Reduced-order models for control of fluids using the eigensystem realization algorithm

  • Zhanhua Ma
  • Sunil Ahuja
  • Clarence W. Rowley
Original Article


As sensors and flow control actuators become smaller, cheaper, and more pervasive, the use of feedback control to manipulate the details of fluid flows becomes increasingly attractive. One of the challenges is to develop mathematical models that describe the fluid physics relevant to the task at hand, while neglecting irrelevant details of the flow in order to remain computationally tractable. A number of techniques are presently used to develop such reduced-order models, such as proper orthogonal decomposition (POD), and approximate snapshot-based balanced truncation, also known as balanced POD. Each method has its strengths and weaknesses: for instance, POD models can behave unpredictably and perform poorly, but they can be computed directly from experimental data; approximate balanced truncation often produces vastly superior models to POD, but requires data from adjoint simulations, and thus cannot be applied to experimental data. In this article, we show that using the Eigensystem Realization Algorithm (ERA) (Juang and Pappa, J Guid Control Dyn 8(5):620–627, 1985) one can theoretically obtain exactly the same reduced-order models as by balanced POD. Moreover, the models can be obtained directly from experimental data, without the use of adjoint information. The algorithm can also substantially improve computational efficiency when forming reduced-order models from simulation data. If adjoint information is available, then balanced POD has some advantages over ERA: for instance, it produces modes that are useful for multiple purposes, and the method has been generalized to unstable systems. We also present a modified ERA procedure that produces modes without adjoint information, but for this procedure, the resulting models are not balanced, and do not perform as well in examples. We present a detailed comparison of the methods, and illustrate them on an example of the flow past an inclined flat plate at a low Reynolds number.


Flow control Model reduction Eigensystem Realization Algorithm Balanced truncation 


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Ahuja, S., Rowley, C.W.: Feedback control of unstable steady states of flow past a flat plate using reduced-order estimators. J. Fluid Mech. (accepted) (2009)Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Akers, J.C., Bernstein, D.S.: ARMARKOV least-squares identification. In: Proceedings of the ACC, pp. 186–190. Albuquerque, NM, USA (1997)Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Åkervik E., Hœpffner J., Ehrenstein U., Henningson D.S.: Optimal growth, model reduction and control in a separated boundary-layer flow using global eigenmodes. J. Fluid Mech. 579, 305–314 (2007)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Bagheri S., Brandt L., Henningson D.S.: Input–output analysis, model reduction and control of the flat-plate boundary layer. J. Fluid Mech. 620, 263–298 (2009)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Cabell R.H., Kegerise M.A., Cox D.E., Gibbs G.P.: Experimental feedback control of flow-induced cavity tones. AIAA J. 44(8), 1807–1815 (2006)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Cattafesta, L.N. III, Garg, S., Choudhari, M., Li, F.: Active control of flow-induced cavity resonance. AIAA Paper 97-1804 (1997)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Cattafesta L.N. III, Song Q., Williams D.R., Rowley C.W., Alvi F.S.: Active control of flow-induced cavity oscillations. Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 44, 479–502 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Choi H., Jeon W.P., Kim J.: Control of flow over a bluff body. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 40, 113–139 (2008)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Colonius T., Taira K.: A fast immersed boundary method using a nullspace approach and multi-domain far-field boundary conditions. Comput. Methods Appl. Mech. Eng. 197(25–28), 2131–2146 (2008)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Djouadi, S.M., Camphouse, R.C., Myatt, J.H.: Empirical reduced-order modeling for boundary feedback flow control. J. Control Sci. Eng. 2008, Article ID 154956, 11 pages. doi: 10.1155/2008/154956 (2008)
  11. 11.
    Gaitonde A.L., Jones D.P.: Reduced order state-space models from the pulse responses of a linearized CFD scheme. Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 42, 581–606 (2003)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Gawronski W.: Balanced Control of Flexible Structures. Springer, London (1996)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Holmes P., Lumley J.L., Berkooz G.: Turbulence, Coherent Structures, Dynamical Systems and Symmetry. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK (1996)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ilak, M., Rowley, C.W.: Modeling of transitional channel flow using balanced proper orthogonal decomposition. Phys. Fluids 20, 034,103 (2008)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Juang J.N., Pappa R.S.: An eigensystem realization algorithm for modal parameter identification and model reduction. J. Guid. Control. Dyn. 8(5), 620–627 (1985)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Juang J.N., Phan M.Q.: Identification and Control of Mechanical Systems. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge (2001)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Kim J., Bewley T.R.: A linear systems approach to flow control. Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech. 39, 383–417 (2007)MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Lim, R.K., Phan, M.Q., Longman, R.W.: State-space system identification with identified Hankel matrix. Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering Tech. Report 3045, Princeton University (1998)Google Scholar
  19. 19.
    Ma, Z., Rowley, C.W.: Low-dimensional linearized models for systems with periodic orbits, with application to the Ginzburg-Landau equation. AIAA Paper 2008-4196, 4th Flow Control Conference (2008)Google Scholar
  20. 20.
    Moore B.C.: Principal component analysis in linear systems: Controllability, observability, and model reduction. IEEE Trans. Automat. Contr. 26(1), 17–32 (1981)zbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Noack B., Afanasiev K., Morzyński M., Tadmor G., Thiele F.: A hierarchy of low-dimensional models for the transient and post-transient cylinder wake. J. Fluid Mech. 497, 335–363 (2003)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Or A.C., Speyer J.L., Carlson H.A.: Model reduction of input-output dynamical systems by proper orthogonal decomposition. J. Guid. Control Dyn. 31(2), 322–328 (2008)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Rowley C.W.: Model reduction for fluids using balanced proper orthogonal decomposition. Int. J. Bifurc. Chaos 15(3), 997–1013 (2005)MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Silva W.A., Bartels R.E.: Development of reduced-order models for aeroelastic analysis and flutter prediction using the CFL3Dv6.0 code. J. Fluids Struct. 19, 729–745 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag 2010

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical and Aerospace EngineeringPrinceton UniversityPrincetonUSA

Personalised recommendations