16 Part1 ActiveVibrationControlPiezo

16.
Active Vibration Control Using Piezoelectric Materials - Classical Control Methods
Topic 16. Active Vibration Control

Using Piezoelectric Materials Part 1. Classical Control Methods
Dr. G. Song, Associate Professor University of Houston
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering
Instructor: Dr. Song
16. Active Vibration Control Using Piezoelectric Materials - Classical Control Methods
Outline
1. 2. 3. 4. Introduction Experimental Set Up Modal Analysis and Open Loop Testing Vibration Suppression Methods (a) PPF (b) SRF (c) Lead Compensator Conclusions
5.
1. INTRODUCTION
FRP Shapes(Beams and columns) have shown to provide efficient and economical applications for Bridges, Piers, Retaining walls, Airport facilities, Storage structures exposed to salt and chemicals. FRP are thin walled structured manufactured by pultrusion process and although economical have * relatively high deflection low elastic modulus resins. * considerable shear deformation. * critical global and local stability. * potential material failure. External vibrations aggravates these limitations.
Review of control of civil structures using smart materials

Huston R D et al (1994) developed and tested numerous fiberoptic and conventional sensor techniques and designs for the implementation in smart civil structures . Krumme R et al (1995) studied passive control of the dynamic response of civil structures utilizing shape-memory alloy (SMA) damping techniques. Aizawa S et al (1998) used piezoelectric stack actuators for response control of a four story structural frame.
Very little Use of Piezoelectric patch actuators for vibration control of civil structures has been reported.
Review of control using Piezo patches for SRF and PPF control
Positive position feedback (PPF) method was applied by Goh and Caughey (1985), Fanson and Caughey(1990), Agrawal and Bang (1994), Song et al (2000) for control of flexible beams. Strain rate feedback (SRF) for bonded and embedded piezoceramic sensor and actuator was considered by Hanagud, Won and Obal (1988). Hagood and Anderson of MIT studied the possibility of using a single piezo element for actuator and sensor. Song, Schmidt and Agarwal studied the vibration suppression of flexible structure using modular control patch.
Piezoelectricity
Piezo Effect. Conversion between mechanical and electrical energy - materials that respond to stress by producing a voltage - materials that respond to a change in electric field by changing shapes. Discovered in 1880 by Pierre and Jacques Curie. Electrically neutral solid contains polar bonds and noncentrosymmetric units - typically dipoles cancel out in a solid, but not necessarily when the solid is distorted
Piezoelectric Action
Resulting Strain (S) Resulting Strain (S)
+ Polling Axis Electrodes
Piezoelectric material as an actuator
Direction
Direction
Direction
of Polarity
No Voltage
of Polarity
of Polarity
Applied Voltage opposite polarity
Applied Voltage same as polarity
Piezoelectric material as a sensor

F F
Direction of Polarity
Voltage generated same as polarity
No voltage generated
Voltage generated opposite polarity
10
2. Experimental Set Up
Signal Generator, Oscilloscope and Power Amplifier Fixture to Hold the beam PC with Real Time Controls I-Beam Composite
11
EXPERIMENTAL SET UP
Piezoelectric actuator PZT Sensor Composite I-beam
Oscilloscope
Power Amplifier
D/A Converter
A/D Converter
dSPACE data Acq. System
PC with MATLAB
BLOCK DIAGRAM
Dept. of Mechanical Engineering Instructor: Dr. Song
12
EXPERIMENT CONNECTIONS
CANTILEVER END
SIGNAL GENERATOR AND OSCILLOSCOPE
FIXTURE
POWER AMPLIFIERS
MATLAB & dSPACE
ADA
13
ACTUATORS AND SENSORS CONNECTIONS
Actuators Sensors
Strong
Weak
14
DIMENSIONS AND DIRECTIONS OF THE BEAM
wb tb
hb
Strong Direction
Weak Direction
100 X 102 X 6 mms
Length of the Beam = 3.35 m
15
Simulink Model for the Modetest of the I-beam
For Multi-mode excitation
Free End
16
3. Modal Analysis and Open Loop Testing

MODAL TESTING PROCEDURE
Ensure beam is tightly clamped on the fixture. Manual excitation at the free end in strong, weak and twisting directions. Manual excitation at the center of the beam in all three directions to generate multimode results captured by dSPACE and analyzed using MATLAB Natural Modes evaluated and energy levels are compared.
Strong Multimode 45 Degrees
Weak
17
RESULTS OF MODE TEST

Amplitude Vs Time Response for Strong and Weak Sides
t im e re s p o n s e 1 s t ro n g amplitude (Volts) 0.5
-0 . 5
-1
10 15 20 t im e (s e c s ); M a n u a l E x c it a t io n in S t ro n g d ire c t io n
25
30
0.15 weak 0.1 amplitude (Volts) 0.05 0 -0 . 0 5 -0 . 1
10 15 20 t im e (s e c s ); M a n u a l E x c it a t io n in W e a k d ire c t io n
25
30
18

Power Spectral Density Plot for Strong direction
19

Power Spectral Density Plot for Weak direction
P o w e r S p e c t ru m : W e a k 0 -1 0 -2 0 -3 0 -4 0 -5 0 -6 0 -7 0 -8 0 -9 0 -1 0 0
Power Spectrum Magnitude (dB)
10
20
30
40
50 F re q u e n c y
60
70
80
90
100
20

Experimental Modal Frequencies
MODE STRONG DIRECTION (Hz) WEAK DIRECTION (Hz)
FIRST
7.62
4.5
SECOND
45.5
13.28
THIRD FOURTH
80.86
28.47 45.5
21

Drop In Energy Levels Strong and Weak Directions
Power spectral density Comparision plot for 0-2 and 10-12th second: Strong -5 -10 -15 0-2 second 10-12 second
-20 0-2 second 8-10 second -30 Power spectral density Comparision plot for 1-2 and 8-10th second: Weak
-20
-40
Energy level in Decibels
-25 -30 -35
Energy level in Decibels
-50
-60
-40 -45 -50 -55

-80
-70
10
20
30
40
50 60 Frequency (Hz)
70
80
90
100
10
15
20
35
40
45
50
22
Comparative Energy Drop in 20 seconds in Strong and Weak directions

Serial No 1 2 3 4 5 6 Frequency (Hz) 4.5 7.62 13.28 28.47 45.5 80.86 Energy Level (dB) -49.5 -7.68 -58.5 -63 -34.62 -46.20 Energy Drop in 20 Seconds Strong direction (dB) 14.00 15.25 15.00 23.50 34.50 26.40 Energy Drop in 20 Seconds Weak direction (dB) 14 20.13 6.75 8.00 12.40 6.25
Remarks Dominant in Weak direction Most dominant peak in Strong direction Dominant at 45 Degrees Torsional Mode Dominant in Weak direction Dominant in both directions Dominant in strong direction
23
4. VIBRATION SUPRESSION METHODS PPF CONTROL SRF CONTROL LEAD COMPENSATOR - ROOT LOCUS APPROACH
- BODE PLOTS APPROACH
24
Block Diagram of PPF Control

+ + G2
+ 2 + 2 = 0
Structure
c2
+ 2cc2
+ c2 = 0
Compensator
25
PPF Phase Angle Plot
Phase Angle Active Damping
2 Active Flexibility Active stiffness
= c
26
PPF CONTROL OBJECTIVE

Simulation and Modeling - Using Sinusoidal Input - Using Impulse Input Free Vibration of the Beam-Reference Test Controlled Response - Effect of the Damping Ratio 0.5 0.1 - Changes in the Targeted Frequencies 6 9 Hz Result Analysis
27
Simulation and Modeling using sinusoidal response

Plant
Compensator
Plant
Compensator
28
Simulated Time Response comparison using PPF Control
29
Simulation and Modeling for an impulse response: PPF Control
30
Bode Plot of the Closed Loop System for the PPF Simulation
31
Root Locus Plot of the Open Loop System for the PPF Simulation
New Pole Locations
32
PPF Real Time Control of Composite I-Beam
33
Summary of PPF control data and analysis (Experimental)

PPF C O N T RO L D AT A EN ER G Y D RO P dB 5 -1 0 s ec St ro n g 2 3 .9 6 5 .9 7 .6 3 9 .1 7 1 0 .4 4 1 1 .4 6 1 3 .5 5 A N A L Y SIS D A T A EN ER G Y D R O P dB 1 0 -1 5 s ec St ro n g 4 .4 9 .5 1 5 .0 8 2 0 .2 6 6 2 5 .4 5 3 0 .2 1 3 4 .6 3 9 .9 1 Z ET A UNZ ET A CONTROL CONT 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 4 .2 9 8 .3 1 1 1 .3 7 1 3 .1 5 1 0 .6 8 2 2 .8 7 3 4 .4 3 4 1 .3 7 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 4 .5 6 9 .1 8 1 2 .2 7 1 3 .9 1 4 .8 2 1 1 .4 5 2 6 .3 2 3 7 .3 8 4 4 .4 6 5 0 .9 6 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 5 .1 3 1 0 .1 8 1 3 .0 1 1 4 .7 1 1 3 .1 9 3 0 .7 4 2 .3 8 4 9 .9 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 4 0 .0 0 3 2 6 .0 8 1 1 .2 8 1 4 .0 5 1 4 .9 2 1 5 .8 8 3 5 .2 4 6 .2 3 5 2 .2 6 0 .0 0 3 2 0 .0 0 3 2 0 .0 0 3 2 0 .0 0 3 2 0 .0 0 8 3 0 .0 1 4 3 0 .0 1 7 0 0 .0 1 9 8 0 .0 0 7 7 0 .0 1 3 1 0 .0 1 4 8 0 .0 1 6 5 0 .0 0 7 2 0 .0 1 2 2 0 .0 1 4 4 0 .0 1 6 4 0 .0 1 3 8 0 .0 0 6 9 0 .0 1 1 4 0 .0 1 4 2 0 .0 1 4 5 0 .0 0 4 8 0 .0 0 6 4 0 .0 0 8 4 0 .0 1 0 1 0 .0 1 2 0 0 .0 1 3 4 0 .0 1 3 6 0 .0 1 4 4 P e r c e n t a ge I n c r e a s e in Z et a fo r co n t cas e 4 1 .1 8 8 8 .2 4 1 4 7 .0 6 1 9 7 .0 6 2 5 2 .9 4 2 9 4 .1 2 3 0 0 .0 0 3 2 3 .5 3 U n s t a b le a t P P F ga in = - 5 .5 R EM A R K S Sl T E ST FREQ N o . N O P P F G A IN (H z ) 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30 26 27 28 29 30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 - 0 .5 -1 - 1 .5 -2 - 2 .5 -3 - 3 .5 -5 0 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 - 4 .5 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 0 -1 -2 -3 - 3 .5 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 6 .2 6 .2 6 .2 6 .2 6 .2 6 .4 6 .4 6 .4 6 .4 6 .4 6 .4 6 .6 6 .6 6 .6 6 .6 6 .6 6 .8 6 .8 6 .8 6 .8 6 .8 Z ET A ( 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 )
R ef t es t fo r t es t s 2 6 -3 3 R ef t es t fo r t es t s 3 6 -3 9 1 0 2 .9 4 2 3 5 .2 9 3 1 7 .6 5 3 2 6 .4 7 U n s t a b le a t P P F ga in = - 5
R ef t es t fo r t es t s 4 1 -4 5 1 1 1 .7 6 2 5 8 .8 2 3 2 3 .5 3 3 8 2 .3 5 3 0 5 .8 8 U n s t a b le a t P P F ga in = - 5
R ef t es t fo r t es t s 4 7 -5 0 1 2 6 .4 7 2 8 5 .2 9 3 3 5 .2 9 3 8 5 .2 9 U n s t a b le a t P P F ga in = 4 .5
R ef t es t fo r t es t s 5 2 -5 5 1 5 9 .3 8 3 4 6 .8 8 4 3 1 .2 5 5 1 8 .7 5 U n s t a b le a t P P F ga in = - 4
Contd
34

PPF CO N T RO L D A T A Sl N o. T EST NO A N A LYSIS D A T A Increase in Z ET EN ER G Y EN ER G Y Z ET A Z et a for A D R O P dB D R O P dB UN5-10 sec 10-15 sec C O N T R O L Z ET A cont rol St rong St rong cas e CO N T 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.3 0.2 7.22 13.07 15.2 18.89 45.21 57.3 5.03 10.65 13.8 15.16 12.76 32.87 47.06 54.91 4.09 8.88 12.36 14.37 15.41 9.85 24.64 41.23 45.22 51.07 7.79 13.41 14.72 15.78 21.27 45.51 52.96 57.06 7.02 12.87 15.24 18.56 43.92 55.69 6.66 12.04 14.64 15.69 17.57 39.87 57.28 54.89 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0028 0.0028 0.0028 0.0028 0.0027 0.0088 0.0142 0.0298 214.29 407.14 964.29 U nst able at P P F gain= -2 R ef t est for t est s 1920 0.0073 0.0160 0.0250 0.0315 128.13 400.00 681.25 884.38 U nst able at P P F gain= -2.5 R ef t est for t est s 1517 0.0062 0.0112 0.0197 0.0207 0.0383 106.67 273.33 556.67 590.00 1176.67 U nst able at P P F gain= -3 R ef t est for t est s 1013 0.0099 0.0184 0.0246 0.0309 209.38 475.00 668.75 865.63 U nst able at P P F gain= -3.5 R ef t est for t est s 4-8 0.0091 0.0157 0.0262 184.38 390.63 718.75 U nst able at P P F gain= -3.5 R ef t est for t est s 6569 0.0090 0.0148 0.0149 0.0150 181.25 362.50 365.63 368.75 U nst able at P P F gain= -4 R ef t est for t est s 6264
P ercen t age
R EM A R K S
PPF G A IN 0 -1 -2 -3 -3.5 0 -1 -2 -3 0 -1 -2 -2.5 -3 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 -2.5 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 0
F R EQ
31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55 56 57 58 59 60
56 57 58 59 60 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18
7 7 7 7 7 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.2 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.4 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62
R ef t est for t est s 5760
Contd
35

PPF CO N T RO L D A T A A N A LYSIS D A T A REM A RK S FREQ EN ERG Y EN ERG Y P ercen t age Z ET A Increase H z Z ET A D RO P dB D RO P dB 5-10 sec 10-15 sec Z ET A CO N - Control case Strong U N CO N T T RO L Strong 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 7.8 8 8 8 8 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.2 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.4 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.6 8.8 8.8 8.8 8.8 0.2 0.2 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 4.2 8.31 10.87 11.53 34.92 59.09 4.29 8.8 11.66 13.2 11.26 32.93 52.03 57.41 9.14 12.36 14.11 31.21 54.93 55.33 9.18 12.71 14.41 28.67 44.52 44.52 9.14 12.79 14.32 26.57 50.49 54.26 8.66 12.12 13.88 14.88 24.9 42.54 57.26 57.06 9.71 12.78 8.73 16.11 32.08 57.29 23.68 38.67 11.5 15.31 36.62 55.31 0.0027 0.0027 0.0022 0.0022 0.0022 0.0022 0.0022 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0035 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0067 0.0150 0.0319 109.38 368.75 896.88 U nstable at PPF gain= -2 0.0067 0.0142 0.0215 0.0348 109.38 343.75 571.88 987.50 U nstable at PPF gain= -2.5 Ref test for tests 9295 0.0123 0.0211 0.0279 284.38 559.38 771.88 U nstable at PPF gain= -2.5 Ref test for tests 8891 0.0135 0.0211 0.0268 321.88 559.38 737.50 U nstable at PPF gain= -2.5 Ref test for tests 8486 0.0117 0.0177 0.0239 265.63 453.13 646.88 0.0114 0.0186 225.71 431.43 U nstable at PPF gain= -3 Ref test for tests 7678 U nstable at PPF gain= -2.5 Ref test for tests 8082 0.0159 622.73 0.0251 1040.91 0.0099 0.0163 350.00 640.91 With filter added Ref test for tests 7174 0.0147 444.44 0.0322 1092.59 U nstable at PPF gain= -1.5 Ref test for tests 2225
Sl N o . 61 62 63 64 65 66 67 68 69 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93
T EST NO 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 70 71 72 73 74 75 76 77 78 79 80 81 82 83 84 85 86 87 88 89 90 91 92 93 94 95
PPF G A IN -0.5 -1 0 -0.5 -0.3 -0.2 -0.5 0 -1 -1.5 -2 -2.5 0 -1 -1.5 -2 0 -1 -1.5 -2 0 -1 -1.5 -2 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5
0.0256 631.43 0.0386 1002.86
36
Effect of Gain Change, PPF Damping Ratio = 0.5

PPF CONTROL DATA ANALY SISDATA
REMIncrease ZETA ARKS ZETA Sl No. TEST NOPPF GAIN FREQZETA ENERGY ENERGY in UNDROP dB DROP dB CONT CONT Zeta for 5-10 sec 10-15 sec control Strong Strong case % 45 46 47 48 49 50 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 -2.5 7.62 0.5 7.62 0.5 7.62 0.5 7.62 0.5 7.62 0.5 7.62 0.5 4.09 8.88 12.36 14.37 15.41 9.85 24.64 41.23 45.22 51.07 0.0030 0.0030 0.0062 106.67 0.0030 0.0112 273.33 0.0030 0.0197 556.67 0.0030 0.0207 590.00 Unstable 0.0030 0.0383 1176.67 at PPF gain= -3 Ref test for tests 4-8
37
PPF CONTROLDATA ANALY SISDATA TEST NOPPF GAINFREQ ZETA ENERGY ENERGY ZETA ZETA Percentage DROP dB DROP dB UNCONT CONT Increase in 5-10 sec 10-15 sec Zeta for Strong Strong CONT 51 52 53 54 55 9 10 11 12 13 0 -0.5 -1 -1.5 -2 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 0.4 5.03 10.65 13.8 15.16 12.76 32.87 47.06 54.91 0.0032 0.0032 0.0073 128.13 0.0032 0.0160 400.00 0.0032 0.0250 681.25 0.0032 0.0315 884.38
REMARKS
Ref test for tests 1013
Unstable at PPF gain= -2.5
38
PPF CONTROL DATA ANALYSIS DATA Sl No. TEST NO PPF GAIN FREQ ZETA ENERGY ENERGY ZETA ZETA DROP dB DROP dB UNCON CONT 5-10 sec 10-15 sec T Strong Strong 63 64 65 66 67 21 22 23 24 25 0 -0.5 -0.3 -0.2 -0.5 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 7.62 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 0.1 9.71 12.78 8.73 16.11 32.08 57.29 23.68 38.67 0.0022 0.0022 0.0159 0.0022 0.0251 0.0022 0.0099 0.0022 0.0163
REMARKS Percentage Increase in Zeta for CONT case Ref test for tests 22-25 622.73 1040.91 350.00 640.91 With filter added
39
Effect of Gain Change , frequency varied from 6.2 to 6.8 Hz

P P F CO N T RO L D A T A Sl N o. T EST N O P P F G A IN F REQ Z ET A EN ERG Y D RO P dB 5-10 sec St rong A N A LYSIS D A T A REM A RK S Z ET A Z ET A P ercent age EN ERG Y D RO P dB U N CO N T CO N T Increase in 10-15 sec Z eta for St rong CO N T case Ref t est for 0.0034 t est s 36-39 10.68 22.87 34.43 41.37 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 4.56 9.18 12.27 13.9 14.82 11.45 26.32 37.38 44.46 50.96 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 5.13 10.18 13.01 14.71 13.19 30.7 42.38 49.9 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 0.0034 0.0032 6.08 11.28 14.05 14.92 15.88 35.2 46.23 52.26 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0032 0.0083 0.0143 0.0170 0.0198 159.38 346.88 431.25 518.75 U nst able at P P F gain= -4 0.0077 0.0131 0.0148 0.0165 126.47 285.29 335.29 385.29 U nst able at PPF gain= -4.5 Ref t est for t est s 52-55 0.0072 0.0122 0.0144 0.0164 0.0138 111.76 258.82 323.53 382.35 305.88 U nst able at P P F gain= -5 Ref t est for t est s 47-50 0.0069 0.0114 0.0142 0.0145 102.94 235.29 317.65 326.47 U nst able at P P F gain= -5 Ref t est for t est s41-45
10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19 20 21 22 23 24 25 26 27 28 29 30
35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48 49 50 51 52 53 54 55
0 -1 -2 -3 -4 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 -4.5 0 -1 -2 -3 -4 0 -1 -2 -3 -3.5
6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.2 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.4 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.6 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8 6.8
0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 0.5 4.29 8.31 11.37 13.15
40
Time Response for PPF gain = 2.5 & damping ratio=0.5
41
Drop in Energy Level

Drop of 51 dB
P o w e r s p e c t r a l d e n s i t y C o m p a r i s i o n p l o t ( 1 0 - 1 5 s e c ) fo r w i t h a n d w / o c o n t r o l : S t r o n g 40 w it h c o n t ro l w it h o u t c o n t ro l 20
0 Energy level in Decibels
-2 0
-4 0
-6 0
-8 0
-1 0 0
10
20
30
40
50 F re q u e n c y (H z )
60
70
80
90
100
42
Inferences
With lower values of damping ratio, the system becomes unstable at lower gains. Higher values of damping ratio (0.5) yields a better control of damping ratio of 1176.67 percentage. At higher values of damping ratio we get a broader range for control operation. Lower frequencies than the modal frequency produced lower percentage increase in damping ratio for controlled case as compared to the higher frequencies. The highest increase in percentage of controlled damping ratio is effective for the modal frequency (1176.67). At lower frequencies the drop in energy level is lower as compared to higher values and varies from 2 dB to 62.35 dB.
43
SRF CONTROL OBJECTIVE

Simulation and Modeling - Using Sinusoidal Input - Using Impulse Input Free Vibration of the Beam-Reference Test Controlled Response - Effect of the Damping Ratio - Changes in the Targeted Frequencies - Effect of SRF Gain Value Result Analysis
44
BLOCK DIAGRAM OF SRF CONTROL
+
2 (t) = 0 + + ( ) 2 ( ) t t s s s
G s
2
Structure
(t ) + 2 c c (t ) + c2 ( t ) = 0
Compensator
45
SRF Phase Angle Plot

-/2 Active Stiffness Phase Angle
/2
Active Damping
Active Negative Damping
+/2 = c
46
Simulation and Modeling using sinusoidal response : SRF

Plant
Compensator
Plant
Compensator
47
Simulated Time Response comparison using SRF Control
48
Simulation and Modeling for an impulse response: SRF Control
49
Bode Plot of the Closed Loop System for the SRF Simulation
50
Root Locus Plot of the Open Loop System for the SRF Simulation
New pole Locations
51
Real Time Control Using SRF
52
Target Frequencies 8, 9 ,10 &11 Hz and Controlled damping ratio evaluated (Experiment)
SR F C O N T R O L D A T A A N A L YSIS D A T A S N o. T E ST NO P ercen t age In creas e in EN ER G Y EN ER G Y Z E T A Z ET A Z et a fo r SR F G A IN F R E Q Z E T A D R O P 'D B ' D R O P 'D B ' U N C O N T C O N T co n t cas e 5 -1 0 s ec 1 0 -1 5 s ec R EM A R K S
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14 15 16 17 18 19
30 31 32 33 34 35 36 37 38 39 40 41 42 43 44 45 46 47 48
0 -0 .0 1 -0 .0 2 -0 .0 3 -0 .0 4 -0 .0 5 0 -0 .0 1 -0 .0 2 -0 .0 3 -0 .0 4 -0 .0 5 0 -0 .0 1 -0 .0 2 -0 .0 3 0 -0 .0 1 -0 .0 2
8 8 8 8 8 8 9 9 9 9 9 9 10 10 10 10 11 11 11
0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5 0 .5
2 3 .9 6 5 .9 7 .6 3 9 .1 7 1 0 .4 4 1 1 .4 6 1 1 .5 5 1 5 .1 0 1 7 .5 0 2 0 .2 6 2 1 .5 6 1 1 .3 7 1 1 .1 6 1 5 .0 0 1 7 .3 8 9 .1 8 1 2 .2 7 1 3 .9
4 .4 9 .5 1 5 .0 8 2 0 .2 6 6 2 5 .4 5 3 0 .2 1 2 4 .6 2 5 .7 6 2 9 .5 0 3 0 .3 0 3 0 .1 6 2 9 .9 3 3 4 .4 3 2 7 .8 4 3 4 .5 0 3 3 .2 6 2 6 .3 2 3 7 .3 8 4 4 .4 6
0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 0 3 1 0 .0 2 1 5 0 .0 2 0 4 4 6 5 .7 9 4 3 6 .8 4 0 .0 1 4 4 0 .0 1 7 4 0 .0 2 1 3 3 6 2 .1 6 4 6 1 .2 9 5 8 7 .1 0 0 .0 1 4 2 0 .0 1 4 9 0 .0 1 5 3 0 .0 1 5 7 0 .0 1 5 8 3 3 0 .3 0 3 5 1 .5 2 3 6 3 .6 4 3 7 5 .7 6 3 7 8 .7 9 0 .0 1 0 1 0 .0 1 1 0 0 .0 1 1 6 0 .0 1 1 9 0 .0 1 2 1 1 6 5 .7 9 1 8 9 .4 7 2 0 5 .2 6 2 1 3 .1 6 2 1 8 .4 2
R ef t es t fo r t es t s 3 1 -35
53
Time Response Curve for SRF Control: Strong ( Experimental )
54
Drop in Energy Levels SRF: Strong

( Experimental )
P o w e r s p e c t r a l d e n s i t y C o m p a ri s i o n p l o t ( 1 0 - 1 5 s e c ) fo r w i t h a n d w / o c o n t ro l : S t r o n g 40 w i t h c o n t ro l w i t h o u t c o n t ro l 20
0 Energy level in Decibels
-2 0
-4 0
-6 0
-8 0
10
20
30
40
50 F re q u e n c y ( H z )
60
70
80
90
100
55
PHASE LEAD COMPENSATOR
R(S)
Gc(S)
GP(S)
C(S)
56
Lead Compensator for the I-beam (Root Locus Approach)

Lead compensator designed for first dominant mode :7.62 Hz. Transfer function = 238
s 2 + 0.2831s + 2256
Block Diagram of Lead Compensator

(s + z ) (s + p)
Low Pass Filter
Kc
Plant
Compensator
Continued..
57
Lead Compensator for the I-beam (Root Locus Approach)

- 4 .4 + 5 4 . 8 2 i
- 9 5 .6 1
- 3 1 .6 9
0 ,0
location of pole and zero for lead compensator
Pole
Zero
Compensator = 6.33
Transfer function =
s + 31.69 s + 95.61
1508 s + 4.778e004 s 3 + 95.89 s 2 + 2283s + 2.157e005
58
Root Locus Plot of lead compensator (Simulation)

Root Locus 400 0.23 0.17 0.115 0.08 0.05 400 0.025 Broken: Uncompensated Solid: Compensated 350 300 0.36 200 250 200 300
0.6 100
Dominant new Poles
150 100 50
Imag Axis
0 50 -100 0.6 100 150 -200 0.36 -300 200 250 300 350 -400 0.23 -90 -80 0.17 -70 -60 0.115 -50 -40 Real Axis 0.08 -30 0.05 -20 0.025 -10 400 0
10
59
Bode Plot comparison between Plant and System (Root Locus Approach- simulation )
60
Impulse response of the Lead Compensator (Simulation)
61
Block Diagram of lead compensator based on Root Locus Approach
62
PSD Plot Comparison: Strong (Root Locus Approach-Experimental)

P o w e r s p e c t r a l d e n s i t y C o m p a r i s i o n p l o t ( 1 0 - 1 5 s e c ) fo r w i t h a n d w / o c o n t r o l : S t r o n g 20 w it h c o n t ro l w it h o u t c o n t ro l 10 0
-1 0 Energy level in Decibels -2 0
-3 0 -4 0
-5 0 -6 0
-7 0 -8 0
10
20
30
40
50 F re q u e n c y (H z )
60
70
80
90
100
63
Time Response Curve for Strong direction (Root Locus Approach-Experimental)
64
Lead Compensator Gain Comparison (Root Locus Approach)

ANALYSIS DATA Test No Lead Compen- Energy sator Gain Energy dB' drop Zeta zeta cont Zeta intial response % %
drop'dB' Drop'dB' 10-15 sec uncont 5-10 sec 10-15 sec Strong Strong
4.40 9.50 15.08 20.27 25.45 30.21 24.60 39.91 18.95 23.45 25.55 26.70 27.80 28.21 27.68 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030 0.0030
cont increase Increase initial Zeta for controlled

Reference Tes t
overall
1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0 4 6 8 10 12 14 16
2.00 3.96 5.90 7.63 9.17 10.44 11.46 13.55
0.0073 0.0079 0.0081 0.0082 0.0083 0.0082 0.0081
0.0068 143.3333 0.0073 163.3333 0.0076 170.0000 0.0078 173.3333 0.0081 176.6667 0.0081 173.3333 0.0082 170.0000
126.67 143.33 153.33 160.00 170.00 170.00 173.33
65
Lead Compensator for the I-Beam (Bode Plot Approach)
66
Bode Plot comparison between Plant and System (Bode Plot Approach-simulated)
67
Time Response Comparisons: Strong

(Experimental)
68
PSD Plot Comparisons: Strong

Power spectral density Comparision plot (10-15sec) for with and w/o control: Strong 20 with control without control 0
-20 Energy level in Decibels
-40
-60
-80
-100
-120
10
20
30
40
70
80
90
100
69
Movie
70
Frequency Response Comparison of the four Compensators

Bode Diagram 40
20
-20 Magnitude (dB)
-40
-60
-80
Without Control With Lead Control With Pole Placement Control With PPF Control With SRF Control
-100
-120 0 10
10
10 Frequency (rad/sec)
10
71
5. CONCLUSION
Experimental results have shown great potential for active control. PPF, SRF and Lead Compensator methods were very successful 1176% increase in damping in PPF control

16 Part1 ActiveVibrationControlPiezo

Diunggah oleh

Informasi Dokumen

Deskripsi Asli:

Judul Asli

Hak Cipta

Format Tersedia

Bagikan dokumen Ini

Bagikan atau Tanam Dokumen

Opsi Berbagi

Apakah menurut Anda dokumen ini bermanfaat?

Apakah konten ini tidak pantas?

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

16 Part1 ActiveVibrationControlPiezo

Diunggah oleh

Hak Cipta:

Format Tersedia

16.

Active Vibration Control Using Piezoelectric Materials - Classical Control Methods

Topic 16. Active Vibration Control

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Review of control of civil structures using smart materials

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

+ Polling Axis Electrodes

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Piezoelectric material as an actuator

Applied Voltage opposite polarity

Applied Voltage same as polarity

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Piezoelectric material as a sensor

Voltage generated same as polarity

Voltage generated opposite polarity

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

dSPACE data Acq. System

MATLAB & dSPACE

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

ACTUATORS AND SENSORS CONNECTIONS

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

DIMENSIONS AND DIRECTIONS OF THE BEAM

Length of the Beam = 3.35 m

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

Simulink Model for the Modetest of the I-beam

For Multi-mode excitation

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

3. Modal Analysis and Open Loop Testing

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

RESULTS OF MODE TEST

0.15 weak 0.1 amplitude (Volts) 0.05 0 -0 . 0 5 -0 . 1

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

RESULTS OF MODE TEST

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

RESULTS OF MODE TEST

Power Spectrum Magnitude (dB)

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering

Instructor: Dr. Song

RESULTS OF MODE TEST

Dept. of Mechanical Engineering