Advertisement

Soft Computing

, Volume 22, Issue 24, pp 8131–8149 | Cite as

Automotive magnetorheological dampers: modelling and parameter identification using contrast-based fruit fly optimisation

  • Stratis Kanarachos
  • Dzmitry Savitski
  • Nikos Lagaros
  • Michael E. Fitzpatrick
Methodologies and Application

Abstract

The present study discusses the mechanical behaviour and modelling of a prototype automotive magnetorheological (MR) damper, which presents different viscous damping coefficients in jounce and rebound. The force generated by the MR damper is measured at different velocities and electrical currents, and a modified damper model is proposed to improve fitting of the experimental data. The model is calibrated by means of parameter identification, and for this purpose a new swarm intelligence algorithm is proposed, that we call the contrast-based Fruit Fly Optimisation Algorithm (c-FOA). The performance of c-FOA is compared with that of Genetic Algorithms, Particle Swarm Optimisation, Differential Evolution and Artificial Bee Colony. The comparison is made on the basis of no a-priori knowledge of the damper model parameters range. The results confirm the good performance of c-FOA under parametric range uncertainty. A sensitivity analysis discusses c-FOA’s performance with respect to its tuning parameters. Finally, a ride comfort simulation study quantifies the discrepancies in the results, for different identified damper model sets. The discrepancies underline the importance of accurately describing MR damper nonlinear behaviour, considering that virtual sign-off processes are increasingly gaining momentum in the automotive industry.

Keywords

Model identification Swarm intelligence Contrast-based fruit fly optimisation Automotive magnetorheological dampers Ride comfort 

Notes

Acknowledgements

MEF is grateful for funding from the Lloyd’s Register Foundation, a charitable foundation helping to protect life and property by supporting engineering-related education, public engagement and the application of research. We would like to thank Mr Georgios Chrysakis for developing the MR damper current controller and contributing to the experiments.

Compliance with ethical standards

Conflict of interest

The authors declare that they have no conflict of interest.

References

  1. Alajmi A, Wright J (2014) Selecting the most efficient genetic algorithm sets in solving unconstrained building optimization problem. Int J Sustain Built Environ 3(1):18–26CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Ashtiani M, Hashemabadi SH, Ghaffari A (2014) A review on the magnetorheological fluid preparation and stabilization. J Magn Magn Mater 374:716–730CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Ata WG, Salem AM (2017) Semi-active control of tracked vehicle suspension incorporating magnetorheological dampers. Veh Syst Dyn 55(5):626–647CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Ayala HVH, Coelho LDS (2016) Cascaded evolutionary algorithm for nonlinear system identification based on correlation functions and radial basis functions neural networks. Mech Syst Signal Process 68–69:378–393CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Boada MJL, Calvo JA, Boada BL, Díaz V (2011) Modeling of a magnetorheological damper by recursive lazy learning. Int J Non-Linear Mech 46(3):479–485CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Case D, Taheri B, Richer E (2015) A lumped-parameter model for adaptive dynamic mr damper control. IEEE/ASME Trans Mechatron 20(4):1689–1696 art. no. 6918454CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Çeşmeci Ş, Engin T (2010) Modeling and testing of a field-controllable magnetorheological fluid damper. Int J Mech Sci 52(8):1036–1046CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Charalampakis AE, Koumousis VK (2008) Identification of Bouc-Wen hysteretic systems by a hybrid evolutionary algorithm. J Sound Vib 314(3–5):571–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Diwold K, Aderhold A, Scheidler A, Middendorf M (2011) Performance evaluation of artificial bee colony optimization and new selection schemes. Memet Comput 3(3):149–162CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Dixon J (2008) The shock absorber handbook. John Wiley & Sons, HobokenGoogle Scholar
  11. Fellah Jahromi A, Bhat RB, Xie W-F (2015) Frequency dependent Spencer modeling of magnetorheological damper using hybrid optimisation approach. Shock and Vibration, art. no. 382541Google Scholar
  12. Ghaffari A, Hashemabadi SH, Ashtiani M (2015) A review on the simulation and modeling of magnetorheological fluids. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 26(8):881–904CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. Goldasz J (2016) Insight into magnetorheological shock absorbers. Springer, BerlinGoogle Scholar
  14. Guan XC, Guo PF, Ou JP (2011) Modeling and analyzing of hysteresis behavior of magneto rheological dampers. Procedia Eng 14:2756–2764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. Guo P, Guan X, Ou J (2014) Physical modeling and design method of the hysteretic behavior of magnetorheological dampers. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 25(6):680–696CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. Guoqiang L, Niu P, Xiao X (2012) Development and Investigation of efficient artificial bee colony algorithm for numerical function optimization. Appl Soft Comput 12(1):320–332CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. Han Y-Y, He G-T, Lin Y-C, Xu Z-Y, Zhu X-Q, Liu Y-F, Zhao J, Li X-Z (2013) Reviews on the magnetic particles of magnetorheological fluids. Gongneng Cailiao J Funct Mater 44(24):3513–3519Google Scholar
  18. Hu T, Harding S, Banzhaf W (2010) Variable population size and evolution acceleration: a case study with a parallel evolutionary algorithm. Genet Program Evol Mach 11(2):205–225CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. Hu G, Liu Q, Ding R, Li G (2017) Vibration control of semi-active suspension system with magnetorheological damper based on hyperbolic tangent model. Adv Mech Eng 9(5):168781401769458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. Isermann R, Munchhof M (2011) Identification of dynamical systems, 1st edn. Springer, BerlinCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. Kanarachos S, Griffin J, Fitzpatrick M (2017) Efficient truss optimization using the contrast-based fruit fly optimization algorithm. Comput Struct 182:137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. Kasprzyk J, Wyrwał J, Krauze P (2014) Automotive MR damper modeling for semi-active vibration control. In: IEEE/ASME international conference on advanced intelligent mechatronics, AIM art. no. 6878127, pp 500–505Google Scholar
  23. Khalid M, Yusof R, Joshani M, Selamat H, Joshani M (2014) Nonlinear identification of a magneto-rheological damper based on dynamic neural networks. Comput Aided Civ Infrastruct Eng 29(3):221–233CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. Kwok NM, Ha QP, Nguyen TH, Li J, Samali B (2006) A novel hysteretic model for magnetorheological fluid dampers and parameter identification using particle swarm optimization. Sens Actuators A Phys 132(2):441–451CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. Kwok NM, Ha QP, Nguyen MT, Li J, Samali B (2007) Bouc-Wen model parameter identification for a MR fluid damper using computationally efficient GA. ISA Trans 46(2):167–179CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Li Jun-qing, Pan Quan-ke, Mao Kun, Suganthan PN (2014) Solving the steelmaking casting problem using an effective fruit fly optimisation algorithm. Knowl Based Syst 72:28–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Londoño J, Neild S, Wagg D (2015) Using a damper amplification factor to increase energy dissipation in structures. Eng Struct 84:162–171CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Lutz A, Schick B, Holzmann H, Kochem M, Meyer-Tuve H, Lange O, Mao Y, Tosolin G (2017) Simulation methods supporting homologation of Electronic Stability Control in vehicle variants. Veh Syst Dyn 55(10):1432–1497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Metered H, Bonello P, Oyadiji SO (2010) The experimental identification of magnetorheological dampers and evaluation of their controllers. Mech Syst Signal Process 24(4):976–994CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Mitic Marko, Vukovic Najdan, Petrovic Milica, Miljkovic Zoran (2015) Chaotic fruit fly optimisation algorithm. Knowl Based Syst 89:446–458CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. Pan W-T (2012) A new Fruit fly optimisation algorithm: taking the financial distress model as an example. Knowl Based Syst 26:69–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Savitski D, Ivanov V, Augsburg K, Dhaens M, Els S, Sandu C (2015) State-of-the-art and future developments in integrated chassis control for ground vehiclGoogle Scholar
  33. Seifi A, Hassannejad R, Hamed M (2016) Use of nonlinear asymmetrical shock absorbers in multi-objective optimization of the suspension system in a variety of road excitations. In: Proceedings of the Institution of Mechanical Engineers, Part K: Journal of Multi-body DynamicsGoogle Scholar
  34. Shi Y, Eberhart RC (1998) Parameter selection in particle swarm optimization. In: Porto VW, Saravanan N, Waagen D, Eiben AE (eds) Evolutionary programming VII. EP 1998. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 1447. Springer, Berlin, HeidelbergGoogle Scholar
  35. Silveira M, Pontes B, Balthazar J (2014) Use of nonlinear asymmetrical shock absorber to improve comfort on passenger vehicles. J Sound Vib 333(7):2114–2129CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  36. Silveira M, Wahi P, Fernandes J (2016) Effects of asymmetrical damping on a 2 DOF quarter-car model under harmonic excitation. Commun Nonlinear Sci Numer Simul 43:14–24MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Sims N (2006) Limit cycle behavior of smart fluid dampers under closed loop control. J Vib Acoust 128(4):413MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  38. Storn R (1996) On the usage of differential evolution for function optimization. In: Proceedings of North American fuzzy information processing, Berkeley, CA, pp 519–523Google Scholar
  39. Strecker Z, Roupec J, Maůrek I, Klapka M (2015) Limiting factors of the response time of the magnetorheological damper. Int J Appl Electromag Mech 47(2):541–550 art. no. jae140006Google Scholar
  40. Strecker Z, Mazůrek I, Roupec J, Klapka M (2015) Influence of MR damper response time on semiactive suspension control efficiency. Meccanica 50(8):1949–1959CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  41. Talatahari S, Rahbari NM (2015) Enriched Imperialist Competitive Algorithm for system identification of magneto-rheological dampers. Mech Syst Signal Process 62:506–516CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Talatahari S, Kaveh A, Mohajer Rahbari N (2012) Parameter identification of Bouc-Wen model for MR fluid dampers using adaptive charged system search optimization. J Mech Sci Technol 26(8):2523–2534CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Van Breugel F, Dickinson MH (2014) Plume-tracking behavior of flying drosophila emerges from a set of distinct sensory-motor reflexes. Curr Biol 24(3):274–286CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Wang DH, Liao WH (2011) Magnetorheological fluid dampers: A review of parametric modelling. Smart Materials and Structures, 20 (2), art. no. 023001CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Weber F (2014) Semi-active vibration absorber based on real-time controlled MR damper. Mech Syst Signal Process 46(2):272–288CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Wu Lianghong, Zuo Cili, Zhang Hongqiang (2015) A cloud model based fruit fly optimisation algorithm. Knowl Based Syst 89:603–617CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Xu Z, Jia D, Zhang X (2012) Performance tests and mathematical model considering magnetic saturation for magnetorheological damper. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 23(12):1331–1349CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Yang M-G, Li C-Y, Chen Z-Q (2013) A new simple non-linear hysteretic model for MR damper and verification of seismic response reduction experiment. Eng Struct 52:434–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Zhang J, Yue J, Zhang L, Jia J, Peng Z (2013) Design of magnetorheological damper control system for vehicle suspension. Appl Mech Mater 278–280:1436–1441Google Scholar
  50. Zhang C, Chen Z, Wang L (2014) An investigation on the field strength and loading rate dependences of the hysteretic dynamics of magnetorheological dampers. Mech Time Depend Mater 19(1):61–74CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Zhang X, Zhang X, Zhao Y, Zhao J, Xu Z (2017) Experimental and numerical studies on a composite MR damper considering magnetic saturation effect. Eng Struct 132:576–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag GmbH Germany 2017

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Faculty of Engineering, Environment and ComputingCoventry UniversityCoventryUK
  2. 2.Automotive Engineering Group, Department of Mechanical EngineeringTechnische Universität IlmenauIlmenauGermany
  3. 3.School of Civil EngineeringNational Technical University of AthensAthensGreece
  4. 4.Engineering and Computing Building - EC 4-07, Faculty of Engineering, Environment and ComputingCoventry UniversityCoventryUK

Personalised recommendations