How to derive duffing equation for a particular system?

  • Thread starter Thread starter great_sushi
  • Start date Start date
  • Tags Tags
    Derive System
Click For Summary

Homework Help Overview

The discussion revolves around deriving the Duffing equation for a system involving a mass on a nonlinear spring with damping. The original poster outlines their approach using Newton's second law and incorporates a periodic driving force.

Discussion Character

  • Exploratory, Conceptual clarification, Mathematical reasoning

Approaches and Questions Raised

  • The original poster attempts to derive the Duffing equation by equating forces and incorporating damping and driving forces. Some participants question the correctness of signs and the inclusion of terms. Others suggest clarifying the integration of the equation with respect to position to find potential energy.

Discussion Status

Participants are actively engaging in clarifying the derivation process, with some providing guidance on sign conventions and the implications of damping and driving forces. There is a recognition of the complexity involved in defining potential energy in this context, particularly due to the presence of velocity-dependent forces.

Contextual Notes

There is an ongoing discussion about the assumptions related to the forces involved, particularly regarding the nonlinear term and its origin. Participants are also considering the implications of integrating the equation and the conditions under which potential energy can be defined.

great_sushi
Messages
30
Reaction score
0
Say I have a mass m on a non linear spring k with some damping b.

I start with the restoring force of the spring F=-kx+x^3... the x^3 is the non linearity.

Set that equal to Newtons second law F=mx'' = -kx+x^3

Add in the damping which is dependent of velocity bx'

......mx'' = -kx + x^3 + bx'
......= x'' + k/m*x + x^3 + bx'
......= x'' + bx' + w0*x + x^3... Now because my system is driven I add in a periodic force dependent on t.

Fcos(wt) = x'' + bx' + w0*x + x^3

Is this the correct method? I may have gotten mixed up with my signs I tend to do that :(
 
Physics news on Phys.org
Your method is basically correct. But, yes, you do need to be careful with the signs.

Generally, there would be a constant factor in front of the x3 term: βx3

I would recommend going ahead and putting in the driving force at the beginning.

The damping force is usually written -bx' rather than +bx' since the force opposes the velocity.

So, mx'' = -kx +βx3 -bx' + Fcos(ωt)

Then you can easily rearrange the terms to get Fcos(ωt) alone on one side.

You could just as well write the nonlinear part as -βx3 so that

mx'' = -kx -βx3 -bx' + Fcos(ωt)

Then you will get all positive terms when you solve for Fcos(ωt).

[Edit: Be careful when dividing through by the mass m. All terms get divided by m. You should get the Duffing equation .]
 
Last edited:
Oh thank you very much!
Apologies for asking the question twice, i didn't know if it was advanced or introductory..

So if I integrate the duffing equation with respect to x will I get the potential energy? Because the work = force* distance and so the force = work / distance.
 
great_sushi said:
So if I integrate the duffing equation with respect to x will I get the potential energy? Because the work = force* distance and so the force = work / distance.

Potential energy is only defined for forces that depend on position alone. (When you have motion in more than one dimension, there is an additional restriction.) Since you have forces that depend on velocity (damping force) and on time (driving force), there will not be a potential energy for the total force. However, there is a potential energy associated with the force -kx - βx3 which you can find by integrating with respect to x.
 
Ahhh I see that makes sense. So the integral of -kx + βx^3 = -1/2kx^2 + 1/4βx^4 = V(x) and in this case, that gives a double well potential.
 
The potential energy is the negative of the integral of the force. So, the signs in V(x) would be opposite. The shape will depend on whether β is positive or negative.
 
Oh great! I was wondering why my signs were the wrong way round. I didnt realize it was a negative integral.
Thank you very much, you have been extremely helpful :)
 
Can you tell me where the cubic term comes from? I know that it an odd power series but why?
Thanks
 

Similar threads

Replies
25
Views
1K
  • · Replies 5 ·
Replies
5
Views
1K
  • · Replies 4 ·
Replies
4
Views
2K
  • · Replies 3 ·
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
3
Views
2K
Replies
9
Views
4K
  • · Replies 1 ·
Replies
1
Views
2K
  • · Replies 17 ·
Replies
17
Views
2K
Replies
8
Views
1K
Replies
2
Views
2K