\documentclass[reqno]{amsart}
\usepackage{hyperref}
\usepackage{graphicx}

\AtBeginDocument{{\noindent\small
\emph{Electronic Journal of Differential Equations},
Vol. 2008(2008), No. 44, pp. 1--9.\newline
ISSN: 1072-6691. URL: http://ejde.math.txstate.edu or http://ejde.math.unt.edu
\newline ftp ejde.math.txstate.edu  (login: ftp)}
\thanks{\copyright 2008 Texas State University - San Marcos.}
\vspace{9mm}}

\begin{document}
\title[\hfilneg EJDE-2008/44\hfil Non-monotone period functions]
{Non-monotone period functions for impact oscillators}

\author[C. Chicone, K. Felts\hfil EJDE-2008/44\hfilneg]
{Carmen Chicone, Kenny Felts}  % in alphabetical order

\address{Carmen Chicone \newline
Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri-Columbia,
Columbia MO 65211-4100, USA}
\email{carmen@math.missouri.edu}

\address{Kenny Felts \newline
Department of Mathematics, University of Missouri-Columbia,
Columbia MO 65211-4100, USA}
\email{krf835@mizzou.edu}

\thanks{Submitted December 17, 2007. Published March 20, 2008.}
\thanks{C. Chicone is supported by grant NSF/DMS-0604331,
and K. Felts by  grant \hfill\break\indent NSF/DMS-0604331.}

\subjclass[2000]{34C15, 34C25, 37N15}
\keywords{Period function; impact oscillator}

\begin{abstract}
 The existence of non-monotone period
 functions for differential equations of the form
 \[
 \ddot{x}+f(x)+\gamma H(x)g(x)=0
 \]
 is proved for large $\gamma$, where $H$ is the Heaviside
 function and the functions $f$ and $g$ satisfy certain
 generic conditions. This result is precipitated by an
 analysis of the system
 \[
 \ddot{x}+\sin x +\gamma H(x) x^{3/2}=0,
 \]
 which models the conservative dimensionless impact pendulum
 utilizing Hertzian contact during impact with a barrier at
 the downward vertical position.
\end{abstract}

\maketitle
\numberwithin{equation}{section}
\newtheorem{theorem}{Theorem}[section]
\newtheorem{lemma}[theorem]{Lemma}
\newtheorem{corollary}[theorem]{Corollary}

\section{Introduction}\label{intro}

The study of period functions is important in applied mathematics;
especially, to determine the range of resonances with respect to
periodic forcing and for the solution of boundary value problems.
Most often, as in the free-swinging pendulum, the period function
is monotone. Techniques for detecting monotonicity are the subject
of much current research (see, for example,
 \cite{chouikha,chow,francoise,freire,rothe,zevin}). On the other hand,
we know of only one example in the literature where a non-monotone
period function occurs for a model equation in applied mathematics
(see \cite{lichardova}). While the arguments in this paper are
elementary, its main purpose is to report on a new physical model
with a non-monotone period function.

Our study began after observing, via numerical simulation,
a non-monotone period function for the (conservative)
dimensionless impact pendulum model
\begin{equation}\label{impactpendulum}
\ddot{x}+\sin x +\gamma H(x) x^{3/2}=0,
\end{equation}
where $\gamma$ is a positive parameter and $H$, here and hereafter,
 denotes the Heaviside function (see Appendix~\ref{sec:mathmod} or~\cite{impactoscillator} for a
derivation of this model).  We will prove
the existence of non-monotone period functions for the more general
differential equation
\begin{equation}\label{maineq}
\ddot{x}+f(x)+\gamma H(x)g(x)=0.
\end{equation}

In section \ref{model}, we state the precise conditions that we
require on the functions $f$ and $g$ for equation~\eqref{maineq} to
have a non-monotone period function. Under these assumptions,
we prove in section~\ref{decrperiod} that the period function is
decreasing near the rest point at
the downward vertical and, as a corollary, the period function is
non-monotone. In section~\ref{example}, our non-monotonicity result
is illustrated by numerical integration of the impact pendulum
model~\eqref{impactpendulum}. 

\section{The Model Equation}\label{model}

For the entirety of this paper, we will assume
\begin{itemize}
\item[(H1)] there exist positive constants $K_1$ and $K_2$ such that
$f,g: \mathbb{R} \longrightarrow \mathbb{R}$,
$f \in C^4((-K_1,K_2))\cap C^1(\mathbb{R})$ and
$g \in C^1(\mathbb{R})$;

\item[(H2)] $f(0)=f''(0)=0$, $f'''(0)<0$, $f(-K_1)=0$,  $f'(-K_1)<0$
and $xf(x)>0$ on $(-K_1,0) \cup (0,K_2)$;

\item[(H3)]$g'(x)>0$ on $(0,K_2)$ and $g(0)=g'(0)=0$; and

\item[(H4)] for $G$ such that $G'(x)=g(x)$ and $G(0)=0$, there
exists a positive constant $M$ such that the inequality
\[
R(x):=\frac{G'(x)^2-2G(x)G''(x)}{G'(x)^3} \le -M
\]
is satisfied for $0<x<K_2$.
\end{itemize}
We note that (H1) and (H2) imply $f'(0)>0$,  and we
define $F$ such that $F'(x)=f(x)$ and $F(0)=0$.

The differential equation~\eqref{maineq} is equivalent to the first-order
system
\begin{equation}\label{mainfos}
\begin{gathered}
 \dot{x} = y, \\
\dot{y} =-f(x)-\gamma H(x)g(x),
\end{gathered}
\end{equation}
which is in  Hamiltonian form with Hamiltonian
\begin{equation}\label{hamiltonian}
E(x,y):=\frac{1}{2}y^2+U(x,\gamma)=\frac{1}{2}y^2+F(x)+\gamma
H(x)G(x).
\end{equation}
Moreover,  it has rest points in the phase plane at $(x,y)=(0,0)$
and $(-K_1,0)$. We note that for there to be a rest point at
$(-K_1,0)$ no additional  requirement on the function $g$ is
necessary because the Heaviside function vanishes for negative
values of its argument.

System~\eqref{mainfos} has a hyperbolic saddle point at
$(-K_1,0)$; and, there is some number  $\gamma_1>0$  such that,
for $\gamma > \gamma _1$,  this saddle point has a corresponding
homoclinic orbit surrounding the rest point at the origin and a
period annulus containing all other interior orbits. A sample
phase portrait for the impact pendulum~\eqref{impactpendulum} is
shown in Fig.~\ref{phaseportrait}. In general, the energies of the
energy level sets surrounded by the homoclinic loop increase from
$0$ at the origin to $F(-K_1)$ at the homoclinic orbit.
\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.8\textwidth]{fig1}
\end{center}
\label{phaseportrait}
\caption{ Phase portrait for the impact
pendulum \eqref{impactpendulum} for $\gamma =5000$.}
\end{figure}

We will prove that if $\gamma>0$ is sufficiently large, then there
is an open interval of energy levels,  bounded below by the energy
of the origin, for which the period function is decreasing. Since
the period function increases near the homoclinic orbit and is $C^1$
in the punctured region surrounded by the  homoclinic orbit, the
period function is non-monotone for sufficiently large $\gamma>0$.
We opt for a simple self-contained proof of this result, which can
also be obtained using more general results on the first derivatives
of period functions (see, for example, \cite{freire}).

\section{The Period Function Near the Origin}\label{decrperiod}

By our hypotheses, $F$ is invertible on the interval $(-K_1,0]$
and $F+\gamma G$ is invertible on $[0,K_2)$. For each energy level
$E$ in the range $(0,F(-K_1))$, let $x_{-}(E):=x \in (-K_1,0)$ such
that $E=F(x)$ and $x_{+}(E,\gamma):=x \in (0,K_2)$ such that
$E=F(x)+\gamma G(x)$.
Because $F^{-1}(0)=0$ and  $x_{-}(E)=F^{-1}(E)$, it follows that
$\lim_{E\to 0} x_-(E)=0$.


\begin{lemma}\label{lemma1}
There exists $\gamma _2 >\gamma_1$ and a positive constant $M$
such that for $U$ as defined in
formula~\eqref{hamiltonian}, we have
\[
W(x,\gamma):=\gamma\frac{
(U_x(x,\gamma))^2-2U(x,\gamma)U_{xx}(x,\gamma)}{(U_x(x,\gamma))^3}\le
\frac{-M}{2}
\]
for all $\gamma > \gamma _2$ and $0\le x \le K_2$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
We have that $W(x,\gamma) \to R(x)$ as $\gamma \to \infty$ and,
 by hypothesis ${\bf H4}$,  $R(x) \le -M$ on $(0,K_2)$.
\end{proof}


\begin{lemma}\label{lemma4}
The function $Q$ given by
\[
Q(s):=\frac{2F''(s)F(s)-(F'(s))^2}{(F'(s))^3},
\]
for $s\ne 0$ and $Q(0)=0$ is class $C^1$. Moreover,
there exist positive constants $E_2$ and $C$ such that
$Q'(s)<0$ for all $x_{-}(E) \le s <0$ and $0<Q(x_{-}(E)) \le C
\sqrt{E}$ for all $E<E_2$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof}
The Taylor expansion of the function $F$ at the origin  has the form
\[
F(s)=\frac{\lambda^2}{2}s^2-\frac{\mu^2}{24}s^4+O(s^5),
\]
where $\lambda$ and $\mu$ are positive constants.
By substituting this series into the formula for $Q$ and simplifying
the resulting expression, we see that $Q$ has a removable singularity
at $s=0$.
The regularized Taylor series of $Q$ at $s=0$ has the form
\[
Q(s)=-c^2 s+O(s^3),
\]
where $c$ is a positive constant. In particular,  $Q'(0)=-c^2$.
Thus, there exists $\delta > 0$ such that $-2c^2 \le Q'(s) \le
-c^2/2$ for all $s \in (-\delta,0)$. Also, since $x_{-}(E) \to 0^-$
as $E \to 0^+$, there exists $E_1$ such that $-\delta< x_{-}(E) \le
0$ for all $E<E_1$. So, for all $E<E_1$ and $x_{-}(E)<s<0$,
we have $Q'(s)<0$.

By the Mean Value Theorem, there is some $\xi\in (0,s)$ and a
positive constant $c$ such that
\[
Q(s)=Q(s)-Q(0)=|\,Q'(\xi)||\,s| \le 2 c^2|\,s|
\]
for all $s \in (-\delta,0)$. So,
$Q(x_{-}(E)) \le 2 c^2 |\,x_{-}(E)|$ for $E<E_1$.

Using the Taylor expansion of $F$, we also have
\[
\lim_{E \to 0^+} \frac{|\,x_{-}(E)|}{\sqrt{E}}=\lim_{E \to 0^+}
\frac{-x_{-}(E)}{\sqrt{F(x_{-}(E))}}=\lim_{s \to
0^-}\frac{-s}{\sqrt{\frac{\lambda^2}{2}s^2+O(s^4)}}
=\sqrt{\frac{2}{\lambda^2}}\,.
\]
Hence, there exists $E_2<E_1$ such that
$|\,x_{-}(E)| \le 2\sqrt{E}/\sqrt{\lambda^2}$ for all
$E<E_2$.

Combining our results, we have that
\[
Q(x_{-}(E)) \le 2 c^2 |\,x_{-}(E)| \le \frac{2
c}{\sqrt{\lambda^2}}\sqrt{E}=C \sqrt{E}
\]
for all $E<E_2$, where we have consolidated constants.
\end{proof}

Let $P$ be the period function on the period annulus surrounded by
the homoclinic loop for system~\eqref{maineq}. The period for the
orbit at energy level $E$ is given by $P(E,\gamma)$, and the
derivative of $P$ with respect to $E$ is denoted  $P'(E,\gamma)$.

The next theorem is our main result.

\begin{theorem}\label{theorem1}
Let $\gamma_2$ be the number in
Lemma~\ref{lemma1}. There exists a positive number $E_*$
such that $P'(E,\gamma)<0$
for all $\gamma>\gamma_2$ and  $0<E<E_*$.
\end{theorem}

\begin{proof}
Fix $\gamma > \gamma_2$. For simplicity, we will
suppress $\gamma$ in  the expressions $U(x,\gamma), x_{+}(e,\gamma)$ and
$P(E,\gamma)$.

Using the Hamiltonian~\eqref{hamiltonian} and integrating along
orbits, we arrive at the familiar formula for the period of the orbit
at energy level $E$ (see \cite{chiconejacobs}):
\[
P(E)=\frac{2}{\sqrt{2}}\int_{x_{-}(E)}^{x_{+}(E)}\frac{dx}{\sqrt{E-U(x)}}
\,.
\]
The change of variables $s=h(x)$, where
$h(x)= \mathop{\rm sgn}(x)\sqrt{2U(x)}$, transforms the integral into
\[
P(E)=\frac{2}{\sqrt{2}}\int_{-\sqrt{2E}}^{\sqrt{2E}}
\frac{s}{U'(h^{-1}(s))\sqrt{E-\frac{s^2}{2}}}\,ds\,.
\]
After another change of variables, $s=\sqrt{2E}\sin \theta $, the
period function is represented by
\begin{equation}\label{period}
P(E)=2\int_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}
\frac{d\theta}{h'(h^{-1}(\sqrt{2E} \sin \theta))}
=2\int_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^{\frac{\pi}{2}}(h^{-1})'(\sqrt{2E} \sin
\theta) \, d \theta.
\end{equation}
By differentiating and splitting the integral in two pieces, we have
\begin{align*}
P'(E)&=\sqrt{\frac{2}{E}}\,\int_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^0(h^{-1})''(\sqrt{2E}
\sin \theta) \sin \theta \, d \theta \\
&\quad +\sqrt{\frac{2}{E}}\,\int_0^{\frac{\pi}{2}}(h^{-1})''(\sqrt{2E}
\sin
\theta) \sin \theta \, d \theta\\
&=I+II.
\end{align*}

\begin{lemma}\label{lemma5}
Let $E_2$ be as in Lemma~\ref{lemma4}. If $0< E<E_2$, then $0<I<C$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof} Rewrite $I$ as
\[
I=\sqrt{\frac{2}{E}}\int_{-\frac{\pi}{2}}^0(h^{-1})''(h(\tau(\theta)))
\sin \theta \, d \theta,
\]
where $\tau(\theta):=F^{-1}(E \sin^2 \theta)$, which is a well-defined
function because $F$ is restricted to $(-K_1,0]$. Using the formula
$(h^{-1})''(h(s))=-h''(s)/(h'(s))^3$ and making the change of
variables $s=\tau(\theta)$, we have
\[
I=\sqrt{\frac{2}{E}}\int_{x_{-}(E)}^0
\frac{-h''(s)\sin(\tau^{-1}(s))}{(h'(s))^3 \tau'(\tau^{-1}(s))}\,
ds\,.
\]
Substituting in the formula
\[
\tau^{-1}(s)=\sin^{-1}(-\sqrt{F(s)/E}\,)
\]
and using the definitions of $h$ and $\tau$, the last expression for $I$
simplifies to
\[
I=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}E}\int_{x_{-}(E)}^0
Q(s)\frac{-F'(s)}{\sqrt{E-F(s)}}\,ds\,.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lemma4} and the inequalities $Q(s)>0$ and $F'(s)<0$ on
$(x_{-}(E),0)$, it follows that $I$ is positive and
\[
I \le \frac{Q(x_{-}(E))}{\sqrt{2}E}\int_{x_{-}(E)}^0
\frac{-F'(s)}{\sqrt{E-F(s)}}\,ds=\frac{\sqrt{2}Q(x_{-}(E))}{\sqrt{E}}
\le \frac{\sqrt{2}\, C \sqrt{E}}{\sqrt{E}}=C\,,
\]
where we have consolidated constants.
\end{proof}

\begin{lemma}\label{lemma6}
Integral $II$ is negative and $|\,II|>C/({\gamma\sqrt{E}\,})$.
\end{lemma}

\begin{proof} By defining $\tau(\theta):=U^{-1}(E \sin^2 \theta)$
and proceeding as in Lemma~\ref{lemma5}, we express $II$ in the form
\[
II=\frac{1}{\sqrt{2}E}\int_0^{x_+(E)}\frac{(U'(s))^2
-2U(s)U''(s)}{(U'(s))^3}\frac{U'(s)}{\sqrt{E-U(s)}}\,ds\,.
\]
By Lemma~\ref{lemma1} and the inequality $U'(s) \ge 0$ on
$(0,x_+(E))$, the integrand is always negative. Thus, $II<0$ and
\[
|\,II| >
\frac{M}{2\sqrt{2}E\gamma}\int_0^{x_+(E)}\frac{U'(s)}{\sqrt{E-U(s)}}\,ds
=\frac{2 M \sqrt{E}}{2\sqrt{2} E \gamma}=\frac{C}{\gamma \sqrt{E}}\, ,
\]
where we have consolidated constants.
\end{proof}

To complete the proof of the theorem, we choose
$E_*=\min(E_2,C_2^2/(\gamma^2 C_1^2))$ so that
$P'(E,\gamma)=I+II<0$ whenever  $0<E<E_*$ and
 $\gamma<\gamma_2$.
\end{proof}

\begin{corollary} \label{coro3.8}
Let $\gamma_2$ be  as in Theorem~\ref{theorem1}. If $\gamma>\gamma_2$, then
the period function for system~\eqref{maineq} is non-monotone and
has at least one critical point in the interval $[E_*,F(-K_1))$.
\end{corollary}

\begin{corollary}
Let $\gamma_2$ be  as in Theorem~\ref{theorem1}. If
$\gamma>\gamma_2$ and $x_c>0$ is sufficiently small, then the period
function for the system
\begin{equation}\label{xcperturb}
\ddot{x}+f(x)+\gamma H(x-x_c)g(x-x_c)=0
\end{equation}
is non-monotone and has at least two critical points.
\end{corollary}
\begin{proof}
Let $T(x_0,x_c)$ be the period of the orbit with initial conditions
$x(0)=x_0$ and $\dot{x}(0)=0$ for equation~\eqref{xcperturb} and
define
\[T(0,x_c)=\lim_{x_0\to 0} T(x_0,x_c).\]
Since $T$ is continuous and the function $x_0\mapsto T(x_0,0)$ is
decreasing near the origin, there exists $\bar{x}_0$ near $0$ such
that $T(\bar{x}_0,0)< T(0,0)$. Hence,
$T(\bar{x}_0,\bar{x}_c)<T(0,0)$ for $\bar{x}_c$ sufficiently small.

Alternatively, in a neighborhood of the origin, for $x_c>0$, the
period function $T(x_0,\bar{x}_c)$ must coincide with the period
function of $\ddot{x}+f(x)=0$, which is increasing near the origin.

Because the periods of periodic orbits are unbounded in a
neighborhood of the homoclinic loop boundary of the period annulus
under consideration, we have the desired result.
\end{proof}

\section{The Impact Pendulum}\label{example}

The non-dimensional system
$\ddot{x}+\sin x +\gamma H(x)x^{\frac{3}{2}}=0$
is a Hertzian contact model (see~\cite{goldsmith}) for an
undamped unforced pendulum striking an elastic barrier at
its downward vertical position. The constant $\gamma$ corresponds
to the elastic modulus of the barrier (see~\cite{mannpaper}).

The functions $f(x)=\sin x$ and $g(x)=x^{3/2}$ satisfy the
assumptions in section~\ref{model} for Theorem~\ref{theorem1}, which
states that there exists a region near the rest point at the barrier
where the period function is decreasing. Using numerical integration
techniques with $\gamma = 3.57 \times 10^8$ (an approximate value
for an aluminum barrier), we are able to integrate the system
numerically and graph its period function.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fig2}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{periodplot} Period function for the impact
pendulum~\eqref{impactpendulum} with $\gamma=3.57 \times
10^8$.}
\end{figure}

A plot of the period function near $E=0$ is given in
Fig.~\ref{periodplot}, which confirms that the period function
is decreasing near $E=0$. The interval of decrease is small
in this case because $\gamma$ is large.

\begin{figure}[ht]
\begin{center}
\includegraphics[width=0.7\textwidth]{fig3}
\end{center}
\caption{\label{wallnotzero} Period function for the impact
pendulum~\eqref{notzeroequ} with $x_c=0.281$ and $\gamma=3.57 \times
10^8$.}
\end{figure}

Numerical experiments suggest that a version of the decreasing
period phenomenon persists in case the wall is positioned at some
positive angle relative to the downward vertical. The Hertzian
contact model for the impact pendulum with wall angle $x_c>0$ is
\begin{equation}\label{notzeroequ}
\ddot{x}+\sin x +\gamma H(x-x_c) (x-x_c)^{3/2}=0.
\end{equation}
Theorem~\ref{theorem1} does not apply to the impact pendulum in this
case because our hypotheses are not satisfied.  In fact, due to
the smoothness of the period function and its positive derivative
in the region of small oscillation with no impacts,
there must exist an interval containing the contact point on which
the period function increases. Our numerical experiments verify this
fact and suggest that the period function will decrease for an
interval corresponding to  more energetic impacts, reach a minimum value,
 and then increase as the energies of the periodic orbits approach the
energy of the homoclinic loop.  This scenario is illustrated in
Fig.~\ref{wallnotzero}.

A natural prediction (cf.~\cite[Ch. 5]{chiconebook}) is that harmonic
motions of the periodically forced and damped pendulum with impacts
will correspond to low-order resonances between the forcing period
and the available periods of the conservative impact pendulum studied
in this paper.  In experiments, where only relatively small oscillations
are feasible, the interval of available periods is the interval
corresponding to the local maximum and local minimum in
Fig.~\ref{wallnotzero}. By approximating these values, the range
of $(1:1)$-period locking (harmonic motions) has been predicted
and verified by physical experiments (see \cite{impactoscillator}).

\appendix

\section{Derivation of the Impact Pendulum Model}\label{sec:mathmod}
Consider a pendulum that encounters a barrier when the pendulum's
angular position $x$ (measured counterclockwise relative to the
downward vertical) is $x_c$.

The kinetic energy for the pendulum is
\[ T  = \frac{1}{2}m \Big[ \Big(L
\dot{x}\cos x \Big)^2   + \Big(  L \dot{x} \sin x \Big)^2 \Big] ,
\]
where $m$ is the pendulum mass and $L$ is the pendulum effective
length. Here, the pendulum effective length refers to the distance
between the pendulum pivot point and the pendulum center of mass.
Because the mass in this physical system is distributed along the
pendulum shaft and bob, the effective length differs from the total
length, $l$, which is the distance from the pivot to the sphere
center of mass. The pendulum's potential energy when not in contact
with the barrier is
\[ V = m g  L(1-\cos x). \]

Using Lagrange's equation
\[ \frac{d}{dt} \Big( \frac{\partial T}{\partial \dot{x} }
\Big) - \frac{\partial T}{\partial x} + \frac{\partial V}{\partial
x} = 0,  \] the equation of motion for the pendulum during the
contact and non-contact regimes is
\begin{equation}
\label{system} \ddot{x} + \omega^2 \sin x  + \frac{ l }{m L^2}
H(x-x_c)  F_c (x-x_c) = 0.
\end{equation}
where $H$ is the Heaviside function, $F_c$ is the contact force
function that occurs at distance $l$ from the pendulum pivot point,
and $\omega^2=g/L$ is the square of the  pendulum's natural
frequency.


The Hertzian contact force is given by
\[
F_c(x) = \frac{4}{3} E \sqrt{R} ( l \sin x )^{3/2},
\]
where $E$ is the elastic modulus of the barrier and $R$ is the
radius of the sphere that impacts the barrier
(see~\cite{goldsmith}).

The equation of motion~\eqref{system} is made non-dimensional by
changing the time-scale via $t\mapsto t/\omega$. After simplifying
and replacing the sine function in the contact term by the first
term of its Taylor series centered at $x_c$ (which is justified by
the small
 penetration depth), we obtain the smooth dimensionless model equation
\begin{equation}\label{sys1}
 \nonumber \ddot{x}+ \sin x + \gamma(x-x_c)^{3/2} H(x-x_c)=0,
\end{equation}
where
\[\gamma=\frac{4 l^{5/2} E R^{1/2}}{3\omega^2 m L^2}.
\]

While the equation of motion incorporates the discontinuous
Heaviside function, we note that the contact term is class $C^1$ due
to the presence of the Hertzian penetration function given in the
model equation~\eqref{sys1}  by $(x-x_c)^{3/2}$.

\subsection*{Acknowledgments}
The authors thank the anonymous referee for carefully
reading this paper and making valuable suggestions for improvements.

\begin{thebibliography}{0}

\bibitem{chiconebook} C. Chicone, \emph{Ordinary Differential
Equations with Applications}, 2nd Ed. (New York: Springer-Verlag),
2006.

\bibitem{chiconejacobs} C. Chicone and M. Jacobs, Bifurcation of
critical periods for plane vector fields,
\emph{Transactions of the American Mathematical Society},
{\bf 312} (2)  1989,  433--486.

\bibitem{impactoscillator} C. Chicone, K. Felts and B.P. Mann, An
Impact Oscillator with Hertzian Contact, In preparation.

\bibitem{chouikha} R. Chouikha and F. Cuvelier,
Remarks on some monotonicity conditions for the period function,
\emph{ Appl. Math.} (Warsaw), {\bf 26 } (3) 1999, 243--252.

\bibitem{chow} S.-N. Chow and Duo Wang,
On the monotonicity of the period function of some second order equations,
 \emph{ \v Casopis P\v est. Mat.},  {\bf 111} (1) 1986,  14--25.

\bibitem{francoise} J.-P. Fran\c{c}oise,
The successive derivatives of the period function of a plane vector field,
 \emph{ J. Differential Equations},  {\bf 146} (2)  1998, 320--335.

\bibitem{freire} E. Freire,  A. Gasull and A. Guillamon,
First derivative of the period function with applications,
 \emph{ J. Differential Equations} {\bf  204} (1)  2004, 139--162.

\bibitem{goldsmith} W. Goldsmith,
\emph{Impact}, (London: Edward Arnold), 1960.

\bibitem{lichardova} H. Lichardov\'{a}, The Period of a Whirling
Pendulum, \emph{Mathematica Bohemica}, {\bf 126} (3) 2001, 593--606.

\bibitem{mannpaper} B. P. Mann, R. E. Carter  and S. S. Hazra,
Experimental study of an impact oscillator with viscoelastic and
Hertzian contact, \emph{Nonlinear Dynamics}, {\bf 50} (3) 2007, 587--596.

\bibitem{rothe} F. Rothe,
The energy-period function and perturbations of Hamiltonian systems
in the plane. \emph{Oscillations, bifurcation and chaos}
(Toronto, Ont., 1986),  621--635, CMS Conf. Proc., 8, Amer.
Math. Soc., Providence, RI, 1987.

\bibitem{zevin} A. A. Zevin and M. A. Pinsky,
Monotonicity criteria for an energy-period function in planar
Hamiltonian systems,
\emph{Nonlinearity} {\bf 14} (6)  2001, 1425--1432.

\end{thebibliography}



\end{document}
