 174 €
IMA Schaltschrankelektronik 264 €
SM2 0...2 mm 184 €
SM10 0...10 mm 225 €
SM50 0...50 mm 250 €
Ausführung
freier Anker
Stößel
Stößel gelagert
Federtaster (bis max. 0...50 mm)
A
S
SG
T
Anschlusskabel:
Kabel mit geradem Stecker M12 (SA)
K4P2M-S 2 m 14 €
K4P5M-S 5 m 17 €
K4P10M-S 10 m 22 €
Kabel mit Winkelstecker M12 (SA)
K4P2M-SW 2 m 14 €
K4P5M-SW 5 m 17 €
K4P10M-SW 10 m 22 €
Festes Anschlusskabel (2,0 m Standard, KA, KR):
je weiterer Meter PVC-Kabel 6 € /m
je weiterer Meter PUR-Kabel 6 € /m
je weiterer Meter PTFE-Kabel (-H) 10 € /m
Externelektronik
Kabelelektronik
IMA-3A
KAB
Spannungsversorgung
12 VDC (nicht 10/±5V-Ausgang)
24 VDC
12 V
24 V
Ausgang
0...20 mA
4...20 mA
0...10 V
0...5 V
± 5 V
± 10 V
020A
420A
10V
5V
±5V
±10V
SM200 0...200 mm 355 €
- 6 -
Head Office
Mehlbeerenstr. 4
82024 Taufkirchen
Tel. +49 (0)89 67 97 13-0
Fax +49 (0)89 67 97 13-250
Office Köln
Kierberger Str. 24
50321 Brühl
Tel. +49 (0)2232 56 79 44
Fax +49 (0)2232 56 79 45
WayCon Positionsmesstechnik GmbH
e-mail: info@waycon.de
internet: www.waycon.de
Diese Daten können jederzeit ohne Vorankündigung geändert werden
C.8 Linear Motor (Voice Coil Actuators) 87
C.8 Linear Motor (Voice Coil Actuators)
This appendix provides the manufacturers specifications regarding the voice coil actuators (type
NCC10-15-023-1X) used in the set-up. Copyright and responsibility remain with the manufacturer
(H2W Technologies, Inc.).
Source: www.h2wtech.de
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
88 C.8 Linear Motor (Voice Coil Actuators)
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
6
-
3
2

x
.
2
0

D
p
M
t
g

H
o
l
e
s

(
2

P
l
)
.
6
0
0
.
3
0
0

6
-
3
2

x

.
2
0

D
p

M
t
g

H
o
l
e
s


(
3

P
l
)
1
.
0
0
0
.
5
0
0
B
T
I
T
L
E
D
W
G

#
M
A
T
E
R
I
A
L
F
I
N
I
S
H
D
R
A
W
N
R
E
V
p
e
r
m
i
s
s
i
o
n

f
r
o
m

H
2
W

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
,

I
n
c
.
.
0
1
0





F
I
L
L
E
T
S




A
N
D






























w
w
w
.
h
2
w
t
e
c
h
.
c
o
m
N
C
C
1
0
-
1
5
-
0
2
3
-
1
X
O
O
G
3
0
-
0
1
1
4
A
P
P
R
O
V
E
D
D
A
T
E
D
A
T
E
3
-
2
9
-
0
2
F
G
W
3
-
2
9
-
0
2
E
C
N
H
2
W

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
,

I
n
c
.






T
e
l
:



(
6
6
1
)
-
7
0
2
-
9
3
4
6



F
a
x
:

(
6
6
1
)
-
7
0
2
-
9
3
4
8
2
8
3
1
0
-
C


A
v
e

C
r
o
c
k
e
r



V
a
l
e
n
c
i
a
,

C
A



9
1
3
5
5


U
S
A
.
X










R
e
m
o
v
e

A
l
l

B
u
r
r
s

a
n
d

S
h
a
r
p

E
d
g
e
s
.
0
2
0




C
O
R
N
E
R
S


.
0
1
0
U
N
L
E
S
S

S
P
E
C
I
F
I
E
D

O
T
H
E
R
W
I
S
E
:
A
l
l

d
i
m
e
n
s
i
o
n
s

a
r
e

i
n

i
n
c
h
e
s
S
t
a
n
d
a
r
d

T
o
l
e
r
a
n
c
e
s

a
r
e

a
s

f
o
l
l
o
w
s
.
X
X
X




.
0
0
5





A
N
G
L
E
S








±
1
°
.
X
X







T
h
e
s
e

d
r
a
w
i
n
g
s

a
n
d

s
p
e
c
i
f
i
c
a
t
i
o
n
s

a
r
e

t
h
e

p
r
o
p
e
r
t
y

o
f

H
2
W

T
e
c
h
n
o
l
o
g
i
e
s
,

I
n
c
.

T
h
e
y

a
r
e

i
s
s
u
e
d

i
n


c
o
n
f
i
d
e
n
c
e

a
n
d

s
h
a
l
l

n
o
t

b
e

r
e
p
r
o
d
u
c
e
d
,

c
o
p
i
e
d
,

o
r

u
s
e
d


w
i
t
h
o
u
t

w
r
i
t
t
e
n

1
3
9
3
P
o
w
e
r

l
e
a
d
s
1
.
5
0
0
1
.
9
1
0
2
.
1
6
0
1
.
2
3
0
M
o
t
o
r

P
/
N
N
C
C
1
0
-
1
5
-
0
2
3
-
1
X
S
t
r
o
k
e
1
.
0
0
"
R
a
d
i
a
l

C
l
e
a
r
a
n
c
e
0
.
0
1
0
"

p
e
r

s
i
d
e
M
o
v
i
n
g

M
a
s
s
5
6

g
r
a
m
s
T
o
t
a
l

M
a
s
s
3
7
5

g
r
a
m
s
R
e
s
i
s
t
a
n
c
e
7
.
3

o
h
m
s
F
o
r
c
e

C
o
n
s
t
a
n
t
0
.
8
1

L
B
S
/
(
W
a
t
t
)
^
1
/
2
C
o
n
t
i
n
u
o
u
s

F
o
r
c
e
2
.
3
0

L
B
S
P
e
a
k

F
o
r
c
e
6
.
9
0

L
B
S
P
o
w
e
r

I
n

@

1
0
0
%

D
u
t
y
8

W
A
T
T
S
S
P
E
C
I
F
I
C
A
T
I
O
N
S
90 C.8 Linear Motor (Voice Coil Actuators)
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
D Related Papers and Conferences 91
D Related Papers and Conferences
In this section the ENOC 2008 paper related to this project is supplied. This paper is presented at
the ENOC 2008 conference in St. Petersburg.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
92 D Related Papers and Conferences
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
ENOC-2008, Saint Petersburg, Russia, June, 30–July, 4 2008
SYNCHRONIZATION BETWEEN COUPLED
OSCILLATORS: AN EXPERIMENTAL APPROACH
David Rijlaarsdam
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Eindhoven University of Technology
The Netherlands
D.J.Rijlaarsdam@student.tue.nl
Alexander Yu. Pogromsky
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Eindhoven University of Technology
The Netherlands
A.Pogromski@tue.nl
Henk Nijmeijer
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Eindhoven University of Technology
The Netherlands
H.Nijmeijer@tue.nl
Abstract
We present an experimental set-up that allows to study
both controlled and uncontrolled synchronization be-
tween a variety of different oscillators. Two experi-
ments are presented where uncontrolled synchroniza-
tion between two types of identical oscillators is inves-
tigated. First, uncontrolled synchronization between
two Duffing oscillators is investigated and second, un-
controlled synchronization between two coupled rotat-
ing elements is discussed. In addition to experimental
results we provide both analytical and numerical results
that support the experimental results.
Key words
Synchronization, Experiment, Duffing oscillator,
Huygens experiments
1 Introduction
In the 17th century the Dutch scientist Christiaan Huy-
gens observed a peculiar phenomenon when two pen-
dula clocks, mounted on a common frame, seemed to
’sympathize’ as he described it. What he observed was
that both clocks adjusted their rhythm towards anti-
phase synchronized motion. This effect is now known
as frequency or Huygens synchronization and is caused
by weak interaction between the clocks due to small
displacements of the connecting frame. In (Bennett et
al., 2002; Pantaleone, 2002; Senator, 2006; Kuznetsov
et al., 2007) an extended analysis of this phenomenon
is presented. In (Oud et al., 2006) the authors present
an experimental study of Huygens synchronization and
finally, in (Pogromsky et al., 2003; Pogromsky et
al., 2006) a study of the uncontrolled as well as the
controlled Huygens experiment is presented.
In this paper we present an experimental set-up
(Tillaart, 2006) that allows to study both controlled and
uncontrolled synchronization between a variety of dif-
ferent oscillators. In section 2 the set-up is introduced
and we present the dynamical properties of the system.
Furthermore, we present the means by which we are
able to modify these properties to represent a variety of
different oscillators. Next, in section 4, we present an
experiment of the synchronization of two Duffing os-
cillators. We analyze the stability of the synchroniza-
tion manifold and continue with numerical and experi-
mental results. Section 5 presents an experiment where
the set-up is adjusted to model two rotating eccentric
discs which are coupled through a third disc mounted
on a common axis. Conclusions and future research are
presented in section 6.
2 Experimental Set-up
In order to experimentally study synchronization be-
tween coupled oscillators a set-up consisting of two os-
cillators, mounted on a common frame has been de-
veloped (see figure 1 and 2). The parameters of pri-
Figure 1. Photograph of the set-up.
mary interest are presented in table 1. The set-up con-
tains tree actuators and position sensors on all degrees
of freedom. Furthermore, although the masses of the
oscillators (m) are fixed, the mass of the connecting
beam (M) may be varied by a factor 10. This allows
for mechanical adjustment of the coupling strength.
Table 1. Parameters in experimental set-up.
Oscillator 1 Oscillator 2 Frame / beam
Mass m m M
Stiffness κ
1
(·) κ
2
(·) κ
3
(·)
Damping β
1
(·) β
2
(·) β
3
(·)
x
1
x
2
x
3
κ
1
κ
2
κ
3
β
1
β
2
β
3
m m
M
F
1
F
2
F
3
Figure 2. Schematic representation of the set-up.
A schematic representation of the set-up is depicted in
figure 2 and the equations of motion are:
m¨ x
1
= −κ
1
(x
1
−x
3
) −β
1
( ˙ x
1
− ˙ x
3
) + F
1
(2.1)
m¨ x
2
= −κ
2
(x
2
−x
3
) −β
2
( ˙ x
2
− ˙ x
3
) + F
2
(2.2)
M¨ x
3
= κ
1
(x
1
−x
3
) + κ
2
(x
2
−x
3
) (2.3)
− κ
3
(x
3
) + β
1
( ˙ x
1
− ˙ x
3
) + β
2
( ˙ x
2
− ˙ x
3
) −β
3
( ˙ x
3
)
+ F
3
−F
1
−F
2
,
where m, M ∈ R
>0
and x
i
∈ D
i
⊂ R, i = 1, 2, 3
are the masses and displacements of the oscillators and
the beam respectively. Functions κ
i
: R → R, β
i
:
R → R describe the stiffness and damping character-
istics present in the system. F
i
are the actuator forces
that may be determined such that the experimental set-
up models a large variety of different dynamical sys-
tems (see 2.1).
The stiffness and damping in the system are found to
be very well approximated by:
κ
i
(q
i
) =
5

j=1
k
ij
q
j
(2.4)
β
i
( ˙ q
i
) = b
i
˙ q
i
, (2.5)
where q
1
= x
1
− x
3
, q
2
= x
2
− x
3
and q
3
= x
3
. The
values of k
ij
and b
i
∀ i = 1, 2, 3 have been experimen-
tally obtained and will be used to modify the systems’
properties in the sequel.
2.1 Adjustment of the Systems’ Properties
In order to experiment with different types of oscil-
lators, the derived properties (stiffness and damping)
are adjusted. Note that, since we know the damping
and stiffness present in the system and we can fully
measure the state of the system, we may adjust these
properties, using actuators, to represent any dynamics
we want. This allows modeling of different types of
springs (linear, cubic), gravity (pendula) and any other
desired effect within the limits of the hardware. In the
next part of this paper we present two examples of this
type of modulation. The system is first adapted to an-
alyze synchronization between Duffing oscillators and
secondly to analyze the synchronizing dynamics of two
coupled rotating eccentric discs under the influence of
gravity.
3 Definition of Synchronization
Before continuing with the experimental and analyt-
ical results the notion of synchronization should be
defined in more detail. Due to the large amount of
phenomena that seems to be gathered under the term
synchronization, it is often difficult to correctly define
synchronization. In (Pikovsky et al., 2001) the authors
introduce the concept of synchronization as:
Synchronization is the adjustment of rhythms of
oscillating objects due to their weak interaction.
Although the above concept provides an insightful
idea of synchronization a more rigorous definition is
provided in (Blekhman et al., 1997):
Definition 3.1: (Asymptotic Synchronization).
Given k systems with state x
i
∈ X
i
and output y
i

Y
i
, i = 1, . . . , k and given ℓ functionals g
j
: Y
1
×. . .×
Y
k
× T → R
1
, where T is a set of common time in-
stances for all k systems and Y
i
are the sets of all func-
tions from T into the outputs Y
i
. Furthermore defining
a shift operator σ
τ
s.t. (σ
τ
y)(t) = y(t +τ), we call the
solutions x
1
(·), . . . , x
k
(·) of systems Σ
1
, . . . , Σ
k
with
initial conditions x
1
(0), . . . , x
k
(0) asymptotically syn-
chronized w.r.t the functionals g
1
, . . . , g

if:
g
j

τ1
y
1
(·), . . . , σ
τ
k
y
k
(·), t) ≡ 0 ∀ j = 1, . . . , ℓ
(3.1)
is valid for t →∞and some σ
τi
∈ T.
Definition 3.2: (Approximate Asymptotic Synchroniza-
tion).
Using the notations introduced in definition 3.1, we call
systems Σ
1
, . . . , Σ
k
approximately asymptotically syn-
chronized w.r.t. to the functionals g
1
, . . . , g

if for some
sufficiently small ε > 0:
|g
j

τ1
y
1
(·), . . . , σ
τ
k
y
k
(·), t)| ε ∀ j = 1, 2, . . . , ℓ
(3.2)
is valid for t →∞and some σ
τi
∈ T.
In the sequel definition 3.1 and 3.2 will be used to de-
fine (approximate) synchronization.
4 Example 1: Coupled Duffing Oscillators
In this section experimental results with respect to two
synchronizing Duffing oscillators are presented. Af-
ter introducing the dynamical system an analysis of the
limiting behaviour of the system is presented. Finally,
both numeric and experimental results are presented
and discussed.
4.1 Problem Statement & Analysis
x
1
x
2
x
3
κ
d
κ
d
k
b m m
M
Figure 3. Schematic representation of the set-up modeling two cou-
pled Duffing oscillators.
Consider the system as depicted in figure 3, where:,
κ
d
(q
i
)
m
= ω
2
0
q
i
+ ϑq
3
i
(4.1)
where q
i
= x
i
−x
3
and constants ω
0
, ϑ ∈ R
>0
.
The system under consideration represents two un-
driven, undamped Duffing oscillators coupled through
a third common mass. The set-up depicted in figure 2
can be adjusted to model this system by defining the
actuator forces as:
F
i
= κ
i
(q
i
) + β
i
( ˙ q
i
) −κ
d
(q
i
), i = 1, 2 (4.2)
F
3
= 0 (4.3)
Where F
3
= 0 is chosen because, in the original set-up,
the beam already models the situation as depicted in
figure 3 (linear stiffness and damping) fairly accurate.
The equations of motion of the resulting system are:
m¨ x
1
= −κ
d
(x
1
−x
3
) (4.4)
m¨ x
2
= −κ
d
(x
2
−x
3
) (4.5)
M¨ x
3
= κ
d
(x
1
−x
3
) + κ
d
(x
2
−x
3
) (4.6)
− kx
3
−b ˙ x
3
,
where k, b ∈ R
>0
are the stiffness and damping coeffi-
cients of the beam.
Before continuing with the experimental and nu-
merical results the systems’ limiting behaviour is
analyzed. In order to do so the notion of anti-phase
synchronization needs to be defined:
Definition 4.1:((Approximate) Anti-phase Synchroniza-
tion).
Consider two systems Σ
1
and Σ
2
with initial conditions
x
10
and x
20
and correspondingsolutions x
1
(x
10
, t) and
x
2
(x
20
, t). Furthermore, assume that both x
1
(x
10
, t)
and x
2
(x
20
, t) are periodic in time with period T. We
call the solutions of x
1
(x
10
, t) and x
2
(x
20
, t) (approx-
imately) asymptotically synchronized in anti-phase if
they are (approximately) asymptotically synchronized
according to definition 3.1 or 3.2, with:
g(·) = x
1
(·) − ασ
(
T
2
)
x
2
(·), (4.7)
with α ∈ R
>0
a scale factor and σ
(
T
2
)
a shift operator
over half an oscillation period.
Using definition 4.1 it can been shown that the
dynamics of the oscillators in (4.4) - (4.6) converges to
anti-phase synchronization as t → ∞(see Lemma 4.1
below).
Lemma 4.1: (Global Asymptotic Stability of the
Synchronization Manifold).
Consider the system of nonlinear differential equations
(4.4) - (4.6). The trajectories of the oscillators Σ
1
and
Σ
2
will converge to anti-phase synchronized dynamics,
according to definition 4.1 as t → ∞ for all initial
conditions.
Proof (of Lemma 4.1).
Consider the system (4.4) - (4.6). To analyze the limit
behaviour of this system, the total energy is proposed
as a candidate Lyapunov function:
V =
1
2
3

i=1
m
i
˙ x
2
i
+
3

i=1
ξi

0
κ
i
(s) ds, (4.8)
where m
1
= m
2
= m, m
3
= M, ξ
i
= x
i
− x
3
, i =
1, 2, ξ
3
= x
3
, κ
i
(q
i
) = κ
d
(q
i
) and κ
3
= kx
3
. Cal-
culating the time derivative of V along the solutions of
the system (4.4) - (4.6) yields:
˙
V = −b ˙ x
2
3
. (4.9)
Hence, we find
˙
V ≤ 0 and the system may be analyzed
using LaSalle’s invariance principle.
Equation (4.9) implies that V is a bounded function of
time. Moreover, x
i
(t) is a bounded function of time
and will converge to a limit set where
˙
V = 0. On this
limit set ˙ x
3
= ¨ x
3
= 0, according to (4.9). Substitut-
ing this in system (4.4) - (4.6) yields x
3
= 0 on the
systems’ limit set. Substituting x
3
= ˙ x
3
= ¨ x
3
= 0 in
(4.6) shows:
κ
d
(x
1
) = −κ
d
(x
2
) (4.10)
Since κ
d
is a one-to-one, odd function, this implies:
x
1
= −x
2
(4.11)
Finally, substituting x
1
= −x
2
in (4.4) - (4.5) yields:
˙ x
2
= −˙ x
1
. (4.12)
Summarizing, it has been shown that any solution of
(4.4) - (4.6) will converge to anti-phase synchronized
motion according to definition 4.1 as t →∞.
The next paragraph will present numerical and experi-
mental results that support the analysis provided in this
section.
4.2 Experimental & Numerical Results
In order to experimentally investigate the synchroniz-
ing behaviour of two coupled Duffing oscillators the
set-up has been modified as specified in the previous
paragraph. The oscillators are released from an ini-
tial displacement of −3 mm and −2.5 mm respec-
tively (approximately in phase) and allowed to oscillate
freely.
Figure 4 shows the sum of the positions of the oscil-
lators and the position of the beam v.s. time. As be-
comes clear from figure 4, approximate anti-phase syn-
chronization occurs within 40 s. Furthermore, figure
5 shows the limiting behaviour of both oscillators and
the beam. Although the amplitudes of the oscillators
differ significantly, the steady state phase difference is
1.01π. The most probable cause for the amplitude dif-
ference is the fact that the oscillators are not exactly
identical. As a result, the beam does not come to a
complete standstill, although it oscillates with an am-
plitude that is roughly ten times smaller than that of the
oscillators.
In addition to the experimental results, numerical re-
sults are provided in figure 6 and 7. The parameters in
the simulation are chosen as shown in table 2.
Table 2. Parameters in numerical simulation.
ω
o
= 15.26 ϑ = 8.14 M = 0.8
m = 1 k = 1 b = 5
The results presented in figure 6 and 7 correspond to
the experimental results provided in 4 and 5 respec-
tively. Although the oscillation frequencies of the os-
cillators are almost equal (within 5%) in the simulation
20 25 30 35 40 45
1
2
3
4
5
20 25 30 35 40 45
−0.4
−0.2
0
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
|
x
1
+
x
2
|
[
m
m
]
x
3
[
m
m
]
t [s]
Figure 4. Experimental results: (top) Sum of the displacements of
both oscillators. (bottom) Displacement of the connecting beam.
45 45.2 45.4 45.6 45.8 46 46.2 46.4 46.6 46.8
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
45 45.2 45.4 45.6 45.8 46 46.2 46.4 46.6 46.8
−0.06
−0.04
−0.02
0
0.02
0.04
0.06
x
i
[
m
m
]
x
3
[
m
m
]
t [s]
Figure 5. Experimental results: Steady state behaviour of the sys-
tem. (top) Displacement of the oscillators (- x
1
, - x
2
). (bottom)
Displacement of the connecting beam.
and the experiment, the final amplitudes of the oscilla-
tors differs by a factor 15. This is due to the fact that
in the experiment the damping is over compensated,
resulting in larger amplitudes of the oscillators. This
presents no problem since the residual energy may dis-
sipate through the motion of the beam, which does not
come to a complete standstill due to the amplitude dif-
ference between the oscillators. In the numerical sim-
ulation almost exact anti-phase synchronization with
equal oscillator amplitudes is achieved and this mecha-
nism fails.
Finally, note that some of the differences between the
experimental and simulation results may be coped with
by tuning either the parameters of the numerical sim-
ulation or those of the set-up itself. The question of
identifying a model can thus be reversed to tuning the
parameters of the set-up rather than those of the model.
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
0
5
10
15
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45
−1
−0.5
0
0.5
1
|
x
1
+
x
2
|
[
m
m
]
x
3
[
m
m
]
t [s]
Figure 6. Numerical results: (top) Sumof the displacements of both
oscillators. (bottom) Displacement of the connecting beam.
45 45.2 45.4 45.6 45.8 46 46.2 46.4 46.6 46.8 47
−0.05
0
0.05
45 45.2 45.4 45.6 45.8 46 46.2 46.4 46.6 46.8 47
−0.05
0
0.05
x
i
[
m
m
]
x
3
[
m
m
]
t [s]
Figure 7. Numerical results: Steady state behaviour of the system.
(top) Displacement of the oscillators (- x
1
, - x
2
). (bottom) Dis-
placement of the connecting beam.
5 Example 2: Two Coupled Rotary Elements
Next to the synchronization of Duffing oscillators we
investigated synchronization in a system of coupled ro-
tating disc as depicted in figure 8. First the dynamics
of the system will be specified in more detail and next
experimental results will be presented.
5.1 Problem Statement
Consider the system as depicted in figure 8. This sys-
tem consists of three discs. Discs 1, 2 represent the
oscillators and disc 3 is connected to both other discs
by torsion springs with stiffness k. Each of the discs
has an eccentric mass at a distance ℓ
i
from it’s center
(ℓ
1
= ℓ
2
= ℓ). Furthermore the middle disc is coupled
to the world by a torsion spring with stiffness k
3
and
a torsion damper with constant b. The rotation of the
discs is represented w.r.t. the world by the angles θ
i
.
θ
1
θ
2
θ
3
ℓ ℓ

3
m m
M
k k
k
3
b
1 2 3
g
Figure 8. Schematic representation of the set-up modeling two cou-
pled rotating elements.
The equations of motion of the system depicted in fig-
ure 8 are:
¨
θ
i
= −ϑ
i
(k (θ
i
− θ
3
) + δ
i
sin θ
i
) , i = 1, 2 (5.1)
¨
θ
3
= ϑ
3

2

j=1
k (θ
j
−θ
3
) (5.2)
−k
3
θ
3
−b
3
˙
θ
3
−δ
3
sin θ
3

,
with ϑ
i
=
1
mℓ
2
i
+Ji
and δ
i
= m
i
gℓ
i
. The modification
to the set-up is now more involved than in the previ-
ous example. First of all, the translation coordinates x
i
should be mapped to rotation angles θ
i
(arbitrary map-
ping). Secondly, in case of the Duffing oscillator the
actuation forces F
1
and F
2
were meant to act on both
the oscillators and the connecting mass. In the situa-
tion depicted in figure 8 the actuation force generated
to model the coupling between the oscillator discs and
the middle disc by means of the torsion spring should
again act on the oscillators and the connecting beam
in our set-up. However, the part of the actuation force
that models the influence of gravity on the oscillators
should only act on the oscillators and not on the con-
necting beam, since in figure 8 the gravity on discs 1
and 2 exerts a force only on the corresponding disc and
not directly on the middle mass.
In order to adjust the set-up in figure 2 to model the
system in figure 8 the actuator forces are defined as:
F
i
= κ
i
(q
i
) + β
i
( ˙ q
i
) −ϑ
i

i
+ g
i
) , i = 1, 2 (5.3)
F
3
= κ
3
(x
3
) −ϑ
3

3
+ g
3
) − ˜ g(·), (5.4)
with κ
i
(q
i
) and β
i
( ˙ q
i
) as defined earlier, η
i
=
k (θ
i
−θ
3
) , i = 1, 2, g
i
= δ
i
sin θ
i
and ˜ g =
2

j=1
ϑ
i
g
i
.
Damping is left to be the natural damping of the beam
in the set-up. Furthermore, translation is mapped to ro-
tation angles according to: θ
i
=
π
2
xi
x

i
, with x

i
is the
maximal displacement of the oscillators and the beam,
assuring ± 90

turns in the rotation space.
5.2 Experimental Results
Experimental results, are presented in figure 9 and 10.
It becomes clear that approximate anti-phase synchro-
nization occurs after about 20 s. Again complete syn-
chronization does not occur because the oscillators are
not identical. In addition figure 10 shows the steady
state behaviour of the rotating system, from which
the approximate anti-phase synchronized behaviour be-
comes clear immediately.
6 Conclusion & Future Research
We presented a set-up capable of conducting synchro-
nization experiments with a variety of different oscil-
lators. Two sets of experimental results were provided
that show the potential of this set-up. First we modeled
and experimentally obtained synchronization between
two coupled Duffing oscillators. Second, we showed
that it is possible to model systems with rotating dy-
namics and to effectively model the local influence of
gravity in this case.
In addition to studying uncontrolled synchronization
the set-up has the potential to study controlled synchro-
nization. Furthermore, we aim to model the Huygens
set-up and perform controlled and uncontrolled syn-
chronization experiments with this type of dynamical
system.
7 Acknowledgements
This work was partially supported by the Dutch-
Russian program on interdisciplinary mathematics
’Dynamics and Control of Hybrid Mechanical Systems’
(NWO grant 047.017.018).
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
20
40
60
80
100
120
140
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
−20
−10
0
10
20
30
|
θ
1
+
θ
2
|
[

]
θ
3
[

]
t [s]
Figure 9. Experimental results: (top) Sum of the rotation angles of
the outer discs. (bottom) Rotation angle of the connecting disc.
References
Bennett, M., M. Schat, H. Rockwood and K. Wiesen-
feld (2002). Huygens’s clocks. Proceedings of the
Royal Society A: Mathematical, Physical and Engi-
neering Sciences 458(2019), 563–579.
Blekhman, I.I., A.L. Fradkov, H. Nijmeijer and A.Yu.
Pogromsky (1997). On self-synchronization and con-
trolled synchronization. System & Control Letters
(31), 299 – 305.
Kuznetsov, N.V., G.A. Leonov, H. Nijmeijer and
A.Yu. Pogromsky (2007). Synchronization of two
metronomes,. 3rd IFAC Workshop ’Periodic Control
Systems’. St. Petersburg, Russian Federation.
Oud, W., H. Nijmeijer and A.Yu. Pogromsky (2006).
A study of huygens synchronization. experimental
results. Proceedings of the 1st IFAC Conference on
Analysis and Control of Chaotic Systems, 2006.
Pantaleone, J. (2002). Synchronization of metronomes.
American Jounal of Physics 70(10), 992–1000.
Pikovsky, A., M. Rosenblumand J. Kurths (2001). Syn-
chronization, A universal concept in nonlinear sci-
ences. Cambridge Nonlinear Science Series. Cam-
bridge University Press.
Pogromsky, A.Yu, V.N. Belykh and H. Nijmeijer
(2003). Controlled synchronization of pendula. Pro-
ceedings 42rd IEEE Conference on Decision and
Control pp. 4381–4368.
Pogromsky, A.Yu, V.N. Belykh and H. Nijmeijer
(2006). Group Coordination and Cooperative Con-
trol. Chap. A Study of Controlled Synchronization of
Huygens’ Pendula, pp. 205–216. Vol. 336 of Lecture
Notes in Control and Information Sciences. Springer.
Senator, M. (2006). Synchronization of two cou-
pled escapement-driven pendulum clocks. Journal of
Sound and Vibration 291(3-5), 566–603.
Tillaart, M.H.L.M. van den (2006). Design of a
mechanical synchronizing system for research and
demonstration purooses for d&c. Master’s thesis.
Eindhoven University of Technology.
78 78.2 78.4 78.6 78.8 79 79.2 79.4 79.6 79.8
−6
−4
−2
0
2
4
6
8
78 78.2 78.4 78.6 78.8 79 79.2 79.4 79.6 79.8
0.2
0.4
0.6
0.8
1
1.2
1.4
θ
i
[

]
θ
3
[

]
t [s]
Figure 10. Experimental results: Steady state behaviour of the sys-
tem. (top) Outer discs (- θ
1
, - θ
2
). (bottom) Connecting disc.
References 99
References
Ananyevskiy, M.S., A.L. Fradkov and H. Nijmeijer (2008). Control of mechanical systems with
constraints: two pendulums case study. Proceedings IFAC World Conference 2008.
Andriesse, C.D. (1993). Titan kan niet slapen (A biography of Christiaan Huygens). Amsterdam /
Antwerpen: Contact.
Appleton, E. (1922). The automatic synchronization of triode oscillators. Proceedings of the Cam-
bridge Philosophical Society (Math. and Phys. Sci.) 21, 231–248.
Belykh, V.N., E.V. Pankratova, A.Yu. Pogromsky and H. Nijmeijer (2008). Two van der pol -
duffing oscillators with huygens coupling. Proceedings ENOC-2008 (St. Petersburg).
Bennett, M., M. Schatz, H. Rockwood and K. Wiesenfeld (2002). Huygens’s clocks. Proceedings of
the Royal Society of London A: Mathematical, Physical and Engineering Sciences 458(2019), 563–
579.
Birch, T. (1756). The history of The Royal Society of London for improving of natural knowledge,
in which the most cosiderable of those papers communicated to the Society, which have hith-
erto not been published, are inserted in their proper order, as a supplement to the Philosophical
Transactions. pp. 19, 21, 23–24. Vol. 2. London: Johnson. (Reprint 1968).
Blekhman, I.I. (1988). Synchronization in science and technology. New York: ASME.
Blekhman, I.I., A.L. Fradkov, H. Nijmeijer and A.Yu. Pogromsky (1997). On self-synchronization
and controlled synchronization. System & Control Letters (31), 299 – 305.
Buck, J. (1988). Synchronous rhythmic flashing of fireflies. ii. Quaterly review of biology 63(3), 265–
289.
Gelb, A. (1996). Applied optimal estimation. 14 ed.. The M.I.T. Press.
Gray, C.M., P. K¨onig, A.K. Engel and W. Singer (1989). Oscillatory responses in cat visual
cortex exhibit inter-columnar synchronization which reflects global stimulus properties. Nature
338(6213), 334–337.
Huygens, C. (1669). Instructions concerning the use of pendulum-watches for finding the longitude
at sea. p. 937. Vol. 4 of Philosophical Transactions, Royal Society of London.
Huygens, C. (1932). Oeuveres Compl`etes de Christiaan Huygens. Vol. 17. The Hague: Martinus
Nijhoff. (Includes work from 1651-1666).
Huygens, C. (1934). Horologium Oscillatorium (1673). pp. 69–368. Vol. 18 of Oeuveres Compl`etes
de Christiaan Huygens. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff.
Huygens, C. (1983a). Attachment to a letter to Constantyn Huygens, his father. pp. 243–244. Vol. 5
of Oeuveres Compl`etes de Christiaan Huygens. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff. (Correspondance
1664-1665, Letter No. 1335 dd. 26 February 1665).
Huygens, C. (1983b). Letter to de Sluse. p. 241. Vol. 5 of Oeuveres Compl`etes de Christiaan
Huygens. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff (published for the Soci´et´e Hollandaise Des Sciences).
(Correspondance 1664-1665, Letter No. 1333 dd. 24 February 1665).
Huygens, C. (1986). Christiaan Huygens’ the pendulum of geometrical demonstrations concerning
the motion of pendula as applied to clocks. Iowa State University Press. (Translated by R.
Blackwell).
Korteweg, D.J. (1906). Les horloges sympathiques de Huygens, les ph´enom`enes connexes et les
oscillations principales et compos´ee que pr´esentent deux pendules fix´es ` a un m´ecanisme ` a un seul
degr´e de libert´e. pp. 273–295. II, T. XI. The Hague: Martinus Nijhoff (Archives N´eerlandaises).
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.
100 References
Kraker, B. de and D.H. van Campen (2001). Mechanical Vibrations. Shaker Publishing.
Kuznetsov, N.V., G.A. Leonov, H. Nijmeijer and A.Yu. Pogromsky (2007). Synchronization of two
metronomes,. 3rd IFAC Workshop ’Periodic Control Systems’. St. Petersburg, Russian Federa-
tion.
Michaels, D.C., E.P. Matyas and J. Jalife (1987). Mechanisms of sinoatrial pacemaker synchroniza-
tion: A new hypothesis. Circ. Res. 61, 704–714.
Oud, W., H. Nijmeijer and A.Yu. Pogromsky (2006). A study of huygens synchronization. ex-
perimental results. Proceedings of the 1st IFAC Conference on Analysis and Control of Chaotic
Systems, 2006.
Oud, W., I. Tyukin and H. Nijmeijer (2004). Sufficient conditions for synchronization in an ensemble
of hindmarsh and rose neurons: Passivity-based approach. Proceedings NOLCOS 2004.
Pantaleone, J. (2002). Synchronization of metronomes. American Jounal of Physics 70(10), 992–
1000.
Pikovsky, A., M. Rosenblum and J. Kurths (2001). Synchronization, A universal concept in non-
linear sciences. Cambridge Nonlinear Science Series. Cambridge University Press.
Pintelon, R. and J. Schoukens (2001). System identification, a frequency domain approach. IEEE
Press.
Pogromsky, A.Yu, V.N. Belykh and H. Nijmeijer (2003). Controlled synchronization of pendula.
Proceedings 42rd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control pp. 4381–4368.
Pogromsky, A.Yu., V.N. Belykh and H. Nijmeijer (2006). Group Coordination and Cooperative
Control. Chap. A Study of Controlled Synchronization of Huygens’ Pendula, pp. 205–216. Vol.
336 of Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences. Springer.
Rijlaarsdam, D.J., A.Yu. Pogromsky and H. Nijmeijer (2008). Synchronization between coupled
oscillators: a uniform experimental approach. Proceedings ENOC-2008 (St. Petersburg). (Sub-
mitted).
Rijlaarsdam, D.J., I. Tyukin, H. Nijmeijer, A. Semyanov and C. van Leeuwen (2007). Synchroniza-
tion of neural oscillators with diffusive coupling: does the leakage of neurotransmitter matter?.
Proccedings Physcon 2007 (Potsdam).
Senator, M. (2006). Synchronization of two coupled escapement-driven pendulum clocks. Journal
of Sound and Vibration 291(3-5), 566–603.
Strogatz, H.H. and I. Stewart (1993). Coupled oscillators and biological synchronization. Sci. Am.
269, 102–109.
Strogatz, S. (2003). Sync. Penguin books.
Tillaart, M.H.L.M. van den (2006). Design of a mechanical synchronizing system for research and
demonstration purooses for d&c. Master’s thesis. Eindhoven University of Technology.
Yoder, J.G. (1990). Unrolling time: Christiaan Huygens and the mathematization of nature. Cam-
bridge University Press.
Huygens Synchronization in Various Dynamical Systems. Experimental Results.

Sign up to vote on this title
UsefulNot useful