Experimental Robust Control of Structural Acoustic Radiation

Abstract

This work addresses the design and application of robust controllers for structural acoustic control. Both simulation and experimental results are presented. H ∞ and µ-synthesis design methods were used to design feedback controllers which minimize power radiated from a panel while avoiding instability due to unmodeled dynamics. Specifically, highorder structural modes which couple strongly to the actuator-sensor path were poorly modeled. This model error was analytically bounded with an uncertainty model, which allowed controllers to be designed without artificial limits on control effort. It is found that robust control methods provide the control designer with physically meaningful parameters with which to tune control designs and can be very useful in determining limits of performance. Experimental results also showed, however, poor robustness properties for control designs with ad-hoc uncertainty models. The importance of quantifying and bounding model errors is discussed.

Enclosure Acoustics Modeling and Control Utilizing a Passive and Active Structural Tailoring

“…An ideal controller is one that can achieve uniform noise reductions in space as well as in frequency. Toward this goal there has been a steady progression [1], [2], [3]and several successful implementations. There have been numerous explorations into the use of actively controlled smart structures [4], [5], [6] (a few representative examples).…”

Modelling, system identification, and control of acoustic–structure dynamics in 3-D enclosures

“…Modelling of acoustics in a two-layered cylindrical shell excited by a boundary layer pressure fluctuations was presented in Tang, Silcox, and Robinson (1996). Experimental results on control of acoustic radiation from structure (plate) were studied in Cox, Gibbs, Clark, and Vipperman (1998).…”

Robust active sound radiation control of a piezo-laminated composite circular plate of arbitrary thickness based on the exact 3D elasticity model

“…Here, it should be noted that, as H 2 and H 1 control methodologies are standard tools in the control community, there is not a vital need for detailed re-description of this mathematically intensive subject, where the interested reader is referred to the literatures. [13][14][15][16][17][18][19][20][21][77][78][79][80][81][82][83] Figure 2(a) shows the standard configuration of the multi-objective H 2 =H 1 robust output feedback controller where P s ð Þ is the generalized plant comprising the arrangement of all dynamics required for design and synthesis of the generalized controller K s ð Þ based on the measurable error signal e, while w denotes the exogenous input vector to the generalized plant (e.g. reference signal, r, disturbances, d, noise, n, etc., see Figure 2(b)).…”

“…The piezoelectric materials are particularly used in new-generation high-performance smart structures for vibration and noise control owing to their low power consumption, lightweight, flexibility, wide dynamic range, and fast response time. 6,7 Also, a wide variety of control strategies, such as velocity feedback control, 8 optimal control, 9,10 neural network control, 11 adaptive control, 12 and H 2 13 and H 1 robust control 14,15 theories, have been developed for active vibro-acoustic response control of oscillating fluid-coupled structures. Important among these control schemes are the H 1 controllers that have the key advantage of systematically assuring the robust performance/stability along with optimized vibration eradication in the face of uncertainties in the nominal system model and external disturbances.…”