Resonance — the series · Illustrated Physics

Response against driving frequency. The steady-state amplitude of a driven oscillator against driving frequency, at three damping ratios. Lighter damping gives a taller and narrower peak, and the peak sits slightly below the natural frequency.

The frequency that gets an answer, and the quarter cycle nobody mentions

Push an oscillator at its own frequency and the response grows enormously. The reason is not that the push is in step with the motion — at resonance it is a quarter cycle out, and that is precisely why it works.

part 1 · waves

Where modulating a system sets it going. The regions of the modulation plane in which an oscillator with a damping ratio of 0.02 will not stay still. The horizontal axis is the modulation frequency in units of the oscillator's own; the vertical is how deeply the stiffness is modulated. Inside a shaded wedge the state of rest is unstable and any disturbance grows exponentially; outside it, nothing happens at all. The wedges sit at modulation frequencies of twice, once and two-thirds of the natural frequency, and the first is much the widest — it opens at a depth of 8.0%, against 40.0% for the second. Each boundary is found by integrating one period of the modulation from two independent starts and asking whether the resulting map has a multiplier outside the unit circle, then bisecting on the depth; none of the shape is drawn by hand. Without damping every wedge would come to a point on the axis and there would be no threshold at all — the flat bottom of each is damping, and it is why a swing has to be pumped hard enough before it does anything.

The swing that is pumped, not pushed

Nobody pushes a swing they are sitting on. They stand up at the bottom and sit down at the ends, which changes the pendulum rather than forcing it — and does so twice per period. The equation that describes it has no forcing term at all, so standing still is always a solution, and what the pumping changes is whether standing still is stable.

part 2 · waves

The response of a machine with a 10% absorber bolted to it. The amplitude of the driven mass, in units of the deflection the same force would cause if applied slowly, against drive frequency in units of the machine's own natural frequency. Dashed: the machine alone, with its single resonance. Solid: the same machine with a second mass and spring attached, weighing 10 per cent of it and tuned to the same frequency. At that frequency the driven mass does not move at all — the amplitude is zero rather than small, and the absorber is moving 10.0 static deflections to make it so. What the device costs is the two new resonances it creates, at 0.854 and 1.171 times the original frequency, which are infinite in this undamped calculation and straddle the frequency the machine was protected at.

The mass that makes another stand still

Bolt a small mass on a spring to a machine that is shaking itself apart, tune it to the frequency that is doing the damage, and the machine stops moving. Not moves less — stops, exactly, at that one frequency. The price is two new resonances either side of it, and the whole device is a bet that the drive stays where it was put.

part 3 · waves

The same number read off a decay and off a linewidth. A lightly damped oscillator released and left alone, above, and the power spectrum of exactly those samples, below. The decay falls to 1/e of its starting amplitude after 8.0 cycles, which makes the quality factor π times that, or 25.0. The spectrum peaks at 1.0000 radians per second and falls to half its power 0.04001 radians per second wide, which makes the quality factor the peak divided by the width, or 25.0. The two disagree by 0.02 per cent, which is the resolution of the frequency grid rather than a difference in the physics. They cannot disagree by more, because they are the same statement: a resonance is narrow because its ringing is long, and the transform that turns one into the other is not an approximation but an identity. A measurement of either is a measurement of both — which is why a bell can be characterised by hitting it and listening, or by driving it and sweeping, and why the two instruments never argue.

The width that is a lifetime

Hit a bell and time how long it rings; drive it and measure how narrow its response is. The two numbers are the same number, and they cannot disagree — not because the physics conspires but because a decay and a linewidth are one function seen in two coordinate systems.

part 4 · waves

The resonance with a zero in it

Where a resonance is the only way through a system, the response is a symmetric peak. Where there is also a smooth path that does not care about the frequency, the two add before anything is squared — and the result is lopsided, with a frequency at which nothing gets through at all.

part 5 · waves

One width that falls to nothing. The decay rates of the two modes of a pair of resonances that leak into one shared channel at rates 0.1 and 0.05 and are coupled to each other with strength 0.2, against the detuning of the first from the second. The two rates always add to 0.15, the trace of the leak matrix, to 10⁻¹². Where the resonances are far apart each mode keeps roughly its own resonance's leak. Near them the leaks interfere, and at a detuning of 0.1414 — κ(γ₁ − γ₂)/√(γ₁γ₂) — the slower mode's decay rate is zero to within 10⁻¹², and the faster carries all 0.15. That mode sits at a frequency where the channel is open and does not leak into it: the two routes by which it could escape cancel.

The resonance that refuses to leak

A resonance that sits at a frequency where waves can escape has a width, because it leaks. Put two such resonances into the same channel and let them talk to each other, and at one precise detuning one of their combinations stops leaking altogether — a mode with no width, surrounded by a continuum it could escape into and does not. It cannot be seen from outside, it traps whatever energy lands in it, and if a symmetry is what forbids the leak, it survives any change that keeps the symmetry.

part 6 · waves