LQG control design for panel flutter suppression using piezoelectric actuators

Abstract

Theoretical modelling of active flutter suppression of plate components of a aerospace structure is presented. The equations governing the dynamics of the panel, relating the strains in the piezoelectric elements to the strain induced in the system, are derived for isotropic plates using the Rayleigh–Ritz method. A criterion for optimal placement of piezoelectric actuators was suggested using modal controllability. The model was then used to find the optimal location for the piezoelectric actuator utilizing genetic algorithms. The linear quadratic Gaussian design method was used to stabilize the panel flutter using a piezoelectric actuator. This study clearly showed that the flutter can be delayed using the piezoelectric actuator.

Aeroelastic analysis and active flutter suppression of an electro-rheological sandwich cylindrical panel under yawed supersonic flow

“…For instance, Frampton et al [17] studied active control of linear panel flutter in the transonic and low supersonic flow regime by using a collocated direct rate feedback controller with a self-sensing piezo-electric segment. Sadri et al [42] applied the linear quadratic Gaussian (LQG) control methodology with optimally placed piezo-electric actuators for active flutter suppression of an aerospace panel structure. Moon and Kim [33] used the finite element method and a linear quadratic regulator (LQR) scheme for active/passive hybrid control of nonlinear supersonic panel flutter by means of piezo-electric actuators connected in series with a passive resonant shunt circuit.…”

Optimum placement of piezoelectric ceramic modules for vibration suppression of highly constrained structures

“…The number of actuators, their sizes and their optimal locations for maximum controllability of isotropic plates were determined using genetic algorithms. The authors later applied the modal controllability as a criterion for optimal placement of piezoelectric actuators for panel flutter suppression [25]. Again, the optimal locations were found by applying genetic algorithms.…”

Theoretical comparison of different controlled damping devices for cable vibration mitigation

“…3). The measurement noise is assumed to be 5% of the accelerometer signals 8 . • Both damping devices are located at the cable at 5% of the cable length (similar to the test set-up, see Figure 2) and at the location, where the first four modes effect the largest displacement ( Figure 1, Right).…”