×

Limit cycle-strange attractor competition. (English) Zbl 1141.34323

Summary: To understand the competition between what are known as limit cycle and strange attractor dynamics, the classical oscillators that display such features were coupled and studied with and without external forcing. Numerical simulations show that, when the Duffing equation (the strange attractor prototype) forces the van der Pol oscillator (the limit cycle prototype), the limit cycle is destroyed. However, when the van der Pol oscillator is coupled to the Duffing equation as linear forcing, the two traditionally stable steady states are destabilized and a quasi-periodic orbit is born. In turn, this limit cycle is eventually destroyed because the coupling strength is increased and eventually gives way to strange attractor or chaotic dynamics. When two van der Pol oscillators are coupled in the absence of external periodic forcing, the system approaches a stable, nonzero steady state when the coupling strengths are both unity; trajectories approach a limit cycle if coupling strengths are equal and less than 1. Solutions grow unbounded if the coupling strengths are equal and greater than 1. Quasi-periodic solutions give way to chaos as the coupling strength increases and one oscillator is strongly coupled to the other. Finally, increasing the nonlinearity in both the oscillators is stabilizing whereas increasing the nonlinearity in a single oscillator results in subcritical instability.

MSC:

34C15 Nonlinear oscillations and coupled oscillators for ordinary differential equations
37D45 Strange attractors, chaotic dynamics of systems with hyperbolic behavior
Full Text: DOI

References:

[1] Drazin P. G., Nonlinear Systems (1992) · Zbl 0753.34001 · doi:10.1017/CBO9781139172455
[2] Vedd Y., New Approaches to Nonlinear problems in dynamics pp 311– (1980)
[3] Jordan D. W., Nonlinear Ordinary Differential Equations (1999)
[4] DOI: 10.1016/0020-7462(87)90031-X · Zbl 0636.34029 · doi:10.1016/0020-7462(87)90031-X
[5] DOI: 10.1115/1.1302314 · doi:10.1115/1.1302314
[6] El-Abbasy E. M., SIAM J. Appl. Math. 31 pp 269– (1983)
[7] Pinto S. E. D., Physica A 303 (3) pp 339– (2002)
[8] DOI: 10.1016/S0378-4371(00)00041-8 · doi:10.1016/S0378-4371(00)00041-8
[9] Hu G., Commun. Theor. Phys. 31 (1) pp 99– (1999) · doi:10.1088/0253-6102/31/1/99
[10] DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.52.1480 · doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.52.1480
[11] DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.48.171 · doi:10.1103/PhysRevE.48.171
[12] Gonzalez-Miranda J. M., Phys. Rev. E 65 (3) pp 036232-1– (2002)
[13] DOI: 10.1142/S0218127499001747 · Zbl 1089.34522 · doi:10.1142/S0218127499001747
[14] Han Y. J., J. Korean Phys. Soc. 37 (1) pp 3– (2000)
[15] DOI: 10.1109/81.928157 · Zbl 1011.37048 · doi:10.1109/81.928157
This reference list is based on information provided by the publisher or from digital mathematics libraries. Its items are heuristically matched to zbMATH identifiers and may contain data conversion errors. In some cases that data have been complemented/enhanced by data from zbMATH Open. This attempts to reflect the references listed in the original paper as accurately as possible without claiming completeness or a perfect matching.