Active Vibrration Control of Beam

ACTIVE VIBRATION CONTROL OF A SMART
BEAM USING LQR , PID AND FUZZY LOGIC

CONTROLLERS

A THESIS
SUBMITED TO THE COLLEGE OF ENGINEERING
UNIVERSITY OF BASRAH
IN PARTIAL FULFILMENT OF
THE REQUIRMENTS FOR THE DEGREE OF
MASTER OF SCIENCE
IN
MECHANICAL ENGINEERING
(Applied Mechanics)

By
Tahseen Hashim saleh
B. SC .Mechanical engineering
April ,2014
ACKNOWLEDGMENT
I

ACKNOWLEDGMENT

I would like to give me deeply gratitude and appreciation to
my supervisors Dr. Qusai Talib Abdulwahab and Dr. J aafar
Khalaf Ali for their assistance, support and guidance in order
to complete this thesis, thanks also owing to Prof .Dr. Rabeea
H. Thjeel, the dean of the college, and for Prof. Dr. Amen A.
Nassar, the Head of Mechanical Engineering Department, for
their appreciated support and assistance to me in order to
complete my study. The author also wants to thanks all the
staff of the Mechanical Engineering Department for their
facilitating , support and encouragement in order to complete
this Thesis.

ABSTRACT
III

ABSTRACT

Theoretical model of a cantilever beam bonded with pair of piezoelectric
patches (sensor and actuator) used as a smart beam is derived. The first four
fundamental natural frequencies and mode shapes of this system are verified
using ANSYS. The optimal location of the piezoelectric patches (actuators) is
determined to give best possible active vibration control performance. Then three
different controllers, Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR), Proportional-Integral-
Derivative (PID) and Fuzzy Logic (FL) are implemented in order to achieve the
required reduction in the output velocity and displacement of the smart beam. A
comparison between system responses using these three controllers is carried out
in order to realize which controller will give the desired performance, in terms of
robust design, faster response, higher reliability and stability. Simulation results
showed that fuzzy logic controller gave the best results. A comparison with the
results of other studies [18] , [19] and [24] showed that the controllers designed
in this study gave better performance for the same case studies.

CONTENTS
IV

CONTENTS

Title Page
Acknowledgment
I
Abstract
II
Contents
III
Abbreviations
VI
Symbols
VII
List of Figures
IX
List of Tables
XII
Chapter one : Introduction
1
1.1Background
1
1.2 Smart Structures
2
1.3 Aim of this Thesis
3
1.4 Structure and layout of this Thesis
3
Chapter two : literature review
5
2.1 Introduction
5
2.2 Summary of literature review
14
Chapter three : Mathematical Modeling and Active
Control Techniques
16
3.1 Introduction
16
3.2 Mathematical model of the cantilever beam
17
CONTENTS
V

3.3 State space representation of the cantilever beam
23
3.4 Active vibration control
26
3.5 Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) State Feedback Design
27
3.6 Proportional Integral Derivative Controller (PID)
32
3.6.1 PID controller theory
33
3.6.2 Loop tuning
34
3.6.3 Stability
34
3.6.4 Manual tuning
35
3.6.5 PID Controller auto tuning
36
3.7 fuzzy logic controller(FLC)
37
3.7.1 Fuzzification
38
3.7.2 The rule of fuzzy control and the FLC
39
3.7.3 Defuzzification
41
chapter four : computer simulation using matlab, results and discussion
42
4.1 Introduction
42
4.2 mode shapes and natural frequencies of the cantilever beam
45
4.3 active vibration control using (LQR) controller
47
4.3.1 response of cantilever beam to initial condition
47
4.3.2 impulse response of cantilever beam
52
4.4 active vibration control using (PID) controller
56
4.4.1 Manually determination of (PID) controller constants
56
4.4.2 determination of (PID) controller constants using auto tuning
61
4.5 Active vibration control using (FL) controller
66
CONTENTS
VI

4.6 The optimal location of the piezoelectric patches
77
4.7 Results and discussion
79
4.8 comparison between the current research and other researches
81
chapter five : conclusion and recommendations for future works
82
5.1 Conclusion of this Thesis
82
5.2 Recommendations for future works
84
References

Appendix

ABBREVIATIONS
VII

ABBREVIATIONS

Term Description
DISO Double-input, single-out
FE Finite element
FL CONTROLLER Fuzzy logic controller
LQR CONTROLLER Linear-quadratic-regulator controller
MIMO Multi input multi output
MOM Middle of Maximum
MV manipulated variable
NB Negative big
NM Negative medium
NS Negative small
PB Positive big
PDVF Polyvinylidene fluoride
PI Performance index
PID CONTROLLER Proportional -integral-derivative controller
PM Positive medium
POF Proportional output feedback
PS Positive small
PZT Lead zirconate titanate patches
RTOS real time operation system
rlocus root locus
SISO Single input single output
SVFB State-variable feedback
ZO Zero

SYMBOLS

VIII

SYMBOLS
Term Description Si Units
A
Cross sectional area of the beam
m
2
A
State matrix
-
A
c

The closed-loop plant matrix
-
B
Input matrix
-
b
aj

Width of the j-th actuator
m
b
i

Constant
Vm
3
/N
b
si

The width of the i- th sensor patch
m
C
pi

Piezoelectric capacitance of i-th sensor
F

D
The matrix of the influence of actuators
on varied modal of structure

-
d
31j

Constant of the j-th actuator
m/V
E
Output matrix
-
E
aj

Youngs modulus of the j-th actuator
N/m
2
Eb
Youngs modulus of smart beam
N/m2
e
31i

The piezoelectric stress constants of the i-
th sensor patch
Vm/N
e(t)
Error
-
F
feedforward matrix
-
g(i)
The electric charge measured at the i -th
sensor at instant (t)
coulomb
g
31i

Piezoelectric constant of i-th sensor
Vm/N
H(x)
Heaviside function
-
h
aj

Thickness of the j-th actuator
m
hb
Thickness of smart beam
m
h
si

Thickness of sensor patch
m
J
Cross sectional area moments of inertia
m
4
K
Gain of LQR controller
-
K
d

Derivative gain of PID controller
-
K
i

Integral gain of PID controller
-
SYMBOLS

IX

K
j

Constant
N.m
K
p

Proportional gain of PID controller
-
K
si

Constant
Vm
3
/N.F
L
Length of smart beam
m

M
The influence matrix of the sensors
output
-
m
The number of the actuator
-
N
The number of modes used
-
Q
Applied force from the actuator
N
Q
Matrix of LQR controller
-
q
k
(t)
The generalized modal coordinate
-
R
Matrix of LQR controller
-
r
The total number of sensors.
-
r
si

The average coordinate of the sensor
measured from the mid-plane of the beam
m
t
Time
sec
u
The electrical input vector
V
V(t)
The vector of the voltage subjected to
(m) actuator
V
V
j

The control voltage across piezoelectric
actuators
V
W(x ,t)
Transverse displacement of the beam
m
X
j
,X
j+1

The locations of the ends of the j -th
piezoelectric patch along the x-axis.
m
y
The output vector
m
k

Damping ratio of the i -th mode
-

Density of the beam material
kg/m
3
A
Mass per unit length of smart beam
kg/m
k
(x)
The mode shape function
-
k

The natural frequency of the i - th mode
rad/sec
LIST OF FIGURES
X

LIST OF FIGURES
Figure No. Figure title Page
3.1 Smart cantilever beam with piezoelectric patches 18
3.2 LQR block diagram controller 31
3.3 Block diagram of PID controller 33
3.4 The basic configuration of fuzzy logic system 39
4.1 The first four mode shapes of the cantilever beam 46
4.2 Response of the cantilever beam to initial condition when
piezoelectric patches near fixed end with LQR control
48
4.3 Bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected to initial
condition when piezoelectric patches near fixed end with
(LQR)controller
49

4.4 Rlocus plot of the controlled and uncontrolled cantilever
beam subjected to initial condition when piezoelectric
patches near fixed end with LQR controller
49
4.5 Response of the cantilever beam with initial condition when
piezoelectric patches at free end with LQR controller
50
4.6 Bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected to initial
condition when piezoelectric patches at free end with LQR
controller
51
beam subjected to initial condition when piezoelectric
patches at free end with LQR controller
51
4.8 Impulse response of the cantilever beam when piezoelectric
patches near fixed end with LQR controller
52
4.9 Bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected impulse force
when piezoelectric patches near fixed end with LQR
controller
53
beam subjected to impulse force when piezoelectric patches
near fixed end with LQR controller
54
4.11 Impulse response of the cantilever beam when piezoelectric
patches at free end with LQR controller
54
4.12 Bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected to impulse force
when piezoelectric patches at free end with LQR controller
55
at free end with LQR controller
56
LIST OF FIGURES
XI

4.14 Impulse response of cantilever beam when the patches near
fixed end with PID controller
57
4.15 Bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected to impulse force
when piezoelectric patches near fixed end using PID
controller
58
near fixed end using PID controller
59
4.17 Impulse response of cantilever beam when the patches at
free end with PID controller
59
when piezoelectric patches at free end using PID controller
60
at free end using PID controller
61
4.20 MATLAB (PID )tuner 62
4.21 Impulse response of cantilever beam when the patches near
fixed end with (PID parameter tuning with matlab )
controller
62
when piezoelectric patches near fixed end using PID
controller MATLAB tuning
63
near fixed end using PID controller MATLAB tuning
64
4.24 Impulse response of cantilever beam when the patches at
free end with PID controller MATLAB tuning
64
when piezoelectric patches at free end using PID controller
MATLAB tuning
65
at free end using PID controller MATLAB tuning
66

4.27 Fuzzy logic controller page in MATLAB 70
4.28 The input displacement member function of cantilever beam 70
4.29 The input velocity member function of cantilever beam 71
4.30 The output controlled displacement member ship of
cantilever beam
71
4.31 Rule viewer of the designed FLC 72
LIST OF FIGURES
XII

4.32 Surface viewer of the designed FLC 73
4.33 Inputs displacement and velocity of uniform random number 74
4.34 Output controlled displacement when the inputs are
uniform random number
74
4.35 Inputs displacement and velocity of sine wave 75
4.36 Output controlled displacement when the input is sine wave 75
4.37 Inputs displacement and velocity of unit step 76
4.38 Output controlled displacement when the inputs are unit
steps
76
4.39 The Simulink page of FLC in MATLAB 77
4.40 The optimal location of piezoelectric patches on the
cantilever beam
79
4.41 Response of cantilever beam- different type of controller at
optimal Location
80
4.42 Comparison between Ref.[18] and current study for LQR
controller
82
4.43 Comparison between Ref. [19] and current study for PID
controller
83
4.44 Comparison between Ref [24] and current study for FL
controller
84

LIST OF TABLES
XIII

LIST OF TABLES

Table No. Table Title Page
3.1 Effects of increasing PID parameters independently 36
3.2 Fuzzy logic controller rule base 40
4.1 Properties of cantilever beam 43
4.2 Properties of piezoelectric patches (sensor and actuator) 44
4.3 Natural frequencies of the cantilever beam 45
4.4 Properties of controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam
subjected to initial conditions when the patches near fixed
end with LQR controller
48
subjected to initial conditions when the patches at free
50

subjected to impulse force when the patches near fixed
53
subjected to impulse force when the patches at free end
with LQR controller
55
4.8 Properties of impulse response of cantilever beam with
PID controller when the patches near fixed end
58
(PID)controller when the patches at free end
60
(PID)controller when the patches near fixed end matlab
tuning
63
(PID)controller when the patches at free end matlab
tuning

65
4.12 FLC expanded rules 67
4.13 Effect of piezoelectric patches location on the beam
response
78

Chapter
one
CHAPTER ONE INTRODUCTION
1

CHAPTER ONE
INTRODUCTION

1.1Background
In diverse areas like space and aircraft structures, satellites, cars, bridges etc,
undesired vibrations are a major cause of problems. The effects of such
vibrations are varied. Minor effects may include annoyance due to noise in
automobiles, machines etc. Major effects are felt in areas like space structures
where precise behavior of the structure is desired and any deviation from the
required behavior may result in major expense. Under such conditions ,vibration
control becomes very important. Vibration control is an upcoming and
challenging branch of mechanical engineering. It has wide ranging applications
in diverse fields. A lot of research is being conducted in this area and new
methods of control are being proposed and applied to the practical systems. In
particular, active vibration control using smart materials is attracting much
interest around the world. Active vibration control is the process of using smart
materials for controlling vibrations in real time. Smart materials are materials
that respond with significant change in a property upon application of an external
driving force. Such materials can act as sensors, which sense the disturbances in
the structures, and actuators, which are capable of applying the controlling force.
Examples of smart materials include piezoelectric materials, shape memory
alloys, etc.

2

1.2 Smart Structures
Piezoelectric materials could be divided, from structural viewpoint, into ceramic
and polymeric forms. The most popular piezoelectric ceramics (or in short,
piezoceramics) are compounds of lead zirconate titanate (PZT), the properties of
which can be optimized to suit specific applications by appropriate adjustment of
the zirconatetitanate ratio. The polymeric form of the piezoelectric materials as
polyvinylidene fluoride (PDVF) having low stiffness and electromechanical
coupling coefficients (when compared to ceramics like PZT, for instance).
Structures with added functionality over and above the conventional purpose of
providing strength by reinforcement or stiffness may be regarded as smart. Smart
or adaptive structures, based on using a small change in the structure geometry at
critical locations induced by internally generated control signals, can result in a
non-linear amplification of the shape, stiffness or strength, and so the structure
will adapt to a functional need. In practice, smart structures may be classified
depending on their functionality and adaptation to the changing situation:

1. Passive smart
2. Active smart
3. Intelligent.

3

1.3 Aim of this Thesis

The aim of this study can be summarized into the following points :

1. Drive a mathematical model of a cantilever beam with a pair of
piezoelectric patches (sensor and actuator) considering the whole
structure as a smart beam .
2. Apply different types of vibration control techniques such as (LQR , PID
and FL) on the smart beam in order to achieve the optimal design to
control its vibration.
3. Comparing the results obtaining from the three control methods for the
same structure to find the best method to be used in this application.

1.4 Structure and layout of this Thesis
This thesis consists of five chapters , chapter one give an introduce to the
active vibration control of smart beam . Chapter two discuss the literature of the
past researcher whose researches were dedicated to the control of the smart
beam with many different types of controller .
Chapter three introduce the methodology of getting the mathematical model of
the smart beam and discuss the active vibration control techniques .

4

Chapter four discuss the computerized modeling and simulation of the smart
beam using MATLAB software and introduce a discussion of the results
obtaining in this chapter.
Finally , chapter five is dedicated to discuss the conclusions from this thesis and
give the recommendation for futures works.

Chapter
two
CHAPTER TWO LITERATURE REVIEW
5

CHAPTER TWO
LITERATURE REVIEW

2.1 Introduction

An increasing interest in the possibilities of active control of structures has given
rise to new achievements in this field of research in many branches of
engineering over the past few years. In comparison with passive structures, smart
structures (or active structures, or structronic systems as they are referred to in
different literature) offer a great variety of possibilities for the structural behavior
control under changing environment conditions in the sense of adjusting or
adapting the structure parameters and behavior to new conditions. From this
point of view the term adaptive structure is also used to denote the possibility of
altering the structural response in the presence of disturbances or changed
working conditions. The ability of the structure to change its response in
accordance with the changed environment conditions comes from the presence
of active materials integrated with the structure. Such active materials (acting as
sensor and/or actuators) in connection with the control system enable automatic
adaptation of the structure to changing environment conditions. An important
role among active materials belongs to piezoelectric materials (such as thin
wafers, fibers or piezoelectric rods) used as actuators and sensors integrated in a
structure providing thus the adaptability of the smart structure, while not

6

affecting significantly its passive behavior. Some recent works are reported here.
The active vibration control of simple cantilever beams is studied by many
researchers. Piezoelectric patches as actuators are mounted on the beams. The
system identification and pole placement control method is used by[1] . The
beam with piezo-patches Finite Element (FE) model of the structure is
constructed and the closed loop control is applied by [2] and [3]. Ref.[ 4] also
used the beam with piezo-patches FE model, but applied modal control
strategies. Ref.[5] reported results on active vibration control of cantilever beam
type of structures by using the commercial FE package ANSYS. The influence
of sensor/actuator location is studied for a cantilever type beam. Ref.[6] extended
the work of Ref.[5] and proposed the procedure for the simulation of active
vibration control in ANSYS, for cantilever and plate type of structures. Ref.[7]
used a reduced model of a cantilever beam to design the optimal controller using
Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) algorithm with state feedback control law.
Ref.[ 8] studied the vibration control of several modes of a clamped square plate
by locating discrete sensor/actuator devices at points of maximum strain. Ref.[ 9]
presented an optimal placement strategy of piezoelectric sensor/actuator pairs for
the vibration control of laminated composite plates. Ref.[10] studied active
vibration control in a four-bar linkage. Numerical simulations are reported in all
the references given. Experimental results are also reported in some studies
refs.[1], [3] and [5]. In the present study piezoelectric patches are used as both
sensor and actuator to control the vibration of a cantilever beam. The controller
used here is a proportional- integral-derivative (PID) based output feedback
controller. The state space mathematical model required for designing the
controller in MATLAB is extracted from the results of modal analysis of a
cantilever beam done in ANSYS. Both full and reduced models of the cantilever
7

beam are used for the analysis and their responses are obtained in SIMULINK
environment.
Piezoelectric sensing and control with distributed piezoelectric transducers
have been intensively studied, e.g. [11], [12], [13]. Application of piezoelectric
materials in active structural control requires appropriate simulation and design
tools ( such Matlab , Labview , Ansys ,etc.) , Vibration control of cantilever
beam based on the piezoelectric smart component has become the hot issue in
the research of vibration engineering A numerical study concerning the active
vibration control of smart piezoelectric beams is presented by many researchers
as some of their researches are mentioned below:

In (2001) ,Yavuz Yaman , et al ,[13], investigates the effects of element
selection in finite element modeling and The effects of the piezoelectric
patches on the resonance frequencies of the smart structure the results of their
work were the design of H controller was which effectively suppresses the
vibrations of the smart beam due to its first two modes. The suitability of the H
design technique in the modeling of uncertainties and in evaluating the robust
performance of the system was demonstrated .

In( 2002), Ulrich Gabbert, et al, [14], introduce a development in modelling
and numerical analysis of piezoelectric material systems and controlled smart
structures based on a general purpose finite element software with the
possibilities of static and dynamic analyses and simulation. Design and
simulation of controlled smart structure is also presented, using a state-space
model of a structure obtained through the finite element analysis as a starting
point for the controller design. For the purpose of the control design for the
8

vibration suppression discrete-time control design tools were used, such as
optimal LQR controller incorporated in a tracking system .

In (2007), Gou Xinke and Tian Haimin ,[11], used a general method of active
vibration control and suppression for intelligent structures is put forth on the
basis of a negative state feedback control law. Actuator on different positions is
performed in order to investigate their effectiveness to suppress vibration in
intelligent structures, and the optimal position of piezoelectric cantilever beam in
vibration control is pointed out and the Analytical results are verified with
numerical simulations the conclusion of this research was that the vibration of a
cantilever beam has been actively suppressed by applying control voltage to the
piezoceramic actuator, and the optimal control theory lead to a useful controller
design methodology for the design of robust controllers for the vibration control
of cantilever beam-like structures..

In (2008) , Zhang Jing-jun , et al , [15] , used the fuzzy logic controller to
control the smart structures vibration. The fuzzy IF-THEN rules are established
on analysis of the motion traits of cantilever beam. The fuzzy logic controller
(FLC) designs on using the displacement and the velocity of the cantilever
beams tip as the inputs, the control force on cantilever beams as the output. This
new method improves calculation efficiency and reduces calculation complexity
and have the better effects than which uses the acceleration and its rate of the
cantilever beams tip as the inputs. The simulation results with MATLAB
illustrate that the proposed method has a better control performance than existing
methods , their simulation results prove the effectiveness of theoretical analysis
and achieve good effects. It also demonstrates that compared with the LQG
9

control method, robust H control has strong robustness to modal parameters
variation and has a good closed-loop dynamic performance.

In (2010), Dong Jingshi ,et al , [16] , introduced active vibration control system
in which The dynamic model of the cantilever beam is established by finite
element method (FEM). The piezoelectric actuator excited by control signal is
bonded near the fixed end of the cantilever beam to suppress the beam's first
vibration mode. The control signal is collected by a sensor and processed by the
quadratic optimal control theory. Experiment results show that the amplitude of
the active controlled cantilever beam is reduced to 48.2% than the uncontrolled
one under constant external excitation.

Also in (2010), K. B. Waghulde ,et al ,[17], optimized the performance metric
corresponding to the mode of interest. This methodology is ideal for the design
of low-order controllers. A smart structure involves distributed actuators and
sensors along the structure and some type of processor that can analyze the
response from the sensor and use control theory to output commands to the
actuator. The actuator applies local stresses/strains to alter the behavior of the
system and they took into consideration that piezoelectric materials must be
bonded to the beam in a uniform fashion along with the fact that both materials
must have electrical contact on each side of the material, the results of their
work was a 30 % reduction in 1
st
- mode vibration response and there conclusion
was that the focus on the first mode will allow the creation of better controllers
through more accurate models of best fit.

In (2011), S.M. Khot ,et al ,[18], used reduced model for cantilever beam and
the design of optimal controller is achieved using Linear Quadratic Regulator
10

(LQR) algorithm with state feedback control law. The responses are obtained in
both MATLAB and ANSYS based on the obtained optimal control gains and
compared. Effect of selection of weighting matrices of performance index of
LQR on the performance of optimal controller is also reported. Validity of using
reduced model for designing optimal controller is checked by comparing its
response with that of full model. and they realize that reduced models are used
for designing controllers for active vibration control of real life complicated
systems, a lot of computational time can be saved .

Also in (2011) , Deepak Chhabra , et al ,[19], addressed a general design and
analysis scheme of piezoelectric smart structures with control laws. The classical
control law, pole placement technique and LQR optimal control approach using
state feedback and arbitrary value of gain by output feedback has analyzed to
achieve the desired control. Numerical examples are presented to demonstrate
the validity of the proposed design scheme, Their study revealed that the LQR
control scheme is very effective in controlling the vibration as the optimal gain
is obtained by minimizing the cost function. Numerical simulation showed that
modeling a smart structure by including the sensor / actuator mass and stiffness
and by varying its location on the beam from the free end to the fixed end
introduced a considerable change in the systems structural vibration
characteristics.

Also in(2011) , S.M. Khot , et al ,[20], dealt with the extraction of the full and
reduced mathematical models of a cantilever beam into MATLAB from its FE
model. The full model of the beam is reduced by discarding those modes which
do not contribute to the overall response. It is found that the frequency and
11

transient responses of the full and reduced models match closely. Hence the
reduced model may be used to represent the system which in turn reduces the
computational time. The controller is designed using proportional-integral-
derivative(PID) theory with output feedback. SIMULINK is then used to create
a working block diagram of the control system and perform the control action.
The result of their work that The transient responses of the controlled full and
reduced models are then plotted which are found to be in close agreement.

In(2012), Deepak Chhabra ,et al ,[21], Developed a smart structure with
patches located at the different positions to determine the better control effect.
The piezoelectric patches are placed on the free end, middle end and fixed end.
The study is demonstrated through simulation in MATLAB for various
controllers like Proportional Controller by Output Feedback (POF) , Proportional
Integral Derivative controller (PID) and Pole Placement technique. A smart
cantilever beam is modeled with SISO system. The entire structure is modeled
using the concept of piezoelectric theory, Euler-Bernoulli beam theory, Finite
Element Method (FEM) and the State Space techniques. The numerical
simulation shows that the sufficient vibration control can be achieved by the
proposed method, their conclusion was that From the responses of the various
locations of sensor/actuator on beam, it has been observed that best performance
of control is obtained, when the piezoelectric element is placed at fixed end
position.

Also in (2012), Tamara Nestorovi , et al ,[22] , introduced the concept of an
active vibration control for piezoelectric light weight structures and presented
through several subsequent steps: model identification, controller design,
12

simulation, experimental verification and implementation on a particular object
piezoelectric smart cantilever beam. Special attention is paid to experimental
testing and verification of the results obtained through simulations. The
efficiency of the modeling procedure through the subspace based system
identification along with the efficiency of the designed optimal controller are
proven based on the experimental verification, which results in vibration
suppression to a very high extent not only in comparison with the uncontrolled
case, but also in comparison with previously achieved results. The experimental
work demonstrates a very good agreement between simulations and experimental
results and their result was the design of an optimal LQ feedback strategy is used
for the controller design, which provides the designer with lots of flexibility to
perform trade-offs among various performance criteria. The optimal LQ
controller requires a full knowledge of the state variables ,in order to generate
the control input. Therefore, a Kalman filter is used as an observer, in order to
estimate the unmeasurable state variables.

In (2013) , A.P. Parameswaran , et al ,[23], introduced the principle of direct
output feedback based active vibration control which has been implemented on
a cantilever beam using Lead Zirconate-Titanate (PZT) sensors and actuators.
Three PZT patches were used, one as the sensor, one as the exciter providing the
forced vibrations and the third acting as the actuator that provides an equal but
opposite phase vibration/force signal to that of sensed so as to damp out the
vibrations. The designed algorithm is implemented on LabVIEW 2010 on
Windows 7 Platform , the results showed inconsistent transient as well as steady
state characteristics in the dynamics of the beam. Hence, it was concluded that
experimental control of the vibrating smart beam needed to be performed on a
13

real time operating system (RTOS) platform wherein deterministic and reliable
control could be achieved.

Also in (2013 ) , Preeti Verma , et al ,[24] , presented a design of fuzzy logic
controller for identification of cracks and vibration control of cantilever beam
and an identification of the location and depth of creaks in beam using
measured the vibration data is introduced . Fuzzy controller is applied to
attenuate vibrations in a cantilever beam structure with large varying parameters.
The fuzzy logic controller used here comprises of two input parameters and one
output parameters. Gaussian and triangular, trapezoidal membership functions
are used for the fuzzy controller. The input parameters to the fuzzy- Gaussian
controller and fuzzy- triangular controller are relative deviation of first three
natural frequencies. The output parameters of the fuzzy inference system are
relative crack depth and relative crack location. At the beginning theoretical
analyses have been outlined for cracked cantilever beam to calculate the
vibration parameters such as natural frequencies. A set of boundary conditions
are considered involving the effect of crack location. A series of fuzzy rules are
derived from vibration parameters which are finally used for prediction of crack
location and its intensity. The comparison is made between Gaussian and
triangular membership functions by calculating deviation from expected values
of crack depth and crack location.
By the Membership Function, they have been detecting the crack depth and
crack location, here, the fuzzy logic controller is used for vibration control of
cracks through the fuzzy parameters. So the damage cracks in cantilever beam
would be identified.

14

2.2 Summary of literature review

Smart structures consist of highly distributed active device which comprises
sensors and actuators either embedded or attached with an existing passive
structure coupled by controller. The piezoelectric sensor senses the disturbance
and generates an electric charge due to the direct piezoelectric effects. The
piezoelectric actuator in turn produces a control force/moment due to the
converse piezoelectric effects. If the control force is appropriate, the structural
vibration may be suppressed. This technology has several applications such as
active vibration and buckling control, shape control and active noise control. The
finite element method is powerful tool for designing and analyzing smart
structures. Both structural dynamics and control engineering need to be dealt to
demonstrate smart structures, In most of present researches, FEM formulation of
smart cantilever beam usually done in ANSYS and design of control laws are
carried out in MATLAB control system toolbox. Hence, for designing
piezoelectric smart structures with control laws, it is necessary to develop a
general design scheme of actively controlled piezoelectric smart structures. In
order to achieve good, fast and robust controller , the researcher used many
different control method such as proportional-integral-derivative (PID), H
norm and Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) algorithm with state feedback
control law , from the literature review it can be observe and conclude the
following points of interesting :

1. There was many work done in order to achieve a robust and fast
controllers using different methods.
15

2. There was no sufficient work done on the active vibration control using
fuzzy logic controller method.
3. There was no comparison made between the controllers (i.e. PID , LQR
and FL controllers ).

In the current thesis , a design of a controller based on LQR controller , PID
auto-tuning controller and FL controller with (35 rules) will be achieved.

Chapter
three
CHAPTER THREE MATHEMATICAL MODELING AND ACTIVE CONTROL TECHNIQUES
16

CHAPTER THREE
MATHEMATICAL MODELING AND ACTIVE
CONTROL TECHNIQUES

3.1 Introduction
A mathematical model is a description of a system using mathematical concepts
and language, The process of developing a mathematical model is termed
mathematical modelling which considered as the first and the important step in
any analysis , in this study the derivation of the mathematical model of a
cantilever beam based on newtons second law of motion . Vibration control
techniques can be classified into three main categories:

1. Passive vibration control .
2. Semi active vibration control.
3. Active vibration control.

The Passive vibration control refers to vibration control or mitigation of
vibrations by passive techniques such as rubber pads or mechanical springs, as
opposed to "active vibration control" or "electronic force cancellation"
employing electric power, sensors, actuators, and control systems.

17

Passive vibration isolation is a vast subject, since there are many types of
passive vibration isolators used for many different applications. A semi active
vibration controller can be defined as a passive device in which the properties
(stiffness, damping, etc.) can be varied in real time with a low power input. As
they are inherently passive, they cannot destabilize the system. Active vibration
controller can be defined as an active device which reacts on the vibrations. In
this case, it can destabilize the system if the smart structure is not correctly tuned
but as the system is active the response versus large bandwidth disturbances is
better. In this study, the widely used techniques in active vibration control which
are Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) controller, Proportional-Derivative -
Integral (PID) controller and Fuzzy logic controller (FLC) would be described in
this chapter.

3.2 Mathematical model of the cantilever beam

The smart structure is modeled based on the concept of piezoelectric theory and
Bernoulli-Euler beam theory, Figure (3.1) shows a schematic diagram of a
cantilever beam laminated with piezoelectric layers, such as PZT. The beam is
assumed to be initially straight, of length, of length (L) , width (b) , thickness
(hb), and of constant mass (A) per unit length and constant stiffness. W(x, t)
denotes the transverse displacement of the beam. The quantity ( EbJ) is the
bending stiffness of the beam , where (Eb) is Youngs modulus of the material
and (J ) is the principal cross sectional area moments of inertia, (Q) the applied
load, and the time (t). It is also assumed that the thickness of piezoelectric layers
is much thinner than that of the elastic plate, the smart structure in Fig.(3.1). is
18

considered as a Bernoulli-Euler beam , the governing equations of motion and
associated boundary conditions are derived as follows [11]:

( ) ( )
( )
( ) ()

Where:
:density of the beam material (Kg/m
3
) .
A :cross sectional area of the beam (m
2
).
W(x ,t) :transverse displacement of the beam(m).
C
n
:damping coefficient of the beam(N.s/m).
E
b
:Youngs modulus of the beam(N/m
2
).
J :moments of inertia of the beam (m
4
).
Q(x ,t) :applied force from the actuator (N).

Figure (3.1) smart cantilever beam with piezoelectric patches

19

The total electric charge of the i-th piezoelectric sensor can be obtained as
follows [11]:

()
( )
()
()
()
where :
g(i) :the electric charge measured at the i -th sensor at instant (t)(coulomb).
r
si
: The average coordinate of the sensor measured from the mid-plane of
plate (m) and given by [11]

()
h
bi
: thickness of the beam(m) .
h
si
:thickness of sensor patch(m).
b
si
:the width of the i- th sensor patch(m) .
e
31i
:the piezoelectric stress constants of the i- th sensor patch (Vm/N).
r :the total number of sensors.
The moment resultant can be obtained from [11]
( )
[(
) (
) ] ()

Where :
m :is the number of the actuator.
V
j
=V(x, t) :the control voltage across piezoelectric actuators(V).
H(x) :Heaviside function.
K
j
:is a constant (N.m) and can be calculated from the equation below :

20

()
And
()

Where:
h
aj
:thickness of the j-th actuator(m).
b
aj
:width of the j-th actuator(m).

E
aj
:youngs modulus of the j-th actuator(N/m
2
).

d
31j
:constant of the j-th actuator (m/V).
The transverse displacement w(x , t) of the composite beam can be expressed as
a linear superposition of the modes of the beam as [11]:
( )
() ()

Where:
qk(t) :the generalized modal coordinate.
k(x) :the mode shape function.
N :the number of modes used.
The mode shape function of a cantilever beam is given by [25]:
((
) (
))
((
) (
)) ()

21

Where

) (
)
(
) (
)
()

L :length of cantilever beam(m).
and (
) is given by :
()
Substituting equation (3.7) into the sensor equation (3.2), lead to :

()
()
()
()

() ()

Where :
b
i
:b
si
e
31i
r
si
(Vm
3
/N)
After substituting equation (3.7) and equation(3.4) in equation (3.1) with the
help of equation (3.11)and after arrangement the equation become[11]:
(
j
)
(
j
)
j
()
Where
k
:the natural frequency of the i - th mode (rad/s).
k
:damping ratio of the i -th mode.
X
j
,X
j+1
:the locations of the ends of the j -th piezoelectric patch along the X-
axis(m).
Systematic equation of the cantilever beam can be rewritten as [11] :
22

() () () () ()

() ()
where
(
)
) ()
(
) ()

Where
V(t) R
m
: the vector of the voltage subjected to (m) actuator .
D R
Nxm
: the matrix of the influence of actuators on varied modal of structure.
M R
rxN
:the influence matri of the sensors output .
And they are given as[11] :

( i , j)
j

(
j
)
(
j
) i,, j,,,m ()

And
(i , )
si

(
i
)
(
i
) i,,, r ,,, ()
Where

N :total number of mode used.
K
si
: constant given as(V.m
3
/N.F) [15]:

23

()
Where
b
i
:width of i-th sensor(m).
h
si
:thickness of i-th sensor(m).
g
31i
:piezoelectric constant of i-th sensor(Vm/N).
C
pi
:piezoelectric capacitance of i-th sensor(F).

3.3 State space representation of the cantilever beam
a state space representation is a mathematical model of a physical system as a set
of input, output and state variables related by first-order differential equations.
To abstract from the number of inputs, outputs and states, the variables are
expressed as vectors. Additionally, if the dynamical system is linear and time
invariant, the differential and algebraic equations may be written in matrix form.
The state space representation (also known as the "time-domain approach")
provides a convenient and compact way to model and analyze systems with
multiple inputs and outputs. With (p) inputs and (q) outputs, it would otherwise
have to write down (q x p) Laplace transforms to encode all the information
about a system. Unlike the frequency domain approach, the use of the state space
representation is not limited to systems with linear components and zero initial
conditions. "State space" refers to the space whose axes are the state variables.
The state of the system can be represented as a vector within that space. The
internal state variables are the smallest possible subset of system variables that
can represent the entire state of the system at any given time .The minimum
number of state variables required to represent a given system, (n) , is usually
24

equal to the order of the system's defining differential equation. If the system is
represented in transfer function form, the minimum number of state variables is
equal to the order of the transfer function's denominator after it has been reduced
to a proper fraction[26].

The most general state-space representation of a linear system
with (p) inputs, (q) outputs and (n) state variables is written in the following
form for continuous time invariant [26]:
() () () ()
() () () ()
Where
x(t) :state vector.
y(t) :output vector.
u(t) :input vector.
A :state matrix with dimension (n x n).
B :input matrix with dimension( n x p).
E :output matrix with dimension (q x n).
F :feedforward matrix ( q x p ).

The state space approach is considered as the basic of the modern control
theories and is strongly recommended in the design and analysis of control
systems with a great amount of inputs and outputs. the system equations are
expressed by state-space equations, and then decoupled using the procedure
outlined in the following ,let
25

() ( ) (
()
()
()
()
()
()) ()

by applying the state space representation procedure on cantilever beam ,
equations (3.12)and (3.13) can be rewritten in state form as :
() () () ()
() () () ()
Where
A :the system matrix.
B :the electrical input matrix.
E :the output matrix.
F :feedforward matrix.
u :the electrical input vector.
y :the output vector.
and matrices are given by [11] :
[

] ()
[
] ()
()
F = [0] (3.28)

26

3.4 Active vibration control
Active vibration control is the active application of force in an equal and
opposite fashion to the forces imposed by external vibration. With this
application, a precision industrial process can be maintained on a platform
essentially vibration-free, Many precision industrial processes cannot take place
if the machinery is being affected by vibration. For example, the production
of semiconductor wafers requires that the machines used for the
photolithography steps be used in an essentially vibration-free environment or
the sub-micrometer features will be blurred. Active vibration control is now also
commercially available for reducing vibration in helicopters, offering better
comfort with less weight than traditional passive technologies , In the past ,
passive techniques were used. These include traditional vibration dampers, shock
absorbers, and base isolation.
The typical active vibration control system uses several components:
A massive platform suspended by several active drivers (that may use voice
coils, hydraulics, pneumatics, piezoelectric or other techniques)
Three accelerometers that measure acceleration in the three degrees of
freedom
An electronic amplifier system that amplifies and inverts the signals from the
accelerometers. A PID controller or any other controller can be used to get
better performance than a simple inverting amplifier.

27

For very large systems, pneumatic or hydraulic components that provide the
high drive power required.
If the vibration is periodic, then the control system may adapt to the ongoing
vibration, thereby providing better cancellation than would have been provided
simply by reacting to each new acceleration without referring to past
accelerations.
3.5 Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR) state feedback design
A system can be expressed in state variable form as shown in equation ( 3.22)
with x(t)R
n
, u(t)R
m
. The initial condition is x(0). assuming here that all the
states are measurable and seek to find a state-variable feedback (SVFB) control :
u (3.29)
that gives desirable closed-loop properties. The closed-loop system using this
control becomes :
( )
()
Where
A
c
:the closed-loop plant matrix
Note that the output matrices C and D are not used in SVFB design. If there is
only one input so that m=1, then Ackermann's formula gives a SVFB K that
places the poles of the closed-loop system as desired. However, it is very
inconvenient to specify all the closed-loop poles, and it is also liked a technique
that works for any number of inputs. Since many naturally occurring systems are
optimal, it makes sense to design man-made controllers to be optimal as well. To
design a SVFB that is optimal, performance index (PI) may be defined the

28

()
Substituting the SVFB control into this yields

) ()
The objective in optimal design is to select the (SVFB) gain ( K) that minimizes
the performance index J.
The performance index J can be interpreted as an energy function, so that
making it small keeps small the total energy of the closed-loop system. Note that
both the state x(t) and the control input u(t) are weighted in J, so that if J is small,
then neither x(t) nor u(t) can be too large. Note that if J is minimized, then it is
certainly finite, and since limits of integral of x(t) goes to infinity, which implies
that x(t) goes to zero as (t) goes to infinity, This in turn guarantees that the
closed loop system will be stable., The two matrices Q (an n n matrix) and R
(an mm matrix) are selected by the design engineer. Depending on how these
design parameters are selected, the closed-loop system will exhibit a different
response.
Generally speaking, selecting Q large means that, to keep J small and the state
x(t) must be smaller. On the other hand selecting R large means that the control
input u(t) must be smaller to keep J small. it means that larger values of Q
generally result in the poles of the closed-loop system matrix A
c
= (A - BK)
being further left in the s-plane so that the state decays faster to zero. On the
other hand, larger R means that less control effort is used, so that the poles are
generally slower, resulting in larger values of the state x(t). One should select Q
29

to be positive semi-definite and R to be positive definite. This means that the
scalar quantity (x
T
Q x) is always positive or zero at each time t for all functions
x(t), and the scalar quantity (u
T
R u) is always positive at each time t for all
values of u(t) , This guarantees that J is well-defined. In terms of eigenvalues, the
eigenvalues of Q should be non-negative ,while those of R should be positive. If
both matrices are selected diagonal, this means that all the entries of R must be
positive while those of Q should be positive, with possibly some zeroes on its
diagonal, then R is invertible.
Since the plant is linear and the PI is quadratic, the problem of determining the
(SVFB) gain (K) to minimize J is called the Linear Quadratic Regulator (LQR).
The word 'regulator' refers to the fact that the function of this feedback is to
regulate the states to zero. This is in contrast to tracker problems, where the
objective is to make the output follow a prescribed (usually nonzero) reference
command. to find the optimal feedback (K) it should be proceed as follows.
Suppose there existing of a constant matrix (P) such that :
) ()

Then, substituting into equation (3.31) yields :

()() ()
where assuming that the closed-loop system is stable so that x(t) goes to zero as
time (t ) goes to infinity. Equation (3.34) means that (J ) is now independent of
K. It is a constant that depends only on the auxiliary matrix P and the initial
conditions.
30

Now, SVFB gain (K ) can be found so that assumption (3.32) does indeed
hold. To accomplish this, differentiate (3.32) and then substitute from the closed-
loop state equation (3.29) to see that (3.32) is equivalent to :
()
()
) ()
Now note that the last equation has to hold for every x(t). Therefore, the term in
brackets must be identically equal to zero. Thus, proceeding one sees that :
( )
( )
()
()
This is a matrix quadratic equation. Exactly as for the scalar case, one may
complete the squares. Though this procedure is a bit complicated for matrices,
suppose that:

()
Then, there results :-
A
A (
) ()
()

31

This result is of extreme importance in modern control theory. Equation (3.41) is
nown as the algebraic iccati equation (AE) It is a matri quadratic
equation that can be solved for the auxiliary matrix P given (A,B ,Q ,and R).
Then, the optimal SVFB gain is given by (3.40). The minimal value of the PI
using this gain is given by (3.34), which only depends on the initial condition.

This mean that the cost of using the SVFB (3.40) can be computed from the
initial conditions before the control is ever applied to the system. The design
procedure for finding the LQR feedback K is:
Select design parameter matrices Q and R.
Solve the algebraic Riccati equation for P.
Find the SVFB using K = R
1
B
T
P.

There are very good numerical procedures for solving the ARE. The MATLAB
routine that performs this is named LQR(A ,B, Q ,and R).

Figure (3.2) LQR block diagram controller
32

3.6 Proportional Integral Derivative controller (PID)
A proportional-integral-derivative controller is a control loop feedback
mechanism (controller) widely used in industrial control systems. A PID
controller calculates an "error" value as the difference between a
measured process variable and a desired set point. The controller attempts to
minimize the error in outputs by adjusting the process control inputs, The PID
controller algorithm involves three separate constant parameters , and is
accordingly sometimes called three-term controller, the proportional , the
integral , the derivative values, denoted (P, I, and D), ( P ) depends on
the present error,( I ) on the accumulation of past errors , and (D ) is a prediction
of future errors, based on current rate of change, The weighted sum of these
three actions is used to adjust the process via a control element such as the
position of a control valve, a damper, or the power supplied to a heating element.
In the absence of knowledge of the underlying process, a PID controller has
historically been considered to be the best controller . By tuning the three
parameters in the PID controller algorithm , the controller can provide control
action designed for specific process requirements. The response of the controller
can be described in terms of the responsiveness of the controller to an error, the
degree to which the controller overshoots the set point, and the degree of system
oscillation. Note that the use of the PID algorithm for control does not
guarantee optimal control of the system or system stability[27].

33

Figure (3.3) block diagram of PID controller

3.6.1 PID controller theory
The PID control scheme is named after its three correcting terms, whose sum
constitutes the manipulated variable (MV). The proportional, integral, and
derivative terms are summed to calculate the output of the PID controller.
Defining L(t) as the controller output, the final form of the PID algorithm is:
() ()
()
()
() ()
Where
K
p
:Proportional gain, a tuning parameter.
K
i
:Integral gain, a tuning parameter.
K
d
:Derivative gain, a tuning parameter.

e(t) :Error.
t :Time or instantaneous time (the present).
34

In this study a design of PID controller with the help of auto tuning in
MATLAB software.

3.6.2 Loop tuning
Tuning a control loop is the adjustment of its control parameters (proportional
band/gain, integral gain/reset, derivative gain/rate) to the optimum values for the
desired control response. Stability (bounded oscillation) is a basic requirement,
but beyond that, different systems have different behavior, different applications
have different requirements, and requirements may conflict with one another.

Designing and tuning a PID controller appears to be conceptually intuitive, but
can be hard in practice, if multiple (and often conflicting) objectives such as
short transient and high stability are to be achieved. Usually, initial designs need
to be adjusted repeatedly through computer simulations until the closed-loop
system performs or compromises as desired. Some processes have a degree
of nonlinearity and so parameters that work well at full-load conditions don't
work when the process is starting up from no-load; this can be corrected by gain
scheduling (using different parameters in different operating regions). PID
controllers often provide acceptable control using default tunings, but
performance can generally be improved by careful tuning, and performance may
be unacceptable with poor tuning.

3.6.3 Stability
If the PID controller parameters (the gains of the proportional, integral and
derivative terms) are chosen incorrectly, the controlled process input can be
35

unstable [27], i.e., its output diverges, with or without oscillation, and is limited
only by saturation or mechanical breakage. Instability is caused by excess gain,
particularly in the presence of significant lag . Generally, stabilization of
response is required and the process must not oscillate for any combination of
process conditions and set points, though sometimes marginal stability (bounded
oscillation) is acceptable or desired .
3.6.4 Manual tuning
If the system must remain online, one tuning method is to first set (K
i
) and (K
d
)
values to zero. Increase the (K
p
) until the output of the loop oscillates, then
the (K
p
) should be set to approximately half of that value for a "quarter
amplitude decay" type response. Then increase (K
i
) until any offset is corrected
in sufficient time for the process. However, too much (K
i
) will cause instability.
Finally, increase (K
d
) , if required , until the loop is acceptably quick to reach
its reference after a load disturbance. However, too much (K
d
) will cause
excessive response and oscillation. A fast PID loop tuning usually overshoots
slightly to reach the set point more quickly; however, some systems cannot
accept overshoot, in which case an over-damped closed-loop system is required ,
which will require a (K
p
) setting significantly less than half that of the
(K
p
) setting that was causing oscillation . in table (3.1) , the effect of each
increment or reducing of parameters to the final response is shown [28].

36

Table (3.1) Effects of increasing PID parameters independently.
parameter rise time Overshoot Settling
time
Steady-
state error
Stability
K
p
decrease increase small
change
Decrease Degrade
K
i
decrease increase increase Eliminate Degrade
K
d
minor
change
decrease degrease no effect Improve if
(K
d
)small

3.6.5 PID Controller auto tuning
MATLAB software enable us to get the optimal gains of PID controller [29] ,
Simulink Control Design provides automatic gain-tuning
capabilities for Simulink PID Controller blocks. It can be accomplished that the
initial tuning of a PID controller with a single click. The product linearizes a
Simulink model to obtain a linear plant model, MATLAB software then uses the
linear plant model and a proprietary tuning method to compute the PID gains
based on the closed-loop performance that desired. An initial controller is
suggested based on an analysis of our system dynamics. it can then interactively
adjust the response time and transient behavior in the PID Tuner. The PID Tuner
also provides several plots that can use to analyze the controller behavior. For
example, a step reference tracking plot and an open-loop Bode plot can be used
to compare the performance of the current design with the design corresponding
to initial gain values.

37

3.7 Fuzzy Logic Controller(FLC)
The field of fuzzy system and control has been making a big progress motivated
by the practical success in industrial process control. Fuzzy systems can be used
in as closed-loop controllers. In this case the fuzzy system measures the outputs
of the process and takes control actions on the process continuously. The fuzzy
logic controller uses a form of quantification of imprecise information (input
fuzzy sets) to generate by an inference scheme, which is based on a knowledge
base of control force to be applied on the system [30], The advantage of this
quantification is that the fuzzy sets can be represented by a unique linguistic
expression such as small, medium, and large etc. The linguistic representation of
a fuzzy set is known as a term, and a collection of such terms defines a term-set,
or library of fuzzy sets. Fuzzy control converts a linguistic control strategy
usually based on expert knowledge into an automation control strategy. There
are three functions required to be performed by fuzzy logic controller before the
controller can generate the desired output signals. The first step is to fuzzify each
input. This can be realized by associating each input with a set of fuzzy
variables. In order to give semantics of a fuzzy variable a numerical sense, a
membership function is assigned with each variable. The logical controller is
made of four main components [31]:
1. Fuzzification.
2. Rule base.
3. Decision making .
4. Defuzzification.

38

In this study , fuzzy logic controller is designed as the double-input, single-out
(DISO) system: The inputs are the displacement and the velocity of the tip of
cantilever beams, and the output is the control force on cantilever beams.

3.7.1 Fuzzification
In Fuzzification , the displacement is defined as (S) the velocity is defined as
(V) and the control force is defined as (U). Two types of membership functions
commonly adopted in fuzzy logic control are triangle and trapezoidal shape.
these two type membership functions can be used. In this study , as compared
with other methods, the method of the Middle of Maximum ( MOM ) was more
effective. Accordingly, a way of establish fuzzy system is proposed as following:
(1) At first, the scope of the displacement and the velocity are the maximal
response of when received step response.
() lot the scopes of displacements and the force of controls out (Negative
Big) , NM (Negative Medium) , NS (Negative Small ) , ZO (ZerO ) , PS
(Positive Small ) , PM (Positive Medium ) , PB (Positive Big) ; Then plot the
scopes of velocity s out (Negative Big) , NS(Negative Small), ZO (ZerO) ,
PS(Positive Small) , PB(Positive Big) .
(3) According to the fuzzy rule of [32], the process of fuzzy illation can be
determined.
(4) At last, using the way of MOM method to calculate in order to obtain the
result.

39

3.7.2 The rule of fuzzy control and the FLC

The fuzzy rule shows the fuzzy relation between the input and output. The inputs
and output are connected with this relationship. The basic configuration of the
fuzzy system with Fuzzifier and Defuzzifier is shown in Figure (3.4) . In this
study , the displacement of the tip of cantilever beam is chosen for the one input,
the velocity is the other. In tradition method, the inputs usually are the velocity
and the rate of the velocity. In this way, the time of calculation has been
improved.

Figure (3.4) shows the basic configuration of fuzzy logic system.
40

Basing on the control rules, the signal is translated to the driver. The function of
fuzzy logic controller is making the inputs fuzz up. In other words, it is the fuzzy
control that executes the process of Fuzzification he fuzzy controls basis is
the rule database which was composed of several rules. The final purpose of the
fuzzy logic controller is to make the fuzzy rule come true. The aim of vibration
control is to minimize the response of the cantilever beam. The function of the
fuzzy logic controller is to provide a force to reduce the vibration of the beam.
Fuzzy IF-THEN rule base is obtained by the analysis with many trial-and-
errors. Table(3.2) shows the rule base used to control the cantilever beam.
Ref.[35] used only (8 rules) and a modification and addition of a new rule in
order to obtain the desired response would be used and the result is (35 rules )
instead of (8 rules). Fuzzy IF-THEN rule is the center of control system. The
fuzzy rule base is not invariable, it could be modify in practice.
Table (3.2) fuzzy logic controller rule base.
Control
force (U)
Displacement (S)
VELOCITY
(V)
NB NM NS ZO PS PM PB
NB PS PM PB ZO NB NM NS
NS PS PM PB ZO NB NM NS
ZO ZO ZO ZO ZO ZO ZO ZO
PS PS PM PB ZO NB NM NS
PB PS PM PB ZO NB NM NS

41

Where
NB :Negative Big.
NM :Negative Medium.
NS :Negative Small.
ZO :ZerO.
PS :Positive Small.
PM :Positive Medium.
PB :Positive Big.

3.7.3 Defuzzification
Defuzzification is the process of producing a quantifiable result in fuzzy logic,
given fuzzy sets and corresponding membership degrees. It is typically needed
in fuzzy control systems. These will have a number of rules that transform a
number of variables into a fuzzy result, that is, the result is described in terms of
membership in fuzzy sets. A common and useful Defuzzification technique
is middle of maximum (MOM) which is used in this study, First, the results of
the rules must be added together in some way. The most typical fuzzy set
membership function has the graph of a triangle. Now, if this triangle were to be
cut in a straight horizontal line somewhere between the top and the bottom, and
the top portion were to be removed, the remaining portion forms a trapezoid. The
first step of Defuzzification typically "chops off" parts of the graphs to form
trapezoids (or other shapes if the initial shapes were not triangles).

Chapter
four
CHAPTER FOUR COMPUTER SIMULATION USING MATLAB, RESULTS AND DISCUSSION
42

CHAPTER FOUR
COMPUTER SIMULATION USING MATLAB, RESULTS AND
DISCUSSION

4.1 Introduction
This chapter covers the simulation of vibration control of fixed free aluminum
cantilever beam using MATLAB . firstly , the formula described in [25] would
be used to obtain the first four mode shapes and natural frequencies , then
verification of this result with the result obtain for the same cantilever beam from
ANSYS software , The properties of the aluminum cantilever beam used in this
study is shown in table (4.1) and the properties of piezoelectric patches (sensor
and actuator ) which are used in this chapter is shown in table (4.2) below , In
this study, the masses of the piezoelectric patches and the Epoxy layer between
the patches and the cantilever beam were neglected because they were very
small compared with the mass of the cantilever beam , also assuming that the
mounting of the patches on the cantilever beam is in perfect way which wouldnt
allow to any relative motion between the cantilever beam and the piezoelectric
patches (sensor and actuator).

43

Table (4.1) properties of cantilever beam.
parameter symbol value unit
Thickness of the
beam
h
b
0.006 m
Length of the beam l
b
0.26 m
Width of the beam b 0.01 m
Cross sectional area
of the beam
A 6x10
-6
m
2
Youngs modulus of
the beam
E
b
70x10
9
N/m
2
damping ratio 0.002 -
density 2700 Kg/m
3
second moment of
area
I 18x10
-14
m
4
mass of the beam m 4.21 g

44

Table (4.2) properties of piezoelectric patches (sensor and actuator).
parameter symbol value unit
Thickness of the
piezoelectric patch
h
p

0.0005

m
Length of the
piezoelectric patch
l
p
0.045 m
Width of the
piezoelectric patch
b 0.01 m

Capacitance

C
P
65x10
-9
F
Youngs modulus
of the piezoelectric
patch
E
p
5.3x10
10
N/m
2
Piezoelectric
constant
d
31
-270x10
-12
m/V
Piezoelectric
constant
g
31
-9.2x10
-3
Vm/N

45

4.2 Mode shapes and natural frequencies of the cantilever beam
The natural frequencies of the cantilever beam can be obtaining from the
equation (4.1) shown below [25]
()
Where
I
b
:second moment of area of the cantilever beam(m
4
)
m :mass of the cantilever beam(Kg)
E
b
:youngs modulus of the beam(N/m
2
)
L :length of cantilever beam(m)
And (a
k
) is giving in equation (3.10).
The natural frequencies for the first four modes of the cantilever beam shown in
table (4.3) below .
Table (4.3) natural frequencies of the cantilever beam.
mode natural frequency(rad/s)

1
st
mode

32.1

2
nd
mode

289.7

3
rd
mode

804.7

4
th
mode

1577.2

46

Figure (4.1) below shows the first four mode shapes of the cantilever beam using
ANSYS software.

Figure (4.1) The first four mode shapes of the cantilever beam.

47

4.3 Active vibration control using (LQR) controller
In this section , a design of a controller to the cantilever beam based on linear
quadratic regulator (LQR) theory would be achieved , according to equation
( 3.31), the design of the controller depends on the weight of the matrix (Q)and
(R) , after many trial and error , the desired value of (Q) and (R) which gives the
optimal response of the cantilever beam finally determined , the value of (Q and
R) are given below :

[

4.3.1 response of cantilever beam to initial condition

The response of the cantilever beam when the piezoelectric patches (sensor and
actuator) at position near fixed end ( x1=0.01 m , x2=0.055 m) to initial
condition of x0=[ 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0.01] {i.e. displacement of (1cm) at
free end} is shown in figure (4.2 ) below :

48

Figure (4.2 ) response of the cantilever beam to initial condition when piezoelectric patches
near fixed end with LQR controller.
The properties of the controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam when the
piezoelectric patches near fixed end are given in table (4.4) below:
Table (4.4) properties of controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam subjected to initial
conditions when the patches near fixed end with LQR controller.
cantilever beam property value unit
uncontrolled peak amplitude

-6.43x10
-5
m

controlled peak amplitude

-5.48x10
-5
m

The figures below shows the bode plot and the rlocus plot of the controlled and
uncontrolled cantilever beam when the beam subjected to initial condition and
the piezoelectric patches near fixed end with LQR controller .
49

Figure (4.3 ) bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected to initial condition when piezoelectric
patches near fixed end with LQR controller.

Figure (4.4 ) rlocus plot of the controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam subjected to initial
condition when piezoelectric patches near fixed end with LQR controller.
50

The response of the cantilever beam when the piezoelectric patches (sensor and
actuator) at free end ( x1=0.215 m , x2=0.26 m) to initial condition of x0=[ 0 ; 0
; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0 ; 0.01] {i.e. displacement of (1cm) at free end} is shown in
figure ( 4.5) below :

Figure ( 4.5) response of the cantilever beam with initial condition when piezoelectric
patches at free end with LQR controller.
piezoelectric patches at free end are given in table (4.5) below:
Table (4.5) properties of controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam subjected to initial
conditions when the patches at free end with LQR controller.

10.6x10
-5
m


8.44x10
-5
m

51

uncontrolled cantilever beam when the beam subjected to initial condition and
the piezoelectric patches at free end with LQR controller .

Figure (4.6 ) bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected to initial condition when piezoelectric

Figure (4.7 ) rlocus plot of the controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam subjected to initial
condition when piezoelectric patches at free end with LQR controller.
52

4.3.2 impulse response of cantilever beam

The impulse response of the cantilever beam when the piezoelectric patches
(sensor and actuator) at position near fixed end ( x1=0.01 m , x2=0.055 m) to is
shown in figure ( 4.8) below :

Figure (4.8 ) impulse response of the cantilever beam when piezoelectric patches near fixed
end with LQR controller.

53

Table (4.6) properties of controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam subjected to impulse
force when the patches near fixed end with LQR controller

2.9x10
-6
m

settling time 5.4 sec

1.46x10
-6
m


uncontrolled cantilever beam when the beam subjected to impulse force and the
piezoelectric patches near fixed end with LQR controller.

Figure (4.9 ) bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected impulse force when piezoelectric
patches near fixed end with LQR controller.
54

Figure (4.10 ) rlocus plot of the controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam subjected to
impulse force when piezoelectric patches near fixed end with LQR controller.

The impulse response of the cantilever beam when the piezoelectric patches
(sensor and actuator) at free end ( x1=0.215 m , x2=0.26 m) is shown in figure (
4.11) below :

Figure (4.11 ) impulse response of the cantilever beam when piezoelectric patches at free end
with LQR controller.
55

Table (4.7) properties of controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam subjected to impulse
force when the patches at free end with LQR controller.

4.05x10
-6
m


2.75x10
-6
m


piezoelectric patches at free end using LQR controller.

Figure ( 4.12) bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected to impulse force when piezoelectric
56

impulse force when piezoelectric patches at free end with LQR controller.

4.4 Active vibration control using (PID) controller
In this section , a design of an active vibration controller for the cantilever beam
base on (PID) controller would be attained, according to equation(3.43) the
proportional- integral-derivative (PID) controller depend fundamentally on the
constant (K
p
, K
i
and K
d
) , therefore in order to reach the desired response and
properties for the control system , there are two method used in order to
determine the value of the three controller (K
p
, K
i
and K
d
) which are described
below.
4.4.1 Manually determination of (PID) controller constants
In this method , the effect of each constant mentioned in table (3.1) will be used
to determine the optimal value of each constant. After many trial and error ,
finally the three constant values were determined and whom shown below :
57

The figure( 4.14) below show the response of cantilever beam with (PID)
controller to impulse force when the piezoelectric patches near fixed end
(x1=0.01 m ,x2=0.055 m) :

Figure (4.14) impulse response of cantilever beam when the patches near fixed end with PID
controller.

The properties of the controlled with (PID parameter tuning with MATLAB)
controller and uncontrolled cantilever beam when the piezoelectric patches near
fixed end are given in table (4.8) below:

58

Table (4.8) properties of impulse response of cantilever beam with PID controller when the
patches near fixed end.

2.45x10
-6
m


0.467x10
-6
m


piezoelectric patches near fixed end using PID controller.

Figure (4.15 ) bode plot of the cantilever beam subjected to impulse force when piezoelectric
patches near fixed end using PID controller.
59

impulse force when piezoelectric patches near fixed end using PID controller.

The figure(4.17) below show the response of cantilever beam with (PID)
controller to impulse force when the piezoelectric patches at free end (x1=0.215
m , x2=0.26 m) :

Figure (4.17) impulse response of cantilever beam when the patches at free end with PID
controller.
60

The properties of the controlled with (PID) controller and uncontrolled cantilever
beam when the piezoelectric patches at free end are given in table (4.9) below:
Table (4.9) properties of impulse response of cantilever beam with (PID)controller when the
patches at free end.

2.61x10
-6
m


1.04x10
-6
m

piezoelectric patches at free end using PID controller.
patches at free end using PID controller.
61

Figure ( 4.19) rlocus plot of the controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam subjected to
impulse force when piezoelectric patches at free end using PID controller.

4.4.2 Determination of (PID) controller constants using auto tuning
MATLAB software enable us to determine the (PID) controller constants with a
very accurate values and gives the optimal values of the constants in order to
reach the desired response , Figure (4.20) shows the main window in MATLAB
used to parameter tuning , when using the MATLAB window of (parameter
tuning ) and applying our system , the following values of the (PID) controller
were determined :

62

Figure( 4.21) below show the response of cantilever beam with (PID)with
MATLAB auto tuning controller to impulse force when the piezoelectric
patches near fixed end (x1=0.01 m ,x2=0.055 m) :

Figure (4.20) MATLAB PID tuner.

Figure (4.21) impulse response of cantilever beam when the patches near fixed end with (PID
parameter tuning with matlab ) controller.
63

beam when the piezoelectric patches near fixed end are given in table (4.10)
below:
patches near fixed end MATLAB auto tuning.

2.45x10
-6
m


0.234x10
-6
m

Figures (4.22,4.23) below shows the bode plot and the rlocus plot of the
controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam when the beam subjected to impulse
force and the piezoelectric patches near fixed end using PID controller
MATLAB auto tuning.

patches near fixed end using PID controller MATLAB auto tuning.
64

impulse force when piezoelectric patches near fixed end using PID controller MATLAB auto
tuning.
Figure(4.24) below show the response of cantilever beam with (PID) controller
to impulse force when the piezoelectric patches at free end (x
1
=0.215 m
,x
2
=0.26 m) with MATLAB auto tuning .

Figure (4.24) impulse response of cantilever beam when the patches at free end with PID
controller MATLAB auto tuning.
65

beam when the piezoelectric patches at free end are given in table (4.11) below:
patches at free end MATLAB auto tuning.

2.6x10
-6
m


0.3x10
-6
m

Figures (4.25,4.26) below shows the bode plot and the rlocus plot of the
controlled and uncontrolled cantilever beam when the beam subjected to impulse
force and the piezoelectric patches free end using PID controller MATLAB
auto tuning.

66

patches at free end using PID controller MATLAB auto tuning.

impulse force when piezoelectric patches at free end using PID controller MATLAB auto
tuning.
4.5 Active vibration control using (FL) controller
In this section ,the design of a vibration controller for the cantilever beam based
on fuzzy logic controller theory will be achieved , the design of the controller
would be created using MATLAB software . the main page in MATLAB for
fuzzy logic controller is shown in Fig. (4.26) below . the inputs for the controller
will be the displacement and the velocity while the output will be the controlled
displacement of the beam , Fig. (4.27) and (4.28) shows the displacement and
velocity ranges respectively ,while Fig.(4.29 ) shows the output controlled
displacement of the cantilever beam , the rules base used are contain (35 rules)
based on table (3.2) which are obtained as follows in table (4.12) :

67

Table (4.12) FLC expanded rules
NO. RULE
1
If (velocity is NB) and (displacement is NB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PS)
2
If (velocity is NB) and (displacement is NM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PM)
3
If (velocity is NB) and (displacement is NS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PB)
4
If (velocity is NB) and (displacement is ZO) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
5
If (velocity is NB) and (displacement is PS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NB)
6
If (velocity is NB) and (displacement is PM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NM)
7
If (velocity is NB) and (displacement is PB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NS)
8
If (velocity is NS) and (displacement is NB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PS)
9
If (velocity is NS) and (displacement is NM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PM)
10
If (velocity is NS) and (displacement is NS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PB)
11
If (velocity is NS) and (displacement is ZO) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
68

12
If (velocity is NS) and (displacement is PS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NB)
13
If (velocity is NS) and (displacement is PM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NM)
14
If (velocity is NS) and (displacement is PB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NS)
15
If (velocity is ZO) and (displacement is NB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
16
If (velocity is ZO) and (displacement is NM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
17
If (velocity is ZO) and (displacement is NS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
18
If (velocity is ZO) and (displacement is ZO) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
19
If (velocity is ZO) and (displacement is PS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
20
If (velocity is ZO) and (displacement is PM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
21
If (velocity is ZO) and (displacement is PB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
22
If (velocity is PS) and (displacement is NB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PS)
23
If (velocity is PS) and (displacement is NM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PM)
24
If (velocity is PS) and (displacement is NS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PB)
69

25
If (velocity is PS) and (displacement is ZO) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
26
If (velocity is PS) and (displacement is PS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NB)
27
If (velocity is PS) and (displacement is PM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NM)
28
If (velocity is PS) and (displacement is PB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NS)
29
If (velocity is PB) and (displacement is NB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PS)
30
If (velocity is PB) and (displacement is NM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PM)
31
If (velocity is PB) and (displacement is NS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is PB)
32
If (velocity is PB) and (displacement is ZO) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is ZO)
33
If (velocity is PB) and (displacement is PS) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NB)
34
If (velocity is PB) and (displacement is PM) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NM)
35
If (velocity is PB) and (displacement is PB) then (controlled cantilever
displacement is NS)

70

Figure (4.27) fuzzy logic controller page in MATLAB

Figure (4.28) the input displacement member function of cantilever beam
71

Figure (4.29) the input velocity member function of cantilever beam

Figure (4.30) the output controlled displacement member ship of cantilever beam
72

The rule viewer and the rule surface of the designed (FLC) are shown below in
figure (4.30) and (4.31) respectively .

Figure (4.31) rule viewer of the designed FLC
73

Figure (4.32) surface viewer of the designed FLC

The designed (FL) controller is tested using different type of inputs to ensure its
validity to control many type of inputs . The types of inputs used are (uniform
random number, sine wave and unit step) , (4.33,4.34,4.35,4.36,4.37 and 4.38)
below shows each type of inputs and the response (output) of the controller to
these different types of inputs while Fig. (3.37) shows the Simulink page for the
FLC in MATLAB .
74

Figure (4.33) inputs displacement and velocity of uniform random number

Figure (4.34) output controlled displacement when the inputs are uniform random number
75

Figure (4.35) inputs displacement and velocity of sine wave

Figure (4.36)output controlled displacement when the inputs are sine wave
76

Figure (4.37) inputs displacement and velocity of unit step

Figure (4.38) output controlled displacement when the inputs are unit steps

77

Figure (4.39) the Simulink page of FLC in MATLAB
4.6 The optimal location of the piezoelectric patches
The optimal location of the piezoelectric patches refer to the position in the
cantilever beam where the actuation and sensing process is optimal , i.e. the
location where the better response of the cantilever beam is achieved , this is
reflected as small amplitudes of displacement and velocity and small settling
time. In order to obtain this location and get a robust and fast controller , by
examine the effect of the location on each controller ( i.e. LQR controller , PID
controller ,and FL controller ) . Table (4.13) below illustrated the properties of
each used controller and the effect of the patches location on the response of the
cantilever beam .it can be clearly recognizing that the optimal location for the
patches locate near fixed end (given better reduction in displacement amplitude
with relatively decent settle time ). Fig. (4.40) shows the optimal location of the
patches on the cantilever beam.
78

Table (4.13) effect of piezoelectric patches location on the beam response.
type of
controller
response to
location of the
piezoelectric
patches
peak amplitude of
the output
displacement(m)
settle
time(sec)

LQR
impulse force near fixed end 1.46x10
-6
0.209
impulse force at free end 2.75x10
-6
0.19
initial
condition
near fixed end -5.48x10
-5
0.35
initial
condition
at free end 8.44x10
-5
0.23

PID
-6
2.48
-6
1.02
PID-
MATLAB
auto
TUNING
-6
0.9
-6
0.637

FLC
uniform
random
number
near fixed end 0.5x10
-6
1.3
uniform
random
number
at free end 0.7x10
-6
0.9
sine wave near fixed end 0.71x10
-6
2.01
sine wave at free end 0.82x10
-6
1.7

79

Figure (4.40) the optimal location of piezoelectric patches on the cantilever beam

4.7 Results And Discussion
In order to conclude which vibration control technique is better to achieve a
robust , faster and reliable controller , a comparison between (LQR , PID ,PID
MATLAB auto tuning and FL ) controller has been made in figure (4.41) below ,
80

Figure (4.41) response of cantilever beam different type of controller at optimal
Location.
It is obvious from figure (4.41) and table (4.13) that fuzzy logic controller (FLC)
is the best controller compared with the other controller according to the suitable
reduction in the output displacement of the cantilever beam and the relatively
smaller settle time which give the desired properties to control the vibration of
the cantilever beam , PID-MATLAB auto tuning also provide acceptable
performance.
81

In figures(4.22 and 4.23) which showing the bode plot of the controlled with
PID-MATLAB auto tuning and uncontrolled system , it can be noticed that the
original system(uncontrolled ) and the controlled system are at the same phase
( there were no change in phase between input and output ) with less
amplitude(dB) for the controlled system which giving as the optimal vibration
control of the system and the same results also can be realized from
figures(4.3, 4.4, 4.6, 4.7, 4.9,4.10, 4.12, 4.13, 4.15, 4.16, 4.18, 4.19, 4.25 and
4.26).
Also in Figures (4.32 , 4.34 and 4.36) which illustrate the response of the fuzzy
logic control to different type of inputs , it is obvious that the controller is very
robust and reliable .

4.8 comparison between the current research and other researches
In this section , a comparison between the different type of controller used in this
study with the controllers from other studies will be illustrated in the followed
paragraphs .
The response of the system with LQR controller to initial condition of (1cm at
free end ) when the patches near fixed end and the response of the same system
taken from Ref. [18] are shown below in figure (4.42):
82

From Ref.[18] current study

Figure (4.42) comparison between Ref. [18] and current study for LQR
controller.

It is obvious that our designed LQR controller is much better performing than
the controller in Ref. [18] since the amplitude of the output in our controller is
(-5.48*10
-6
m) while in Ref. [18] is (-6*10
-6
m) and the settle time in the current
study is (0.18 sec ) while in Ref. [18] is (20 sec) .

In the other hand , the response of the system to response force with PID-
MATLAB auto tuned controller in the current study and the response of the same
system to the same force given in Ref. [19] are shown in figure (4.43) below:
83

Current study Ref. [19]
Figure (4.43)comparison between Ref [19] and current study for PID
controller.

The response of the current PID controller give us an output peak amplitude of
(0.234*10
-6
m) with settle time of (0.9 sec ) while in Ref. [19] the output peak
amplitude is (4*10
-6
m ) therefore the current study gives much better controller
design than that of Ref. [19].
The last comparison will be made to compare the performance of the fuzzy logic
controller FLC of the current study with the controller from Ref.[24], figure
(4.44) shows the response of the cantilever beam of both FLC of Ref.[24] and
FLC of the current study to the impulse force :
84

Current study Ref. [24]
Figure (4.44)comparison between Ref. [24] and current study for FL
controller.

Again , the designed FLC of the current give us a peak amplitude of the output
of (0.6*10
-6
m) while the FLC controller from Ref.[24] give a peak amplitude of
the output of (4*10
-6
m) , therefore , our designed controller is better than the
controller of Ref.[24] .

Chapter
five
CHAPTER FIVE CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE WORKS
85

CHAPTER FIVE
CONCLUSION AND RECOMMENDATIONS FOR FUTURE
WORKS

5.1 Conclusion of this Thesis
This study presents a theoretical analysis of the flexural response of a beam with
bonded piezoelectric sensor/actuator patches based on the classical beam theory.
A controller is designed by the optimal control theory. Piezoelectric patches have
been bonded at the root and the tip of the cantilevered beam investigated
respectively. Simulation results indicate that the vibration of a cantilever beam
has been actively suppressed by applying control voltage to the piezoceramics
actuators, and the optimal control theory lead to a useful controller design
methodology for the design of robust controllers for the vibration control of
cantilever beam-like structures. It also demonstrated that when application of
vibration control theory, the arrangement of sensors and actuators should
considering the result of other assemblies, but the optimal position is near the
fixed point, which is also called maximal deformation of the beam.
The conclusions of this study can be summarized into the following points:
1. Wide range of Active controllers can be applied in order to achieve the
desired response of the cantilever beam .

86

2. Active vibration control using (LQR , PID and FL) controllers give strong
robustness to modal parameters variation and has a good closed-loop
dynamic performance compared to (H) controller .

3. It has been demonstrated that the optimal location for the piezoelectric
patches(sensor/actuator) and investigation of the response in different
location on the cantilever beam and finally the optimal location obtaining
to be near the fixed end.

4. Controlling of the cantilever beam using fuzzy logic controller (FLC)
gives a better results than proportional-integral-derivative(PID) and linear
quadratic regulator(LQR) in terms of response and settling time.

5.2 Recommendations for future works

The recommendations for the other future works can be summarized in to the
following :

1. The future researches can cover another types of active controllers to
control the cantilever beam such as (H controller and Fuzzy-PID
controller ).
2. A comparison between the results from MATLAB software and ANSYS
software can be done in order to verifying the theoretical results.
87

3. An experimental study of active vibration control of a cantilever beam is
extremely recommended to verifying the theoretical results.

references
REFERENCES

REFERENCES

[1] Manning Wj, Plummerar and Levesleymc, (2000),Vibration Control of A
Flexible Beam with Integrated Actuators and Sensors. Smart Materials and
Structures 9: Pp 932939.
[2] Bruant I, Coffignal G, Lene F And Verge M, (2000),Active Control Of
Beam Structures With Piezoelectric Actuators And Sensors: Modeling
And Simulation. Smart Materials and Structures 10: pp 404408.
[3] Gaudenzi P, Carbonaro R and Benzi E, (2000),Control Of Beam Vibrations
By Means Of Piezoelectric Devices: Theory and Experiments. Composite
Structures 50(4): pp 373379.
[4] Singh Sp, Pruthi Hs and Agarwal Vp, (2003), Efficient Modal Control
Strategies For Active Control Of Vibrations. Journal Of Sound And
Vibration 262: pp 563575.
[5] Xu Sx And Koko Ts, (2004), Finite Element Analysis And Design Of
Actively Controlled Piezoelectric Smart Structures. Finite Elements In
Analysis And Design 40: pp 241262.
[6] Karagulle H, Malgaca L And Oktem Hf, (2004), Analysis Of Active
Vibration Control In Smart Structures By Ansys. Smart Materials And
Structures 13: pp 661667.

REFERENCES

[7] Khot Sm, Yelve Np And Iyer R, (2008), Active Vibration Control Of
Cantilever Beam By Using Optimal (LQR) Controller. Proceedings Of
International Conference On Total Engineering, Analysis And
Manufacturing Technologies (Team Tech 2008), September 2008, Jn Tata
Auditorium, Iisc Bangalore, India: pp 2224.
[8] Lim Yh, (2003),Finite Element Simulation Of Closed Loop Vibration
Control Of A Smart Plate Under Transient Loading. Smart Materials And
Structures 12: pp 272286.
[9] Quek St, Wang Sy And Ang Kk, (2003), Vibration Control Of Composite
Plates Via Optimal Placement Of Piezoelectric Patches. Journal Of
Intelligent Material, Systems And Structures 14: pp 229245.
[10] Xianmin Z, Changjian S And Erdman Ag, (2002),Active Vibration
Controller Design And Comparison Study Of Flexible Linkage Mechanism
Systems. Mechanical Machine Theory 37: pp 985997.
[11] Gou Xinke Tian Haimin, (2007), Active Vibration Control Of A
Cantilever Beam Using Bonded Piezoelectric Sensors And Actuators
College Of Electrical And Information Engineering, Lanzhou University Of
Technology, Lanzhou, 730050, China : pp 8588.
[12] Juntao Fei, Yunmei Fang And Chunyan Yan, (2010), The Comparative
Study Of Vibration Control Of Flexible Structure Using Smart Materials
Volume 2010 : pp 212.
[13] Yavuz Yaman, Tarkan alikan, Volkan Nalbantolu, Eswar Prasad, And
David Waechter ,(2001) , Active Vibration Control Of A Smart Beam
REFERENCES
Paper Published In The Proceedings Of Cansmart Symposium Held At
Montreal, October 2001: pp 125133.
[14] Ulrich Gabbert, Tamara Nestorovi Trajkov And Heinz Kppe , (2002) ,
Modelling, Control And Simulation Of Piezoelectric Smart Structures
Using Finite Element Method And Optimal LQR Control Facta
Universities Series : pp 418430.
[15] Zhang Jing-Jun , Cao Li-Ya And Yuan Wei-Ze ,(2008), Active Vibration
Control For Smart Structure Base On The Fuzzy Logic International
Conference On Advanced Computer Control : pp 231234
[16] Dong Jingshi , Guo Kang , Zheng Wei , Shenchuanliang, Cheng Guangming
, Ding Ji ,(2010), Study On Active Vibration Control Technique Based On
Cantilever Beam 2010 International Conference On Computer,
Mechatronics, Control And Electronic Engineering (Cmce) : pp 468471
[17] K. B. Waghulde , Dr. Bimleshkumar Sinha , M. M. Patil And Dr. S. Mishra
,(2010), Vibration Control Of Cantilever Smart Beam By Using
Piezoelectric Actuators And Sensors K. B. Waghulde Et Al. /International
Journal Of Engineering And Technology Vol.2(4), 2010: pp 259-262.
[18] S.M. Khot, Nitesh P. Yelve And Ramya Iyer ,(2011), Active Vibration
Control Of Cantilever Beam By Using Optimal (LQR) Controller : pp 2
10.
[19] Deepak Chhabra1, Pankaj Chandna And Gian Bhushan,(2011), Design
And Analysis Of Smart Structures For Active Vibration Control Using
Piezo-Crystals International Journal Of Engineering And Technology
Volume 1 No. 3, December, 2011 : pp 153163.
REFERENCES

[20] Sm Khot, Nitesh P Yelve, Rajat Tomar, Sameer Desai And S Vittal,(2011),
Active Vibration Control Of Cantilever Beam By Using PID Based Output
Feedback Controller Journal Of Vibration And Control 18(3): pp 366372.
[21] Deepak Chhabra, Kapil Narwal And Pardeep Singh,(2012),Design And
Analysis Of Piezoelectric Smart Beam For Active Vibration Control
International Journal Of Advancements In Research & Technology,
Volume 1, Issue1, June-2012 1 Issn 2278-7763 : pp 15.
[22]Tamara Nestorovi, Navid Durrani And Miroslav
Trajkov,(2012),Experimental Model Identification And Vibration Control
Of A Smart Cantilever Beam Using Piezoelectric Actuators And Sensors J
Electroceram (2012) 29: pp 4255.
[23] A.P. Parameswaran, A.B. Pai, P.K. Tripathi And K.V. Gangadharan ,(2013)
,Active Vibration Control Of A Smart Cantilever Beam On General
Purpose Operating System Defence Science Journal, Vol. 63, No. 4, July
2013: pp 413-417.
[24] Preeti Verma , Manish Rathore And Dr Rajeev Gupta,(2013),Vibration
Control Of Cantilever Beam Using Fuzzy Logic Controller International
Journal of Science, Engineering and Technology Research (IJSETR)
Volume 2, Issue 4, April 2013: pp 906-909.
[25] Vibration Of Continuous Systems By Singiresu S. Rao,(2007), John
Wiley & Sons. Inc. pp 563-570.
[26] Friedland And Bernard,(2005), Control System Design: An Introduction
To State Space Methods,Dover. Isbn 0-486-44278-0 : pp 103130.
REFERENCES

[27] Ang, K.H., Chong, G.C.Y., And Li, Y., (2005),.PID Control System
Analysis, Design, And Technology , IEEE Trans Control Systems Tech,
13(4): pp 559-576.
[28] Jinghua Zhong ,(Spring 2006), PID Controller Tuning: A Short Tutorial,
Retrieved 2011-04-04 : pp 408412.
[29] [Http://Www.Mathworks.Com]
[30] Subramaniam R. S., Reinhorn A. M., Riley M. A., Nagarajaiah S. ,(1996),
Hybrid Control Of Structures Using Fuzzy Logic, Microcomput, Civil
Eng: pp 1-17.
[31]Yen J., Langari R. ,(1998), Fuzzy Logic-Intelligence Control And
Information , Prentice Hall, Englewood Cliffs, Nj : pp 101-125.
[32] Zadeh L.A., (1965), Fuzzy Set. In Format. Control, Vol. 8: pp 338- 353.
[33] Dr. Wedad Ibraheem Majeed , Dr. Shibly Ahmed Al-Samarraie And
Mohanad Mufaq Al-Saior ,(2013) , Vibration Control Analysis Of A
Smart Flexible Cantilever Beam Using Smart Material Journal Of
Engineering, Volume 19 January 2013, Number 1 : pp 82-95.
[34] Jingjun Zhang, Lili He, Ercheng Wang And Ruizhen Gao ,(2008), Active
Vibration Control Of Flexible Structures Using Piezoelectric Materials
Hebei University Of Engineering, Handan, China :pp540544.
[35] Jingjun Zhang, Liya Cao, Weize Yuan And Ruizhen Gao,(2008), Active
Vibration Control For Smart Structure Base On The Fuzzy Logic Second
REFERENCES
International Symposium On Intelligent Information Technology
Application : pp 901905.
[36] Varun Kumar And Deepak Chhabra ,(2013), Design Of Fuzzy Logic
Controller For Active Vibration Control Of Cantilever Plate With Piezo -
Patches As Sensor /Actuator International Journal Of Emerging Research
In Management &Technology : pp 3444.
[37] Bennett, Stuart, (1993),.A History Of Control Engineering, 1930-1955.
Iet. Isbn 978-0-86341-299-8: pp 48.
[38] Sellers, David. "An Overview Of Proportional Plus Integral Plus Derivative
Control And Suggestions For Its Successful Application And
Implementation. Archived From The Original On March 7, 2007.
Retrieved 2007-05-05 : pp 212226.

appendix
APPENDIX

APPENDIX

1-MATLAB program used for LQR controller
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% % Active Vibration Control of a Cantilever Beam Using Bonded %%
%% Piezoelectric Sensors and Actuators with LQR controller %%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
Eb=70e9; % young's modulus of the beam
hb=0.006; % thickness of the beam
b=0.01; % width of the beam = width of piezoelectric patches
hp=0.0005; % thickness of piezoelectric patches
Ib=(b*hb^3)/12; % second moment of area of the beam
ro=2700; % density of the beam
Ab=b*hb; % cross sectional area of the beam
lb=0.26; % length of the beam
z=0.02; % damping ratio of the beam
d31=-270e-12; % piezoelectric constant
lp=45e-3; % length of piezoelectric patches
APPENDIX
Ep=5.3e10; % young's modulus of piezoelectric patches
cp=65e-9; % capacitance of piezoelectric patches
g31=-9.2e-3; % piezoelectric constant
% location of piezoelectric patches is x1=0.01 , x2=0.05 if the patches
locate near fixed end and x1=0.215 , x2=0.26 if the patches locate at
free end
x1=0.215 ; % location of the piezoelectric patches
x2=x1+(lp); % location of the piezoelectric patches
w=zeros(1,4);
bl=zeros(1,4);
for i=1:4
bl(i)=((2*i)-1)*pi/2;
w(i)=(bl(i))^2*(Eb*Ib/(ro* Ab *lb^4 ))^(1/2);
end
k=[w(1,1)^2 w(1,2)^2 w(1,3)^2 w(1,4)^2];
k=-diag(k);
c=[2*z*w(1,1) 2*z*w(1,2) 2*z*w(1,3) 2*z*w(1,4)];
c=-diag(c);
p=-((Ep/Eb)*(6*hp*hb*(hp+hb))/(hb^3+8*hp^3+(6*hb*hp^2)));
kj=-(b*d31*Eb*hb^2*p)/(12*hp*(1-p));
an=zeros(1,1);
phi1=zeros(1,1);
phi2=zeros(1,1);
d=zeros(4,1);
s1=zeros(1,1);
for j=1:4
for g=1:1
APPENDIX
an(j)=(j*pi/lb);
s1(j)=((cos(an(j)*lb))+(cosh(an(j)*lb)))/((sin(an(j)*lb))+(sinh(an(j)*lb)));
phi1(j)=((an(j)*(sinh(an(j)*x1))+(sin(an(j)*x1))))-
((an(j)*s1(j)*(cosh(an(j)*x1))-(cos(an(j)*x1))));
d(j,g)=kj*(phi2(j)-phi1(j));
end
end
ks=(b*hb*g31)/(2*cp);
am=zeros(1,1);
ph1=zeros(1,1);
ph2=zeros(1,1);
M=zeros(1,4);
s2=zeros(1,1);
for n=1:1 %here we are considering only one sensor output y(1). This
%sensor extends from x1 to x2
% therefore, we will get response of this sensor only
% y is the response of the sensor (output voltage of it)
for m=1:4
am(m)=(m*pi/lb);
s2(m)=((cos(am(m)*lb))+(cosh(am(m)*lb)))/((sin(am(m)*lb))+(sinh(am(m)*
lb)));
ph1(m)=((am(m)*(sinh(am(m)*x1))+(sin(am(m)*x1))))-
((am(m)*s2(m)*(cosh(am(m)*x1))-(cos(am(m)*x1))));
ph2(m)=((am(m)*(sinh(am(m)*x2)))+(sin(am(m)*x2)))-
APPENDIX
M(n,m)=ks*(ph2(m)-ph1(m));
end
end
A=[0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0;0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0;0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0;0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1;k(1,1)
k(1,2) k(1,3) k(1,4) c(1,1) c(1,2) c(1,3) c(1,4);k(2,1) k(2,2) k(2,3) k(2,4)
c(2,1) c(2,2) c(2,3) c(2,4);k(3,1) k(3,2) k(3,3) k(3,4) c(3,1) c(3,2) c(3,3)
c(3,4);k(4,1) k(4,2) k(4,3) k(4,4) c(4,1) c(4,2) c(4,3) c(4,4)];
B=[0;0;0;0;d(1,1);d(2,1);d(3,1);d(4,1)];
C=[M(1,1) M(1,2) M(1,3) M(1,4) 0 0 0 0 ];
D=0;
sys_without_controller=ss(A,B,C,D);
x0=[ 0 ;0 ; 0 ; 0; 0; 0 ; 0 ;0.01];
t=0:0.1:10;
impulse(sys_without_controller,'b')%plot impulse response without
controller
% if we want the initial condition response ,we should use the command
below
% initial(sys_without_controller,'b',x0) %plot response before control in
blue color
R=1e-10; %here we want to minimize the effect of u, because u is very
large %(in quantity) as compared to x
% we can play with weights to achieve better controller design
and
% smaller response

APPENDIX

Q=30e1*[1 0 0 0 0 0 0 0;0 1 0 0 0 0 0 0;0 0 1 0 0 0 0 0;0 0 0 1 0 0 0 0;0 0
0 0 1 0 0 0;0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0;0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0;0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1];
KK=lqr(A,B,Q,R);
ACONT=(A-(B*KK));
sys_with_controller_LQR=ss(ACONT,B,C,D);
hold on
impulse(sys_with_controller_LQR,'r')
% if we want the initial condition response ,we should use the command
below
%initial(sys_with_controller_LQR,'r',x0) % plot response after control
title('response of cantilever beam ')
ylabel('displacement (m)')

2-MATLAB program used for PID controller
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
% % Active Vibration Control of a Cantilever Beam Using Bonded%%%
%% Piezoelectric Sensors and Actuators with PID controller %%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%%
APPENDIX
Eb=70e9; % young's modulus of the beam
hb=0.006; % thickness of the beam
b=0.01; % width of the beam = width of piezoelectric patches
hp=0.0005; % thickness of piezoelectric patches
Ib=(b*hb^3)/12; % second moment of area of the beam
ro=2700; % density of the beam
Ab=b*hb; % cross sectional area of the beam
lb=0.26; % length of the beam
z=0.02; % damping ratio of the beam
d31=-270e-12; % piezoelectric constant
lp=45e-3; % length of piezoelectric patches
Ep=5.3e10; % young's modulus of piezoelectric patches
cp=65e-9; % capacitance of piezoelectric patches
g31=-9.2e-3; % piezoelectric constant
% location of piezoelectric patches is x1=0.01 , x2=0.05 if the patches
locate near fixed end and x1=0.215 , x2=0.26 if the patches locate at
free end
x1=0.215 ; % location of the piezoelectric patches
x2=x1+(lp); % location of the piezoelectric patches
w=zeros(1,4);
bl=zeros(1,4);
for i=1:4
bl(i)=((2*i)-1)*pi/2;
w(i)=(bl(i))^2*(Eb*Ib/(ro* Ab *lb^4 ))^(1/2);
end
k=[w(1,1)^2 w(1,2)^2 w(1,3)^2 w(1,4)^2];
k=-diag(k);
APPENDIX

c=[2*z*w(1,1) 2*z*w(1,2) 2*z*w(1,3) 2*z*w(1,4)];
c=-diag(c);
p=-((Ep/Eb)*(6*hp*hb*(hp+hb))/(hb^3+8*hp^3+(6*hb*hp^2)));
kj=-(b*d31*Eb*hb^2*p)/(12*hp*(1-p));
an=zeros(1,1);
phi1=zeros(1,1);
phi2=zeros(1,1);
d=zeros(4,1);
s1=zeros(1,1);
for j=1:4
for g=1:1
an(j)=(j*pi/lb);
s1(j)=((cos(an(j)*lb))+(cosh(an(j)*lb)))/((sin(an(j)*lb))+(sinh(an(j)*lb)));
d(j,g)=kj*(phi2(j)-phi1(j));
end
end
ks=(b*hb*g31)/(2*cp);
am=zeros(1,1);
ph1=zeros(1,1);
ph2=zeros(1,1);
M=zeros(1,4);
s2=zeros(1,1);
APPENDIX
for n=1:1 %here we are considering only one sensor output y(1). This
%sensor extends from x1 to x2
% therefore, we will get response of this sensor only
% y is the response of the sensor (output voltage of it)
for m=1:4
am(m)=(m*pi/lb);
s2(m)=((cos(am(m)*lb))+(cosh(am(m)*lb)))/((sin(am(m)*lb))+(sinh(am(m)*
lb)));
ph1(m)=((am(m)*(sinh(am(m)*x1))+(sin(am(m)*x1))))-
ph2(m)=((am(m)*(sinh(am(m)*x2)))+(sin(am(m)*x2)))-
M(n,m)=ks*(ph2(m)-ph1(m));
end
end
A=[0 0 0 0 1 0 0 0;0 0 0 0 0 1 0 0;0 0 0 0 0 0 1 0;0 0 0 0 0 0 0 1;k(1,1)
k(1,2) k(1,3) k(1,4) c(1,1) c(1,2) c(1,3) c(1,4);k(2,1) k(2,2) k(2,3) k(2,4)
c(2,1) c(2,2) c(2,3) c(2,4);k(3,1) k(3,2) k(3,3) k(3,4) c(3,1) c(3,2) c(3,3)
c(3,4);k(4,1) k(4,2) k(4,3) k(4,4) c(4,1) c(4,2) c(4,3) c(4,4)];
B=[0;0;0;0;d(1,1);d(2,1);d(3,1);d(4,1)];
C=[M(1,1) M(1,2) M(1,3) M(1,4) 0 0 0 0 ];
D=0;
sys_without_controller=ss(A,B,C,D);
x0=[ 0 ;0 ; 0 ; 0; 0; 0 ; 0 ;0.01];
t=0:0.1:10;
impulse(sys_without_controller,'b') % plot impulse response without
controller
APPENDIX

sys_without_controller_ss=ss(A,B,C,D);
[num,den]=ss2tf(A,B,C,D);
sys_without_controller=tf(num,den);
% the value of PID controller constants which determined using MATLAB
% are:
kp=0.0002 ;
ki=0.03;
kd=0.004;
% if we used the values of the constant determined manually then
% kp=1e-4 ;
% ki=1e-1;
% kd=1e-1;
Controller = tf([kp,ki,kd],[1,0]);
sys_with_controller=feedback(Controller*sys_without_controller,1);
impulse(sys_without_controller,'r',t)
hold on
impulse(sys_with_controller,'b',t)
title('response of cantilever beam ')
ylabel('displacement (m)')

Active Vibrration Control of Beam

Enviado por

Dados do documento

Descrição original:

Direitos autorais

Formatos disponíveis

Compartilhar este documento

Compartilhar ou incorporar documento

Opções de compartilhamento

Você considera este documento útil?

Este conteúdo é inapropriado?

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

Active Vibrration Control of Beam

Enviado por

Direitos autorais:

Formatos disponíveis

ACTIVE VIBRATION CONTROL OF A SMART

BEAM USING LQR , PID AND FUZZY LOGIC

Você também pode gostar