Controls and limitations of a Foucault pendulum

An unwanted ellipse is an experimental warning: a finite-amplitude pendulum can develop additional orbit-axis precession even without Earth's rotation. A symmetrical, firm support and careful launch reduce this effect.^[ref] Distinguish that nonlinear effect from the tiny ellipse already present in the Exact linear Foucault pendulum trajectory. The linear calculation establishes a controlled approximation, not the complete motion of an arbitrary large swing.

Support anisotropy creates a second competing mechanism. As an illustrative modification, let the two horizontal restoring angular frequencies be ${\omega }_x$ and ${\omega }_y$. Even with $\alpha =0$, a diagonal release from rest givesWhen ${\omega }_x\ne {\omega }_y$, the relative phase changes on the scale $1/|{\omega }_x-{\omega }_y|$: the trace changes shape without any terrestrial Coriolis force. It need not be uniform precession of a Foucault pendulum. To cleanly resolve the terrestrial effect over times of order $1/|\alpha |$, a useful design target is $|{\omega }_x-{\omega }_y|\ll |\alpha |$. Near the equator that target becomes particularly demanding. Compare fast periods along perpendicular launch directions to look for this frequency splitting; repeat at several launch orientations to detect preferred suspension axes.

Other controls address distinct alternatives: shelter the apparatus from air currents, track the support against the building, measure both orbit axes, and compare early and late fitted directions as the amplitude decays. A sustaining drive, if used in a different apparatus, must supply mechanical energy without imposing an azimuthal bias; an undriven run provides a useful comparison. A change in swing direction alone cannot exclude these effects. Agreement of the signed rate with independently known geographical latitude and Earth's rotation, together with stable repeat launches and small competing effects, is the inference the experiment is designed to support.