2015
DOI: 10.1088/0964-1726/24/8/085006
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Reduction of spillover effects on independent modal space control through optimal placement of sensors and actuators

Abstract: structure [3]. However, these limits could be considered less burdensome if new technologies, such as optical strain gauges [6-8], are adopted.A variety of modal control algorithms has been specifically developed for civil engineering structures [10,11], and mechanical [5] and aerospace systems [15,18]. How-ever, the great potential of the independent modal space control (IMSC) technique has not been fully exploited yet, mainly because of problems related to spillover effects. A few works have suggested contai… Show more

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
3
1

Citation Types

0
4
0

Year Published

2016
2016
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
7
1

Relationship

0
8

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 21 publications
(4 citation statements)
references
References 25 publications
0
4
0
Order By: Relevance
“…The feedback control force V i in each flexible mode is designed to depend only on its modal displacement q i and modal velocity q·i where gi1 and gi2 are negative control gains and can be determined by minimizing a quadratic performance index (Fang et al., 2003; Meirovitch et al., 2012; Herpen et al., 2014). The disadvantage of the IMSC is that it can only be designed for some local points (Cinquemani et al., 2015; Park and Park, 2015) while in motion systems with a time-varying performance location, global vibration control performance is desired. To overcome this disadvantage and to utilize its advantages, a modified IMSC is proposed in this paper which takes the time-varying dynamics of the plant into account.…”
Section: Vibration Control In Modal Spacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…The feedback control force V i in each flexible mode is designed to depend only on its modal displacement q i and modal velocity q·i where gi1 and gi2 are negative control gains and can be determined by minimizing a quadratic performance index (Fang et al., 2003; Meirovitch et al., 2012; Herpen et al., 2014). The disadvantage of the IMSC is that it can only be designed for some local points (Cinquemani et al., 2015; Park and Park, 2015) while in motion systems with a time-varying performance location, global vibration control performance is desired. To overcome this disadvantage and to utilize its advantages, a modified IMSC is proposed in this paper which takes the time-varying dynamics of the plant into account.…”
Section: Vibration Control In Modal Spacementioning
confidence: 99%
“…In parallel, other modal methods have been developed (Inman, 2001;Kim, Wang, & Brennan, 2011;Pereira, Aphale, Feliu, & Moheimani, 2011). Despite the evolution, an efficient modal controller to face the spillover effects is still an open problem (Braghin, Cinquemani, & Resta, 2012;Cinquemani, Ferrari, & Bayati, 2015;Serra, Resta, & Ripamonti, 2013). A possible solution is to formulate this control system technique by merging the features of both modal and H ∞ controls.…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…However, mode selectivity in terms of both the amplitude and the frequency in the interest bandwidth is usually a difficult objective because ∞ H control techniques work with contiguous low-frequency bands. Common modal control techniques provide reasonable modal selectivity, but these methods are still very sensitive to spillover [28][29][30][31][32].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%