J.A& MathsMe&s,Vol. 64, No. 5, pp.

765-IIZ,2000
0 2001EkevierScienceLtd
Pergamon All rightsreserved.Printedin Great Britain
PII: SOO21-8928(00)00106-4 0021-8928/MKS--see frontmatter
www.elsevier.com/locateijappmathmech

NON-SMOOTH MECHANICAL SYSTEMS-f

K. POPP
Hannover
e-mail: [email protected]
(Received 27 April 2000)
A review of research on non-smooth dynamical systems from an applications point of view is given. ‘P.votypes of non-smoothness
are considered: caused by impacts or by friction. For each type a list of basic models is given, areas of application are specified,
and the results of research are reviewed. 0 2001 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. INTRODUCTION
By providing some examples of practical relevance, we hope to stimulate further work in non-smooth mechanics,
since they now represent a challenge to both engineers and mathematicians. In the examples presented below,
non-smooth phenomena are caused by kinematic constraints or physical effects like friction, impacts or backlash.
In the modelling of real practical problems such phenomena have been considered as errors and have therefore
been neglected for a long time. Later, these phenomena were considered in an approximate manner by smoothed
characteristics often unjustified from the physical paint of view. Just recently, in refined and more precise models,
these phenomena have been taken into account correctly as non-smooth effects. However, building adequate models
for real practical problems depends on our knowledge of the processes involved and also on the nature of the
problem itself. Hence, in applications the golden rule still holds, namely, models must be as simple as possible and
as accurate as necessary.
This means that physical effects like friction and impacts are usually modelled in a simple way and described,
e.g. by Coulomb’s friction law and Newton’s impact law leading to a non-smooth force and motion characteristic,
respectively. Gaining better insight may result in an exchange of these non-smooth models by smooth ones. This
verities that modelling is an interesting and non-trivial process, sometimes called an “engineering art”. However,
from a pragmatic application point of view the question remains: How can we deal with non-smooth dynamical
systems?
Simply speaking, a non-smooth system is characterized by force and/or motion characteristics which are not
continuous or non-differentiable. Figure 1 shows three simple mechanical force elements (left) with non-smooth
force characteristics (right). Usually these elements are coupled to masses and other elements to form a dynamical
system. In case l(a) we have a system of linear springs (with stiffness k), with a backlash of magnitude 2~. The
force characteristic has the form

0-a) if s3a
fF=
I 0
k(s+a)
if
if
Isl”a
SC-U

In cases l(b) and l(c) the corresponding forces change their sign if the displacement s and the velocity s change
sign, respectively. Figure l(b) shows a system of springs (with stiffness k) with preload lfc 1 = ka and force
characteristic

f~ = k(s + a) if s>o
(rd<ka if s=O
(1.1)
f~=k(s-a) if S<O

Figure l(c) represents a pair of dry Coulomb friction with coefficient I*; here& is the normal load. In this case
the force characteristic is

~R=PLN if s >o

;= 0 (1.2)
tfR\ c k!&N if

fR t-w,.., if s <o

$Prikl. Mat. Mekh. Vol. 64, No. 5, pp. 795-804,2000.

765
766 K. POPP

fF

I/

Fig. 1

The vertical part of the force characteristics (1.1) and (1.2) near the origin has a special mechanical meaning, here
the force is not an applied force but a reaction or constraint force which cannot be determined from the force
characteristic. However, there are enough reaction or constraint equations in a mechanical system available to
calculate these forces uniquely. This is an example of the general fact, that, if we prescribe the displacements or
velocities in a system, i.e. if we improve kinematic constraints on it, we get reaction or constraint forces and at the
same time we may change the number of degrees of freedom. Figure 2 illustrates this by three simple motion
characteristics
In case 2a a point mass moves freely in the region s G 0 and collides elastically with a rigid wall with
s=Qherei+=-eLwhereO<e 4 1. In case 2b the system consists of two point masses with coordinates si and
~2; the unilateral constraint is described by the inequality s2 - ~1 > 0. When s1 = ~2, ideally plastic impact occurs
(e = 0) and the number of degrees of freedom is changed from two to one by the impact. The post-impact velocities
are expressed by the formula

A similar situation occurs in systems if certain positions are tixed, e.g. in snapper mechanisms. An example is
the deployment of folded solar panels from a spacecraft. When contiguous panels have reached their final position
their relative motion is suddenly stopped, resulting in a reduction in the numberfof degrees of freedoms. Another
example is a point mass suspended on a thread of length 1 in a plane (case 2c), where the position of the point
mass at the end of the thread can lie within a circle of radius l(r c 1,f = 2) or on its boundary (r = l,f = 1). Here,
there is a unilateral constraint of the form g(xi,& ‘1 G 0, where g denotes a function which depends on kinematic
quantities, (see, e.g. Fig. 2(c) where g = 4 + $ - 1 )
Alternatively, this unilateral constraint can also be formulated using the tension force fNof the thread. For a
mass position within the circle the thread is not in tension andfN = 0 when g c O(f = 2). However, when the mass
is positioned on the boundary of the circle the thread is in tension so thatf, > 0 for g = 0 (f = 1). Thus, for the
tension force we have fNP 0, which supplements the constraint equation g s 0. Both conditions can be combined
using the complementary relation gfhl = 0 which holds at anywhere t. Hence, as a complete description of the
unilateral constraint we get

g==o, fN2=0, g&l=0

(b)

ZP
Skb-
St

$2
s’=s2coY

I St = s2

Fig, 2

This formula has plays the central role in all contact problems with unilateral constraints.
Other examples of non-smooth systems can be found in the area of active control, where constraints are usually
imposed on the control variables. Thus, in closed-loop control some switching takes place depending on the states
of the system when the constraints are active, e.g. time optimal control or bang-bang control [l]. Other examples
are systems with variable structure, where switching takes place from one structure to another, finally reaching
the control goal by a so-called sliding mode, cf. [2]. In the following we also use the term, “switching” in passive
systems in order to have a general formulation.
The mathematical description of non-smooth systems consists of three parts:
(i) a smooth mathematical description for each switching state of the system,
(ii) an indicator function or switching surface defining where a non-smooth transition in state space is
given,
(iii) a transition function defining how the change from one switching state to another occurs.
If we consider two switching statesp and q, described by ordinary differential equations in state space, we get
the following mathematical description:
(i) prior to switching (t < t*)

t =fP 0, &) = Go, f* E c’

after switching (t > t*),

1= f* k), r(4) = I+, fq E c’

(ii) switching surface S,

(iii) transition function for t = t* and -_hp

Let us take the impact of a point mass on a rigid wall as an example, (Fig. 2, case a). The state variables are s
and S. Let us assume that the velocities of the point mass before and after the impact are constant. Then, the
equations corresponding to (i)-(iii) are:
(i) prior to switching (I c t*)

s = s=const,s=s3+so

after switching (t > t*)

S=S+=const,s=S+t+s+

(ii) switching surface

s = (sls = O}

(iii) transition function for t = t* and s = 0

s+ =-es_, s+ =s_ = 0

Below a review will be given of non-smooth systems. Since we are dealing with complex non-linear dynamical
problems, chaotic motions will also appear. The existing literature will be reviewed together with applications; there
is also some general literature on non-smooth systems available. We mention, in particular the course material
[3], the IUTAM conference proceedings [4], lecture notes [5], and the monograph [6], where multiple impact
problems are also considered (which are omitted here) and, furthermore, the monographs [7,8].

2. EXAMPLES OF NON-SMOOTH SYSTEMS

Problemswithimpacts. Figure 3 shows a collection of simple impact problems together with the corresponding
mechanical models -which can easily be built for demonstration. Figure 3(a) is a classroom example where the
phase portrait consists of two families of parabolas with a non-smooth transition [9]. The rocking block problem,
Fig. 3(b), dates back to 1956, [lo, 111, where the design of foundations for buildings subject to earthquakes has
been discussed. In [12] small-scale experiments using a vibrating table with harmonic and random excitation were
performed. In [13], in particular, the impacts of free rocking blocks were investigated. The forced response has
been investigated, e.g. in [14-171, as well as in [18-201, where impacts on the sidewalls of the block were also
investigated.
The bouncing ball problem (Fig. 3c), was investigated in [21,22] for random repeated impacts. Impacts due to
a harmonically vibrating table were considered in [23, 241 and, under some simplifying assumptions, a two-
dimensional discrete mapping was found. The boundaries of the region of attraction were calculated in [25], and
were found to be fractal curves. The regular motion behaviour is governed by the number of excitation periods
between subsequent impacts and the periodic&y of the motion itself. This behaviour is similar to the operation of
a percussion drilling machine, [26].
Another problem of practical importance are rattling gear boxes when the gear-wheels are not loaded. A simple
mechanical model is shown in Fig. 3(d), where impacts occur in due to backlash, [271.This problem has been studied
extensively in [28-311. Periodic and chaotic motions have been found. The results of a simulation have been verified
by experiments. A good review is given in [32], where further references can be found. Similar investigations are
described in [33,34]. A related but different impulsive process is hammering, where the gear-wheels are loaded. Results
are given in [32,35,36]. Further applications are impacts of heat exchanger tubes [37,38] and clearance connections
in high-speed machinery [39,40].
Figure 3(e) shows a classical impact oscillator. It has been investigated in [41] under the name of a vibro-impact
system. An extensive analysis has been given in [42-44], where chaotic motions are included. The transition to
chaos has also been investigated in [45]. Technical applications are impact print hammers [4-S] and pile-drivers
[49]. A new type of bifurcation has been found, namely grazing bifurcation, where the limiting case of an impact
 Non-smooth mechanical systems 769

(4

Fig. 3

with zero velocity is given [50,51]. New numerical and experimental results are presented in [52-541, where further
references can be found.
So far, only free and forced vibrations have been mentioned. However, there are also non-smooth parametric
vibrations as well as self-excited vibrations. Impulsive parametric excitation problems using the point mapping
approach, among other methods, were investigated in [55,56]. A review and particular applications to vehicles on
elevated guideways are given in [57,58], resulting in systems with jumping state variables.
With regard to self-excited vibrations, the classical problem of a clock pendulum, the electric bell and a variety
of hydraulic self-excited oscillatory systems can be found in [9]. The “woodpecker”, a mechanical toy which exhibits
self-excited vibrations has been analysed in [59, 601. An important technical system, the railway bogie, has been
investigated extensively in [59-611. Here also chaotic motions have been found.

Problems with fiction. Dry friction appears in two different phenomena in nature:
1. as a resistance against the beginning of a motion from equilibrium (the sticking mode), where the friction
force is a constraint force,
2. as a resistance against an existing motion (the slip mode), where the friction force is an applied force.
In vibration problems with friction, summarized in Fig. 4, both phenomena occur. In a simple friction oscillator,
Fig. 4(a), friction leads to energy dissipation until the mass sticks in a so called dead zone [9]. For the oscillators
Fig. 4(b)-(e) both phenomena can occur successively, resulting in stick-slip motions. Here, a rich literature is
available describing the state-of-the-art [64-67]. The physics of friction is addressed in [68,69]. A review of structural
vibrations with friction contacts has been given in [70] and will not be repeated here. Some additional references
will be given below for the problems summarized in Fig. 4.
Figure 4(b) shows a friction oscillator with external excitation dating back to 1931 [71]. Harmonic or random
excitation has been investigated in [72-741.
Friction oscillators with pure self excitation, Fig. 4(c), result in robust limit cycles. The energy is transferred
from the moving belt to the oscillator either by friction forces with a decreasing characteristic [9, 67,751, or, in
the case of constant friction forces, by fluctuating normal forces [76,771. The resulting stick-slip vibrations appear
in everyday life as well as in engineering systems. Example are the sound of bowed instruments, singing wine glasses,
creaking doors, squeaking chalks, and also rattling joints of robots, chattering machine tools, grating brakes and
the squealing noise of tramways in narrow curves. The squealing noise of railway wheels has been investigated in
[78,79]. Investigations of machine tool chatter can be found in [80,81].
It is possible to break up the robust limit cycle by using an additional external excitation, (see Fig. 4d). This case
has been investigated extensively in [53,82-89]. Here, a rich bifurcational behaviour has been found which were
analysed using numerical simulations and the mapping approach; experiments have also been performed. An analysis
of some multi-degree-of-freedom friction oscillators, Fig. 4(e), can be found in [90-921 as well as in [54].

3. CONCLUDING REMARKS
It is not appropriate here, to draw any conclusions. Instead, we will use some questions.
1. How can non-smooth systems be solved efficiently? Solution methods like piecewise solutions, the mapping
approach, smoothing techniques and numerical simulations have to be evaluated and improved.
2. How can the properties of the solutions of non-smooth systems be analysed? Efficient methods for stability
and bifurcation analysis are required.
770 Ic POPP

Fig. 4

3. How can the attractor characteristics for non-smooth systems be reconstructed? Signal-and model-based
methods for computing Lyapunov exponents and the dimension of attractors need to be developed. All these
methods must be suitable for analysing non-smooth multi-degree-of-freedom systems which occur in applications.

REFERENCES
1. PONTRYAGIN, L. S., BOLTYANSKII, V G., GAMKRELIDZE, R. V and MISHCHENKO, E. I?, The Marhemurical Z7reov
of Optimal Processes. Interscience, New York, 1962.
2. UTKIN, V I., SlidingModes and theirApplication in Wriable Structure Systems. Mir, Moscow, 1978.
3. MOREAU, J. J. and PANAGIOTOPOULOS, P D. (Eds) Nonsmooth Mechanics and Applications. CISM Courses and
Lectures, No. 302 Springer, Vienna, 1988.
4. SCHIEHLEN, W., (Ed) Nonlinear dynamics in engineering systems. Proc. IUTAM Symp., Stuttgart 1989. Springer, Berlin,
1990.
5. BROGLIATO, B., Nonsmooth Impact Mechanics. Lecture Notes in Control and Information Sciences 220. Springer, Berlin,
1996.
6. GLOCKER, C. and PFEIFFER, E Multibody Dynamics with Unilateral Contacts. Wiley, New York, 1996.
7. BELETSKY, V. V, Reguriire und chaotische Bewegungstarmr K&per. ‘Ibubner, Stuttgart; 1995.
8. IVANOV, A. I!, Dynamics of Systems with Mechanical Collisions. International Programm of Education, Moscow, 1997.
9. MAGNUS, K. and POPE K., Schwingungen. lbubner, Stuttgart, 1997.
10. HOUSNER, G. W., Limit design of structures to resist earthquakes. In Proc. I%# Con$ on Earthquake Engineering, 1956,
University of California, Berkeley, CA, 1956,5.1-5.13.
11. HOUSNER, G. W., The behavior of inverted pendulum structures during earthquakes. BulL Seismol Sot. America, 1963,
53.2,403-417.
12. PRIESTLEY, M. J. N., EVISON, R. J. and CARR, A. J., Seismic response of structures free to rock on their foundations.
Bull of the New Zealand Nat. Seismol Sot. Earthquake Engng, 1978,11,3,141-150.
13. LIPSCOMBE, P. R. and PELLEGRINO, S., Free rocking of prismatic blocks. J. Eng. Mech., 1993.119,7,1387-1410.
14. ASLAM, M., GODDEN, W. G. and SCALIZE, D. T, Earthquake rocking response of rigid bodies. J. Smc~r. Engng. Rot.
ASCE, 1980,106,2,377-392.
15. ISHYAMA, Y., Motions of rigid bodies and criteria for overturning by earthquake excitations. Earthquake Engngand Sttuct.
DyMmics, 1982,10,5,635-650.
16. IYENGAR, R. N. and MANOHAR, C. S., Rocking response of rectangular rigid blocks under random noise base excitations,
Znt. I. Non-linear Mechanics, 1991,26,6,885-892.
17. YIM, S. C. S. and LIN, H. A., Nonlinear impact and chaotic response of slender rocking objects. J. Eng. Mechanics, 1991,
117,9,2079-2100.
18. HOGAN, S. J., On the motion of a rigid block, tethered at one comer, under harmonic forcing. Proc. R. Sot. LXX&, 1992,
4394 35-45.
19. HOGAN, S. J., Heteroclinic bifurcations in damped rigid block motion. Pmt. Roy. Sot. London, Sex A., 1992,439, 1905,
155-162.
20. HOGAN, S. J., Slender rigid block motion. J. Eng. Mech., 1994,120,1,11-24.
21. WOOD, L. A. and BYRNE, K. I?, Analysis of a random repeated impact process. J. Sound I%., 1981,78,3,329-345.
22. WOOD, L. A. and BYRNE, K. I?, Experimental investigation of a random repeated impact process. J. Sound Vib., 1982,85,
1,53-69.
23. HOLMES, P J., The dynamics of repeated impacts with a sinusoidally vibrating table. /. Sound vib., 1982,84,2,173-189.
24. GUCKENHEIMER, J. and HOLMES, I? J., Nonlinear Oscillations, Dynamical System, and Bifurcation of Vector Fields.
Springer, New York, 1983.
25. ISOMAKI, H. Fractal properties of the bouncing-ball dynamics. In Nonlinear Dynamics in Engineering Systems. Proc. IU7XU
Symp. (Ed. W. Schiehlen), Stuttgart, 1989. Springer, Berlin, 1990,125-131.
26. GLOCKER, Ch. and PFEIFFER, I?, Dynamical systems with unilateral contacts. Nonlinear Dynamics, 1992,3,4,245-259.
 Non-smooth mechanical systems 771

27. REITHMEIER, E., Periodic solutions of nonlinear dynamical systems with discontinuities. In Nonlinear Dynnmics in
Engineering Systems. Z+oc. ZUTXM Symp. (Ed. W. Schiehlen), Stuttgart, 1989. Springer, Berlin, 1990,125-131.
28. KUCUKAY, E and PFEIFFER, F., UberRusselschwingungen in Z@-Schaltgettieben Ing.-Arch., 1986,56,1,25-37.
29. PFEIFFER, F., Seltsame Attraktoren in Zahnradgetrieben. Zng.-Arch., 1988,58,2,113-125.
30. KARAGIANNIS, K., and PFEIFFER, F., Theoretical and experimental investigations of gear-rattling. Nonlinear @am&,
1991,2,367-387.
31. KUNERT, A. and PFEIFFER, I?, Stochastic mode1 for rattling in gear-boxes. In Nonlinear Dynamics in Engineering Systems.
Froc. ZUTAM Symp. (Ed. W. Schiehlen), Stuttgart, 1989. Springer, Berlin, 1990,125-131.
32. PFEIFFER, F., Dynamical systems with time-varying or unsteady structure. ZAMM, 1991,71,4, T6-l’22.
33. MICHALOPOULOS, D. and DIMAROGONOS, A., Dynamic behavior of geared systems with backlash due to stick-slip
vibratory motion. Wear, 1982,81, 1,13.5-143.
34. KLECZKA, M., KREUZER, E. and WILMERS, C., Crises in mechanical systems. In Nonlineur Dynumics in Engineering
Systems. Proc. IUTAM Symp. (Ed. W. Schiehlen), Stuttgart, 1989. Springer, Berlin, 1990,125-131.
35. PRESTL, W., Zuhnhiimmern in Riidertrieben von Dieselmotoren. Fortschr-Ber. VDI. R.ll. VDI, Dusseldorf, 1991,145,142.
36. FRITZER, A., Nichtlineare DyMmik von Steuerttieben. Fortschr-Bez VDI. R.ll. MI, Dusseldorf, 1992,176,143.
37. WHISTON, G. S., Global dynamics of a vibro-impacting linear oscillator. 1. Sound I%. 1987,118,3,395-424.
38. GOYDER, H. and TEH, C. E., A study of the impact dynamics of loosely supported heat exchanger tubes. Tmns. ASME Z.
Pressure Tech., 1989,111,4,394-401.
39. SZCZYGIELSKI, W. M., Dynamisches Verhalten eines schnell drehenden Rotors bei Anstreifvorgangen. Diss. Nr. 8894,
ETH Zurich: Techn. Hochschule, 1986.
40. DECK, J. E and DUBOWSKY, S., On the limitations of predictions of the dynamic response of machines with clearance
connections. ASME Flexible Mechanirms, Dynamics and Analysis, 1992,47,461-469.
41. BARTSKIL, V. I., Theory of Vibroshock Systems. Approzimate Methods. Nauka, Moscow, 1978.
42. SHAW, S. W. and HOLMES, P. J., A periodically forced piecewise linear oscillator x Sound tib. 1983,90,1,129-155.
43. SHAW, S. W., Dynamics of harmonically excited system having rigid amplitude constraints. Pt 1: Subharmonic motions and
local bifurcations. Tmns. ASME. .I Appl. Mech., 1985,52,2,453-$58.
44. SHAW, S. W., Dynamics of harmonically excited system having rigid amplitude constraints. Pt 2: Chaotic motions and global
bifurcations. Tmns. ASME. J. Appl. Mech., 1985,52,2,459-464.
45. PETERKA, I? and VACIK, J., Transition to chaotic motion in mechanical systems with impact. J. Sound Vibr., 1992,154,1,
95-115.
46. HENDRIKS, E, Bounce and chaotic motion in impact print hammers. IBML Res. Development, 1983,27,3,24-31.
47. TUNG, P. C. and SHAW, S. W., The dynamics of an impact print hammer.J. vib,: Acoust. Stmss, Reliability Design. 1988,110,
2,193-200.
48. SPRINGER, H. and ULLRICH, M., Dynamics of dot-matrix printers. In Nonlinear L$namics in Engineering Systems. Proc.
ZUEAM Symp. (Ed. W. Schiehlen), Stuttgart, 1989. Springer, Berlin, 1990,297-304.
49. VIELSACK, P. and STORZ, M., Bifurcation of motion in a technical system with stick-slip and impact. Inst. f. Wiss. Rechnen
u. Math. Modellbildung. Preprint Nr. 95/5, Uni Karlsruhe 1995.
50. NORDMARK, A. B., Non-periodic motion caused by grazing incidence in an impact oscillator. J. Sound Vib., 1991,145,2,
279-297.
51. BUDD, C. and DUX, I?, Chattering and related behaviours in impact oscillators. Z’hiL Trans. Roy. Sot. London. Ser A, 1994,
347,1683,365-389.
52. BISHOP, S. R., THOMPSON, M. G. and FOALE, S., Prediction of period-l impacts in a driven beam. J+oc. Roy Sot. London.
Sex A, 1996,452,1954,2579-2592.
53. HINRICHS, N., OESTREICH, M. and POPP, K., Dynamics of oscillators with impact and friction Chaos, Soliron and FmctaZs,
1997,8,4,53.5-558.
54. OESTREICH, M., Untersuchung von Schwingem mit nichtglatten Kennlinien. Fortschr. Ber. VDI. R 11, VDI, Dusseldorf,
1998,258,166.
55. HSU, C. S., Impulsive parametric excitation: Theory. Tmns. ASME. Ser E. 1. Appl. Mech., 1972,39,9,551-558.
56. HSU, C. S., Cell-to-Cell Mapping. Springer, New York, 1987.
57. POPR K, Beitrige zur Dynamik von Magnetschwebebahnen auf gestdndetten Fahnvegen Fottschr-Ber: VDZ-Z. R 12, VDI,
Dusseldorf; 1978,35,194.
58. POPP, K., Analyse von Systemen mit Impuls-Parametererregung. Zng-Arch., 1980,50,1,49-60.
59. PFEIFFER, F., Mechanische Systeme mit unstetigen Ubergiingen. Ing.-Arch., 1984,54,3,232-240.
60. GLGCKER, C., Dynamikvon Starrkiirpersystemen mit Reibung und St&en. For&t.-Ber. VDZ. R 18, VDI, Dusseldorf, 1995, .
182,220.
61. KAAS-PETERSEN, C., Chaos in a railway bogie. Acta Mech., 1986,61,1-4,89-107.
62. TRUE, H., Some recent developments in nonlinear railway vehicle dynamics. In Proc. 1st Eump. Nonlinear Oscilkzt. Conf.
Akademie Verlag Berlin, 1993,129-148.
63. ISAKSEN, P. and TRUE, H., On the ultimate transition to chaos in the dynamics of Cooperrider’s bogie. Chaos, Solitons
and Fmctals, 1997,8,4,559-581.
64. IBRAHIM, R. A,, Friction-induced vibration, chatter, squeal, and chaos. Tmns. ASME. Friction-Induced Vttr, Chatter; Squeal,
and Chaos, 1992,49DE, 107-121.
65. GURAN, A. et al. (Eds), Dynamics with Friction. World Scientific, Singapore, 1996.
66. FEENY, F., GURAN, A., HINRICHS, N. and POPP, K, A historical review on dry friction and stick-slip phenomena. Apple
Mech. Rev., 1998,51,5,321-341.
67. HINRICHS, N., Reibungsschwmgungen mit Selbst-und Fremderregung: Experiment, Modellierung und Berechnung. Fottschz-
Ber: VDZ. R 11. VDI, Dusseldorf, 1997,240,124.
68. SINGER, I. L. and POLLOCK, H. M. (Eds), FundamentuZs of Friction: Macroscopic and Microscopic Processes. NATO AS1
Series E. V 220. Kluwer, Dortrecht, 1992.
69. PERSSON, B. N. J., Sliding Friction. Springer, Berlin, 1998.
70. POPP, K., Nichtlineare Schwingungen mechanischer Strukturen mit Ftige-oder Kontaktstellen. ZAMM, 1994,74,3,147-165.
772 K. POPP

71. DEN HARTOG, J. I?, Forced vibrations with combined Coulomb and viscous friction. Tmns ASME. 1931, N APM 53-9,
107-115.
72. MARUI, E. and KATO, S., Forced vibration of a base-excited single-degree-of-freedom system with Coulomb friction. Tmns.
ASMEJ. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control. 1984,106,4,280-285.
73. SHAW, S. W., On the dynamic response of a system with dry friction. /. Sound F’ibr. 1986,108,2,305-325.
74. MOSER, M. A., The response of stick-slip systems to random seismic excitation. Diss. California Institute of ?zchnology,
Pasadena, 1987.
75. KAUDERER, H., Nichdineare Mechanik. Springer, Berlin, 1958.
76. ODEN, J. T and MARTINS, J. A., Models and computational methods for dynamic friction phenomena. Comp~r. Meth. in
Apple Mech. and Engng, 1985,52,1-3,527-634.
77. FEENY, B. I? and MOON, E C., Chaos in a forced dry-friction oscillator: Experiments and numerical modelling. /. Sound
@br., 1994,170,3,303-323.
78. POPP, K., SCHNEIDER, E. and IRRETIER, H., Noise generation in railway wheels due to rail-wheel contact forces. In
Boc. 9th IA VSD-Symp., Linkaping, 1985,448-466.
79. FINBERG, U., A model of wheel-rail squealing noise. J. Sound Kbr. 1990,143,3,365-377.
80. GRABEC, I., Chaotic dynamics of cutting process. Inr. 1. Mach. Tools Manufact., 1988,28,1,19-32.
81. GRADISEK, J., GOVEKAR, E. and GRABEC, I., A chaotic cutting process and determining optimal cutting parameter
values using neutral networks. Inr. Machine Tools Manufact., 1996,36,10,1161-1172.
. _ Nonlinear
82. POPP. K. and STELTER, I?. Nonlinear oscillations of structures induced bv dry friction. In Proc. IUZXU Symp.
L$na&ic~ in Engineering .!?ysiems; Stuttgart, 1989. Springer, Berlin, 1990,23-%2.&.
83. POPP. K. and STELTER. P.. Stick-&n vibrations and chaos PhiL Tmns. Rov. Sot. London. Ser: A. 1990,332,1624,89-105.
84. STEL!I’ER, P., Nichtlineak ,!&hwin&gen reibungsenqter Stmkturen. For&hr.&r. VDI. R. 11 VDI, I&eidorf, i990,137.
136.
85. POPP, K., Chaotische Bewegungen beim Reibschwinger mit simultaner Selbst-und Fremderregung. ZAMM, 1991, 71, 4,
T71-l-73.
86. POPP, K., Some model problems showing stick-slip motion and chaos. Tmns. ASME. Friction-induced, Kbr Chattec Squeal,
and Chaos, DE. 1992,49,1-12.
87. POPP, K, HINRICHS, N. and OESTREICH, M., Dynamical behaviour of a friction oscillator with simultaneous self and
external excitation. Sadhuna, Bangalore. 1995,20,2-4,627-654.
88. POPP, K., HINRICHS, N. and OESTREICH, M., Analysis of a self excited friction oscillator with external excitation. In
Qvwmics with Friction (Eds Guran, A. et al.). World Scientific, Singapore, 1996, l-35.
89. OESTREICH, M., HINRICHS, N. and POPP, K, Bifurcation and stability analysis for a non-smooth friction oscillator. Arch.
Appl. Mech., 1996.66,5,301-314.
90. STELTER, I? and SEXTRO, W., Bifurcation in dynamic systems with dry friction. Int. Series of Numerical MathemaGcs, 1991,
97,343-347.
91. SIKORA, J. and BOGACZ, R., On dynamics of several degrees of freedom systems. Z4MM, 1993,73,4/5, T118-T122.
92. BOGACZ, R. and RYCZEK, B., Dry friction self-excited vibrations. Analysis and experiments. Engng Trans., 1!?97,45,3/4,
486-504.

Tmnskztedby the author