An Introduction to Nonlinearity

Mike Brennan (UNESP)

Bin Tang (Dalian University of Technology, China)
Gianluca Gatti (University of Calabria, Italy)
An Introduction to Nonlinearity
• Introduction
• Historical perspective
• Nonlinear stiffness
• Symmetry
• Asymmetry
• Nonlinear damping
• Conclusions
Dynamical System
Inertia force m

+
Damping force c

+
k
Stiffness force
=
Excitation force
Common stiffness nonlinearities
Common damping nonlinearities
Historical Perspective
Historical Perspective
Galileo Galilei, 1564–1642, studied the
pendulum. He noticed that the natural frequency of
oscillation was roughly independent of the amplitude
of oscillation

Christiaan Huygens, 1629–1695, patented the

pendulum clock in 1657. He discovered that wide
swings made the pendulum inaccurate because he
observed that the natural period was dependent on
the amplitude of motion, i.e. it was a nonlinear
system.
Historical Perspective
Robert Hooke, 1635–1703, is famous for
his law which gives the linear relationship
between the applied force and resulting
displacement of a linear spring.

Isaac Newton, 1643–1727, is of course,

famous for his three laws of motion.
Historical Perspective
John Bernoulli, 1667–1748, studied a
string in tension loaded with weights. He
determined that the natural frequency of a
system is equal to the square root of its
stiffness divided by its mass, n  k m

Leonhard Euler, 1707–1783, was the first

person to write down the equation of motion of a
harmonically forced, undamped oscillator,
my  ky  F sin t . He was also the first person
to discover the phenomenon of resonance
 Historical Perspective

Robert Hooke, 1678 F  ky

9 years

Isaac Newton, 1687 F  my

63 years

Leonhard Euler, 1750 my  ky  F sin t

Historical Perspective
Hermann Von Helmholtz, 1821–1894, was
the first person to include nonlinearity into the
equation of motion for a harmonically forced
undamped single degree-of-freedom oscillator. He
postulated that the eardrum behaved as an
asymmetric oscillator, such that the restoring force
was f  k1 y  k2 y which gave rise to additional
2

harmonics in the response for a tonal input.

John William Strutt, Third Baron Rayleigh,

1842–1919, considered the free vibration of a
nonlinear single-degree-of-freedom in which the
force-deflection characteristic was symmetrical,
given by f  k1 y  k3 y 3
 The Duffing Equation

my  cy  k1y  k3 y 3  F cos t

Georg Duffing 1861-1944

The Duffing Equation:
Nonlinear Oscillators and their Behaviour

Editors:

Ivana Kovacic and Michael J. Brennan

Published in 2011
Nonlinear stiffness
 Nonlinear Spring

k f
f stiffness 
x
hardening
spring
x
linear
force
f softening
For a linear system spring
f  kx

displacement
x
 Symmetric Nonlinear Spring

Force-deflection
Fs  k1 y  k3 y 3

Non-dimensional

Fs  y   y 3

Fs  Fs k1l y  y d0   k d k1
2
3 0

d0 =original length of spring

Symmetric Nonlinear Spring

Fs  y   y 3

Fs  y
Fs  y   y 3

Note symmetry
 Asymmetric Nonlinear Spring

Force-deflection
Fs  k1 y  k2 y  k3 y
2 3

Non-dimensional

Fs  y   y   y
2 3

  k2 d 0 k1

d0 =original length of spring

 Asymmetric Nonlinear Spring
Fs  y   y 2   y 3 Fs  y   y 2   y 3

linear
 0

Fs  y   y 2   y 3 Fs  y   y 2   y 3
 Asymmetric Nonlinear Spring
Fs  y   y 2   y 3 Fs  y   y 2   y 3

linear
 0

Fs  y   y 2   y 3 Fs  y   y 2   y 3
 Asymmetric Nonlinear Spring
Fs  y   y 2   y 3 Fs  y   y 2   y 3

linear
 0

Fs  y   y 2   y 3 Fs  y   y 2   y 3
 Asymmetric Nonlinear Spring
Fs  y   y 2   y 3 Fs  y   y 2   y 3

linear
 0

Note Asymmetry
Fs  y   y 2   y 3 Fs  y   y 2   y 3
Pendulum – softening stiffness

Stiffness Moment
d 2

ml 2 2  mgl sin   M cos t
dt

3 5
sin       ....
3! 5!

 3 
stiffness moment  mgl    
 6 

Softening
 Pendulum – softening stiffness
1

0.8
k 2
 1
0.6
klin 2
k
klin 0.4

k 2 4
 1 
0.2 klin 2 24

0
0 20 40 60 80 90

angle (degrees)
 Pendulum – softening stiffness

30 60 120 170

 Geometrically nonlinear spring

Force-deflection
 d0 
Fs  2ky 1  
 2 
y d 
2


Non-dimensional
 d 
Fs  y 1  ,
 y  1 
2


Fs  Fs 2kd yy d d  do d
d 0 =original length of spring
Geometrically nonlinear spring

 d0 
Fs  2ky 1  
 y 2  d 2 


which approximates to

Fs  k1 y  k3 y 3

k1  2k 1  d0 d  k3  k d0 d 3
Geometrically nonlinear spring
– non-dimensional
 d 
Fs  y 1  ,
 y 2  1 

which approximates to
Fs   y   y 3

  1 d  d 2
Geometrically nonlinear spring
– non-dimensional
approximation

actual
Geometrically nonlinear spring
– snap through

Fs
 Geometrically nonlinear spring
– snap through
V  V  2kd 2 
Potential Energy
1
  1 4
V  1  d y  dy ,
2
2

V
Example of a snap-through system
.
Nonlinear Energy Harvesting Device
– snap through
.
Nonlinear Energy Harvesting Device
 Nonlinear Energy Harvesting Device
– snap through

Positive Stiffness Negative Stiffness

Beam Magnets
Nonlinear Energy Harvesting Device
– snap through
2
Stiff vertical spring
1.8 Optimal vertical spring
Soft vertical spring

1.6

1.4

1.2

Force
1

0.8

0.6

0.4

0.2

0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Deflection
 Nonlinear Energy Harvesting Device
– snap through

5
4
3

potential energy 2
1
0
-1
-2
1.05
1
0.5
0.95
0
0.9
-0.5
0.85
d displacment
Vibration Isolation

fe
xt
m

kv c

xe

ft
 Vibration Isolation

fe
kh kh xt
m
l
kv c

xe

ft
 An Achievable Stiffness Characteristic
0.3

0.2
Normalised stiffness force

0.1

-0.1

-0.2
Low stiffness
-0.5 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5

Normalised displacement
Bubble Mount

Very low stiffness

Static equilibrium
(natural position
frequency)
Large Deflection of Beams
 Large deflection of beams

2w
M  EI x 2 ,
3
  w  2  2

1    
  x  

Causes nonlinear effect

Softening

4w s  2 w 3 2  w  2  2 w 
EI 4   A  EI 2   2 
 f  x, t 
x x t 2
2 x  x  x 
Large deflection of beams
-in-plane stiffness

 w
2
 w4  EA  w    2 w
l 2

 A 2  EI 4   Ts 
t x      dx  2  f ( x, t )
2l 0  x   x

Causes nonlinear effect

Hardening
 Large deflection of beams
-in-plane stiffness
 w2
 w  4
EA  w    2 w
l 2

 A 2  EI 4   Ts 
t x      dx  2  f ( x, t )
2l 0  x   x

Assume simple supports and first mode only

x 
  x   sin   w  x, t     x  q(t ) f  x, t   F  x  l 2  cos t
 l 
2
d q
so m 2  k1q  k3q  F cos t
3

dt


k1 = 1  Tsl 2
 EI  EI  2l 
 4 2 3
k3   EA 8l
4 3

Asymmetrical Systems
Bubble Mount
Bubble Mount
 Asymmetry

stiffness  k1  3k3 x 2
stiffness
5

4.5

3.5
softening hardening
3

2.5

1.5

1
0 0.2
hardening
0.4 0.6 0.8 1
hardening
1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2

displacement
 Asymmetry
10
Symmetric system
Fs  k1 y  k3 y 3 5

Fs 0

-5

-10
-2 -1 0 1y 2
 Asymmetry
10
Asymmetric system
5
Fs  F0  k1 y  k3 y 3

Fs
0

-5

-10
-2 -1 0 1 y 2
 Asymmetry
10
Asymmetric system
5
Fs  F0  k1 y  k3 y 3

Fs
0

Fs  kˆ1 z  kˆ2 z 2  kˆ3 z 3 -5

-10
-2 -1 0 1 y 2
Asymmetric System - Cable
Mode shapes

Increasing tension

d 2q
m 2  k1q  k2 q 2  k3q 3  F cos t
dx
Due to asymmetry
-softening effect
Nonlinear damping
Nonlinear damping
Nonlinear damping
 Nonlinear damping

(a)
fe
Damping force
ch x 2
m
fd  x
O  a2  x2 
c1
ch x
k For x / a  0.2
2
x
f d  ch 2 x
a y a
ft

Damping coefficient is dependent

on the square of the amplitude
 Summary

• Historical perspective
• Nonlinear stiffness
• Symmetry
• Asymmetry
• Nonlinear damping