Dynamic Interactions Between Parametric Pendulum and Electro-Dynamical Shaker

ZAMM Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 87, No. 2, 172 186 (2007) / DOI 10.1002/zamm.
200610311
Dynamic interactions between parametric pendulum

and electro-dynamical shaker
X. Xu1 , E. Pavlovskaia1, , M. Wiercigroch1 , F. Romeo2 , and S. Lenci3
1
Centre for Applied Dynamics Research, University of Aberdeen, UK
2
Department of Structural and Geotechnical Engineering, University of Rome La Sapienza, Italy
3
Department of Architecture, Buildings and Structures, Polytechnic University of Marche, Ancona, Italy
Received 3 August 2006, revised 14 November 2006, accepted 12 December 2006

Published online 8 February 2007
Key words parametric pendulum, electro-dynamical shaker, dynamic interaction, nonlinear oscillations
Dedicated to the memory of Professor Pavel Zhilin

In this paper we investigate the dynamic interactions between a parametric pendulum and an electro-dynamical shaker
aiming to explain a weak correlation between the theoretical predictions obtained for a parametric pendulum model and
the experimental results for pendulum rig driven by the shaker. In particular, the quasi-periodic rotations were found
experimentally to be co-existing with the period one rotations, where no such motion can be predicted for parametric
pendulum with an ideal parametric excitation. First the experimental setup including the pendulum, the shaker and data
acquisition system is described. Then the electro-dynamical shaker is modelled as two and a half degrees-of-freedom
system. Next the parameters of the system have been identied by static and dynamic tests. Finally, comparisons between
theoretical and experimental results were made for the pendulumshaker system and a good agreement was obtained for a
wide range of the system parameters.

c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim
1 Introduction
A simple parametric pendulum is a classical nonlinear dynamic system which has been extensively investigated in the past,
e.g. [15]. Most of those studies have been undertaken assuming an ideal excitation, i.e. the excitation which is not inuenced
by the response of the considered system. For a pendulum this means that the pre-described kinematics of the pivot point
can be precisely realised, or in other words, the system possesses an ideal energy source. Non-ideal systems or systems
where the excitation is inuenced by the response (e.g. [68]), are known mostly due to the Sommerfeld effect discovered
in 1902 [9], when it was observed experimentally that closer the motor speed approaches the resonance frequency, the more
power is required. Also instabilities were found in the region close to the resonance as an unexpected jump phenomenon
occurred. In the case of limited power supply, a driving motor cannot pass the critical speed creating a huge problem for
rotor systems designed to operate beyond the resonance. A good explanation of these phenomena can be obtained if the
interactions between the motor and its exible support structure are taken into account. Then it becomes clear that a large
portion of the supplied energy near the resonance is consumed to generate vibrations of the support structure rather than to
increase the motor speed. Recently a lot of work has been done to investigate the resonant conditions of non-ideal vibrating
systems [8], and a number of various of non-ideal systems has been studied, e.g. [1012] including a horizontally driven
pendulum by a direct current motor through a shaft-crank mechanism [1315]. All of these systems were modelled by adding
an equation describing the energy source to the equations of the ideal system.
In this paper a pendulum driven vertically by an electro-mechanical shaker is considered, and the dynamic interactions
between the pendulum and the shaker are investigated. The study has been motivated (as it is often the case for non-ideal
systems) by a weak correlation between the experimental results and the theoretical predictions using a simple model of
parametric pendulum (see for example [5]).
The paper is organised as follows. In the next section the experimental set-up including the pendulum, the electro-
mechanical shaker and the data acquisition system, is described. Then a mathematical model of the shaker is developed.
In the following section the model parameters are identied, and a comparison between the theoretical and experimental
Corresponding author, E-mail: e.pavlovskaia@eng.abdn.ac.uk, Phone: +44 1224 272786, Fax: +44 1224 272497

ZAMM Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 87, No. 2 (2007) 173
Connection
Box
Motor
Encoder
DC Power E i X&& b X&&a q
Supply
Adjustable
PCI-MIO-16E-1
DC Power
Pendulum Supply
Charge
Amplifiers
Computer
Accelerometers
Shaker Current probe

Oscilloscopes
Differential probe
Waveform
DPA8 Switching Generator
Power Amplifier
Power Supply
Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of the experimental set-up.
results for the shaker dynamics is discussed. In Sect. 4 the mathematical model of the pendulum-shaker system is developed
and analysed; the obtained predictions are confronted with the experiments. Finally, some concluding remarks are given.
2 Experimental set-up
An experimental rig has been developed at the Centre for Applied Dynamics Research [17] to study dynamics of the pendulum
under vertical excitation. The pendulum rig consists of a rod which is hinged at one end to a rigid support column, and a
mass attached on the other end. The support column is welded to a base plate, which in turn can be attached to the shaker.
A circular plate is added to monitor an angular motion of the pendulum visually. Behind the plate a DC servo-motor and an
encoder are coupled in series with the rotating shaft of the pendulum.
The schematic diagram of the experimental setup is shown in Fig. 1. The external excitation is controlled by a waveform
generator. The signal produced by the generator is amplied by a switching power amplier and then supplied to the shaker.
The alternating voltage received by the shaker causes the vertical oscillations of the shaker table on which the pendulum
is mounted. Thus, the pendulum can exhibit a variety of motions including equilibrium, oscillations, and rotations. The
angular displacement of the pendulum is measured by the encoder providing an output voltage signal, where the change
of the voltage from 0 to 10 Volts corresponds to the angular displacement variation from 0 to 10. If an angle exceeds
10, the output voltage drops to 0 Volts. The signal from the encoder passed through the connection box is collected and
sampled in real time by Labview [16] data acquisition system. To monitor the vertical excitation provided by the shaker,
an accelerometer is mounted on the base plate of the pendulum rig. Another accelerometer is attached on the body of the
shaker. The supplied voltage and current of the armature coil are sensed by differential and current probes respectively. The
signals from accelerometers are passed to the charge ampliers and then captured by the data acquisition system.
As already eluded, the base excitation of the experimental rig is provided by the electro-mechanical shaker, which is
shown in Fig. 2 (a) and its simplied electro-magnetic scheme is depicted in Fig. 2 (b). The shaker consists of a cylindrical
steel magnetic body housing and supporting an armature assembly and a eld coil. The magnetic body is mounted on a
support system where air and steel springs, together with a set of linear bearings are used to provide suspension of the body.
The armature assembly is composed of a table and a cylindrical coil bonded in a cast radial-nned structure. The armature
table is capped on the centre pole and the coil is located in the air gap between the inner and outer poles. Magnetic ux in the
air gap is generated by direct current passing through the eld coil winding. An additional degaussing coil is tted around
the armature table and is mounted underneath the top plate to balance the stray magnetic eld above the table surface. When
a current is applied to the armature coil, an axial force generated is proportional to the current. A sinusoidal alternating
current supplied to such electro-mechanical system creates a sinusoidal alternating force acting between the armature and
the body producing the vertical oscillations of the table.
www.zamm-journal.org
174 X. Xu et al.: Dynamic interactions between parametric pendulum and electro-dynamical shaker
Fig. 2 (online colour at: www.zamm-journal.org) (a) Ling Dynamic V806 LS shaker and (b) its simplied electro-magnetic
scheme.
(a) (b)
Ma R
I
Xa
ka Fem ca
E
L
Mb
Eback
Xb
kb cb
Eback=-K(Xa -Xb )
Fig. 3 Physical model of the (a) mechanical and (b) electrical circuit of the shaker.
The physical model of the shaker is shown in Fig. 3, where its mechanical and electrical components are presented
separately. The mechanical system (Fig. 3 (a)) is comprised of two masses: the body mass, Mb , representing the mass of the
magnetic structure containing the eld coil, and the armature assembly mass, Ma . The excitation is provided by an axial
electro-magnetic force, Fem , which is generated by the alternating current in the constant magnetic eld. As shown in Fig. 2,
the support structure of the shaker is positioned on the vibro-isolated oor. Thus, the equations of motion for the mechanical
system can be readily obtained as
Ma Xa + ca (Xa Xb ) + ka (Xa Xb ) = Ma g Fem ; (1)

Mb Xb + cb Xb + ca (Xb Xa ) + kb Xb + ka (Xb Xa ) = Mb g + Fem , (2)
where Xa and Xb are displacements of the armature assembly and the body respectively, g is the gravity acceleration, dot
denotes differentiation with respect to time. Damping coefcients ca and cb , and stiffnesses ka and kb are to be determined
from experiments, which will be shown in the next section.
Although the electrical system is comprised of the eld, armature and degaussing circuits, only the armature circuit is
important for the current modelling. This is due to the fact that the eld circuit is used to provide a constant magnetic
eld and the degaussing circuit is needed to reduce the magnetic eld above the shaker. The equation describing the circuit
dynamics of the armature coil depicted in Fig. 3 (b) can be expressed as,
LI + RI + Eback = E(t), (3)

c 2007 WILEY-VCH Verlag GmbH & Co. KGaA, Weinheim www.zamm-journal.org
where R and L are the coil resistance and inductance respectively, E(t) is the externally supplied time dependent voltage,
and Eback is the back voltage generated due to the movement of the coil in the magnetic eld, and t is time.
To complete the mathematical description of the shaker Fem and Eback have to be dened. As shown in Fig. 2 (b), constant
magnetic ux, emanating from the inner magnetic pole, passes perpendicularly through the armature coil. As was mentioned
earlier, when an oscillating current is applied to the armature coil, an oscillating electro-magnetic force is generated along
the axial direction of the armature coil, Fem , and a relative motion between the armature coil and the magnetic body is
obtained. The relative motion causes the back voltage, Eback , to be generated across the coil, which is proportional to the
relative velocity. Electro-magnetic force Fem depends on the magnetic eld vector, B, and the total moving charge in the
coil, which can be calculated from the following integral equation
lc
Fem = Idl B.
0
In the considered system the only axial component of Fem is generated, for which as mentioned earlier the notation Fem is
used, and it can be calculated as a product of the current, I, and the length of the conductor lc in the magnetic eld. For
a coil of radius, rcoil , having N loops in the magnetic eld, the length lc = 2rcoil N and the electro-magnetic force is
Fem = BI2rcoil N. In the shaker system, B, N , and rcoil are constant, therefore Fem is proportional to I,
Fem = KI, (4)
where K is equal to 2rcoil N B.

In general, the electromotive force (EMF) or the back voltage, Eback , is generated by a relative movement between a
conductor and a magnetic eld, and thus depends on the magnetic eld vector , B, the relative velocity between the conductor
l
and the magnetic eld, v, and the length of the conductor, l: Eback = 0 c v B dl. The relative velocity between the
armature coil and the magnetic eld is directed axially with respect to the armature coil, and is equal to Xa Xb . The
magnetic ux of the eld B is constant and directed radially towards the centre of the armature coil. Thus, Eback has an
opposite sign with regards to the externally supplied voltage Eback = B(Xa Xb )2rcoil N. Again EMF is proportional
to the relative velocity,
Eback = K(Xa Xb ). (5)
3 Identication of the system parameters

To identify the parameters of the mathematical model developed previously (Eqs. (1)(5)), a number of tests were carried out
as described later in this section and also some reference data provided by the shaker manufacturer Ling Dynamic Systems
Ltd was used. The mass of the body, Mb is 820 kg, and the mass of the armature assembly, Ma is 15.88 kg. It should be
noted here that when the pendulum shaker system shown in Fig. 8 is considered, the mass of the pendulum rig without the
pendulum arm, which is 51.6 kg, should be added to the original mass of the armature assembly and Ma becomes 67.5 kg. The
inductance, L, of the armature coil was evaluated by measuring the impedance, XL , under an alternative current and voltage
of certain frequency, f , and it was calculated as L = XL /2f . The impedance of the coil provided by the manufacturer was
15 18 . The average value, 16.5 , was used, and thus it was obtained that L = 2.626 103 H. The supplied resistance
of the armature coil, R was 0.3 . All the other system parameters have been identied from static and vibrational tests and
they are discussed in the following subsections.
3.1 Mechanical parameters of shaker

Free vibration tests were performed to determine the damped natural frequency of the armature assembly. To ensure accuracy
the armature acceleration was measured by two different accelerometers three times each. Fast Fourier Transform (FFT)
of the recorded times series was used to obtain amplitude-frequency spectra (see an example in Fig. 4 (a)) and the natural
frequency was identied at the peak value of the frequency curve. Thus an average value fa = 5.6 Hz was determined based
on 6 tests with less than 5% difference between the results.
Similar tests were carried out to identify the damped natural frequency of the body. The armature and the body oscillate
together and they can be considered as two degrees-of-freedom system. During the test the accelerations of the body and
the armature were recorded by two accelerometers. Again to ensure the accuracy the test was repeated six times, where the
positions of accelerometers were exchanged after three tests. Using the same method, the amplitude-frequency spectra were
obtained for every test, and one of them is shown in Fig. 4 (b). As can be seen from this gure two natural frequencies of the
system were identied as equal to 5.62 Hz and 2.75 Hz, thus giving the damped natural frequency of the body fb = 2.75 Hz.
(a) Amplitude of armature acceleration

0.25 (b)
0.12
Amplitude of body acceleration

5.6Hz 2.75 Hz
0.20
0.09
0.15
0.06
0.10
0.05 0.03
5.62 Hz
0.00 0.00
0 35 70 105 140 0 10 20 30 40
Frequency (Hz) Frequency (Hz)
Fig. 4 FFT spectra used for identication of the natural frequency of masses Ma and Mb , (a) free vibration test of the armature; (b)
free vibration test of the body.
Fig. 5 Force-displacement diagram of the static body stiffness test.
Viscous damping ratios, a and b were calculated using the logarithmic decrement method. The armature damping ratio,
a , was obtained by substituting
the average logarithmic decrement, , from the four free vibration tests for the armature into
the formula, = / 2 + 4 2 , giving the value a = 0.11. Using the same method the body damping ratio, b = 0.024,
was calculated based on six free vibration tests for the body and neglecting inuence of the armature as Ma Mb .
By substituting the damping ratio and the damped frequency into the equation, n = d / 1 2 , the undamped natural
frequency of the armature and the body were determined as
na = 2fa 2 = 35.50 rad/s, nb = 2fb 2 = 17.26 rad/s.

1a 1b
This allowed to calculate the stiffness ka and kb , and the damping coefcients, ca and cb
2 2
ka = Ma na = 86176 N/m, kb = Mb nb = 244284 N/m,
ca = 2Ma na a = 534 Nm1 s, cb = 2Mb nb b = 679 Nm1 s.
Additional static tests were carried out to conrm the determined value of the stiffness kb . This stiffness was estimated by
measuring the displacement of the body j under a prescribed weight, Mj placed on the shaker. Three different masses were
placed on the body one by one, rst increasing the total weight and then decreasing; the measurements were repeated twice.
Two displacement dial gauges were attached to both sides of the body. The average value of the two readings was considered
to be the displacement of the body. The results are presented in Fig. 5 as force-displacement diagram. The average value of
the stiffness kb was obtained to be equal to 246450 N/m, giving less than 1% difference with the value determined by the
free vibration test.
3.2 Coupling coefcient K

As no manufacturers data to calculate the coupling coefcient K = 2rcoil N B was available, two different methods
described below were used to estimate its value. First the voltage/current-frequency characteristic supplied in the shaker
manual was employed. This characteristic was obtained for varying frequency by using a payload of 8.98 kg positioned on
the shaker armature assembly. The data for calculation of the coupling coefcient K was taken within the range where the
shaker is operating at the peak acceleration of 486 m/s2 as frequency is varied, for the range of frequency above 60 Hz. In

Fig. 6 The choice of the coupling coefcient K, difference between the numerical and experimental data of the armature
displacement amplitude, |Anum (K) Aexp |/Aexp 100%.
the range from 60 Hz to 300 Hz, both the current applied to the shaker and the obtained thrust have constant peak values of
70 A and 12000 N, respectively. When the shaker is operating at high frequency, the movement of the body tends to be very
small compared to the oscillations of the armature and therefore it can be neglected. So it can be considered that Fem is used
to generate only the acceleration of the armature and Fem is equal to the thrust, |Fem | = 12000 N. Thus, the proportional
coefcient, K, is obtained from Eq. (4),
Fem 12000
K= = = 121.22 N/A .
I 2 70
As in the current study the shaker is required to operate at the frequencies below 3 Hz, the second experimental estimate
of the coupling coefcient K was sought in the following way. As mentioned earlier, this estimate of K can be obtained
also from Eq. (4). The current I is measured experimentally, and the electro-magnetic force, Fem is calculated using Eq. (1)
re-written as
Fem = Ma Xa ca (Xa + Xb ) ka (Xa Xb ) + Ma g, (6)
where constants Ma , ca , and ka were determined in the previous section, Xa is measured acceleration of the armature, the
displacements, Xa and Xb , and velocities Xa and Xb , are evaluated from the measured accelerations of the armature and
the body, Xa and Xb .
The electro-mechanical model of the shaker derived in Sect. 2 is linear, and therefore the shaker will respond harmonically
to the excitation, E(t) = E0 cos(2f t), which practically means that both displacements Xa and Xb , the current I and Fem
are harmonic functions. Hence, K can be obtained by knowing the amplitudes Fem,0 and I0 of Fem and I. To implement this
approach the accelerations Xa and Xb and the current I were measured at a number of different combinations of the external
frequencies and the voltage amplitudes. A low pass lter was then applied to the recorded data. The average amplitudes
Fem,0 and I0 were obtained using 10 peaks of the ltered harmonic signals, and then K was calculated as Fem,0 /I0 . The
results are given in Table A.1 of Appendix A, where the average amplitudes of Fem,0 and I0 arelisted for the different
external excitations described by the frequency f and the root mean square value of the voltage, E0 / 2. Finally the average
value of the coupling coefcient was determined, K = 153.6 N/A.
It can be seen from a comparison of two obtained values of K, that a signicant discrepancy of 27% was obtained
between the coupling coefcients estimated by two methods described above and therefore, a further analysis was required
to determine the value of K which would give the best match between the experimental and numerical results. This was done
by comparing the experimentally obtained values of the amplitudes of the body and the armature displacements, and the
current with the numerical values of the corresponding amplitudes. The difference between the numerical and experimental
results was estimated using the following formula, = |Anum (K) Aexp |/Aexp . This is shown in Fig. 6, where the
difference as function of K calculated for the armature displacement amplitude is presented for 11 different combinations
of the excitation frequency and external voltage. As can be seen the most suitable coupling coefcient is 130 N/A, where
(a) 1.0 (d) 2.4
Acceleration of armature, [m/s2]

0.5 1.2
0.0 0.0
-0.5 -1.2
-1.0 -2.4
80T 82T 84T 86T 88T 90T 96T 98T 100T 102T 104T 106T
Time, [s] Time, [s]
(b) 0.04 (e) 0.2
Acceleration of body, [m/s2]

0.02 0.1
0.00 0.0
-0.02 -0.1
-0.04 -0.2
80T 82T 84T 86T 88T 90T 96T 98T 100T 102T 104T 106T
Time, [s] Time, [s]
(c) 5.0 (f) 9.0
2.5 4.5
Current, [A]
Current, [A]
0.0 0.0
-2.5 -4.5
-5.0 -9.0
80T 82T 84T 86T 88T 90T 96T 98T 100T 102T 104T 106T
Time, [s] Time, [s]
Fig. 7 (online colour at: www.zamm-journal.org) Comparisons between time histories obtained experimentally (black)
and numerically (red) for E0 = 8.52V and f = 1.59 Hz, and E0 = 19.33V and f = 1.95 Hz respectively, (a) and (d)
acceleration of the armature, (b) and (e) acceleration of the body, (c) and (f) current of the armature coil.
the error for all considered experimental results does not exceed 5%. A similar comparison for the amplitudes of the body
displacement and the current reveals that none of values of the coefcient K, obtained from all conducted experiments,
could provide a good correlation between the theoretical and experimental results. Therefore based on the results obtained
by two different approaches described above, the value K = 130 N/A was chosen for the future investigations.
3.3 Comparison between experimental and numerical results for shaker alone
Sample comparisons between experimental and numerical results obtained for the harmonic external excitation, E(t) =
E0 cos(2f t) are presented in Fig. 7. The results for different frequencies and amplitudes of the supplied voltages are given,
where time histories of the armature acceleration, the body acceleration and the current are depicted. Experimental and
numerical data are plotted in black and in red respectively.
For E0 = 8.52 V and f = 1.59 Hz, the accelerations of the armature, measured experimentally and obtained theoretically,
are found to show a close correlation. However, there is approximately 10% difference in the amplitude of body acceleration.
For the current, there is roughly 15% difference in amplitude and 5% phase discrepancy. Inspecting the comparisons for
E0 = 19.33 V and f = 1.95 Hz, a good agreement is found for the armature acceleration. For the body acceleration and the
current, the differences in amplitudes are similar to that of E0 = 8.52 V and f = 1.59 Hz. In the experiment, the current
oscillates about the 0.4 A level instead of zero and this is observed both in Figs. 7 (c) and (f), where (c) shows this difference
more explicitly.
As can be seen from the discussed example results, the dynamics of the armature assembly is well described by the proposed
mathematical model. The identied values of the system parameters allow to predict the vibrations of the armature assembly
for the different frequencies and amplitudes of the external excitation giving a good correlation with the experimental results.
Accurate modeling of the armature behaviour is particularly important for the investigation of the pendulumshaker system

c
q l
m
Ma
Xa
Ka Fem Ca
Mb
Xb
Kb Cb
Fig. 8 Physical model of the pendulum-shaker system having three mechanical and half
electrical degrees-of-freedom.
(a) 2.6 (b) 12
1.3 Current, [A] 6

Angle, [rad]
0.0 0
-1.3 -6
-2.6 -12
20T 22T 24T 26T 28T 30T 20T 22T 24T 26T 28T 30T
(c) Time, [s] (d) Time, [s]
1.6 0.16
0.8 0.08
0.0 0.00
-0.8 -0.08
-1.6 -0.16
20T 22T 24T 26T 28T 30T 20T 22T 24T 26T 28T 30T
(e) Time, [s] (f) Time, [s]
1 0.1
Amplitude of armature acceleration
0.1 0.01
0.01 1E-3
1E-3 1E-4
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 2 4 6
Fig. 9 (online colour at: www.zamm-journal.org) Comparisons between experimental (black) and numerical (red) results
for pendulum oscillatory motion obtained for E0 = 15.72V and f = 1.42 Hz. Time histories for (a) angular displacement
of the pendulum, (b) current of the armature coil, (c) acceleration of the armature, and (d) acceleration of the body; FFT
spectra for (e) armature acceleration, and (b) body acceleration.
and for this reason the proposed model of the shaker can be considered satisfactory and the identied parameters are reliable.
Although there are some differences between the experimental and the theoretical data, overall, a sufcient correlation has
been obtained.
Table 1 Experimentally determined parameters of the pendulum-shaker system
m 0.854 kg l 0.3166 m c 0.0475 kg/s

Ma 68.38 kg Ka 86175.9 kg/s2 Ca 534.05 kg/s
Mb 820 kg Kb 244284 kg/s2 Cb 679.35 kg/s
R 0.3 L 2.626 103 H K 130 N/A
4 Pendulumshaker system
4.1 Mathematical model
The pendulumshaker system is made up by mounting the pendulum rig described in Sect. 2 on the shaker table as shown
schematically in Fig. 8. The mathematical model of this electro-mechanical system can be derived by applying the method
of Lagrange equations of the second order; details of the derivations are given in Appendix B. The mechanical part of the
pendulumshaker system is described by three generalised coordinates: angular displacement of the pendulum, , and the
vertical displacements of the body and the armature, Xb and Xa . Whereas the electrical part is described by one coordinate
the electric charge q, where the current I is its derivative, I = dq/dt. The corresponding generalised forces are equal to
zero for the mechanical part of the system and an externally supplied voltage, E(t) is the generalised force for the electrical
part. The equations of motion for each degree-of-freedom are given below
: ml + cl + mg sin = mXa sin , (7)

Xa : (Ma + m)Xa + ca (Xa Xb ) + ka (Xa Xb )
= (Ma + m)g + ml sin + ml2 cos Fem , (8)
Xb : Mb Xb + cb Xb ca (Xa Xb ) + kb Xb ka (Xa Xb )
= Mb g + Fem , (9)
dI
I : RI + L K(Xa Xb ) = E(t) = E0 cos(t), (10)
dt
where E0 is the amplitude and is the frequency of the externally supplied voltage. The equations of motion (7)(10) are
then non-dimensionlised with respect to the natural linear frequency of the pendulum as described in Appendix B.
4.2 Experimental verication of pendulum-shaker model

The majority of the parameters for the pendulumshaker model have been identied in Sect. 3, and now only the pendulum
characteristics need to be determined. The real pendulum arm is composed of a steel bar and a steel block screwed up by bolt
and nuts, and it is mounted to the pivot shaft of the pendulum rig. This arm is inertia-wise equivalent to a mass m = 0.854
kg xed at one end of massless rod of the length l = 0.317 m. The damping coefcient of the pendulum was determined
using the logarithmic decrement method as = 0.01 and more details could be found in [18]. All the parameters of the
pendulum-shaker system are listed in Table 1, whereas the non-dimensional parameters are given in Table 2.
Comparisons have been made between the theoretical and experimental results to verify the developed mathematical
model of the pendulumshaker system. Three examples shown in Figs. 9, 10, and 11, one for oscillations and two for
rotations, were selected to support the verication. Time histories of the angular displacement, accelerations of the shaker
armature and body, current of the armature coil and FFT spectra for the armature and the body accelerations were considered.
As shown in Fig. 9 (a), a good correspondence for the angular displacement was obtained for the period two oscillations
observed at E0 = 15.72 V and f = 1.42 Hz. The FFT spectrum of the armature acceleration presented in Fig. 9 (e)
reveals the existence of superharmonics, although their presence is not noticeable at the graph of the time history, Fig. 9 (c).
The inuence of the superharmonics is more visible at the time history graph of the body acceleration, Fig. 9 (d), and its
FFT diagram shown in Fig. 9 (f) indicates that the second superharmonic is dominant over the main excitation harmonic
f = 1.42 Hz. Figs. 9 (d) and (f) give comparison between FFT diagrams obtained experimentally and numerically, which
indicates that the damping coefcients for the armature and the body were identied not very precisely. As can be seen from
these gures, the armature damping coefcient is underestimated for some frequencies and overestimated for the others,
whereas the body damping coefcient is underestimated for the whole range of frequencies.
Figs. 10 and 11 demonstrate rotational motions observed at E0 = 8.51 V and f = 1.59 Hz, and E0 = 18.25 V and
f = 1.77 Hz, respectively. As can be seen from these gures a good agreement has been obtained between the experiments
and the theory, in particular, for the angular displacement and the acceleration of the armature. As far as the current and the

(a) (b) 4.6

185p
2.3
180p
Current, [A]
Angle, [rad]
0.0
175p
170p -2.3
165p
-4.6
68T 70T 72T 74T 76T 78T 68T 70T 72T 74T 76T 78T
0.90 0.12

0.45 0.06
0.00 0.00
-0.45 -0.06
-0.90 -0.12
68T 70T 72T 74T 76T 78T 68T 70T 72T 74T 76T 78T
Time, [s] Time, [s]
(e) 1
(f) 0.1
0.1 0.01
0.01
1E-3
1E-3
1E-4
0 2 4 6 0 2 4 6 8
for pendulum rotational motion obtained for E0 = 8.51V and f = 1.59 Hz. Time histories for (a) angular displacement
of the pendulum, (b) current of the armature coil, (c) acceleration of the armature and (d) acceleration of the body; FFT
spectra for (e) armature acceleration and (b) body acceleration.
Table 2 Parameters of the pendulum-shaker system; R0 = R = 0.3 and I0 = mg/K = 0.0644

n = g/l 5.566 = c/mn 0.01
1 = Ma /m 80.07 2 = Mb /m 960.187
1 = Ka /mn2 3257.178 2 = Kb /mn2 9233.177
1 = Ca /c 11243.16 2 = Cb /c 14302.11
i = KI0 /mg 1 v = Kln /R0 I0 11851.35
r = R/R0 1 = Ln /R0 0.0487
acceleration of the body are concerned, the differences are larger but still acceptable. Comparison between the FFT spectra
obtained experimentally and theoretically shown in Figs. 10(e), (f), and 11(e), (f) conrms that the resonance frequencies
were predicted correctly and the situation with the body damping coefcient identication for the rotational motion is better
than for the oscillatory motion. However, the armature damping coefcient is still underestimated for some frequencies and
overestimated for the others. This suggests that a more complex frequency dependent model of damping should be used in
the future studies.
4.3 Interactions between pendulum and shaker

The set of gures discussed in the previous subsection (Figs. 9, 10, and 11) is examined here to study the interactions between
the pendulum and the shaker for the oscillatory and rotational motions. The superharmonic peaks shown on the FFT spectra
in these gures clearly demonstrate interdependence of the pendulum and the shaker dynamics, and they provide an evidence
(a) (b) 9.0
95p
4.5
Current, [A]
Angle, [rad] 90p
0.0
85p
-4.5
80p
-9.0
36T 38T 40T 42T 44T 46T 36T 38T 40T 42T 44T 46T
2 0.2

1 0.1
0 0.0
-1 -0.1
-2 -0.2
36T 38T 40T 42T 44T 46T 36T 38T 40T 42T 44T 46T
Time, [s] Time, [s]
(e) (f)
1 0.1
0.1 0.01
1E-3
0.01
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 0 2 4 6 8
for pendulum rotational motion obtained for E0 = 18.25V and f = 1.77 Hz. Time histories for (a) angular displacement
of the pendulum, (b) current of the armature coil, (c) acceleration of the armature, and (d) acceleration of the body; FFT
spectra for (e) armature acceleration, and (b) body acceleration.
of the inuence of the pendulum motion on the vertical excitation supplied by the shaker. If no interactions between the
pendulum and the shaker occur, the armature assembly response to the externally applied single harmonic voltage would
contain only this single harmonics. Nevertheless, when the amplitude of the superharmonics is 10 times smaller than that
of the excitation harmonic, the phase trajectories of angular displacement of the pendulumshaker system are close to that
of the simple pendulum with the pre-described kinematics of the pivot point. Hence in this case, the interactions can be
neglected. However, for some sets of the system parameters quasi-periodic rotations were found, which do not occur for the
discussed parametric pendulum with the ideal harmonic excitation of the pivot. In addition, these rotations were co-existing
with periodic rotational motions, even for the conditions of apparently negligible interactions.
An example of these quasi-periodic rotations is shown in Fig. 12, where the phase trajectories and the corresponding
Poincare maps are presented on the bounded phase plane ( , ). As can be seen from this gure, this behaviour was
well predicted by the developed pendulumshaker mathematical model, Eqs. (7)(10) and a good agreement was obtained
between the theory (Fig. 12(c) and (d)) and the experiments (Fig. 12(a) and (b)). Co-existence of period one rotation and
quasi-periodic rotational motion calculated numerically are shown in Fig. 13 (a), whereas the Fig. 13 (b) demonstrate the
difference between period one rotation predicted by the pendulumshaker model (red curve) and by the simple pendulum
model (black curve). As can be seen from the Fig. 13(b) the difference between the predictions using two models is relatively
small, however the co-existing quasi-periodic motion is a sequence of the non-linear interactions between the pendulum and
the shaker and it cannot be obtained using simple pendulum model.
The quasi-periodic rotations have been studied further using the developed mathematical model. The attractor following
bifurcation diagrams were calculated and they are shown in Fig. 14. Bifurcation diagrams are constructed as follows. The
initial value of the voltage amplitude e0 = E0 /(R0 I0 ) was set to the initial value (e0 = 500 in Fig. 14(a) and e0 = 775
in Fig. 14(b)). For the chosen set of parameters in order to exclude the transient behaviour, the response of the system was

(a) 15 (b) 15
12 12
9 9
6 6
3 3
q, (rad/s)
0.80p 1.20p 1.60p 2.00p 0.80p 1.20p 1.60p 2.00p
(c) 15 (d) 15
12 12
9
Fig. 12 Comparisons between experimental and
9
numerical results for quasi-periodic rotational
motion obtained for E0 = 14.67 V and f =
6 6
1.51 Hz. Experimental results for (a) phase tra-
jectory and (b) Poincare map; Numerical results
3 3
1.00p 1.40p 1.80p 2.20p 1.00p 1.40p 1.80p 2.20p for (c) phase trajectory and (d) Poincare map.
q-wt, (rad)
Fig. 13 (online colour at: www.zamm-journal.org)

Phase portraits for (a) co-existing attractors of quasi-
periodic rotations (black) and period one rotation (red)
at e0 = 758 and = 1.7 generated for the pendulum-
shaker model; (b) period one rotations generated for
the simple parametric pendulum model (black) and the
pendulum-shaker model (red), where the parameters are
set as close as possible to those of the pendulum-shaker
model.
calculated for 100 periods of external excitation without plotting anything. The next 300 periods generate 300 values of the
bounded angular displacement, , which are plotted. Then a small increment is added (or subtracted in Fig. 14(b))
to the voltage e0 and the procedure is repeated until the voltage reaches the rightmost (leftmost) value. The period one
rotational attractor was followed from e0 = 500 to 1000 and it can be seen in Fig. 14 (a). Fig. 14 (b) is the bifurcation
diagram following the quasi-periodic rotational attractor for increasing e0 from 775 to 1000 and for decreasing e0 from
775 to 500. The quasi-periodic rotations were found existing in the range, e0 (575, 907), and there are intervals where
period-n rotations exist.
Further study [20] reveals that the interactions for the rotational motion are stronger than those for the oscillatory motion.
Fig. 15 shows comparisons between FFT spectra for the body accelerations obtained experimentally and theoretically. These
co-existing rotational and oscillatory motion were recorded for E0 = 18.25V and f = 1.77 Hz and as can be seen from this
gure, the superharmonic peaks indicating the strength of the pendulumshaker interactions are signicantly higher for the
rotational motion than for oscillatory motion both in numerical and experimental studies.
5 Concluding remarks
In this paper, a parametric pendulum excited by an electro-mechanical shaker was studied, and the dynamic interactions
between the pendulum and the shaker were investigated. First, the electro-mechanical model of the shaker was developed
and its parameters were identied through an experimental programme of static and dynamic tests. Comparisons between
the experimental results and the theoretical predictions for the developed model showed a particularly good correspondence
Fig. 14 Bifurcation diagrams of the pendulum-shaker system constructed at = 1.7 by following two co-existing
attractors: (a) period one rotations for increasing e0 , (b) quasi-periodic motion for decreasing e0 from 775 to 500 and for
increasing from 775 to 1000.
(a) (b)
0.1 0.1

0.01 0.01
1E-3 1E-3
0 2 4 6 8 0 2 4 6 8
Fig. 15 (online colour at: www.zamm-journal.org) The FFT spectra comparisons for the body accelerations obtained at
E0 = 18.25V and f = 1.77 Hz for the oscillations (black) and rotations (red) of the pendulum generated (a) numerically
and (b) experimentally.
for the armature assembly displacement. Although some differences for the body displacement and the current were found,
overall, there was a sufciently good correlation between the theory and experiments.
Both the theoretical and experimental studies conrmed that interactions in the pendulum-shaker system have signicant
inuence on the dynamics of both the shaker and the pendulum, which was manifested by untypical dynamic responses. In
particular, the quasi-periodic rotations were discovered co-existing with period one rotations for a wide range of parameters,
whereas no quasi-periodic motion was found for a simple parametrically excited pendulum. It has been understood that the
interactions depend on the acceleration of the pendulum, which is controlled by the ratio of the pendulum mass, the shaker
armature mass and body mass, and the length of the pendulum arm. As a result, the interactions for the rotational motion are
stronger than that for the oscillatory motion. For high frequency oscillations or rotations, the interactions are weaker than
for low frequencies.
A Results of the experimental tests for estimating coupling coefcient
Table A.1 Average values of F0 and I0 for the different external excitation.
Input
f (Hz) 1.3 1.6 1.6 1.9

E0 / 2 (V) 10.24 7.84 11.72 8.78
Fem,0 (N) 1015.35 653.56 1000.44 599.1
Output I0 (A) 4.78 3.03 4.41 2.80
K 150.2 152.5 160.41 151.3
Average K 153.6

B Equations of motion of the pendulumshaker system

The mathematical model of the pendulum-shaker electro-mechanical system can be derived by applying the method of
Lagrange equations of the second order

d L L D
+ = Qi , (11)
dt qi qi qi
where qi are generalised coordinates, Lagrangian, L, is the difference between kinetic and potential energy, T V , and D
is the Rayleighs dissipation function of energy, and Qi are non-potential generalised forces. The expressions of T , V , and
D for the pendulum-shaker system are given below
1 2 1 2 1 2 1
T = Ma Xa + Mb Xb + m(l2 2 + Xa 2lXa sin ) + LI 2 , (12)
2 2 2 2
1 1
V = Mb gXb + kb Xb2 Ma gXa + ka (Xa Xb )2
2 2
+mg(l l cos Xa ) + Fem (Xa Xb ), (13)
1 2 1 1 1
D= cb Xb + ca (Xa Xb )2 + c(l)2 + RI 2 . (14)
2 2 2 2
The obtained earlier equations of motion (7)(10) are non-dimensionlised with respect to the natural linear frequency of
the pendulum:
+ + sin = xa sin , (15)
(1 + cos2 )xa + 1 (xa xb ) + 1 (xa xb )
= i i + 1 + cos2 sin + 2 cos , (16)
2 xb + (1 + 2 )xb + (1 + 2 )xb = 1 xa + 1 xa + 2 + i i, (17)

i + ri = v (xb xa ) + e0 cos . (18)
In the above equations, denotes the differentiation with respect to non-dimensional time , and the non-dimensional
variables and parameters are dened as

g Xa Xb I
n = , = n t, xa = , xb = , i= ,
l l l I0
c Ma Mb ka kb
= , 1 = , 2 = , 1 = , 2 = ,
mn m m mn2 mn2
ca cb KI0 Kln Ln
1 = , 2 = , i = , v = , = ,
c c mln2 R0 I0 R0
R E0
r= , e0 = , = ,
R0 R0 I0 n
where R0 and I0 are constants.
Acknowledgements Financial support from the British Council and the Royal Society is gratefully acknowledged. The authors would
like to thank late Dr. M. N. Cerri of the Polytechnic University of Marche, who contributed to the experimental studies of this paper.
References
[1] M. J. Clifford and S. R. Bishop, Rotating periodic orbits of the parametrically excited pendulum, Phys. Lett. A 201, 191196 (1995).
[2] M. J. Clifford and S. R. Bishop, Locating oscillatory orbits of the parametrically-excited pendulum, J. Aust. Math. Soc. Series
B-Appl. Math. 37, 309319 (1996).
[3] M. J. Clifford and S. R. Bishop, Inverted oscillations of a driven pendulum, Proc. R. Soc. Lond. Series A 454, 28112817 (1998).
[4] W. Szemplinska-Stupnicka and E. Tyrkiel, The oscillation-rotation attractors in the forced pendulum and their peculiar properties,
Int. J. Bifurcation and Chaos 12, 159168 (2002).
[5] X. Xu, M. Wiercigroch, and M. P. Cartmell, Rotating orbits of a parametrically-excited pendulum, Chaos, Solitons Fractals 23(5),
15371548 (2005).
[6] V. O. Kononenko, Vibrating system with limited power supply (Ilife, London, 1969).
[7] A. H. Nayfeh and D. T. Mook, Nonlinear Oscillations (Wiley, New York, 1979).
[8] J. M. Balthazar, D. T. Mook, H. I. Weber, R. M. Brasil, A. Fenili, D. Belato, and J. L. Felix, An overview on non-ideal vibrations,
Meccanica 30, 613621 (2003).
[9] A. Sommerfeld, Beitrage zum dynamischen Ausbau der Festigkeitslehre, Zeitschrift des Vereins Deutscher Ingenieure 46, 391394
(1902).
[10] B. R. Pontes, V.A. Oliveira, and J. M. Balthazar, On friction-driven vibrations in a mass block-belt-motor system with a limited
power supply, J. Sound Vib. 234(4), 713723 (2000).
[11] J. Warminski, J. M. Balthazar, and R. M. L. R. F. Brazil, Vibrations of a non-ideal parametrically and self-excited model, J. Sound
Vib. 245(2), 363374 (2001).
[12] S. L. T. de Souza, I. L. Caldas, J. M. Balthazar, et al. Analysis of regular and irregular dynamics of a non ideal gear rattling problem,
J. Braz. Soc. Mech. Sci. 24(2), 111114 (2002).
[13] T. S. Krasnospolskaya and A.Yu. Shvets, Chaotic interactions in a pendulum-energy source system, Prikladnaya Mekhanika 26(2),
9096 (1990).
[14] T. S. Krasnospolskaya and A.Yu. Shvets, Chaos in vibrating systems with a limited power supply, Chaos 3, 387395 (1993).
[15] D. Belate, H. I. Weber, J. M. Balthazar, and D. T. Mook, Chaotic vibrations of a non-ideal electro-mechanical system, Int. J. Solids
Struct. 38, 16991706 (2001).
[16] National Instruments, Labview: Data acquisition basics manual, version 5.1, 1998.
[17] http://www.eng.abdn.ac.uk/cadr
[18] B. Horton, X. Xu, and M. Wiercigroch, Damping identication for a parametric pendulum operating in chaotic regions, in prepa-
ration.
[19] G. F. Lang and D. Snyder, Understanding the physics of electrodynamic shaker performance, Sound and Vibration Magazine
35(10), 2433 (2001).
[20] X. Xu, Nonlinear dynamics of parametric pendulum for wave energy extraction, PhD thesis, Aberdeen University, 2005.


Dynamic Interactions Between Parametric Pendulum and Electro-Dynamical Shaker

Uploaded by

Document Information

Original Title

Copyright

Available Formats

Share this document

Share or Embed Document

Sharing Options

Did you find this document useful?

Is this content inappropriate?

Copyright:

Available Formats

Dynamic Interactions Between Parametric Pendulum and Electro-Dynamical Shaker

Uploaded by

Copyright:

Available Formats

ZAMM Z. Angew. Math. Mech. 87, No. 2, 172 186 (2007) / DOI 10.1002/zamm.

Dynamic interactions between parametric pendulum

Received 3 August 2006, revised 14 November 2006, accepted 12 December 2006

Dedicated to the memory of Professor Pavel Zhilin

Shaker Current probe

Fig. 1 Schematic diagram of the experimental set-up.

Ma Xa + ca (Xa Xb ) + ka (Xa Xb ) = Ma g Fem ; (1)

LI + RI + Eback = E(t), (3)

Fem = KI, (4)

where K is equal to 2rcoil N B.

Eback = K(Xa Xb ). (5)

3 Identication of the system parameters

3.1 Mechanical parameters of shaker

(a) Amplitude of armature acceleration

Amplitude of body acceleration

Fig. 5 Force-displacement diagram of the static body stiffness test.

na = 2fa 2 = 35.50 rad/s, nb = 2fb 2 = 17.26 rad/s.

3.2 Coupling coefcient K

Fem = Ma Xa ca (Xa + Xb ) ka (Xa Xb ) + Ma g, (6)

(a) 1.0 (d) 2.4

Acceleration of armature, [m/s2]

Acceleration of armature, [m/s2]

Acceleration of body, [m/s2]

(a) 2.6 (b) 12

1.3 Current, [A] 6

Acceleration of body, [m/s2]

Amplitude of body acceleration

Table 1 Experimentally determined parameters of the pendulum-shaker system

m 0.854 kg l 0.3166 m c 0.0475 kg/s

: ml + cl + mg sin = mXa sin , (7)

4.2 Experimental verication of pendulum-shaker model

(a) (b) 4.6

Acceleration of body, [m/s2]

Amplitude of body acceleration

Table 2 Parameters of the pendulum-shaker system; R0 = R = 0.3 and I0 = mg/K = 0.0644

4.3 Interactions between pendulum and shaker

(a) (b) 9.0

Acceleration of body, [m/s2]

0.80p 1.20p 1.60p 2.00p 0.80p 1.20p 1.60p 2.00p

Fig. 13 (online colour at: www.zamm-journal.org)

Amplitude of body acceleration

A Results of the experimental tests for estimating coupling coefcient

B Equations of motion of the pendulumshaker system

You might also like