Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456

www.elsevier.com/locate/chaos

Chaotic response of a quarter car model forced by a road

profile with a stochastic component
a,*
Grzegorz Litak , Marek Borowiec a, Michael I. Friswell b, Wojciech Przystupa c

a
Department of Applied Mechanics, Technical University of Lublin, Nadbystrzycka 36, PL-20-618 Lublin, Poland
b
Department of Aerospace Engineering, University of Bristol, Queens Building, Bristol BS8 1TR, United Kingdom
c
Department of Applied Mathematics, Agricultural University of Lublin, Akademicka 13, PL-20-950 Lublin, Poland

Accepted 4 July 2007

Abstract

The Melnikov criterion is used to examine a global homoclinic bifurcation and transition to chaos in the case of a
quarter car model excited kinematically by a road surface profile consisting of harmonic and noisy components. By
analyzing the potential an analytic expression is found for the homoclinic orbit. The road profile excitation including
harmonic and random characteristics as well as the damping are treated as perturbations of a Hamiltonian system. The
critical Melnikov amplitude of the road surface profile is found, above which the system can vibrate chaotically. This
transition is analyzed for different levels of noise and illustrated by numerical simulations.
Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.

1. Introduction

The problem of rough surface road profiles and its influence on vehicle unwanted vibrations due to kinematic
excitations is still a subject of research among automotive manufacturers and research groups, whose objective is
to minimize their effects on the driver and passengers [1–6]. Recently many new applications of active and semi-
active control procedures and special devices to minimize vehicle vibrations have been developed [7–9]. Dampers
based on magneto-rheological fluid with typical hysteretic characteristics have significant promise for effective vibra-
tion damping in many applications [10–12]. New ideas in vehicle vibration damping, such as ‘Sky hook’ control [13]
or H1 control [12,14] have already been implemented and tested in several car and motorcycle applications. Efforts
have focused on studies of the excitation of the automobile by a road surface profile with harmful noise components
[3,4]. Due to various nonlinearities and in the presence of harmonic excitations of a road profile, chaotic behaviour
may produce noise-like responses [6,15]. However one cannot exclude more complex excitations from the road pro-
file. This paper analyses the case when the excitation consists of a harmonic term with a small random noise
component.

*
Corresponding author. Tel.: +48 81 5384573; fax: +48 81 5250808.
E-mail address: g.litak@pollub.pl (G. Litak).

0960-0779/$ - see front matter Ó 2007 Elsevier Ltd. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.chaos.2007.07.021
 G. Litak et al. / Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456 2449

2. The model and equations of motion

The equation of motion of a single degree of freedom quarter car model (Fig. 1) is [6]
 
d2 x d
m 2 þ k 1 ðx  x0 Þ þ mg þ F h ðx  x0 Þ; x  x0 ¼ 0; ð1Þ
dt dt
where Fh is an additional nonlinear hysteretic suspension damping and stiffness force dependent on relative displace-
ment and velocity, given by
   3
d 3 d d
Fh ðx  x0 Þ; x  x0 ¼ k 2 ðx  x0 Þ þ c1 ðx  x0 Þ þ c2 ðx  x0 Þ ð2Þ
dt dt dt
and the road profile can be described by a combination of harmonic and noise terms [16–18] as
x0 ðtÞ ¼ A sinð2pv0 t=kÞ þ wðv0 tÞ; ð3Þ
where v0 is the car velocity, k is the wavelength of a road profile modulation, and the small random component w(v0t) is
a random process defined along the vehicle horizontal displacement coordinate z 0 = v0t.
By assuming the simplified model with one degree of freedom (Fig. 1), the authors have focused on the analytical
estimation of the transition to chaos by means of Melnikov’s method, which can be applied only in systems of one
degree of freedom [19,20]. Choosing a one degree of freedom model was also a consequence of the assumption that
the unsprung mass is significantly smaller than the sprung mass [21].
Defining a new variable for the relative vertical displacement as
y ¼ x  x0 ; ð4Þ
Eqs. (1) and (2) become
 3
d2 y dy dy d2 wðv0 tÞ
2
þ x 2
y þ B 1 y 3
þ B2 þ B3 ¼ g þ AX2 sinðXtÞ  ; ð5Þ
dt dt dt dt2
where X = 2pv0/k, x2 = k1/m, B1 = k2/m, B2 = c1/m, B3 = c2/m. The stochastic component of the road excitation
roughness can be modelled as a white noise process that is passed through two first order low-pass filters with limiting
wave numbers xg1 , xg2 [3]. Thus
d2 wðz0 Þ dwðz0 Þ 0 0 0
þ c2 þ x2 0
2 wðz Þ ¼ r n ðz Þ ð6Þ
dz02 dz0
where c2 ¼ xg1 þ xg2 and x2  
2 ¼ xg1 xg2 . The resulting roughness of the road profile is a coloured noise process with an
additional governing differential equation [3].
However in our case the dominant vertical profile change arises from the harmonic excitation term, while the noise
component defines an additional disturbance. Thus, in contrary to the above treatment [3], we do limit the random
component to one that fulfills the following condition,

v0

mass x
mg

z’ x0=Asin(2πv0t/λ)+ψ(v0t)
A
λ ψ(v0t)

Fig. 1. The quarter car model subjected to kinematic excitation of harmonic and random components with nonlinear damping and
stiffness. v0 = dz 0 /dt is the constant velocity of the vehicle, k and A are the wavelength and amplitude of the harmonic excitation, while
2450 G. Litak et al. / Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456

d2 wðz0 Þ
ffi r0 n0 ðz0 Þ; ð7Þ
dz02
pffiffiffiffi
where the white noise has intensity r 0 (scaled in 1= m units). n 0 (z 0 ) has zero mean and unit variance, and hence
< n0 ðz0 Þ >¼ 0 and < n0 ðz0 Þn0 ðz0 þ Dz0 Þ >¼ dðDz0 Þ: ð8Þ
0 0 0
Furthermore n (z ) can be expressed by the Wiener process W z0 (in the z domain), as
n0 ðz0 Þ ¼ dW z0 =dz0 : ð9Þ
Following Li et al. [6], Borowiec et al. [22] and Litak et al. [21,23] the system parameters are defined as
m ¼ 240 kg; k 1 ¼ 160000 N=m; k 2 ¼ 300000 N=m3 ; c1 ¼ 250 Ns=m; c2 ¼ 25 Ns3 =m3 and
k ¼ 3:34 m: ð10Þ
The corresponding dimensionless equation of motion can be written for a scaled time variable s = xt as
€y þ y þ ky 3 þ ay_ þ b_y 3 ¼ g0 þ AX02 sinðX0 sÞ  rnðsÞ; ð11Þ
qffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
k2 c1 k1 g 3 0 3
where k ¼ B1 =x ¼ k1 , a ¼ B2 =x ¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffi, b ¼ B3 x ¼ c2 m3 , g ¼ x2 , X = X/x, r ¼ r ðv0 =xÞ ¼ r ðX k=2pÞ , n(s) =
2 0 0 0 0
k1 m
dWs/ds (the Wiener process Ws in the s domain). The overdots in Eq. (11) denote the corresponding derivative with
respect to s (Æ  d/ds).
Transforming the above second order differential equation into two first order differential equations gives
dy ¼ vds
ð12Þ
dv ¼ ðy  ky 3  ay_  b_y 3  g0 þ AX02 sinðX0 sÞÞds  rdW s :
These equations are the principal result of our investigation in the present section and will be analyzed, both analyti-
cally and numerically, in following sections.

3. Melnikov analysis in the presence of random disturbances

The quarter car model defined in Fig. 1 can be studied further by means of the Melnikov method [19,20] assuming
the road profile excitation and the damping as perturbations of a Hamiltonian system [21].
We start this analysis with the renormalisation of the potential V(y) (Fig. 2a). If we let y = z + y0, where y0 is the
fixed (of saddle type) point, and V1(z) = V(y)  V(y0), then,
k
V 1 ðzÞ ¼ z2 ðz  z1 Þðz  z2 Þ; ð13Þ
4
V1(z)

a b
V

0.16 0.8
y2
y0
0.12 >
V

0.4
z0=0 z1 z2 z
0.08 z0 z1
V(y)

0.0
v

0.04
-0.4 >
0.00
y1
-0.8
-1.0 -0.5 0.0 0.5 1.0 0.0 0.4 0.8 1.2
y z

Fig. 2. External potential V (y) [21] for given system parameters (Fig. 2a). V(y) is scaled in Nm while y is in m. The fixed points are
y0 = 0.7228 m, y1 = 0.0147 m, y2 = 0.7375 m. Renormalized external potential V 1 ðzÞ ¼ 4k z2 ðz  z1 Þðz  z2 Þ for given system
parameters (in our case: k = 1.875 N/m3, z1  1.298 m and z2  1.593 m). A homoclinic orbit for the given energy E = V1(z = 0)
(Fig. 2b). z is expressed in m while vx is given in m/s.
 G. Litak et al. / Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456 2451

where z1 = 1.298 and z2 = 1.593. Notice that the left peak (the saddle point) of the potential V1(z) occurs at
z = 0 < z1 < z2 and that V1(0) = 0 (Fig. 2a).
~ ¼ b, A
a ¼ a, b
Looking for a homoclinic orbit we introduce a small parameter  (formally ~ ~ ¼ A and ~
r ¼ r). The
equations of motion then have the following form,
z_ ¼ v;
3k k ð14Þ
v_ ¼ kz3 þ ~ 3 þ AX
ðz1 þ z2 Þz2  z1 z2 z þ ð~av  bv ~ 02 þ sinðX0 sÞ  r
~nðsÞÞ:
4 2
Note that the unperturbed equations (for  = 0) can be obtained from the gradients of the Hamiltonian H0(z, v),
oH 0 oH 0
z_ ¼ ; v_ ¼  ; ð15Þ
ov oz
where H0 is defined as
v2 k
H0 ¼ þ ðz  z1 Þðz  z2 Þz2 : ð16Þ
2 4
The homoclinic orbits are obtained from the unperturbed Hamiltonian, as
rffiffiffiffiffiffiffi Z
2 dz
s¼ pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi : ð17Þ
k z ðz  z1 Þðz  z2 Þ

Thus, the single homoclinic orbit is given by the inverse of the above expression and the corresponding velocity
(z*(s  s0), v*(s  s0)), as [21,24],
 qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
4z1 z2 exp ðs  s0 Þ kz21 z2
z ¼  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
2
ðz1  z2 Þ  exp 2ðs  s0 Þ kz21 z2 þ 2ðz1 þ z2 Þ exp ðs  s0 Þ kz21 z2
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi ð18Þ
4z1 z2 kz21 z2 exp ðs  s0 Þ kz21 z2 ðz1  z2 Þ2  exp 2ðt  t0 Þ kz21 z2

v ¼  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi  qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi2 :
ðz1  z2 Þ2  exp 2ðs  s0 Þ kz21 z2 þ 2ðz1 þ z2 Þ exp ðs  s0 Þ kz21 z2

Now suppose that

pffiffiffi !
2ðz2  z1 Þ
s0 ¼ s01 þ s02 ; where s01 ¼  ln pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi : ð19Þ
kz1 z2

s01 has been fixed to guarantee the proper parity (under the time transformation s ! s), and hence
zðsÞ ¼ zðsÞ and vðsÞ ¼ vðsÞ: ð20Þ
s02 is an arbitrary constant to be determined later in the minimization procedure of the Melnikov integral M(s02). The
corresponding orbit (z*(s  s0), v*(s  s0)) is plotted on the phase plane in Fig. 2b.
In the deterministic case the distance between a perturbed stable and unstable manifolds and their possible cross-
sections may be examined by means of the Melnikov integral M(s02), given by [20]
Z þ1
Mðs02 Þ ¼ hðz ðs  s01  s02 Þ; v ðs  s01  s02 ÞÞ ^ gðz ðs  s01  s02 Þ; v ðs  s01  s02 ÞÞds; ð21Þ
1

where the wedge product for two dimensional vectors is defined as h ^ g = h1g2  h2g1.
The corresponding vector h is the gradient of unperturbed Hamiltonian (Eq. (16)),
   
3 1
h ¼ k z þ ðz1 þ z2 Þz  z1 z2 z ; v ;
3 2 
ð22Þ
4 2
while the vector g consists of the perturbation terms to the same Hamiltonian (Eq. (14)),
~ 3 þ AX
g ¼ ½~av  bv ~ 02 sinðX0 sÞ  r
~nðsÞ; 0: ð23Þ

In the deterministic case for r = 0, shifting the time coordinate s ! s + s02 under the integral (Eq. (21)), a sufficient
condition for a global homoclinic transition corresponding to a horseshoe type of stable and unstable manifold
cross-section (for the excitation amplitude A > Ac), can be written as:
2452 G. Litak et al. / Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456

_ oMðs02 Þ
Mðs02 Þ ¼ 0 and –0; ð24Þ
s02
os02

where ¤ is the mathematical symbol of existence.

In contrast, for the stochastic case, the direct integration of M (s02) is not relevant and one has to perform the con-
dition for chaotic motion in a statistical mean-square-value sense [18,25–27]. Thus the critical conditions to be satisfied
are

_ orM ðs02 Þ
rM ðs02 Þ ¼ 0 and –0; ð25Þ
s02
os02

where rM(s02) can be written as

Z 1 pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
rM ðs02 Þ ¼ ~ 3 ðs  s01 Þ þ AX
v ðs  s01 ðð~av ðs  s01 Þ  bv ~ 02 sinðX0 ðs þ s02 ÞÞÞds  r
~ < v2 ðx0 ÞS n ðx0 Þ >; ð26Þ
1

where the stochastic part has to be calculated in the mean-squares sense. Sn(x 0 ) is the probability distribution
1
S n ðx0 Þ ¼ S n ¼ : ð27Þ
2p
This definition means that every frequency x 0 has an equal contribution to the white noise process. v*(x 0 ) is given by the
Fourier transform of v*(s  s01) as
Z 1
0
v ðx0 Þ ¼ Re v ðs  s01 Þeix t ds: ð28Þ
1

From Eqs. (24) and (25) for relatively low levels of noise
qffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

I 1  ðX0 k=2pÞ3 I 3 sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi

1 I k 3
I
Ac ¼
¼ 02
1 3 ; ð29Þ
0  3 X0 I ðX0 Þ
X02 I 2 ðX0 Þ X I 2 ðX Þ 8p 2

where
Z
1
I 1 ¼ ðaðv ðsÞÞ2 þ bðv ðsÞÞ4 Þds ð30Þ
1

and
Z Z
1 1
I 2 ðX0 Þ ¼ sup v ðs  s01 Þ sinðX0 ðs þ s02 ÞÞds ¼ v ðs  s01 Þ sinðX0 sÞds ; ð31Þ
s 2R 02 1 1

where sup means supremum for various s02, and is practically realized by
cosðX0 s02 Þ ¼ 1: ð32Þ
The last integral I3 is
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z 1 ffi
10
I3 ¼ r v2 ðx0 Þdx0 : ð33Þ
2p 1

Following paper [21] our strategy will be to calculate all three integrals I1, I2 and I3 numerically. The results of Ac for
various values of r 0 are presented in Fig. 3.

4. Numerical results

Using a discretized integration schema (Euler-Maruyama [28]) for an arbitrary small integration step Ds yields
yðs þ DsÞ ¼ yðsÞ þ vDs
pffiffiffiffiffiffi ð34Þ
vðs þ DsÞ ¼ vðsÞ þ ðyðsÞ  ky 3  ay_  b_y 3  g0 þ AX02 sinðzÞÞDs  r DsCðsÞ
 G. Litak et al. / Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456 2453

a 0.8 b
0.42
0.6 CHAOTIC CHAOTIC A=0.41
A=0.405
A=0.40
A=0.39

A c [m]
A c [m] 0.4 0.38

REGULAR
0.2 0.34 A=0.34
A=0.33
σ’=0, 0.006, 0.012, σ’=0, 0.006,
v 0.024 A=0.31 0.012, 0.024 v
0.0 0.30
0.0 0.5 1.0 1.5 2.0 2.5 3.0 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1.0 1.1 1.2
Ω’ Ω’

Fig. 3. Critical amplitude Ac versus vibration frequency X 0 for different r 0 coefficients (Fig. 3a). Magnification of Fig. 3a where
additional black points correspond to X 0 = 0.8 and A = 0.31, 0.33, 0.34 0.40, 0.405, 0.41 m, respectively (Fig. 3b). In both figures
(Fig. 3a–b) r 0 = 0, 0.006 and 0.012 starting from the top curve.

where C(s) is a Gaussian noise process with zero mean <C(s)> = 0 and unit variance <C2(s)> = 1. Note that now r
plays
pffiffiffiffiffiffi the role of noise strength, and in the discretized algorithm it is scaled by the square root of the integration step
Ds. Following Naess and Moe [28] the computational efficiency of the above schema can be improved easily for the
deterministic parts by calculating intermediate values of y and v. In a similar way one can formulate a Runge–Kutta–
Maruyama 4th order integration scheme, and such a scheme will be used in this paper. The aim of our numerical inves-
tigation is to illustrate the effect of noise on global homoclinic bifurcations leading to chaotic solutions. The ranges of
parameter values were determined by considering the appearance of chaos in the deterministic case [21], as well as pre-
dictions based on the Melnikov theory (in the previous section). The Lyapunov exponents for varying noise intensity,
r 0 , were also calculated to gain further insight. Note that, in general, the Lyapunov exponent for a noisy system should
be evaluated by a dimensional analysis of the nonlinear time series. Here, for simplicity, the algorithm of Wolf et al. [29]
was used. This algorithm has limitations for dynamical systems influenced by random disturbances, but following Kapi-
taniak [30] we assumed the same noise realization for neighbouring trajectories.
Fig. 4 shows the dominant Lyapunov exponent versus the road noise square deviation r 0 for different harmonic
amplitudes chosen from the interval A 2 [0.31 m, 0.41 m]. Note that for each amplitude, A, there exists a critical value
of the noise component r 0 for which the system escapes from the potential well. Interestingly for A P 0.39 m (A = 0.39,
0.405 and 0.41 m) where the dominant Lyapunov exponent k1 is close to 0 the curve k1(r 0 ) is characterized by strong
fluctuations. This is opposite to the situation when A  0.31 (A = 0.31, 0.33 and 0.34 m), where the value of k1 changes
within a very small range as r 0 varies. This could be connected with the vicinity of chaotic solutions (in the case of larger
A). In fact chaotic solutions are usually preceded by period doubling bifurcations and changing r 0 one can switch
between various multi-frequency solutions. This could explain the non-monotonic character of the k1(r 0 ) curve for
A = 0.40. Note also that for A = 0.41 the Lyapunov exponent remains positive in the presence of noise, while the curve
k1(r 0 ) for A = 0.405 clearly shows that the system vibrates regularly for r 0 = 0, but can transit to a chaotic solution with
a random excitation component.

0.05
A=0.41 A=0.405
0.00

-0.05 A=0.39
λ1 A=0.40
-0.10 Escape from
A=0.34
the potential well
-0.15 A=0.33
A=0.31
-0.20
0.000 0.004 0.008 0.012 0.016
σ’

Fig. 4. Dominant Lyapunov exponent calculated for X 0 = 0.8 and different excitation amplitudes: A = 0.31, 0.33, 0.34 0.40, 0.405,
0.41 m. Note that for sufficiently high noise levels, r 0 (different for each amplitude A) the system escapes from the potential well.
2454 G. Litak et al. / Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456

Fig. 5a–h show results as phase portraits (with lines) and Poincare sections (with points), for the following system
parameters: X 0 = 0.8, A = 0.31, 0.33, 0.34, 0.405 and 0.41 m, r 0 = 0 and 0.006. For A = 0.31 m (Fig. 5a and b) we
observe a simple noise effect of smearing in trajectory of period 1 synchronized motion. A more interesting case is

a b
0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
v

v
-0.2 -0.2

-0.4 -0.4

-0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6

y y

c d
0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
v

-0.2 -0.2

-0.4 -0.4

-0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6

y y

e f
0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
v

-0.2 -0.2

-0.4 -0.4

-0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6

y y

g h
0.4 0.4

0.2 0.2

0.0 0.0
v

-0.2 -0.2

-0.4 -0.4

-0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6 -0.6 -0.2 0.2 0.6

y y

Fig. 5. Phase diagrams (velocity v ¼ y_ versus displacement y plotted by lines) and corresponding Poincare sections (plotted by points)
for X 0 = 0.8 and A = 0.31 m (r 0 = 0 – Fig. 5a, r 0 = 0.006 – Fig. 5b), A = 0.39 m (r 0 = 0 – Fig. 5c, r 0 = 0.006 – Fig. 5d), A = 0.405 m
(r 0 = 0 – Fig. 5e, r 0 = 0.006 – Fig. 5f) and A = 0.41 m (r 0 = 0 – Fig. 5g, r 0 = 0.006 – Fig. 5h). vx is scaled in m/s, y in m.
 G. Litak et al. / Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456 2455

presented in Fig. 5c and d (A = 0.39 m) where the deterministic case exhibits a period 2 motion. Clearly, the noise pro-
duces a topological uncertainty, leading to jumps between the trajectory within one cycle of period 2. The same phe-
nomenon may be seen in Fig. 5e and f (A = 0.405 m) where the deterministic motion has period 4. Finally the
deterministic chaotic attractor (Fig. 5g – A = 0.41 m) retains its geometric properties when influenced by random dis-
turbances. In fact the response is changed slightly by the trajectory broadening effect of the noise. This leads to the con-
clusion that random noise with a relatively weak intensity (r 0 = 0.006) does not destroy chaotic attractor. Moreover
multiple period trajectories (Fig. 5c and e) may be destabilized by the noise, making a chaotic solution more likely.
These observations are consistent with the calculated Lyapunov exponents (Fig. 4), and also the Melnikov predictions
(Fig. 3a and b). The phase shift in the Poincare map associated with the increase of r 0 in Fig. 5a–h can be related to a
side effect of the complex harmonic-random forcing.

5. Conclusions

We have analyzed the model of a quarter car [6,21,22] under chaotic and noisy conditions. Note, chaotic vibrations
have a noise-like frequency spectrum of a wide range which are very harmful for drivers. Such oscillations can be con-
trolled in a sophisticated way through the chaos control methods [21] but the principal issue for a vehicle system should
be to eliminate any vibrations.
Introducing a small noise component, which was absent in previous treatments [6,21,22], we used the analytical Mel-
nikov theory and predicted the lowest critical amplitude where the system may transit to a chaotic motion. This pre-
diction has been confirmed numerically (see Figs. 3–5 for specified amplitudes). It must be underlined that a weak noise
component does not destroy a chaotic attractor but in fact makes it more robust. This is consistent with a higher level of
noise giving similar effects as a larger harmonic amplitude.
On the other hand the situation around the critical value of A  Ac is very delicate. Here for slightly stronger noise
the escape from the potential well takes place. One should remember that in reality this escape would be compensated
by a sudden increase of stiffness. Furthermore in our single degree of freedom model chaotic vibrations appear for
about A  0.40 m, which is higher than a realistic value. However it may be possible that this characteristic type of
motion will appear at lower amplitudes for models with more degrees of freedom. Note also that the simulations were
performed for k1 = 3.34 m. As this parameter varies, the noise intensity would change, and thus the conditions for cha-
otic vibrations and also the critical amplitude, Ac, would be affected.

Acknowledgement

This research has been partially supported by the Polish Ministry of Science and Higher Education and the DAAD
scholarship (G.L.). G.L. would like to thank the Institute of Physics, TU Chemnitz for hospitality.

References

[1] Verros G, Natsiavas S, Stepan G. Control and dynamics of quarter car models with dual–rate damping. J Vib Control
2000;6:1045–63.
[2] Gobbi M, Mastinu G. Analytical description and optimization of the dynamic behaviour of passively suspended road vehicles. J
Sound Vib 2001;245:457–81.
[3] Von Wagner U. On nonlinear stochastic dynamics of quarter car models. Int J Non Linear Mech 2004;39:753–65.
[4] Turkay S, Akcay H. A study of random vibration characteristics of the quarter car model. J Sound Vib 2005;282:111–24.
[5] Verros G, Natsiavas S, Papadimitriou C. Design optimization of quarter car models with passive and semi-active suspensions
under random road excitation. J Vib Control 2005;11:581–606.
[6] Li S, Yang S, Guo W. Investigation on chaotic motion in histeretic nonlinear suspension system with multi-frequency excitations.
Mech Res Commun 2004;31:229–36.
[7] Guo DL, Hu HY, Yi JQ. Neural network control for a semi-active vehicle suspension with a magneto-rheological damper. J Vib
Control 2004;10:461–71.
[8] Liu H, Nonami K, Hagiwara T. Semi-active fuzzy sliding mode control of full vehicle and suspensions. J Vib Control
2005;11:1025–42.
[9] Lauwerys C, Swevers J, Sas P. Robust linear control of an active suspension on a quarter car test–rig. Control Eng Pract
2005;13:577–86.
[10] Choi SB, Lee SK. A hysteresis model for the field–dependent damping force of a magneto-rheological damper. J Sound Vib
2001;245:375–83.
2456 G. Litak et al. / Chaos, Solitons and Fractals 39 (2009) 2448–2456

[11] Lai CY, Liao WH. Vibration control of a suspension system via a magneto-rhellogical fluid damper. J Vib Control 2002;8:527–47.
[12] Du H, Sze KY, Lam J. Semi-active H (infinity) control of vehicle suspension with magneto-rheological dampers. J Sound Vib
2005;283:981–96.
[13] Karnopp DC, Crosby MJ, Harwood RA. Vibration control using semi-active force generators. Trans ASME: J Eng Ind
1974:619–26.
[14] Soravia P. H1 control of nonlinear systems: Differential games and viscosity solutions. SIAM J Control Optimiz 1996;34:1071–97.
[15] Zhu Q, Ishitobi M. Chaotic vibration of a nonlinear full vehicle model. Int J Solids Struct 2006;43:747–59.
[16] Risken H. The Focker–Planck Equation, Methods of Solution and Applications. Berlin: Springer; 1989.
[17] Lin YK, Cai GQ. Probabilistic Structural Dynamics: Advanced Theory and Applications. New York: McGraw-Hill; 1995.
[18] Gan C. Noise-induced chaos and basin erosion in softening Duffing oscillator. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 2005;25:1069–81.
[19] Melnikov VK. On the stability of the center for time periodic perturbations. Trans Moscow Math Soc 1963;12:1–57.
[20] Guckenheimer J, Holmes JP. Nonlinear Oscillations, Dynamical Systems and Bifurcations of Vectorfields. New York: Springer;
1983.
[21] Litak G, Borowiec M, Friswell MI, Szabelski K. Chaotic vibration of a quarter Car model excited by the road surface profile.
Commun Nonlinear Sci Num Simul, in press. doi:10.1016/j.cnsns.2007.01.003.
[22] Borowiec M, Litak G, Friswell MI. Nonlinear response of an oscillator with a magneto-rheological damper subjected to external
forcing. Appl Mech Mater 2006;5–6:277–84.
[23] Litak G, Borowiec M, Ali M, Saha LM, Friswell MI. Pulsive feedback control of a quarter car model forced by a road profile.
Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 2007;33:1672–6.
[24] Litak G, Borowiec M. Oscillators with asymmetric single and double well potentials: transition to chaos revisited. Acta
Mechanika 2006;184:47–59.
[25] Huang DW, Gao Q, Wang HL, Feng JF, Zhu ZW. On chaotic motion of some stochastic nonlinear dynamic systems. Chaos,
Solitons & Fractals 2007;31:242–6.
[26] Yang X, Xu W, Sun Z. Effect of bounded noise on the chaotic motion of a Duffing Van der Pol oscillator in a /6 potential. Chaos,
Solitons & Fractals 2006;27:778–88.
[27] Gan C. Noise–induced chaos in a quadratically nonlinear oscillator. Chaos, Solitons & Fractals 2006;30:920–9.
[28] Naess A, Moe V. Efficient path integration method for nonlinear dynamic systems. Prob Eng Mech 2000;15:221–31.
[29] Wolf A, Swift JB, Swinney HL, Vastano JA. Determining Lyapunov exponents from a time series. Physica D 1985;16:285–317.
[30] Kapitaniak T. Chaos in Systems with Noise. Singapore: World Scientific; 1990.