Home Search Collections Journals About Contact us My IOPscience

Resonant controllers for smart structures

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.

2002 Smart Mater. Struct. 11 1

(http://iopscience.iop.org/0964-1726/11/1/301)

View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:

IP Address: 132.203.227.63
This content was downloaded on 10/07/2014 at 16:49

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

INSTITUTE OF PHYSICS PUBLISHING SMART MATERIALS AND STRUCTURES
Smart Mater. Struct. 11 (2002) 18 PII: S0964-1726(02)32066-4

Resonant controllers for smart structures

H R Pota1, S O Reza Moheimani2 and Matthew Smith3
1
School of Electrical Engineering, University College, The University of New South Wales,
ADFA Canberra, ACT 2600, Australia
2
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, The University of Newcastle,
NSW 2308, Australia
3
Department of Systems Engineering, RSISE, The Australian National University,
ACT 0200, Australia
E-mail: [email protected], [email protected]
and [email protected]

Received 21 March 2000, in final form 29 November 2001

Published 6 February 2002
Online at stacks.iop.org/SMS/11/1

Abstract
In this paper we propose a special type of colocated feedback controller for
smart structures. The controller is a parallel combination of high-Q resonant
circuits. Each of the resonant circuits is tuned to a pole (or the resonant
frequency) of the smart structure. It is proven that the parallel combination
of resonant controllers is stable with an infinite gain margin. Only one set of
actuatorsensor can damp multiple resonant modes with the resonant
controllers. Experimental results are presented to show the robustness of the
proposed controller in damping multimode resonances.

1. Introduction Due to the resonant modes of flexible structures, a

disturbance (f (d, t) in figure 2) results in a response
The advancement in materials technology has enabled which is highly underdamped and if uncontrolled takes a
multi-layered structures where actuators, sensors and the long time to settle. This undamped response makes the
main structure form one whole component [1]. These compo- use of an uncontrolled flexible structure unacceptable in most
site structures are called intelligent or smart structures. Smart applications. The modelling and control of flexible structures
structures have found wide applications in areas such as has been a subject of active research for some time now [911].
acoustic noise control [2, 3] and vibration control of washing There are several methods to control flexible structures. Under
machines [4]. In this paper we propose a controller which is most conditions the disturbance control problem for flexible
robust and can be programmed to damp only a few or several structures is a linear control problem. It is generally known
resonant modes at a time [5]. These controllers have also found that colocated velocity feedback results in a robust system
application in active noise control of acoustic ducts [6]. The with guaranteed closed-loop stability [12, 13]. The stability
motivation behind this controller is that, in many situations, guarantee is not valid for dynamic actuators. Another equally
it may be desirable to embed many discrete actuators in a simple control scheme, known as positive position feedback,
structure [7] rather than spread out film-type actuators [2]. A has been proposed [14, 15] which retains the guaranteed
necessary requirement for multiple discrete sensoractuator stability margins. The positive position feedback consists of
pairs is that they provide a robust control. The closed-loop second-order filters (with no zeros) and the control design
robust stability of the controllers suggested in this paper is consists in suitably choosing the poles and the damping of the
proven and experimentally demonstrated. filters. The selection of the poles and damping is a non-trivial
In order to achieve a given task with minimum energy task and new methods are being proposed [16] to improve the
requirements or where large structures are necessary, for design process. The controllers proposed in this paper are
example, space structures [7], large telescopes [8] or large also second-order filters but with two zeros: one zero is at
antennae, smart structures have an in-built flexibility. The the origin and the other is an LHP real zero. Moreover, the
flexibility in the structures is characterized by several resonant real zero and the complex poles are parameterized by three
modes seen in figure 1 for a cantilever beam. The frequency common parameters which leads to a guaranteed infinite gain
response in figure 1 is characteristic of most flexible structures; stability margin. In addition to these practically attractive
it is the colocated response of a typical flexible structure shown qualities, this method can damp multiple modes with only one
in figure 2. sensoractuator pair.

0964-1726/02/010001+08$30.00 2002 IOP Publishing Ltd Printed in the UK 1

H R Pota et al
Analytical Frequency Response Gvv(s)=Vs(s)/Va(s)
10

10

20
Magnitude (dB)

30

40 Figure 4. Flexible structure with feedback controller.

50

60

70
0 1 2 3
10 10 10 10
Frequency (Hz)

Figure 1. Analytical frequency response.

Figure 5. Feedback control block diagram.

This paper is organized as follows. Section 2 discusses

the resonant controllers. Section 3 develops the mathematical
model of the system. Section 4 proves the closed-loop stability
with colocated resonant controllers. Experimental results are
presented in section 5 followed by the conclusions.
Figure 2. A flexible structure.
2. Controller selection and design

The structure of the closed-loop system is shown in figure 4.

The disturbance signal is F (d, s), the output sensor voltage
is Vs (s), the actuator voltage is Va (s) and Y (r, s) is the
displacement of the structure at location r.
The actuator voltage Va (s) is given by
Va (s) = A(s)Vs (s) + Vi (s) (1)


N

Figure 3. Feedback control RLC network. where A(s) = Ai (s) and Ai (s) are of the form
i=1

Advanced linear control system ideas have also been Ci s(Ri + Li s)

Ai (s) = kai (2)
applied to flexible structures and often with good results. The Li Ci s 2 + Ri Ci s + 1
standard LQG [17], the H control [18, 19] and minimax
with i2 = Li1Ci ; i is the ith resonant frequency of the
LQG [20] have also been successfully used to control flexible
flexible structure. The resistance Ri is chosen to maximize
structures. The effect of these controllers is to push the
the damping of the closed-loop system.
resonant peak down, i.e. to increase the system damping.
Independent modal control (pp 1613 in [9]) is another method This configuration is motivated by the passive RL network
to damp flexible structures. For effective modal control one controllers in [21, 22]. In cases where the gain kai = 1, the
actuator per resonant mode is needed. The controller proposed controller Ai (s) can be completely implemented using a series
in this paper uses only one actuator to damp several of the RLC network shown in figure 3.
resonant modes. In this paper sensors and actuators both Let the block transfer functions in figure 4 be defined as
refer to piezoelectric materials but the proposed method will follows for an open-loop situation (A(s) = 0):
work for any pair of appropriate sensors and actuators. In  
 Vs (s)   Vs (s) 
short this paper proposes a direct method to push down the Gf v (s) = Gvv (s) =
resonant peaks using high-Q resonant circuits as shown in F (d, s) Vi(s)=0 Va (s) F (d,s)=0

Y (r, s)   Y (r, s) 
figure 3. The results of the experimental validation of this 
Gfy (r, s) =  Gvy (r, s) = .
method are presented in this paper. F (d, s) Vi (s)=0 Va (s) F (d,s)=0

2
 Resonant controllers for smart structures

15
Comparison of frequency response for different values of R 2.2. Multiple resonant mode controllers
open loop The resonant mode circuit idea can be easily extended to damp
20 R=100
R=550 multiple resonant modes. Instead of one feedback circuit A(s),
25 R=200
R=50 several of these circuits can be applied in parallel to give the
30 closed-loop transfer function given below:
35 Gfy (r, s)F (d, s) Gvy (r, s)Vi (s)
Magnitude (dB)

Y (r, s) =
N +
N
40 1+ Ai (s) Gvv (s) 1 + Ai (s) Gvv (s)
i=1 i=1
45 (5)
50
where the resonant mode filters Ai (s) are of the form given
55 in equation (2). Each resonant filter is tuned to a resonant
60
frequency of the structure. The damping resistor for each
of the resonant filters can be chosen independently because
65
120 125 130 135 140 145 150 155 160 the action of the resonant filters is mostly uncoupled. In the
frequency (Hz)
next section a cantilever beam is selected to demonstrate these
Figure 6. Experimental frequency response for different resistors.
concepts.

With the above definitions the sensor voltage is given by 3. Model of the laminate beam
Vs (s) = Gf v (s)F (d, s) + Gvv (s)Va (s). We consider the piezoelectric laminate cantilevered beam of
After substituting equation (1) into the above expression figure 7. The beam is fixed at one end and free at the other.
The two piezoelectric patches in figure 7 are used as actuators
Vs (s) = Gf v (s)F (d, s) Gvv (s)A(s)Vs (s) + Gvv (s)Vi (s) and/or sensors. There are several different approaches to
on rearranging the terms the closed-loop transfer function is obtain the system model from the solution of the Euler
Bernoulli partial differential equation, with the associated
Gf v (s)F (d, s) Gvv (s)Vi (s)
Vs (s) = + . (3) boundary conditions, see for example [23, 24]. However, to
1 + A(s)Gvv (s) 1 + A(s)Gvv (s) find a solution which suits our controller design methodology,
Equation (3) can also be used to get displacement at a we adopt the assumed modes approach of [11].
given location r in the flexible structure Let y(r, t) denote the elastic deformation of the beam as
measured from the rest position. The elastic deflection y(r, t)
Gfy (r, s)F (d, s) Gvy (r, s)Vi (s) is governed by the classical BernoulliEuler beam equation
Y (r, s) = + . (4)
1 + A(s)Gvv (s) 1 + A(s)Gvv (s)  
2 2 y(r, t) 2 y(r, t) 2 va (x, t)
EI + A = Ca (6)
From the transfer functions in equations (3) and (4) it can r 2 r 2 t 2 r 2
be seen that the feedback is effective only for the frequency
where E, I , A, w(r, t) and represent Youngs modulus,
range where |A( )Gvv ( )| is large. In the present approach
the moment of inertia, the cross-section area, the external
A(s) is a parallel connection of high-Q resonant circuits. Each
force per unit length and the linear mass density of the beam,
circuit is tuned to a resonant mode of the flexible structure,
respectively. The cantilever beam boundary conditions are
making the feedback effective only at resonant frequencies.
y(0, t)
y(0, t) = 0 EI =0
2.1. Selection of R r
(7)
For each resonant controller of equation (2), the values of 2 y(l, t) 3 y(l, t)
EI =0 EI = 0.
the inductor and the capacitor are chosen such that the circuit r 2 r 3
resonant frequency is the same as one of the flexible structure
The main idea of the assumed modes approach is to expand
resonant frequencies. The selection of a suitable value of the
the function y(r, t) as an infinite series in the form [11, 25]
resistance is the key to obtaining a good closed-loop response.



If the damping resistor in the resonant filter of equation (2)
is selected to be too low, there is a notch at the resonant y(r, t) = qi (t)i (r) (8)
i=1
frequency and there is an undesirable shift in closed-loop
poles. For high values of the resistance there is hardly any where i (r) are the eigenfunctions satisfying the ordinary
damping in the structure. These two effects are shown for differential equations, resulting from the substitution of
an experimental cantilever beam in figure 6. In this study R equation (8) into equations (6) and (7). The general form of the
was chosen from numerical simulations and then experimental mode shapes i (r) chosen for the beam-type of problem is
observations. The experimental results show the success of
i (r) = Ai sin i r + Bi cos i r + Ci sinh i r + Di cosh i r.
this method. Work is under progress to develop a suitable
optimality criterion to choose R which is solvable by standard There is a considerable latitude in choosing the constants Ai ,
optimization methods. Bi , Ci and Di . To fix these constants the mode shapes i (r) are

3
H R Pota et al

Figure 7. Piezoelectric laminate beam.

constrained to satisfy the following orthogonality property: Table 1. Parameters of the piezoelectric laminate beam.
 L
Beam length, L 0.775 m
i (r)j (r)A dr = AL3 ij (9)
Beam width 0.05 m
 L0 Beam thickness, tb 0.00589 m
i (r)j (r)A dr = AL3 i2 ij (10) Piezoceramic position, r1 0.03 m
0 Piezoceramic position, r2 0.10 m
Charge constant, d31 210 1012 m v1
where ij is the Kronecker delta function. With this ortho- Voltage constant, g31 11.5 103 Vm N1
gonality and the boundary conditions, the mode shape is given Coupling coefficient 0.340
by Capacitance, C 32.9 nF
 Piezoceramic width 0.025 m
cos i L + cosh i L Piezoceramic thickness ta 1 103 m
i (r) = L cosh i r cos i r
sin i L + sinh i L

(sinh i r sin i r)
Table 2. The first eight modes of the cantilever beam.
where i are the roots of the following equation:
i (Hz)
1 + cos i L cosh i L = 0.
Mode Experimental Analytical
Multiplying the BernoulliEuler equation (6) by j (r) and 1 7.98 7.96
integrating over [0, L] we have 2 50.04 47.75
 L
 L

3 140.14 134.9
EI qi (t)i (r)j (r) dr + A qi (t)i (r)j (r) dr 4 274.61 258.3
0 0 5 453.95 430.5
i=0 i=0
 L 2
6 678.13 644.5
va (x, t) 7 947.13 903
= Ca j (r) dr. (11) 8 1261.0 1206
0 r 2
The voltage va (x, t) is constant in the range [x1 , x2 ], and the
right-hand side of equation (11) can be written as ta is the thickness of the piezo-patch. Also, the frequencies
 L

2 va (x, t) i are related to i by i = A i , where E, I , A, Va (r, t)

EI 2
Ca j (r) dr
0 r 2 and represent Youngs modulus, the moment of inertia, the
 L cross-section area, the voltage across the actuating layer and
= Ca [  (x1 )  (x2 )]va (t)j (r) dr the linear mass density of the beam, respectively.
0
The parameters for the experimental beam at the
= Ca [j (x1 ) j (x2 )]va (t). (12)
University of Newcastle and the PIC151 piezoceramic
Noting that i (r) = 4 i , the ith mode equation can be parameters are given in table 1. The first eight values of
written as i for this beam are shown in table 2.
 Equation (14) describes the elastic deflection of the
AL3 qi (t) + 2 qi (t) = Ca [i (x1 ) i (x2 )]va (t) entire flexible beam due to a voltage applied to the actuating
i = 1, . . . , . (13) piezoelectric layer. Our controller design is based on this
The above modal equations (13) can be put together to give particular model. The sensor voltage expression can be written
the following transfer function between the voltage applied to as [27]



the piezoelectric patch, Va (r, t), and the displacement y(r, t)
vs (t) = Cs qi (t)(i (r2 ) i (r1 )).
[26, 23, 24]:
i=1

Y (r, s)
Ca i (r)[i (r1 ) i (r2 )]
 Substituting the above expressions in the transfer
Gvy (s) = =  (14)
Va (s) AL3 s 2 + i2 functions defined earlier, we get
i=1


 Vs (s) Cs i (d)[i (r2 ) i (r1 )]
where Ca = 12 Ea d31 w(ta + tb ), d31 is the electric charge Gf v (s) = =  (15)
constant of the film, Ea is Youngs modulus of the film and F (d, s) i=1
AL3 s 2 + i2

4
 Resonant controllers for smart structures

 Vs (s) Ca Cs [i (r1 ) i (r2 )]2
Gvv (s) = =  (16)
Va (s) i=1
AL3 s 2 + i2
and


i (r)i (d)
Gfy (r, s) =  . (17)
i=1
AL3 s 2 + i2
In the next section we look at the closed-loop stability of the
resonant controllers.

4. Closed-loop Stability

The passivity theorem [28] is used here to prove the stability

of the closed-loop system. A linear system is said to be passive
if the phase of its frequency response is within 90 , i.e. it
stays in the first and the fourth quadrant. The passivity theorem Figure 8. Experimental beam.
states that a feedback interconnection of two passive systems is Controler performance around first resonant frequency
passive. In the following we show that the closed-loop system 10

can be written as an interconnection of two passive systems. Open loop

15 Closed loop

Theorem 1. The closed-loop system 20

Gvv (s)Vi (s)

Vs (s) =  25
1+ Ni=1 sGvv (s)Ai (s)
Magnitude (dB)

30
with
Ci (Ri + Li s) 35
Ai (s) = kai
Li Ci s 2 + Ri Ci s + 1
40
is stable for all Li > 0, Ri > 0, Ci > 0 and kai > 0.
45

From equation (16) we have

50


sCa Cs [i (r1 ) i (r2 )]2
sGvv (s) =  . 55
i=1
AL3 s 2 + i2 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 12 13 14
Frequency (Hz)

It can be easily verified that R 2+ 2
0, Figure 9. Experimental frequency response for the first mode.
i
[, ], that is s 2 + 2 is passive. Further defining,
s
i
5. Experimental verification
 Ca Cs [i (r1 ) i (r2 )]2
ci =
AL3 The experimental set-up at the University of Newcastle is
sGvv (s) can be seen as a positively weighted (ci > 0) sum shown in figure 8. A cantilever beam with two piezoelectric
of passive transfer functions. This implies that sGvv (s) is patches is used to demonstrate the method. The parameters for
passive [28]. Similarly it can be seen that Ai (s) is strictly the beam are given in table 1. A lowpass filter with a cut-off
passive (Ai (j ) + Ai (j )
0 ). Again A(s) is a sum at 300 Hz is used to filter out the effect of discretized output
of positively weighted transfer functions, hence the strict from the digital controller. A Tektronix active probe was
passivity of A(s). The stability of the closed-loop system is used to sample the sensor voltage to avoid loading the sensor.
due to the passivity theorem [28] which states that a negative A ds1102 dSPACE board is used to implement the digital
feedback interconnection of a passive system and a strictly controller with a 2 kHz sampling frequency. A HP spectrum
passive system is stable. analyser was used to obtain frequency response between Vs (s)
and Vi (s) as shown in figure 8.
Remarks
Experiments were performed to damp the first, second and
1. With the above definition Ai (s) = Ais(s) , where Ai (s) are third modes, both individually and jointly. The resonant con-
the resonant controllers given in equation (2). Theorem 1 troller for the first mode A1 (s) can be built with 1 = 7.98 Hz,
proves the stability of the closed-loop systems considered R1 = 2.5 k/, C1 = 1 F and L1 = 39.716 H. Figure 9 shows
in this paper. The theoretical gain margin of these the open-loop and closed-loop frequency responses of the
controllers is infinity. system. The sinusoidal response (7.98 Hz) of the open-loop
2. The above discussion implies that the phase of Gvv (s) is and closed-loop systems is shown in figure 10.
always between 0 and 180 , implying the well-known The responses with the resonant controller (2 = 49.9 Hz,
pole-zero interlacing property of the colocated transfer R2 = 250 /, C2 = 1 F and L2 = 10.994 H), to control the
functions. second mode, are shown in figures 11 and 12. These figures

5
H R Pota et al
st Controler performance around first resonant frequency
Steady state response to sinusoid at 1 resonant frequency, Reduction = 11.8763(dB)
0.04 15

open loop Open loop

closed loop Closed loop
0.03
20

0.02

25
0.01
Sensor Voltage (V)

Magnitude (dB)
0 30

0.01
35

0.02

40
0.03

0.04 45
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 130 135 140 145
Time (s) Frequency (Hz)

Figure 10. Experimental sinusoidal response for the first mode. Figure 13. Experimental frequency response for the third mode.

rd
Steady state response to sinusoid at 3 resonant frequency, Reduction = 5.5406(dB)
0.05
Controler performance around second resonant frequency open loop
0 0.04 closed loop
Open loop
Closed loop 0.03
10

0.02

20
Sensor Voltage (V)

0.01

0
Magnitude (dB)

30

0.01

40
0.02

0.03
50

0.04

60
0.05
0 0.005 0.01 0.015 0.02 0.025 0.03 0.035 0.04
Time (s)

70
40 42 44 46 48 50 52 54 56 58 60
Frequency (Hz) Figure 14. Experimental sinusoidal response for the third mode.

Figure 11. Experimental frequency response for the second mode.

clearly demonstrate the improvement due to the resonant
controller.
Steady state response to sinusoid at 2
nd
resonant frequency, Reduction = 11.0245(dB)
The third mode controller A3 (s) for the resonant
0.06 frequency 3 = 135 Hz needs R3 = 130 /, C3 = 1 F
open loop
closed loop and L3 = 1.3899 H. Figures 13 and 14 show the frequency
0.04 response and the sinusoidal response for the open-loop and
closed-loop systems, respectively. Again the improvement in
the response is obvious.
0.02
Note that the resonant peak in figure 13 has almost
Sensor Voltage (V)

disappeared.
0

5.1. All three mode controllers

0.02

All three modes can be damped simultaneously using one

0.04
sensoractuator pair and three parallel combinations of
resonant mode controllers. The frequency response of such a
system is shown in figure 15. Figure 16 shows the frequency
0.06
0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
Time (s)
0.05 0.06 0.07 0.08 response for the entire frequency range of interest. The
robustness of the method is clearly demonstrated from these
Figure 12. Experimental sinusoidal response for the second mode. figures.

6
 Resonant controllers for smart structures

First Three Mode Active Control [2] Guigou C and Fuller C R 1997 Foam-pvdf smart skin for
5
aircraft interior sound control Proc. SPIE Smart Structures
10
and Materials (San Diego, CA, 46 March) vol 3044,
ed Janet M Slater, pp 6878
11.6 dB
15 [3] Tappert P M, Mercadal M and von Flotow A H 1997
11.3 dB
Evaluation of actuation schemes used for acoustic
20 attenuation of vibrating surfaces Proc. SPIE Smart
6 dB
Structures and Materials (San Diego, CA, 46 March)
25
vol 3044, ed Janet M Slater, pp 7986
Magnitude (dB)

[4] Diana G, Cheli F, Coppola M and Conrad D C 1997 Active

30
control of vibrations of a metal panel by means of
35
piezoelectric actuators and sensors Proc. SPIE Smart
Structures and Materials (San Diego, CA, 46 March)
40 vol 3044, ed Janet M Slater, pp 32741
[5] Pota H R, Moheimani S O R and Smith M 1999 Resonant
45 controllers for flexible structures Proc. IEEE International
38th Conf. on Decision and Control (Phoenix AZ, 710
50
Dec.) (Piscataway, NJ: IEEE) pp 6316
[6] Pota H R and Kelkar A G 2001 Modelling and control of
55
10
1
10
2
acoustic ducts ASME J. Vib. Acoust. 123 2
Frequency (Hz)
[7] Nye T W, Manning R A and Qassim K 1999 Performance of
active vibration control technology: the actex flight
Figure 15. Experimental frequency response for the first three
experiments Smart Mater. Struct. 8 767
modes: solid, open-loop; dashed, closed-loop.
[8] Bronowick A J, Abhyankar N S and Griffin S F 1999 Active
vibration control of large optical space structures Smart
Mater. Struct. 8 740
Controller performance over the entire bandwidth
0 [9] Fuller C R, Elliott S J and Nelson P A 1996 Active Control of
Open loop Vibration (New York: Academic)
optimal closed loop [10] Inman D J 1989 Vibration with Control, Measurement, and
10
Stability (Englewood Cliffs, NJ: Prentice-Hall)
[11] Meirovitch L 1986 Elements of Vibration Analysis 2nd edn
20
(Sydney: McGraw-Hill)
[12] Gevarter W 1970 Basic relations for control of flexible
vehicles AIAA J. 8 666
Magnitude (dB)

30 [13] Balas M J 1978 Feedback control of flexible structures IEEE

Trans. Autom. Control 23 673
40
[14] Goh C J and Caughey T K 1985 On the stability problem
caused by finite actuator dynamics in the collocated control
of large space structure Int. J. Control 41 787
50 [15] Fanson J L and Caughey T K 1990 Positive position feedback
control for large space structures AIAA J. 28 717
60
[16] Friswell M I and Inman D J 1999 The relationship between
positive position feedback and output feedback controllers
Smart Mater. Struct. 8 285
70
0 1 2 3
[17] Junkins J L and Kim Y 1993 Introduction to Dynamics and
10 10 10 10
Frequency (Hz) Control of Flexible Structures (Washington, DC: AIAA)
[18] Moheimani S O R, Pota H R and Petersen I R 1999 Spatial
Figure 16. Experimental frequency response for the first six modes. balanced model reduction for flexible structrues Automatica
35 269
[19] Moheimani S O R, Petersen I R and Pota H R 1999 Broadband
6. Conclusions disturbance attenuation over an entire beam J. Sound Vib.
227 807
The experiments have shown the effectiveness of the proposed [20] Petersen I R and Pota H R 2001 Minimax LQG optimal
control of a flexible beam Control Eng. Pract. at press
resonant controllers, both in their robustness and multi-modal [21] Hagood N W, Chung W H and von Flotow A 1990 Modelling
control of smart structures. The structure of these controllers is of piezoelectric actuator dynamics for active structural
simple and they can be implemented very easily using passive control J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 21 327
circuit elements and two op-amps. These controllers can be [22] Wang K W 1995 Structural vibration suppression via
effectively used to damp other distributed parameter systems, parametric control actionspiezoelectric materials with
real-time semi-active networks Wave Motion, Intelligent
e.g. active control of acoustic noise. In conclusion, in this Structures and Nonlinear Mechanics ed A Guran and
paper we present a simple and yet effective method to damp D J Inman (Singapore: World Scientific) pp 11234
oscillations in distributed parameter systems such as smart [23] Alberts T E and Colvin J A 1991 Observations on the nature of
structures. transfer functions for control of piezoelectric laminates
J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 2 528
[24] Pota H R and Alberts T E 1995 Multivariable transfer
References functions for a slewing piezoelectric laminate beam Trans.
ASME, J. Dyn. Syst. Meas. Control 117 352
[1] Fukuda T, Takawa T and Nakashima K 2000 Optimum [25] Fraser A R and Daniel R W 1991 Perturbation Techniques for
vibration control of CFRP sandwich beam using Flexible Manipulators (Dordrecht, MA: Kluwer)
electro-rheological fluids and piezoceramic actuators Smart [26] Moheimani S O R, Pota H R and Petersen I R 1998 Spatial
Mater. Struct. 9 121 control for active vibration control of piezoelectric

7
H R Pota et al

laminates Proc. Conf. Decision and Control (Tampa, Proc. Int. Symp. on Intelligent Robotic Systems (Bangalore,
FL, 1618 Dec.) (Piscataway, NJ: IEEE) India, Jan.) ed M Vidyasagar (New Delhi: Tata
pp 430812 McGraw-Hill) pp 50512
[27] Moheimani S O R, Pota H R and Petersen I R 1998 Active [28] Desoer C A and Vidyasagar M 1975 Feedback Systems:
control of a piezo-electric laminate cantilevered beam Input-Output Properties (New York: Academic)