Tuning for force tracking in MR (Magneto-Rheological) dampers

AI Thread Summary
The discussion centers on the tuning of force tracking in Magneto-Rheological (MR) dampers using a non-parametric linearized data-driven model. The user has developed a closed-loop model for force tracking control but is experiencing discrepancies between the desired and actual force outputs, despite tuning parameters G and B. The current values of G and B are set at 0.05 and 2, respectively, but the output does not match the input waveforms as intended. There are concerns that spikes in the output may be linked to the IF-THEN rules in the control system. The user seeks advice on further tuning the G and B values or potentially switching to a PID controller for improved performance.
Shuhaibul
I already create MR damper modelling by using non-parametric linearised data driven (NPLDD) double input model. The hysteresis curve behavior is 99.9% followed as per experimental data, Figure below:

Figure%201_Hysteresis%20Curve.jpg

Then, by using this model, I had created closed loop model for force tracking control. The closed loop is developed by using continuous state control and If-Then Rules block as below:

Figure%202_Closed%20Loop%20Diagram.jpg

The input Fd_des and velocity is set to be sine, square, and sawtooth waveform, so that the output (Fd_act) will exhibit the same as input (Fd_des). However, after several time tuning the value of G and B, the result for force tracking (F_act vs F_des) is not the same as below:

Figure%203_Sine%20wave_force%20tracking.jpg
Figure%204_Square%20wave_force%20tracking.jpg
Figure%205_Sawtooth%20wave_force%20tracking.jpg

All the result is not followed/tracked the input. The value of G and B are 0.05 and 2 respectively.
 
Engineering news on Phys.org
Are you trying to get the graphs to match as close as possible? It was not clear to me in your problem statement. Are those spikes due to something in the IF-THEN part of your control system, causing an abrupt change?
 
Thanks for your response. My aim is to get the graph to be match as close as possible. If the output graph follow exactly the input graph, the the force tracking tuning will be true. The spikes may due the tuning of G and B values. IF-THEN rules is used to ensure the input current will be in between 0 to 0.9A. Do you have any idea how to tune the G and B value? Or need to change to PID controller?
 
Thread 'Weird near-field phenomenon I get in my EM simulation'
I recently made a basic simulation of wire antennas and I am not sure if the near field in my simulation is modeled correctly. One of the things that worry me is the fact that sometimes I see in my simulation "movements" in the near field that seems to be faster than the speed of wave propagation I defined (the speed of light in the simulation). Specifically I see "nodes" of low amplitude in the E field that are quickly "emitted" from the antenna and then slow down as they approach the far...
Hello dear reader, a brief introduction: Some 4 years ago someone started developing health related issues, apparently due to exposure to RF & ELF related frequencies and/or fields (Magnetic). This is currently becoming known as EHS. (Electromagnetic hypersensitivity is a claimed sensitivity to electromagnetic fields, to which adverse symptoms are attributed.) She experiences a deep burning sensation throughout her entire body, leaving her in pain and exhausted after a pulse has occurred...
Back
Top