ISSN 1063-7842, Technical Physics, 2006, Vol. 51, No. 1, pp. 68–77. © Pleiades Publishing, Inc., 2006.

Original Russian Text © N.M. Ryskin, A.M. Shigaev, 2006, published in Zhurnal Tekhnicheskoœ Fiziki, 2006, Vol. 76, No. 1, pp. 72–81.

RADIOPHYSICS

Complex Dynamics of a Double-Cavity Delayed Feedback

Klystron Oscillator
N. M. Ryskin and A. M. Shigaev
Chernyshevsky State University, Saratov, 410012 Russia
e-mail: RyskinNM@info.sgu.ru
Received April 8, 2005

Abstract—The complex dynamics of a model double-cavity delayed feedback klystron oscillator is consid-
ered. The self-oscillation and stationary oscillation conditions are analyzed theoretically. The results of numer-
ical simulation of the self-modulation and chaotic regimes are presented, and routes to chaos at the center and
boundaries of the oscillation zone are studied in detail. The effect of space charge forces on the oscillator
dynamics is discussed.
PACS numbers: 52.80.Pi
DOI: 10.1134/S1063784206010117

INTRODUCTION ing-wave tubes [11–13]. There are grounds to believe

In recent years, great interest has been shown in
studying and applying complex, including chaotic,
oscillation conditions in microwave electron devices.
These devices as sources of noise-like chaotic micro-
wave radiation are very promising for data processing
and data transfer systems based on dynamic chaos
[1−4], radar [5], electronic jamming, microwave heat-
ing, etc. Delayed feedback (DF) self-excited oscillators
based on drift klystrons, which offer a high output and
efficiency, seem to be the most appropriate for such
applications. Earlier [6–8], mathematical models of
double- and multicavity klystron self-excited oscilla-
tors in the form of sets of delay differential equations
were suggested. It was shown by numerical simulation
that, as the beam current or the amount of feedback
grows, the system tends to chaos, the basic route to
chaos being a sequence of self-modulation period dou-
bling bifurcations. Furthermore, the performance of a
multicavity klystron oscillator was studied experimen-
tally [6, 8, 9], and the experimental results were in qual-
itative agreement with the theory. It should be noted,
however, that the results reported in [6–8] do not give a
full indication of the behavior of the system in a wide
range of control parameters. Specifically, the analyses
performed have touched upon only the center of the
oscillation zone. At the same time, it is known that self-
excited oscillatory systems with delay feature an
extremely complex and diversified nonlinear dynamics.
As a rule, as the basic control parameters vary, multiple
alternation of regular and chaotic self-modulation
oscillation regimes are observed and the system tends
to chaos following different scenarios (see, e.g., [10]).
Such behavior is also typical of many other distributed
systems, such as backward-wave oscillators and travel-
that it is also inherent to DF klystron oscillators.
In this work, we report the results of detailed inves-
tigation into the dynamics of a double-cavity klystron
oscillator the model of which was suggested in [6]. Sec-
tion 1 gives a mathematical model of the oscillator and
basic results of its theoretical analysis. In Sect. 2, the
results of numerical simulation are presented. Routes to
chaos at the center and boundaries of oscillation zones
are studied. In Sect. 3, the effect of space charge forces,
an issue of practical importance, is considered with an
efficient technique based on the Solntsev approximate
nonlinear wave theory [14, 15]. It is shown that space
charge forces may suppress the self-modulation and
quench the oscillation.
1. BASIC EQUATIONS AND THEORETICAL
RESULTS
Consider a double-cavity klystron where the input
and output cavities are connected via a wide-band dis-
persionless transmission line including a controlled
attenuator and a phase shifter to control the amount, ρ,
and phase, Ψ, of feedback. A signal passes through the
feedback loop for some frequency-independent time
interval δt. For simplicity, we assume that the cavities
are identical and that their Q factors (Q), characteristic
impedances (K), eigenfrequencies (ωe), and modulation
factors (M) are the same. It is also assumed that the cav-
ities are matched to the feedback loop.
As was shown in [6, 8], an oscillator of this type is
described by a set of two ordinary differential equations

68
 COMPLEX DYNAMICS 69

one of which has a delay, α (a)

7
Ḟ 1 + γ F 1 = γ F 2 ( τ – 1 ),
F (1)
Ḟ 2 + γ F 2 = – 2iαe
– iψ
J 1 ( F 1 ) -------1-. 5
F1
Here, J1 is the Bessel function of the first kind; 3
M A 1 ( τ – θ 0 )θ 0
F 1 ( τ ) = -----------------------------------
-, 1
2V 0
ρM A 2 ( τ )θ 0 –iω0 δt ω
F 2 ( τ ) = ---------------------------
-e (b)
2V 0 2
are slowly varying normalized complex amplitudes A1, 2 π/2
of voltage oscillations across the gaps; τ = ωet/ψ is the
dimensionless time; 0
ρK M I 0 θ 0 ψ
2
α = -----------------------------
- –π/2
4V 0 2
is the excitation parameter of the oscillator, which is
essentially the gain times the amount of feedback; I0 –2π –π 0 π ψ
and V0 are, respectively, the current and voltage of the
beam; θ0 = ωel/v0 is the undisturbed transit angle of Fig. 1. (a) Boundaries of the self-excitation and self-modu-
electrons in the drift space; l is the length of the drift lation zones and (b) oscillation and self-modulation fre-
quencies. The thick lines show the theoretical ψ depen-
space; γ = Ψ/2Q is the damping parameter; and ψ = θ0 + dences of αst and ω. The filled circles indicate the values of
ωeδt + Ψ is the total phase advance for the time the sig- αst and ω obtained by numerical simulations; empty circles,
nal takes to propagate through the feedback loop (it the values of the threshold and frequency of self-modula-
tion. The bistability areas are hatched.
depends both on the time electrons take to transit
between the cavities and on the delay time in the feed-
back loop). Here, ωn are the roots of Eq. (3), which are numbered
It is now appropriate to discuss the conditions of from zero on (i.e., ω0 is the eigenfrequency nearest to
self-excitation of oscillations. The associated analytical zero).1 However, it can be shown that only those roots
technique is described in [6], where only the case ψ = should be taken into account for which cos(ωn + ψ +
2πm – π/2 (the center of the oscillation zone; see below)
is considered. Omitting details of calculations, we will π/2) > 0, i.e., the roots with even numbers [6, 8, 10].
give here the basic formulas. Linearizing Eqs. (1) and Relationships (3) and (4) show that the self-excita-
seeking a solution in the form F1, 2 ~ epτ, we come to the tion threshold periodically depends on ψ; that is, oscil-
characteristic equation lation zones characteristic of distributed DF self-oscil-
– ( p + iψ ) latory systems are observed [6–10, 12, 13]. At the cen-
( p + γ ) = – iαγ e
2
. (2) ters of these zones, where ψ = 2πm – π/2, the phase
This transcendental equation has an infinite number advance of the signal for the time the signal takes to
of complex roots; that is, there is generally an infinite propagate along the feedback loop equals 2πm (the
number of eigenmodes, which is typical of distributed shift –π/2 is introduced by the modulating cavity [8]).
self-oscillatory systems. Taking into account that p is At the center of the zones, self-excitation occurs at the
purely imaginary at the stability boundary (p = iω, frequency ω = 0 (in other words, exactly at the eigen-
where ω is the oscillation frequency), we obtain from frequency of the cavities) and αst = γ. Figure 1 shows
(2) an equation for eigenfrequencies, the self-excitation boundaries and oscillation frequen-
π cies constructed by formulas (3) and (4) at γ = 1 (a typ-
-2 = tan ⎛ ω + ψ + ---⎞ ,
2ωγ
---------------- (3) ical value of this parameter for realistic parameters of
ω –γ
2 ⎝ 2⎠ the oscillator, as will be shown below). As α grows, the
and an equation from which the excitation threshold for oscillation zones expand and eventually overlap. In the
an nth eigenfrequency can be found, hatched zones in Fig. 1a, multistability may arise:

γ + ωn
2 2 1 Recallthat we use the equations applicable for slowly varying
α st = -----------------; n = 0, ± 1, ± 2, … . (4) amplitudes, so that the zero frequency corresponds to the eigen-
γ frequency of the cavities in the initial variables.

TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006

70 RYSKIN, SHIGAEV

y (a) ance of new stationary regimes is presumably due to

1.0 1 multiple electron overbunching in the drift space: the
basic nonlinear effect in devices of O type. Let equilib-
+ + +
0.5 P2+ rium states be designated as S n and P n , where S n and
P1+ S2+ 2 +
P0+ S1+ P n refer to the roots of Eq. (5) in the ascending and
S0+
0 descending branches, respectively, of the Bessel func-
5 10 15 20 +
S1+ F0 tion (Fig. 2a). Designation S 0 corresponds to the trivial
–0.5 P1– zero-amplitude solution.
3 As readily follows from Fig. 2, higher stationary
states appear via hard excitation, and the thresholds of
their appearance can be found analytically. The associ-
F0 (b) ated values of amplitude F0 are found as the roots of the
10 equation
P1+
8 S1+ J 1 ( F0 )
- = J '1 ( F 0 ),
--------------- (6)
P1– F0
6 P1–
S1– S1– where J '1 = dJ1(F0)/dF0.
4
P0+ Hence, for P 1 and S 1 , we found that F0 ≈ 8.417 and
+ +
2
S0+ it follows from (5) that
( ω + γ )F 15.5 ( ω 2 + γ 2 )
2 2
5 10 15 20 25 30
α α = ----------------------------0 ≈ --------------------------------- . (7)
2γ J 1 ( F 0 ) γ
Fig. 2. (a) Graphical solution of Eq. (5): (1) curve y = In addition, there exist equilibrium states that corre-
2J1(F0), (2) curve y = (ω2 + γ2)F0/αγ, and (3) straight line spond to the portions where the Bessel function is neg-
y = –(ω2 + γ2)F0/αγ; (b) α dependences of the stationary ative. Here, the oscillation frequency is found from
solutions at the center (thick lines) and boundaries (thin
lines) of the oscillation zone at γ = 1. Nonstationary solu- Eq. (3) as before but it is now equal to one of roots ω±1
tions are shown by the dashed lines. depending on phase ψ. Instead of Eq. (5), we have
( ω + γ )F 0 = – 2αγ J 1 ( F 0 ).
2 2
(8)
either of two neighboring modes may be excited
– –
depending on the initial conditions. Designate these equilibrium states as S n and P n ,
Analysis of the stationary regimes, which corre- respectively (Fig. 2a). They also appear via hard excita-
(0) (0) tion, and their appearance threshold is calculated from
spond to the solutions F1, 2 = F 1.2 eiωτ, where F 1, 2 are
the equation
constants, leads to an equation for the stationary oscil-
lation amplitude, J 1 ( F0 )
- = – J '1 ( F 0 ),
--------------- (9)
( ω + γ )F 0 = 2αγ J 1 ( F 0 ),
2 2
(5) F0

whence, it follows that F0 ≈ 5.52 for P 1 and S 1 and,

– –
(0)
where F0 = | F 1 |.
instead of Eq. (7), we have
(0)
Note that | F 2 | = F0 1 + ( ω/γ ) and the oscillation
2
( ω + γ )F 8.11 ( ω 2 + γ 2 )
2 2
frequency is again defined by relationship (3). Hence, it α = – ----------------------------0 ≈ --------------------------------- . (10)
follows that, as excitation parameter α grows, the fre- 2γ J 1 ( F 0 ) γ
quency remains unchanged and equal to the corre- For example, from (7) and (10), we find that, for γ =
sponding eigenfrequency determined from the linear + +
theory. As a rule, this is frequency ω0 , except for mul- 1, P 1 and S 1 appear at the oscillation zone center at
tistability zones, where oscillations may also be excited α ≈ 15.5 and P 1 and S 1 , at α ≈ 22.233. Note that one
– –
at one of frequencies ω±2 (Fig. 1).
should substitute the fundamental mode frequency ω0 =
Transcendental equation (5) is convenient to ana- 0 into (7) and ω1 ≈ 0.42π into (10). The excitation
lyze graphically (Fig. 2a). It is seen that the number of thresholds of higher stationary states far exceed the
roots increases with α, new and new stationary states +
appear, and so oscillation multistability will appear excitation threshold of “ground” state P 0 (αst = 1).
even at the fundamental eigenfrequency. The appear- However, away from the center of the oscillation zone,

TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006

 COMPLEX DYNAMICS
–
the excitation thresholds of states P 1 and S 1 decrease,
–
since frequency ω1 approaches zero. In particular, at the
boundary of the zone (ψ = π/2), we have α ≈ 8.11,
which is only three times higher than the self-excitation
threshold (αst ≈ 2.74). The excitation thresholds of
states P 1 and S 1 , conversely, increase to α ≈ 42.51.
+ +
Figure 2b plots the α dependences of the amplitudes of
± ±
stationary states P 0, 1 and S 1 constructed by formulas
(5) and (8) at the center and boundary of the oscillation
zone. As α grows, the solutions tend to the correspond-
ing zeros of Bessel function J1 . It is seen that the above
theoretical threshold values are in good agreement with
those presented in Fig. 2b.
It is also important to clarify the stability conditions
for the stationary solutions. In the general case, com-
prehensive stability analysis is unfortunately infeasible.
±
One can, however, show that equilibrium states S n are
± the oscillation zone equals eigenfrequency ω1 , we find
always unstable, while states Pn
are stable if the self-
excitation threshold is not too much exceeded. With
increasing α, the states lose stability as a result of the
Andronov–Hopf bifurcation, limiting cycles (periodic
self-modulation regimes) arise in their vicinities in the
phase space, and the output signal starts oscillating
about the steady-state value.
At the center of the oscillation zone, where fre-
quency ω0 = 0, stability analysis greatly simplifies. The
equations for amplitude perturbations and phase pertur-
bations separate out and so can be treated indepen-
+ case, we deal with the amplitude mechanism of self-
dently (see [10]). Analyzing the stability of states P n
+
and S n , one can obtain a characteristic equation for
amplitude perturbations,
( iΩ + γ ) = 2αγ J '1 ( F 0 )e
2 – iΩ
, (11)
where Ω is the self-modulation frequency. From this
+
relationship, it follows that, for equilibrium states S n ,
for which J '1 (F0) > 0, there always exists the root iΩ =
λ of characteristic equation (11), where instability
increment λ is a real positive number. Thus, all solu-
+
tions of type S n are unstable with the perturbation
growing exponentially (aperiodic instability).
+
For equilibrium states P n , for which J '1 (F0) < 0, it
follows from relationship (11) that frequency Ω satis-
fies Eq. (3). However, one should now take the roots for
which cos(ωn + ψ + π/2) < 0, i.e., roots ωn with odd
numbers. Clearly, the self-modulation threshold is the
lowest for the modes with numbers 1, the frequencies of
which are the closest to the eigenfrequency of the cav-
ity. If the Q factor of the cavity is sufficiently large (γ <
π/2), it can be shown [6] that the self-modulation fre-
quency lies in the interval γ < Ω < π/2; if (γ > π/2), π/2 <
Ω < γ. Then, from (11), one can find the threshold value
TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006
71
of α at which self-modulation takes place,
γ +Ω
2 2
α sm = -------------------------. (12)
2γ J '1 ( F 0 )
It should be taken into account here that F0 , in turn,
depends on α according to (5). Substituting (5) into
(12) yields (it is remembered that we are considering
the center of the oscillation zone, where the fundamen-
tal frequency equals zero)
F 0 J '1 ( F 0 ) γ +Ω
2 2
- = -----------------
------------------------ - , (13)
J 1 ( F0 ) γ
2
and relationship (12) simplifies to
γ F0
α sm = ------------------
-. (14)
2J 1 ( F 0 )
Since the self-modulation frequency at the center of
from (13) for the case γ = 1 (see above) that F0 ≈ 2.90;
hence, αsm ≈ 3.87. This value is totally coincident with
the result of numerical solution of initial nonstationary
equations (1) (Fig. 1a).
From relationship (12), it is seen that instability
occurs when J 1' (F0) is large and negative, i.e., when the
amplitude response of the amplifier has a steeply
descending portion. Physically, the descending portion
arises because of kinematic debunching, which takes
place when the oscillation amplitude is high. In this
modulation [10, 11, 16].
As for phase perturbations, the analysis shows that
the steady-state solutions are neutrally stable against
these perturbations, which is an obvious consequence
of the invariance of solutions to set (1) under phase
shift. This is a general property of the systems describ-
able in terms of slowly varying complex amplitudes
(see [10, 17]).
– –
Considering equilibrium states S n and P n leads us
–
to the same inferences: S n is always unstable, while P n
–
loses stability at large α because of the Andronov–Hopf
bifurcation. In this case, the fundamental oscillation
frequency is equal to one of roots ω±1 of Eq. (3) and the
self-modulation frequency, to root ω0 .
2. RESULTS OF NUMERICAL SIMULATION
Equations (1) contain three control parameters: α, γ,
and ψ. Let us make several estimates for typical cm-
range klystrons (emphasis will be on the multicavity
klystron that was experimentally studied in [6, 8, 9]).
We assume that wavelength λ equals several centime-
ters and the length of the feedback loop is several
meters, so that the electric length is about 100 wave-
lengths (cf. 105 wavelengths in [9]). Thus, for time ∆t
72 RYSKIN, SHIGAEV
Fout(τ) (a) S, dB
12 0 near the boundaries of two oscillation zones are dis-
9 –10
6 –20
3 –30
0 Feigenbaum classical scenario [18–20]; specifically,
(b)
12 0 universal quantitative laws inherent to this scenario are
9 –10
6 –20
3 –30
0 3 6 9 12 –1.0 –0.5 0 0.5 1.0
Fout(τ – ∆τ) Ω/π
Fig. 3. Phase portraits and spectra in different regimes of
periodic self-modulation at γ = 1 and ψ = –0.4π. α =
(a) 15.25 and (b) 15.75.
the signal takes to propagate in the feedback loop, the
phase advance is ωe∆t ~ 2π × 102. For a drift space
length on the order of several centimeters and a reason-
able value of the accelerating voltage, transit angle θ0 is
much less than ωe∆t and so one can estimate ψ as ψ ~
2π × 102.2 For a loaded Q factor of the cavity of Q =
100–200, we find that γ equals several unities. As fol-
lows from the simulation results, the dynamics of the
system remains qualitatively the same when γ varies in
the interval 0.3 < γ < 3.0. For definiteness, let γ = 1.
The results of numerical simulation are totally con-
sistent with the results of theoretical analysis presented
in Sect. 1. Above the self-excitation threshold, the sta-
+
tionary state with amplitude P 0 is established at funda-
mental mode frequency ω0 . At α > αst, the stationary
regime loses stability and softly changes to periodic
self-modulation. In this case, the spectrum exhibits two
satellites symmetrically offset from the fundamental
frequency. At the centers of the oscillation zones, the
satellite frequencies coincide with frequencies ω±1 .
Figure 1 plots the threshold values of α, as well as the
fundamental oscillation frequencies and the frequen-
cies of self-modulation satellites (at the instant self-
a specific value of ψ is needed only to find the dissipa-
2 Certainly,
tion parameter. In the simulation, ψ was varied from 0 to 2π.
modulation appears), against ψ. The bistability zones
tinctly seen. When parameter ψ varies smoothly, hard
transitions from one zone to another accompanied by
hysteresis take place. All these observations are typical
of delayed self-oscillatory systems [6–10, 12, 13].
The transition to chaos may follow several scenar-
ios. At the center of the oscillation zone, chaos is estab-
lished through a sequence of self-modulation period
doubling bifurcations, which is characteristic of sys-
tems with the amplitude mechanism of self-modulation
[6–11, 16]. The picture as a whole is similar to the
confirmed. It should be noted, however, that the
sequence of period doubling bifurcations covers a nar-
row domain in the parameter space. Next is a multiple
alternation of periodic and chaotic self-modulation
regimes. This stage was described at length elsewhere
[6] and here is not considered. We only note that there
are two types of periodic regime. In one case, the spec-
tral component at the fundamental frequency domi-
nates; in the other, the fundamental mode is suppressed
and two spectral components symmetrically offset
from it have a maximal amplitude. The related spectra
and phase portraits are exemplified in Fig. 3 (hereafter,
Fout = |F2(τ)|. Similar behavior is observed in many
other DF systems, among which are ring optical lasers
[21–23], distributed parametric DF oscillators [24], and
others. The appearance of two modes instead of the fun-
damental one has been named “mode splitting” [23]. It
is noteworthy that the limiting cycles related to periodic
regimes are of complex shape: specifically, they have
many loops the number of which grows with α.3
The effect of mode splitting can be accounted for as
follows. Consider the situation at the center of the oscil-
lation zone, where ψ = 2πm – π/2. Then, one can con-
centrate only on the pure real variant of Eqs. (1),
Ḟ 1 + γ F 1 = γ F 2 ( τ – 1 ),
(15)
Ḟ 2 + γ F 2 = 2αJ 1 ( F 1 ),
where the oscillation amplitudes are also considered
real. Since Eqs. (15) are invariant under the substitution
F1,2 –F1,2, they can have solutions of two types:
either the solutions exhibit this symmetry or they are
asymmetric but appear in pairs that are symmetric to
each other. It is easy to understand that, in the former
case, the oscillation spectrum is akin to that depicted in
Fig. 3b (the fundamental mode is suppressed). Virtu-
ally, the oscillation phase changes periodically by π in
discrete steps under such conditions. Following [21,
23], we will refer to the mode splitting regime as the
3 Itshould be remembered that here we are dealing with the signal
envelope dynamics. Actually, stationary oscillations correspond
to limiting cycles and not to equilibrium positions and periodic
self-modulation (i.e., quasi-periodic motion with two incommen-
surate frequencies), to 2D tori and not to limiting cycles.
TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006
 COMPLEX DYNAMICS 73

symmetric regime. In the latter case, the mean oscilla- Fout(τ)

tion amplitude is other than zero and the zero-fre- 12 (a)
quency spectral mode prevails.
Exactly at the center of the oscillation zone, the sit-
uation is degenerate. At an offset from the center as
small as desired, the variables can no longer be consid- 9
ered real and one cannot speak of symmetric and asym-
metric regimes in the strict sense. Yet, the behavior
–
remains qualitatively the same. As before, one can dis- P1
criminate between the regimes where the fundamental 6
mode dominates and those where it is suppressed and
two modes with roughly equal amplitudes that are equi-
distant from the fundamental frequency are present.
3 P0+
The dynamics of the oscillator is substantially
±
affected by the appearance of new stationary states P n
(see Sect. 1). At the center of the oscillation zone, state
+ – 0
P 1 is the first to appear, while at its boundary, state P 1
12 (b)
is (Fig. 2b). As was already noted, these states arise via
hard excitation and appropriate initial conditions are
therefore needed to excite them. As parameter α varies
smoothly, self-modulation and a sequence of doubling 9
bifurcations on the basis of these stationary states are
observed. In some range of α, the regimes based on P 0
+
–
± P1
and P1 first coexist (they may be single-frequency, 6
multiple-frequency, or chaotic oscillations depending
on the parameter values) and then combine. The phase
portraits illustrating the bistability and subsequent
merging of the attractors are demonstrated in Fig. 4. 3 P0+
After integration, the output signal waveform repre-
sents a random sequence of switching from one regime
to another, i.e., chaotic intermittency. With a further
± 0
increase in α, regimes based on state P 2 appear, etc.
Similar behavior for a simpler model that is described 12 (c)
by the single first-order equation with delay
F(τ – 1)
Ḟ + γF = 2αe J 1 ( F ( τ – 1 ) ) -----------------------
– iψ
(16)
F(τ – 1) 9

was described earlier [25].

Of special interest is the route to chaos at the bound-
aries of the oscillation zone, where the competition of 6
two eigenmodes with close self-excitation thresholds
has an appreciable effect. The bifurcation map on the
plane of parameters ψ and α (Fig. 5) shows the bound-
aries of self-excitation (SE), self-modulation (SM), 3
period doubling (T2), period quadrupling (T4), quasi-
periodic motion (Q), and chaos (Ch). The boundaries
between two neighboring modes, which are shown by
the continuous lines for one mode and by dotted lines 0 3 6 9 12
for the other, are symmetric to each other about the Fout(τ – ∆τ)
straight line ψ = π/2. Here, a scenario other than that by
Feigenbaum is observed: a number of doublings is Fig. 4. Phase portraits in different regimes of periodic self-
+
finite and decreases as the oscillation zone boundary is modulation that are based on equilibrium states (a) P 0 and
approached. In a narrow zone near the boundary, quasi- –
(b) P 1 at the same values of the parameters (γ = 1, ψ = 0.3π,
periodic self-modulation and quasi-periodic route to and α = 12.25). (c) Combined attractor arising when α
chaos are observed. reaches 12.32.

TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006

74 RYSKIN, SHIGAEV

α mittency. If, however, we move over the parameter

12 plane so as to remain under the periodic self-modula-
SYM SYM tion conditions, the asymmetric regime will softly
transform into the symmetric one. In this case, the spec-
T4 Q T4 tral component that has the highest amplitude shifts
10 Ch Ch away from the eigenfrequency of the cavity and its
amplitude declines. The frequency of one of the satel-
T2 T2 lites, conversely, approaches zero and its amplitude
8 grows.
SM SM
Merging of attractors based on neighboring modes
SM SM is also observed in other DF systems, for example, in
6 self-excited oscillators with cubic nonlinearity [10].
The difference here is that, in [10], partial attractors
merged into a fully developed chaotic attractor rather
4 than into a symmetric limiting cycle. Fully developed
SE SE chaos exists in a narrow range of α, and then the solu-
SE SE tions become unstable and tend to infinity. This may be
2 because the steepness (amplitude) of a cubically non-
0.45π 0.50π 0.55π linear characteristic infinitely grows in magnitude,
ψ while in the klystron, the steepness depends on J '1 (F0)
and alternately increases and decreases. As a result,
Fig. 5. Bifurcation map on the plane of parameters α and ψ chaotic and regular regimes alternate.
near the boundary of the oscillation zone. Shown are the
boundaries of the self-excitation (SE), self-modulation Thus, bistability in the SYM domain (Fig. 5) disap-
(SM), period doubling (T2), period quadrupling (T4), and pears. As α grows further, a sequence of symmetric
quasi-periodic motion (Q) domains. Quasi-periodic route to cycle doubling bifurcations followed by chaos and then
chaos is marked by Ch, and the domain of existence of the –
symmetric cycle is marked by SYM. by the periodic regime on equilibrium state P 1 is
observed. The periodic regime exists in some range of
Fmax α. Next, as α goes on increasing, a new attractor (simi-
lar to that shown in Fig. 4c) covering both equilibrium
8
states arises. The situation is illustrated by the bifurca-
tion diagram (the maximal amplitude of the output sig-
nal versus α) constructed for one of the modes when α
6 smoothly grows and the initial conditions are inherited
(Fig. 6). Seen are the range of quasi-periodicity (α ≈
9.25), a narrow resonance range, transition to chaos
4 (α ≈ 9.5), the formation of a symmetric cycle (α ≈
10.0), cycle period doubling bifurcations, and the tran-
sition to the condition based on state P 1 (α ≈ 11.3).
–
2

0 3. ALLOWANCE FOR SPACE

7 8 9 10 11
Fig. 6. Bifurcation diagram near the boundary of the oscil-
lation zone (γ = 1, ψ = 0.4875π).
As α grows, the attractors on neighboring eigen-
modes merge together: a single limiting cycle arises,
which can be identified with the symmetric regimes
discussed above (the domains marked by SYM in
Fig. 5), since its spectrum is virtually symmetric about
the zero frequency. The formation of this cycle with
increasing α proceeds in different ways. If it is pre-
ceded by the quasi-periodic regime, the transition takes
place by softly suppressing incommensurate frequen-
cies; if it is preceded by the chaotic regime, via inter-
12 CHARGE FORCES
α
It was assumed above that space charge effects are
negligibly small, so that the well-known formulas from
the kinematic theory of the klystron are valid. Actually,
however, space charge forces may be appreciable. The
approximate nonlinear wave theory developed by
Solntsev for O-type devices seems to be the most suit-
able for modification of the space-charge-free model
[14, 15]. In this theory, the electron phase is expanded
into the Fourier series in initial phase (by virtue of the
periodicity of the associated dependence) and then
equations of motion for individual electrons are
replaced by equations for Fourier component ampli-
tudes (i.e., nonlinear waves). Without going into
details, we will make use of an expression for the first
harmonic of the bunched current, which is obtained by

TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006

 COMPLEX DYNAMICS 75

taking into account only one Fourier harmonic [14, 15]. Fst
Then, Eqs. (1) can be recast as 4
Ḟ 1 + γ F 1 = γ F 2 ( τ – 1 ), 4
(17) 3
F 3 2
Ḟ 2 + γ F 2 = – 2iαe J 1 ( B ) -------1-,
– iψ
F1 1
where parameter B is found by solving the nonlinear
oscillator equation 2

2
d B
--------2- + θ p Q ( B ) = 0.
2
dz
Here, z is the coordinate normalized to drift space
length l, θp = ωpl/v0, ωp is the plasma frequency, and
∞
J n ( nB )
Q( B) = 2 ∑ - ( J n – 1 ( nB ) – J n + 1 ( nB ) ). (19)
----------------
n
n=1
Formula (19) is written for the simplest case of an
indefinitely wide beam (a reduction of the plasma fre-
quency is disregarded). The boundary conditions to
Eq. (18) have the form
dB ( 0 )
B ( 0 ) = 0, --------------- = F 1 ( τ ) .
dz
When numerically integrating Eqs. (17), one should
additionally perform numerical integration of Eq. (18)
at each step in the domain 0 ≤ z ≤ 1 and substitute B (z =
1) into the second equation of set (17).
It can be shown [14, 15] that, when B ≤ 1 (overtak-
ing is absent), Q(B) = B and the oscillator behaves as a
linear element. Then, a solution to Eq. (18) can be writ-
ten in the form
sin θ
B ( 1 ) = F 1 -------------p ,
θp
that is, we arrive at the result well known from the lin-
ear theory of space charge waves.
Let us discuss the effect of space charge forces on
the oscillator self-excitation condition. Linearizing
Eqs. (17) and taking into account (21), we get the char-
acteristic equation
( p + γ ) = – iα p γ e
2 – ( p + iψ )
, (22)
where αp = αsinθp/θp.
Equation (22) differs from characteristic equation (2)
derived for the kinematic case in that the oscillator exci-
tation parameter is renormalized. Thus, since αp < α,
space charge forces will increase the starting current.
The results of simulation of the self-excitation regime
exactly coincide with the theory. However, for the com-
parison to be correct, one should take into account that,
for θp meeting the condition sinθp < 0, the centers and
boundaries of the oscillation zones change place: at the
center, ψ = π/2; at the boundary, ψ = –π/2. Indeed,
(18) 1
0
0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1.0
α
Fig. 7. Stationary oscillation amplitude vs. α at γ = 1, ψ =
−π/2, and space charge parameter θp = (1) 0.001, (2) 1.0,
(3) 1.5, and (4) 2.0.
parameter αp becomes negative, which is equivalent to
the shift of the feedback-related phase by π.
(20) Figure 7 plots the output signal amplitude versus α
(running from the self-excitation threshold to the self-
modulation threshold) at different θp under the station-
ary oscillation conditions. It is seen that, while the self-
excitation threshold rises substantially with the amount
of the space charge, the self-modulation threshold
remains almost unchanged. In other words, the range of
parameters where single-frequency oscillations may
occur shrinks. The amplitude reaches a maximum near
the self-modulation threshold. In this respect, the
klystron oscillator is similar to the backward-wave
oscillator [26] and differs from the DF traveling-wave
(21)
tube, where the amplitude reaches a maximum far
before the self-modulation threshold [13]. Interest-
ingly, an increase in the space charge parameter causes
an increase in the output signal maximal amplitude.
Similar behavior of backward-wave oscillators was
observed by Rapoport as early as in 1958 [27].
Let us now turn to simulation of self-modulation
and chaotic oscillation conditions. As in the previous
sections, we will be interested in the sequence of bifur-
cations that takes place when parameter α, which is
responsible for excitation of the oscillator, increases. It
should be noted that, in experiments, α can be
increased by either increasing the amount of feedback
or the electron beam current. In the kinematic model,
there is no need to consider these ways separately. Now,
however, the model is characterized by one more
parameter θp, which is proportional to I 0 but is inde-
1/2
pendent of the amount of feedback. Thus, if the situa-
tion to be simulated suggests an increase in the amount
of feedback, one should increase α, keeping θp constant
(the results depicted in Fig. 7 were obtained just in this

TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006

76 RYSKIN, SHIGAEV

Fout α/α st ). It follows from Fig. 8 that, as the current

8 (a) grows, the stationary oscillation regime is changed to
periodic self-modulation. Near its threshold, the self-
4 modulation is quasi-harmonic. Then, the self-modula-
tion period expands noticeably and the time depen-
dence of the signal envelope takes the form of relax-
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 ation oscillations. Finally, at high currents, when θp
8 (b) approaches π, the oscillations are quenched (α = 7.645,
θp = 2.765). Period doubling and chaos are not
4
observed. This effect has much in common with the
effect of self-modulation suppression by space charge
forces in backward-wave oscillators [26]. However,
0 25 50 75 100 125 150 since beam–field interaction in a klystron takes place,
8
in essence, discretely (in the gaps of the cavities), it is
(c)
much stronger than in backward-wave oscillators and
therefore not only suppresses self-modulation but also
4 (at an unfavorable distribution of the bunched current)
quenches the oscillations.
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
8 (d) CONCLUSIONS
In this work, we studied a double-cavity delayed-
4 feedback klystron oscillator whose model was sug-
gested in [6]. The diversified nonlinear dynamics of the
device with various order–chaos and chaos–order tran-
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 sitions following different scenarios was discovered.
τ The detailed theoretical analysis of self-excitation con-
ditions and stationary oscillation regimes was per-
Fig. 8. Output signal waveform envelope in different formed, and the self-modulation threshold was esti-
dynamics regimes at different beam currents: (a) α = 2.2 mated. Routes to chaos that are observed when the elec-
and θp = 1.483, (b) α = 4.5 and θp = 2.121, (c) α = 7.5 and
θp = 2.739, and (d) α = 7.575 and θp = 2.752. The other tron beam current or the amount of feedback increases
parameters are the same as in Fig. 7. were numerically simulated in a wide range of relevant
parameters. At the centers of the oscillation zones, the
transition to chaos follows the Feigenbaum scenario,
way). If, however, it is assumed that the beam current which is typical of systems describable by delay differ-
will increase, an increase in α should be accompanied ential equations [6, 7, 10, 19]. Next comes a compli-
by an increase in θp in proportion to α . cated sequence of alternating regular and chaotic self-
modulation regimes. New and new periodic regimes
The simulation showed that, in the former case (α arise to which limiting cycles of more and more
increases, and θp is constant), the behavior of the sys- involved shape in the phase space correspond. In these
tem is qualitatively the same as in the kinematic case at regimes, either the fundamental mode dominates or two
least at a not too large value of space charge parameter modes equidistant from the suppressed fundamental
θp (θp < π/2). If, however, the beam current is taken as mode that have roughly equal amplitudes prevail (the
a bifurcation parameter (i.e., α and θp increase simulta- mode splitting effect). In each cycle, the transition to
neously), the behavior of the system changes qualita- chaos may occur either through period doubling or via
tively. In fact, as θp grows, the self-excitation threshold hard excitation.
also grows, tending to infinity at θp π, as follows At the boundaries of the oscillation zone, the com-
from characteristic equation (22). Accordingly, the self- petition of two eigenmodes greatly complicated the
modulation threshold and the threshold of going to dynamics. The number of doubling bifurcations here is
chaos also rise. As a result, with an increase in the cur- finite: the nearer to the boundary, the smaller the num-
rent, the system shifts to the domain below the self- ber of the bifurcations. Then, we sequentially observe
excitation threshold and the oscillations are quenched. the inverse transition to the periodic regime, quasi-peri-
Figure 8 shows the envelopes of the output signal wave- odic self-modulation, and transition to chaos through
form at different beam currents. At the parameter val- quasi-periodicity breaking (or through resonance cycle
ues indicated, self-excitation takes place at αst = 1.242 doubling on the torus). The sequence of bifurcations
ends in the merging of attractors based on different
and θ p = 1.115. In the course of numerical simulation,
st
modes. Unlike the self-excited oscillator with cubic
we increased α and simultaneously θp (by a factor of nonlinearity [10], here, instead of fully developed

TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006

 COMPLEX DYNAMICS
chaos, the symmetric periodic regime sets in, in the
spectrum of which the modes at both neighboring fre-
quencies with almost equal amplitudes are present.
Using the approximate nonlinear wave theory by
Solntsev, the starting kinematic model was modified by
making allowance for space charge forces. It was found
that an increase in the space charge of the beam, on the
one hand, makes the self-excitation of the oscillator dif-
ficult and, on the other hand, raises the maximal ampli-
tude of stationary oscillation. With space charge forces
taken into consideration, the scenarios observed with
increasing amount of feedback and beam current den-
sity should be analyzed separately. In the former case
(increasing amount of feedback), the behavior of the
system is qualitatively similar to that in the kinematic
case. When the beam current is taken as a bifurcation
parameter, the behavior of the system changes qualita-
tively. Specifically, debunching of the electrons at unfa-
vorable values of the space charge parameter (θp ≈ πn)
quenches the oscillations.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This work was supported by the Russian Foundation
for Basic Research (grant nos. 03-02-16192 and 03-02-
16269) and the program “Universities of Russia.”
REFERENCES
1. A. S. Dmitriev and A. I. Panas, Dynamical Chaos: Novel
Type of Information Carrier for Communication Systems
(Fizmatlit, Moscow, 2002) [in Russian].
2. A. S. Dmitriev, in Nonlinear Waves. 2002, Ed. by
A. V. Gaponov-Grekhov and V. I. Nekorkin (IPF RAN,
Nizhni Novgorod, 2003), pp. 53–76 [in Russian].
3. Proc. IEEE 90 (5), Special Issue (2002).
4. V. Dronov, M. R. Hendrey, T. M. Antonsen, and E. Ott,
Chaos 14, 30 (2004).
5. K. A. Lukin, in Proceedings of the 1st International
Workshop on the Noise Radar Technology (NRTW
2002), Yalta, 2002, pp. 13–22.
6. B. S. Dmitriev, Yu. D. Zharkov, N. M. Ryskin, and
A. M. Shigaev, Radiotekh. Élektron. (Moscow) 46, 604
(2001).
7. T. V. Dmitrieva, N. M. Ryskin, and A. M. Shigaev, Non-
linear Phenomena in Complex Systems 4, 376 (2001).
8. B. S. Dmitriev, Yu. D. Zharkov, K. K. Kizhaeva, et al.,
Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. Prikl. Nelineinaya Din. 10
(5), 37 (2002).
9. B. S. Dmitriev, Yu. D. Zharkov, D. V. Klokotov, and
N. M. Ryskin, Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 73 (7), 105 (2003) [Tech.
Phys. 48, 901 (2003)].
TECHNICAL PHYSICS Vol. 51 No. 1 2006
77
10. N. M. Ryskin and A. M. Shigaev, Zh. Tekh. Fiz. 72 (7),
1 (2002) [Tech. Phys. 47, 795 (2002)].
11. N. M. Ryskin, V. N. Titov, and D. I. Trubetskov, Dokl.
Akad. Nauk 358, 620 (1998) [Dokl. Phys. 43, 90
(1998)].
12. V. A. Kats, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Radiofiz. 28,
161 (1985).
13. N. M. Ryskin, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Radiofiz. 47,
129 (2004).
14. L. A. Vainshtein and V. A. Solntsev, Lectures on Micro-
wave Electronics (Sov. Radio, Moscow, 1973) [in Rus-
sian].
15. V. A. Solntsev, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Radiofiz. 17,
616 (1974).
16. Yu. P. Bliokh, A. V. Borodkin, M. G. Lyubarskiœ, et al.,
Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. Prikl. Nelineinaya Din. 1 (1–
2), 34 (1993).
17. S. P. Kuznetsov, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved., Radiofiz.
25, 1410 (1982).
18. M. I. Rabinovich and D. I. Trubetskov, Oscillations and
Waves in Linear and Nonlinear Systems (Nauka, Mos-
cow, 1984; Kluwer, Dordrecht, 1989).
19. Yu. I. Neimark and P. S. Landa, Stochastic and Chaotic
Oscillations (Nauka, Moscow, 1987; Kluwert, Dor-
drecht, 1992).
20. S. P. Kuznetsov, Dynamic Chaos, in Modern Theory of
Oscillations and Waves (Fizmatlit, Moscow, 2001) [in
Russian].
21. L. A. Lugiato, L. M. Narducci, E. V. Eschenazi, et al.,
Phys. Rev. A 32, 1563 (1985).
22. L. M. Narducci, J. R. Tredicce, L. A. Lugiato, et al.,
Phys. Rev. A 33, 1842 (1986).
23. Ya. I. Khanin, Principles of Laser Dynamics (Nauka,
Moscow, 1999; Elsevier, Amsterdam, 1995).
24. T. V. Dmitrieva and N. M. Ryskin, Zh. Éksp. Teor. Fiz.
127, 230 (2005) [JETP 100, 208 (2005)].
25. T. V. Dmitrieva, N. M. Ryskin, V. N. Titov and A. M. Shi-
gaev, Izv. Vyssh. Uchebn. Zaved. Prikl. Nelineinaya Din.
7 (6), 66 (1999).
26. B. P. Bezruchko, L. V. Bulgakova, S. P. Kuznetsov, and
D. I. Trubetskov, in Proceedings of the 5th Winter School
on Microwave Electronics and Radio Physics, Saratov,
1980 (Saratovsk. Gos. Univ., Saratov, 1980), Vol. 5,
pp. 25–77.
27. G. N. Rapoport, Radiotekh. Élektron. (Moscow) 3, 255
(1958).
Translated by V. Isaakyan