Sometime in 2009 Compiled on January 30, 2024 at 4:42am
Abstract
The Van Der Pol differential equation Was solved using perturbation with first
order approximation. Two different solutions were obtained. The first solution
restricted the initial conditions to bewhich resulted in forcing function that
caused resonance to be eliminated. This gave a stable solution but with initial
conditions restricted to be near the origin of the phase plane space.
The second solution allowed arbitrary initial conditions any where in the
phase plane but the the resulting forcing function caused resonance resulting in
a solution which became unstable after some time.
Phase plane plots are used to compare the two solutions.
1 First solution: Restriction on initial condition. No resonance
The Van Der Pol equation is Initial conditions are and .
If , then the equation becomes which has an exact solution. We perturb the exact solution
for to approximate the solution of the nonlinear equation in terms of perturbation
parameter Let the solution of the Van Der Pol equation be and the solution to the exact
equation be , then First order approximation results in Now we need to determine and .
Substituting (2) into (1) gives Collecting terms with same power of gives Setting terms
which multiply by higher power to zero and since it is assumed that is very small therefore
For the LHS to be zero implies that And Equation (3) is solved for and (4) is solved for
in order to find the solution . Solution to (3) is Assuming initial conditions for
are zero, then initial conditions for can be taken to be those given for . Solving
for gives Substituting the solution just found (and its derivative) into (4) gives
Using and the above can be simplified to
Using the above can be simplified further to
The above is the equation we will now solve for , which has four forcing functions, hence four
particular solutions. two of these particular solutions will cause a complete solution blows up
as time increases (the first two in the RHS shown above). If we however restrict the initial
conditions such that And Then those forcing function will vanish. The above two
equation result in the same restriction, which can be found to be By restricting to be
exactly , then the solution we obtain for from (5) will not blow up. Hence (4)
can now be rewritten without the two forcing functions which caused resonance
resulting in But and , hence the above becomes after some simplification The
homogeneous solution to the above is And we guess two particular solutions and . By
substituting each of these particular solutions into (6) one at a time, and comparing
coefficients, we can determine . This results in Similarly, Hence the solution to (6)
becomes
Now applying initial conditions, which are and , to (7) and determining and results in
Therefore we now have the final perturbation solution, which is
Where and and the above solution is valid under the restriction that We notice that the
above restriction implies that both and have to be less than to avoid getting a quantity
which is complex. This implies that his solution is valid near the center of the phase plane
only. In addition, it is valid only for small . To illustrate this solution, We show the phase
plot which results from the above solution, and also plot the solution . Selecting and
2 Second solution. No restriction on initial conditions. Resonance present in the
solution
The same initial steps are repeated as in the first solution, up the equation to solve for
There exists four particular solutions relating to the above four forcing functions
For each of the above, we guess a particular solution, and determine the solution parameters.
We guess , , , and . By substituting each of the above into (8) one at a time and comparing
coefficients, we arrive at the following solutions
Now applying initial conditions which are and and determining and results
in
We can now write the final solution for as
To illustrate this solution, we show the phase plot which results from the above solution, and
also plot the solution . We select and . We note that the same initial conditions are used as
in the earlier solution to compare both solutions.
We see clearly the effect of including resonance particular solutions. The limit cycle
boundary is increasing with time.
The effect becomes more clear if we plot the solution itself, and compare it to the solution
earlier with no resonance. Below, We show from both solutions. We clearly see the
effect of including the resonance terms. This is the solution with no resonance
terms
This is the solution with resonance terms
In the second solution (with resonance), there is no restriction on initial conditions. Hence
we can for example look at the solution starting from any and . This is the phase plot for
and . This would not be possible using the first solution, due to the restriction on having
to be equal to
3 Conclusion
Van Der Pol was solved using perturbation for first order approximation. It was solved using
two methods. In the first method, the solution was restricted to not include forcing functions
which leads to resonance.
In the second method, no such restriction was made. In both methods, this problem was
solved for general initial conditions (i.e. both and can both be nonzero.
In the first method, it was found that the we must restrict the initial conditions to be such
that . This is the condition which resulted in the resonance terms vanishing from the
solution. This leads to a solution which generated a limit cycle which did not blow up as the
solution is run for longer time. In other words, once the solution enters a limit cycle, it
remains in the limit cycle.
In the second method, no restriction on the initial conditions was made. This allowed the
solution to start from any state. However, the limit cycle would grow with time, and the
solution will suffer from fluttering due to the presence of the resonance terms. However, even
though the solution was not stable in the long term, this second approach allowed one to
examine the solution for a shorter time but with the flexibility of choosing any initial
conditions.
It was also observed that increasing the value of the perturbation parameter gradually resulted
in an inaccurate solution as would be expected, as the solutions derived here all assumed a very
small1
was used in generating the solutions and plots.
For future research, it would be interesting to consider the effect of higher order
approximation on the solutions and compare with accurate numerical solutions.