No Cover Image

Journal article 445 views 33 downloads

Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System / Shakir Jiffri, Sebastiano Fichera, John E. Mottershead, Andrea Da Ronch

Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics, Volume: 40, Issue: 8, Pages: 1925 - 1938

Swansea University Author: Shakir Jiffri

Check full text

DOI (Published version): 10.2514/1.g002519

Abstract

Experimental implementation of input–output feedback linearization in controlling the dynamics of a nonlinear pitch–plunge aeroelastic system is presented. The control objective is to linearize the system dynamics and assign the poles of the pitch mode of the resulting linear system. The implementat...

Full description

Published in: Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics
ISSN: 0731-5090 1533-3884
Published: 2017
Online Access: Check full text

URI: https://cronfa.swan.ac.uk/Record/cronfa36832
Tags: Add Tag
No Tags, Be the first to tag this record!
first_indexed 2017-11-20T14:26:06Z
last_indexed 2021-01-15T03:57:30Z
id cronfa36832
recordtype SURis
fullrecord <?xml version="1.0"?><rfc1807><datestamp>2021-01-14T12:59:56.9092414</datestamp><bib-version>v2</bib-version><id>36832</id><entry>2017-11-20</entry><title>Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System</title><swanseaauthors><author><sid>1d7a7d2a8f10ec98afed15a4b4b791c4</sid><ORCID>0000-0002-5570-5783</ORCID><firstname>Shakir</firstname><surname>Jiffri</surname><name>Shakir Jiffri</name><active>true</active><ethesisStudent>false</ethesisStudent></author></swanseaauthors><date>2017-11-20</date><deptcode>AERO</deptcode><abstract>Experimental implementation of input&#x2013;output feedback linearization in controlling the dynamics of a nonlinear pitch&#x2013;plunge aeroelastic system is presented. The control objective is to linearize the system dynamics and assign the poles of the pitch mode of the resulting linear system. The implementation 1) addresses experimentally the general case where feedback linearization-based control is applied using as the output a degree of freedom other than that where the physical nonlinearity is located, using a single trailing-edge control surface, to stabilize the entire system; 2) includes the unsteady effects of the airfoil&#x2019;s aerodynamic behavior; 3) includes the embedding of a tuned numerical model of the aeroelastic system into the control scheme in real time; and 4) uses pole placement as the linear control objective, providing the user with flexibility in determining the nature of the controlled response. When implemented experimentally, the controller is capable of not only delaying the onset of limit-cycle oscillation but also successfully eliminating a previously established limit-cycle oscillation. The assignment of higher levels of damping results in notable reductions in limit-cycle oscillation decay times in the closed-loop response, indicating good controllability of the aeroelastic system and effectiveness of the pole-placement objective. The closed-loop response is further improved by incorporating adaptation so that assumed system parameters are updated with time. The use of an optimum adaptation parameter results in reduced response decay times.</abstract><type>Journal Article</type><journal>Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics</journal><volume>40</volume><journalNumber>8</journalNumber><paginationStart>1925</paginationStart><paginationEnd>1938</paginationEnd><publisher/><placeOfPublication/><isbnPrint/><isbnElectronic/><issnPrint>0731-5090</issnPrint><issnElectronic>1533-3884</issnElectronic><keywords/><publishedDay>1</publishedDay><publishedMonth>8</publishedMonth><publishedYear>2017</publishedYear><publishedDate>2017-08-01</publishedDate><doi>10.2514/1.g002519</doi><url/><notes/><college>COLLEGE NANME</college><department>Aerospace Engineering</department><CollegeCode>COLLEGE CODE</CollegeCode><DepartmentCode>AERO</DepartmentCode><institution>Swansea University</institution><apcterm/><lastEdited>2021-01-14T12:59:56.9092414</lastEdited><Created>2017-11-20T11:13:51.6457978</Created><path><level id="1">College of Engineering</level><level id="2">Engineering</level></path><authors><author><firstname>Shakir</firstname><surname>Jiffri</surname><orcid>0000-0002-5570-5783</orcid><order>1</order></author><author><firstname>Sebastiano</firstname><surname>Fichera</surname><order>2</order></author><author><firstname>John E.</firstname><surname>Mottershead</surname><order>3</order></author><author><firstname>Andrea Da</firstname><surname>Ronch</surname><order>4</order></author></authors><documents><document><filename>36832__17548__02d3bb069fb34a57b20c294d41732752.pdf</filename><originalFilename>36832.pdf</originalFilename><uploaded>2020-06-19T15:03:15.5081045</uploaded><type>Output</type><contentLength>1228485</contentLength><contentType>application/pdf</contentType><version>Accepted Manuscript</version><cronfaStatus>true</cronfaStatus><copyrightCorrect>false</copyrightCorrect></document></documents><OutputDurs/></rfc1807>
spelling 2021-01-14T12:59:56.9092414 v2 36832 2017-11-20 Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System 1d7a7d2a8f10ec98afed15a4b4b791c4 0000-0002-5570-5783 Shakir Jiffri Shakir Jiffri true false 2017-11-20 AERO Experimental implementation of input–output feedback linearization in controlling the dynamics of a nonlinear pitch–plunge aeroelastic system is presented. The control objective is to linearize the system dynamics and assign the poles of the pitch mode of the resulting linear system. The implementation 1) addresses experimentally the general case where feedback linearization-based control is applied using as the output a degree of freedom other than that where the physical nonlinearity is located, using a single trailing-edge control surface, to stabilize the entire system; 2) includes the unsteady effects of the airfoil’s aerodynamic behavior; 3) includes the embedding of a tuned numerical model of the aeroelastic system into the control scheme in real time; and 4) uses pole placement as the linear control objective, providing the user with flexibility in determining the nature of the controlled response. When implemented experimentally, the controller is capable of not only delaying the onset of limit-cycle oscillation but also successfully eliminating a previously established limit-cycle oscillation. The assignment of higher levels of damping results in notable reductions in limit-cycle oscillation decay times in the closed-loop response, indicating good controllability of the aeroelastic system and effectiveness of the pole-placement objective. The closed-loop response is further improved by incorporating adaptation so that assumed system parameters are updated with time. The use of an optimum adaptation parameter results in reduced response decay times. Journal Article Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics 40 8 1925 1938 0731-5090 1533-3884 1 8 2017 2017-08-01 10.2514/1.g002519 COLLEGE NANME Aerospace Engineering COLLEGE CODE AERO Swansea University 2021-01-14T12:59:56.9092414 2017-11-20T11:13:51.6457978 College of Engineering Engineering Shakir Jiffri 0000-0002-5570-5783 1 Sebastiano Fichera 2 John E. Mottershead 3 Andrea Da Ronch 4 36832__17548__02d3bb069fb34a57b20c294d41732752.pdf 36832.pdf 2020-06-19T15:03:15.5081045 Output 1228485 application/pdf Accepted Manuscript true false
title Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System
spellingShingle Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System
Shakir, Jiffri
title_short Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System
title_full Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System
title_fullStr Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System
title_full_unstemmed Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System
title_sort Experimental Nonlinear Control for Flutter Suppression in a Nonlinear Aeroelastic System
author_id_str_mv 1d7a7d2a8f10ec98afed15a4b4b791c4
author_id_fullname_str_mv 1d7a7d2a8f10ec98afed15a4b4b791c4_***_Shakir, Jiffri
author Shakir, Jiffri
author2 Shakir Jiffri
Sebastiano Fichera
John E. Mottershead
Andrea Da Ronch
format Journal article
container_title Journal of Guidance, Control, and Dynamics
container_volume 40
container_issue 8
container_start_page 1925
publishDate 2017
institution Swansea University
issn 0731-5090
1533-3884
doi_str_mv 10.2514/1.g002519
college_str College of Engineering
hierarchytype
hierarchy_top_id collegeofengineering
hierarchy_top_title College of Engineering
hierarchy_parent_id collegeofengineering
hierarchy_parent_title College of Engineering
department_str Engineering{{{_:::_}}}College of Engineering{{{_:::_}}}Engineering
document_store_str 1
active_str 0
description Experimental implementation of input–output feedback linearization in controlling the dynamics of a nonlinear pitch–plunge aeroelastic system is presented. The control objective is to linearize the system dynamics and assign the poles of the pitch mode of the resulting linear system. The implementation 1) addresses experimentally the general case where feedback linearization-based control is applied using as the output a degree of freedom other than that where the physical nonlinearity is located, using a single trailing-edge control surface, to stabilize the entire system; 2) includes the unsteady effects of the airfoil’s aerodynamic behavior; 3) includes the embedding of a tuned numerical model of the aeroelastic system into the control scheme in real time; and 4) uses pole placement as the linear control objective, providing the user with flexibility in determining the nature of the controlled response. When implemented experimentally, the controller is capable of not only delaying the onset of limit-cycle oscillation but also successfully eliminating a previously established limit-cycle oscillation. The assignment of higher levels of damping results in notable reductions in limit-cycle oscillation decay times in the closed-loop response, indicating good controllability of the aeroelastic system and effectiveness of the pole-placement objective. The closed-loop response is further improved by incorporating adaptation so that assumed system parameters are updated with time. The use of an optimum adaptation parameter results in reduced response decay times.
published_date 2017-08-01T03:56:19Z
_version_ 1714649279741558784
score 10.83191