Semi-active flutter control of a high-aspect-ratio wing using multiple

MR dampers
Jia-liang Hu, Li Zhou
College of Aerospace Engineering, Nanjing University of Aeronautics & Astronautics, Nanjing,
210016 China

ABSTRACT

This paper presents a semi-active flutter control strategy for a high-aspect-ratio (HAR) wing using multiple
magnetorheological (MR) dampers. In this paper, the aeroelastic behavior of the system is first investigated by
establishing the aeroelastic equations of a HAR wing-aileron system. The strip theory is employed for calculating the
unsteady aerodynamic loads. Then the semi-active aeroelastic control system with multiple MR dampers is modeled. The
clipped-optimal control algorithm is performed for controlling the MR dampers to suppressing the flutter of the
aeroelastic system. A passive flutter control of the system is also performed for the purpose of comparison. Numerical
simulation results show that the semi-active control strategy based on multiple MR dampers holds promise in
suppressing the flutter of the HAR wing-aileron system.

Keywords: Aeroelastic system, high-aspect-ratio wing, MR damper, semi-active control

1. INTRODUCTION

In recent years, application of semi-active control technology which combines advantages of both active and passive
control in civil engineering and other control problems has been widely developed. In particular, the semi-active control
based on MR dampers has attracted considerable attention[1-3] for its simple mechanism, low energy requirement, high
robustness and flexible control algorithm. Hence, it is quite natural to extend the application of semi-active control based
on MR dampers to suppress flutter of aeroelastic systems in aerospace engineering.

To date, investigations have showed the effectiveness of semi-active flutter suppression. Various semi-active control
devices and control strategies have been developed to achieve the goal of linear and nonlinear flutter control. Yang et
al.[4] have performed both theoretical and experimental investigations for a scheme of “flutter taming”, a semi-active
control scheme of structural nonlinear flutter. Agneni et al.[5] have presented a procedure for modeling and analysis of
the effectiveness of shunted piezoelectric devices in increasing damping of aeroelastic systems, and have performed an
application of semi-active control on an aeroelastic system, showing a significant performance in the reduction of the
gust response level. An electro-magnetic controllable dry friction damper has been designed by Tang et al.[6, 7] and both
of theoretical and experimental studies of airfoil gust response alleviation have been conducted to demonstrate its

E-mail: lzhou@nuaa.edu.cn; phone: 86-25-84891722

Sensors and Smart Structures Technologies for Civil, Mechanical, and Aerospace Systems 2007,
edited by Masayoshi Tomizuka, Chung-Bang Yun, Victor Giurgiutiu, Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529,
65291C, (2007) · 0277-786X/07/$18 · doi: 10.1117/12.716013

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-1

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 applicability and effectiveness. Sun et al.[8] have designed a stepped MR damper for semi-active vibration control of a
wing aileron system.

In this paper, multiple MR dampers are used for the purpose of flutter control of a HAR wing-aileron system. The
clipped-optimal control algorithm is performed for controlling the MR dampers to suppressing the flutter of the
aeroelastic system. A passive flutter control using viscous dampers, instead of the MR dampers, is also performed for
comparison. Numerical simulation results show that the semi-active control strategy based on multiple MR dampers
holds promise in suppressing the flutter of the HAR wing-aileron system.

2. AEROELASTIC MODELING

The aeroelastic system to be investigated in the present paper is illustrated in Fig. 1. A cantilevered elastic HAR wing
with aileron is subjected to unsteady aerodynamic loads due to low-speed air-flow. As shown in the figure, a rectangular
wing is considered and it is assumed that the length of the aileron is equal to the semispan l.

z
x

Elastic axis
Aileron
U
l Hinge axis of aileron

Fig. 1. HAR wing in low-speed air-flow

2.1 Equations of motion

A sketch of one partition of the wing-aileron can be seen in Fig. 2. As shown in the figure, the semichord of the wing is b.
The positions of elastic axis and hinge axis of aileron are represented by ab and cb, respectively. The equations of
motion of the HAR wing-aileron is based on the assumption that the wing is chord wise rigid. Thus, there are three
degrees of freedom in the partition of the wing, plunge h, pitch Į and aileron deflection ȕ. Note that h, Į and ȕ are all
variables respect to y.

The structural variable of HAR wing-aileron is expressed as qs = {W(y, t) ĭ(y, t) Ȍ(y, t)}T, where W(y, t), ĭ(y, t), Ȍ(y, t)
are defined as the wing bending deformation, wing torsion deformation and aileron deflection deformation, respectively,
T
and define Dq ­ w 2W w) w< ½ . Then the kinetic energy and potential energy of the entire wing-aileron system
s ® 2 ¾
¯ wy wy wy ¿

can be written as

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-2

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 ­ 1 l T
°°T 2 ³0
q s M s ( y )q s dy
® (1)
°V 1 l T
Dqs K s ( y )Dqs dy
°̄ 2 ³0
where Ms and Ks are the structural mass and stiffness matrix of per unit span length respectively, which are expressed as

ªM SD SE º ª kh 0 0 º
« » « »
Ms M s ( y) « SD ID I E  b(c  a ) S E » and K s K s ( y) «0 kD 0 ».
« SE I E  b(c  a ) S E IE » «0 0 k E »¼
¬ ¼ ¬

b b
Į +

x
ab cb
ȕ

Elastic axis
Hinge axis of aileron

Fig. 2. A partition of the wing

According to the Rayleigh-Ritz method, W(y, t), ĭ(y, t) and Ȍ(y, t) can be written as
Nh
­
°W ( y , t ) ¦ w ( y)h (t )
i 1
i i
°
°° ND

® ) ( y, t ) ¦ I ( y )D (t )
i i (2)
° i 1
° ND
°< ( y , t )
°̄
¦\ ( y)E (t )
i 1
i i

A coordinate transformation is defined as

­ qs Aq
® (3)
¯Dqs Bq
where
T
q q( y) ^h 1 h2  hN h D1 D 2  D ND E1 E 2  E NE ` (4)

ª w1 w2  wNh 0 0  0 0 0  0 º
« »
A A( y ) «0 0  0 I1 I2  IND 0 0  0 » (5)
« »
«¬0 0  0 0 0  0 \1 \2  \ NE »¼

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-3

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 ª w1cc w2cc  wNcch 0 0  0 0 0  0 º
« »
B B( y ) «0 0  0 I1c I2c  INc D 0 0  0 » (6)
« »
¬«0 0  0 0 0  0 \ 1c \ 2c  \ Nc E ¼»

where a prime denotes differentiation with respect to y.

The deformation of one partition of HAR wing is different from the others, which is respect to its location along span
wise. It is described by the variables wr(y),Ir(y) and ȥr(y), which can be represented by different vibration shape
functions due to the constraint conditions of wing and aileron. Here, the variables are defined as
­ S (Or l )
° wr ( y ) U (Or y )  T (O l ) V (Or y ), r 1 ~ Nh
° r

° (2r  1)Sy
®Ir ( y ) sin 澤 r 1 ~ ND (7)
° l
° (r  1)Sy
°\ r ( y ) cos l
澤 r 1 ~ NE
¯
where the Krylov functions are
­ 1 1
°° S (O y ) >cosh(O y)  cos(O y)@ , T (O y) >sinh(O y)  sin(O y)@
2 2
® (8)
°U (O y ) 1 1
°̄
>cosh(O y)  cos(O y)@ , V (O y) >sinh(O y)  sin(O y)@
2 2

Combining equations (1)-(7), and from Lagrange equation

d ª w(T  V ) º w (T  V )
« »  Qi 0, i 1 ~ N h  ND  N E (9)
dt ¬ wqi ¼ wqi

the equations of motion of HAR wing-aileron may be described a matrix form as

l l
³ A T M s ( y ) Adyq + ³ B T K s ( y )Bdyq = Fa (10)
0 0

where Fa denotes the unsteady aerodynamic loads.

2.2 Aerodynamic model

Justified by the high aspect ratio, Theodorsen’s two-dimensional theory is used for the unsteady aerodynamic load.[9] The
Jones approximation[10] is used for the time domain analysis. The Theodorsen’s aerodynamic loads are expressed as
ª §1 · 1 b º
P  
 U b 2 U SD  Sh  SbaD  UT4 E  T1bE  2SUUbC ( s) «Ua  h  b ¨  a ¸ D  T10U E  T11E »
©2 ¹ S 2S
(11)
¬ ¼
­ §1 · §1 ·
MD  U b 2 ®S ¨  a ¸ UbD  Sb 2 ¨  a 2 ¸ D  T4  T10 U 2 E
¯ © 2 ¹ © 8 ¹
§ 1 · ½
 ¨ T1  T8   c  a  T4  T11 ¸ UbE  ª¬T7   c  a  T1 º¼ b 2 E  Sbah¾
© 2 ¹ ¿

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-4

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 § 1· ª §1 · T b º
2 UUb 2 S ¨ a  ¸ C ( s) «U D  h  b ¨  a ¸ D  10 U E  T11 E » (12)
© 2¹ ¬ ©2 ¹ S 2S ¼

­ª § 1 ·º T T T TT T ½
ME  U b 2 ® « 2T9  T1  T4 ¨ a  ¸ » UbD  2T13b 2D  5 4 10 U 2 E  4 11 UbE  3 b 2 E  T1bh¾
¯¬ © 2 ¹¼ S 2S S ¿

ª §1 · T b º
 UUb 2T12C ( s ) «U D  h  b ¨  a ¸ D  10 U E  T11 E » (13)
¬ © 2 ¹ S 2 S ¼
where ȡ and U denote the freestream density and velocity of the air-flow, respectively. According to Jones approximation,
C(s) can be written as
U U U U
0.0075 0.1005 Z1 Z2
C ( s ) 0.5  b  b 0.5  b  b (14)
U U U U
s  0.0455 s  0.3 s  P1 s  P2
b b b b

the state space form of C(s) is

­­ xa1 ½ U ª  P1 0 º ­ xa1 ½ ­1½

°® ¾ « » ® ¾  ® ¾r
°¯ xa 2 ¿ b ¬ 0  P2 ¼ ¯ xa 2 ¿ ¯1¿
® (15)
° y U Z Z ­ xa1 ½  1 r
° a b^ 1 2` ® ¾
¯ ¯ xa 2 ¿ 2

where xa1 and xa2 are state variables of aerodynamic loads. According to the strip theory which is well known to
over-predict the unsteady aerodynamic loads,[11] the aerodynamic loads of the entire HAR wing-aileron can be expressed
as

­ P( y) ½
l° T °
Fa ³0 A ® M D ( y) ¾ dy (16)
°M ( y) °
¯ E ¿

2.3 Discretized aeroelastic equations

Coupling the equations of motions and aerodynamic loads, the continuous equations of motion are discretized by
dividing the HAR wing-aileron to Na partitions. By assuming structural damping, the discretized aeroelastic equations
can be expressed as[12]
Na
­ i
°Mq + Cq + Kq ¦ ī s ( yi ) X a
® i 1 (17)
° X i P ( y ) X i  ī ( y )q  ī ( y )q, i 1 ~ N
¯ a i a a1 i a2 i a

Na Na Na
T T
where M ¦A (M s  M a ) A , C ¦ ª¬ A Cs A  UA T (Ca  Cc ) A º¼ , K ¦ ª¬B T
K s B  U 2 A T (K a  K c ) A º¼ ,
i 1 i 1 i 1

T ª  P1 0 º
X ai ^xi
a1 xai 2 ` , P ( y ) « 0  P2 »¼
, ī s ( y ) U 2 A T H , ī a1 ( y ) S1 A and ī a 2 ( y ) US 2 A .
¬

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-5

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 1 1
In the above equations, the parameters are defined as follows, Cc U bRS1 , K c U bRS 2 , H U R ^Z1 Z 2 ` ,
2 2
­1½ ­1½ T ­ b ½ ­ 1 ½
S1 ® ¾ S1 , S2 ® ¾ S2 , R ^2 S 2Sb(0.5  a ) T12 b` , S1 ®1 b(0.5  a) T11 ¾ , S2 ®0 1 T10 ¾ ,
¯1¿ ¯1¿ ¯ 2S ¿ ¯ S ¿

ª º ª º ª º
« S Sba T1b » «0 S T4 » «0 0 0 »
« » 2 « » 2 « »
Ma U b 2 « Sba Sb 2 (0.125  a 2 ) 2T13b 2 » , Ca U b «0 Sb(0.5  a ) T16 b » and K a U b «0 0 T15 » .
« 1 » « 1 » « 1 »
« T1b 2T13b 2 T3b 2 » «0 T17 b  T4T11b » «0 0 T18 »
¬ S ¼ ¬ 2S ¼ ¬ S ¼

T
Define state space variable of the system, X = q T ^ q T X a1T  X aNa T ` , the state space form of aeroelastic

equations can be written as

X = A s (U ) X (18)

where

ª 0 I 0 0  0 º
«  M 1 K 1 1 1
M C M ī s ( y1 ) M ī s ( y2 )  M ī s ( yNa ) »»
1
«
« ī (y ) ī a1 ( y1 ) P ( y1 ) 0  0 »
A s (U ) « a2 1 » (19)
« ī a 2 ( y2 ) ī a1 ( y2 ) 0 P ( y2 )  0 »
«       »
« »
«¬ ī a 2 ( y Na ) ī a1 ( y Na ) 0 0  P ( y Na ) »¼

3. FLUTTER OF THE AEROELASTIC SYSTEM

The aeroelastic stability analysis is performed firstly. The aeroelastic eigenvalues obtained from solving the aeroelastic
equations determine the stability of the system. When the real part of any one eigenvalue become positive, the entire
system becomes unstable. Here, the number of partitions is Na=20, and the numbers of structural modes which are
mentioned in Eq. (2) are Nh=2, NĮ=1 and Nȕ=1 respectively. A summary of the structural parameters which are utilized in
the stability analysis and following numerical simulations is given in Table 1.

Fig. 3(a) and (b) show a typical graphical representation of the eigenanalysis in the form of real eigenvalues vs. the flow
velocity and also a root-locus plot for the aeroelastic system. There is an intersection of the real eigenvalues with the
velocity axis at Uf=12.5m/s, the critical flutter velocity, as shown in Fig. 3(a). As shown in Fig. 3(b), the flutter mode
which is influenced by the aileron deflection structural mode becomes unstable at the critical flutter velocity. The
corresponding flutter oscillatory frequency is Ȧf=0.753Hz.

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-6

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 Table 1. Various parameters

Parameter Value Unit Parameter Value Unit

b(semi-chord) 0.5 m IĮ(per span) 3.5234 Kg·m2

a 0.2 --- Iȕ(per span) 0.2 Kg·m2

c 0.6 --- kh(per span) 43.572 N/m

l(semi-span) 4 m kĮ(per span) 96.032 N/m

M(per span) 51.1 Kg kȕ(per span) 20.834 N/m

SĮ(per span) 11.685 Kg·m ȟh(per span) 0.03 ---

Sȕ(per span) 1.5 Kg·m ȟĮ(per span) 0.08 ---

ȟȕ(per span) 0.02 ---

10 12

10
0
Imag. part of eigenvalue (Hz)
Real part of eigenvalue

-10
6

-20 4

2
-30

0
0 10 20 30 -30 -20 -10 0 10
Flow velocity (m/s) Real part of eigenvalue

(a) real part of eigenvalue (b) root-locus

Fig. 3. Stability analysis of the aeroelastic system of HAR wing-aileron

0.01
Plunge (m)

-0.01
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
0.2
Pitch (deg)

-0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Aileron deflection (deg)

10

-10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8
Time (sec)

Fig. 4. Time history behavior of the wing tip (U=12.5m/s)

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-7

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 A time-domain simulation is performed using Matlab+Simulink. Fig. 4 shows the plunge, pitch and aileron deflection
time histories of the wing tip (y=l) at the critical flutter velocity. As shown in the figure, the response motions are no
longer convergent.

4. SEMI-ACTIVE FLUTTER CONTROL

4.1 Modeling of the control system

Multiple MR dampers are used for the purpose of flutter control of the HAR wing-aileron system. The MR dampers
provide control forces for the aileron at different locations along span wise. The control system that composed of the
aeroelastic system with ND MR dampers can be expressed as
ND Na
­ T i
°Mq  Cq  Kq  ¦ A ( yDj ) e3 f D ( yDj ) ¦ ī s ( yi ) X a
® j 1 i 1 (20)
° i i
¯ X a P( yi ) X a  ī a1 ( yi )q + ī a 2 ( yi )q , i = 1 ~ N a

where e3={0 0 1}T, and the damping force of one MR damper at the span wise location yDj is denoted fD(yDj).

The state space form of Eq. (20) is

X A s (U ) X  B D u (21)

ª 0( Nh  ND  N E )u N D º ­ f D ( yD1 ) ½
« » ° f (y ) °
1 T 1 T ° D D2 °
where B D « M A( yD1 ) e3  M A( yDN D ) e3 » and u ® ¾.
« » °  °
¬« 0(2 Na )u N D ¼» ° f D ( yDN ) °
¯ D ¿

How to decide the span wise locations of MR dampers is an important problem. Considering the vibration shape
functions that assumed in Eq. (7), two MR dampers are located at y=l/3 and y=l, where the maximum relative
deformation between the aileron and wing occurs.

The MR damper used in this study was modeled by Yi et al.,[13] and the equations governing the force f predicted by this
model are as follows

­ f c0 x  D z
° n 1 n
° z J x z z  E 0 x z  Ax
°
®D D a  D b u (22)
°
°c0 c0 a  c0b u
°¯u K (u  v)

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-8

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 4.2 Control algorithm

4.2.1 Clipped-optimal control algorithm

The clipped-optimal control algorithm proposed by Dyke et al.[1, 14] is performed for controlling the MR dampers to
suppressing the flutter of the aeroelastic system. Assuming the system output y and control forces provided by MR
dampers f, the desired control forces fc is described as

­° ª y º ½°
fc L1 ®K c ( s ) « » ¾ (23)
¯° ¬ f ¼ ¿°

where L{ } is the Laplace transform and the controller Kc(s) can be obtained from the LQG strategies.

To induce the MR dampers to generate approximately the desired control forces, the command signal is selected as
follows. When a MR damper is providing the desired force, the voltage applied to the damper should remain at the
present level. If the magnitude of the force produced by the damper is smaller than the magnitude of the desired force
and the two forces have the same sign, the voltage applied to the current driver is increased to the maximum level so as
to increase the force produced by the damper to match the desired control force. Otherwise, the commanded voltage is
set to zero. The algorithm for selecting the command signal is graphically represented in Fig. 5 and can be concisely
stated as

vi Vmax H ^( f ci  fi ) fi ` (24)

where H{ } is the Heaviside step function.

fci

vi = Vmax
vi = 0
vi = 0

vi = 0 fi
vi = 0

vi = Vmax

Fig. 5. Graphical representation of algorithm for selecting the command signal

4.2.2 Passive control using viscous dampers

For the purpose of comparison, a passive flutter control of the aeroelastic system is performed through the use of viscous
dampers instead of MR dampers. The force provide by viscous damper can be written in the form

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-9

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 fD CD e3T [03u3 I3 03u2 ] X = K X (25)

where CD is the size of viscous damper which can be obtained as follows.[15] Considering the system, an optimal
feedback controller K can be obtained from the LQG strategies. Thus, a quasi-optimal damper size can be obtained by
minimizing the following objective function

J = K  K = tr ^(K  K ) T (K  K )` (26)

where tr{ } denote the trace operation of matrix.

4.3 Numerical results

4.3.1 Result of clipped-optimal control

To illustrate the effectiveness of the semi-active control strategy in suppressing the flutter of HAR wing-aileron system,
a numerical simulation is performed. The simulation procedure is implemented on Matlab+Simulink. Structural
parameters of the wing are shown in Table 1. The parameters of the MR dampers that used in this study are
c0a=0.0064Ns/cm, c0b=0.0052Ns/cmV, Įa=8.66N/cm, Įb=8.86N/cmV, Ȗ=300cm-2, ȕ0=300cm-2, A=120, n=2 and Ș=80s-1.

0.01 0.02
Plunge (m)

Plunge (m)

0 0

-0.01 -0.02
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0.2 0.2
Pitch (deg)

Pitch (deg)

0 0

-0.2 -0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Aileron deflection (deg)

Aileron deflection (deg)

10 5

0 0

-10 -5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (sec) Time (sec)

Fig. 6. Time history behavior of the wing tip (U=12.5m/s) Fig. 7. Time history behavior of the wing tip with
: uncontrolled : clipped-optimal control clipped-optimal control (U=15.5m/s)

The result of clipped-optimal control at the critical flutter velocity U=12.5m/s is shown by the superimposed graph in
Fig. 6. The figure shows the time histories of the responses of the wing tip with clipped-optimal control and without
control. Fig. 7 shows the result at a higher velocity U=15.5m/s. The control signals and desired control forces of MR
dampers at U=15.5m/s are shown in Fig. 8(a) and (b).

Numerical result shows that the critical flutter velocity of the aeroelastic system with clipped-optimal control is 17.6m/s,
which is increased by 40.8%, showing that the application of clipped-optimal control using MR dampers in suppressing
the flutter of HAR wing-aileron system is proper and effective.

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-10

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 Desired force (Nm) Control signal (V)

Desired force (Nm) Control signal (V)

4 4

0 0
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
5 10

0 0

-5 -10
0 1 2 3 0 1 2 3
Time (sec) Time (sec)

(a) MR damper 1 (b) MR damper 2

Fig. 8. Control signals and desired forces of MR dampers during the procedure of clipped-optimal control (U=15.5m/s)

4.3.2 Result of passive control

Fig. 9 and Fig. 10 show the results of the passive control at U=12.5m/s and U=15.5m/s, respectively. The time histories
of the plunge, pitch and aileron deflection of the wing tip are shown in the two figures. Numerical result shows that the
critical flutter velocity of the system with passive control is 16.5m/s, which is increased by 32.0%.

0.01 0.02
Plunge (m)

Plunge (m)

0 0

-0.01 -0.02
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
0.2 0.2
Pitch (deg)

Pitch (deg)

0 0

-0.2 -0.2
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Aileron deflection (deg)

Aileron deflection (deg)

10 10

0 0

-10 -10
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 0 1 2 3 4 5 6
Time (sec) Time (sec)

Fig. 9. Time history behavior of the wing tip (U=12.5m/s) Fig. 10. Time history behavior of the wing tip with passive
: uncontroled : passive control control (U=15.5m/s)

5. CONCLUSIONS

In this study, a semi-active flutter control strategy for a HAR wing-aileron system using multiple MR dampers is
presented. The clipped-optimal control algorithm which has been applied in many semi-active vibration control problems
is performed for controlling the MR dampers to suppressing the flutter of the system. For the purpose of comparison, a
passive flutter control of the aeroelastic system is performed through the use of viscous dampers instead of MR dampers.
A model of the semi-active aeroelastic control system with multiple MR dampers is established. Though the numerical
simulation analysis and the compare with passive control, the feasibility, propriety and effectiveness of the semi-active
control strategy in suppressing the flutter is illustrated. The critical flutter velocity of the aeroelastic system with

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-11

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms

 clipped-optimal control is increased by 40.8% in compare with the uncontrolled case, which is better than the effect of
passive control.
ACKNOWLEDGEMENTS

This research is partially supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China under Grant No.50478037 and
No.10572058, by the Research Fund for the Doctoral Program of Higher Education under Grant No.20050287016. These
supports are gratefully acknowledged.

REFERENCES

1. S. J. Dyke, B. F. Spencer Jr., M. K. Sain, et al., “Modeling and control of magnetorheological dampers for seismic
response reduction”, Smart Materials and Structures, 5(5), 565-575, 1996.
2. J. C. Ramallo, E. A. Johnson, B. F. Spencer Jr., et al., “Semi-active building base isolation”, Proceedings of the
American Control Conference, San Diego, California, 515-519, 1999.
3. G. Z. Yao, F. F. Yap, G. Chen, et al., “MR damper and its application for semi-active control of vehicle suspension
system”, Mechatronics, 12(7), 963-973, 2002.
4. Z. C. Yang, L. C. Zhao, J. S. Jiang, “A semi-active flutter control scheme for a two-dimensional wing”, Journal of
Sound and Vibration, 18(1), 1-7, 1995.
5. A. Agneni, F. Mastroddi, G. M. Polli, “Shunted piezoelectric patches in elastic and aeroelastic vibrations”, Computers
and Structures, 81(2), 91-105, 2003.
6. D. Tang, H. P. Gavin, E. H. Dowell, “Study of airfoil gust response alleviation using an electro-magnetic dry friction
damper. Part 1: Theory”, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 269(3-5), 853-874, 2004.
7. D. Tang, H. P. Gavin, E. H. Dowell, “Study of airfoil gust response alleviation using an electro-magnetic dry friction
damper. Part 2: Experiment”, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 269(3-5), 875-897, 2004.
8. W. Sun, H. Y. Hu, “Semi-active vibration control for wing aileron using stepped magneto-rheological damper”,
International Journal of Nonlinear Sciences and Numerical Simulation, 6(1), 25-30, 2005.
9. T. Theodorsen, “General theory of aerodynamic instability and mechanism of flutter”, NACA Report, No. 496, 1935.
10. J. Ko, T. W. Strganac, A. J. Kurdila, “Nonlinear, adaptive control of an aeroelastic system via geometric methods”,
AIAA Report, No. 98-1795.
11. R. L. Bisplinghoff, H. Ashley, R. L. Halfman, Aeroelasticity, Addison-Wesley, 1955.
12. W. Sun, Semi-active flutter suppression using stepped magnetorheological dampers, PhD Dissertation, Nanjing
University of Aeronautics and Astronautics, 2005.
13. F. Yi, S. J. Dyke, S. French, et al., “Investigation of magnetorheological damper for earthquake hazard mitigation”,
Proceeding of 2nd World Conference on Structural Control, Wiley, West Sussex, UK, 349-358, 1998.
14. S. J. Dyke, B. F. Spencer Jr., “A comparison of semi-active control strategies for the MR damper”, Proceedings of the
LASTED International Conference Intelligent Information Systems, The Bahamas, 580-584, 1997.
15. X. Y. Wang, Y. Q. Ni, J. M. Ko, et al., “Optimal design of viscous dampers for multi-mode vibration control of bridge
cables”, Engineering Structures, 27(5), 792-800, 2005.

Proc. of SPIE Vol. 6529 65291C-12

Downloaded From: http://proceedings.spiedigitallibrary.org/ on 06/13/2015 Terms of Use: http://spiedl.org/terms