Advertisement

A nonlinear transient model for magnetorheological damper response for a time varying field controllable yield shear stress

  • R. M. Bhatnagar
Technical Paper
  • 64 Downloads

Abstract

A nonlinear transient model for the prediction of damper force based on the flow of magnetorheological (MR) fluid through the channel of a semi-active MR damper has been presented which has a potential for its application in the design of adaptive control policies for such dampers. In this work, a transient analytical fluid dynamics model is developed by using a combination of Laplace and Weber transform and Duhamel’s superposition of velocity boundary condition. The solution of the system of nonlinear simultaneous equations, obtained by applying conservation of volumetric flux with nonlinear effects of fluid compressibility and gas spring, zero velocity gradient across the plug and force equilibrium of Bingham plastic plug flow through the annular channel. This method is shown to generate direct and inverse model of an MR device. The temporal variation of yield shear stress corresponding to the change in field excitation has been taken into account by using Fourier series. The model has been validated by testing a commercial MR damper on a test rig for sinusoidal velocity signals for constant field excitation current and constant velocity signals with square wave field excitation current. A useful outcome of the damper tests with constant velocity driving signal and square wave field excitation is that it can be used to measure the sum of non-controllable components of the damper force. The model predictions agree with the experiments within 13.5% error. The benchmarking and comparison with phenomenological/hysteresis models shows that such models can predict response for low-frequency current excitation and in the limited range for damper velocity variations. The phenomenological models are not suitable for high-speed MR damper applications.

Keywords

Magnetorheological semi-active damper Laplace and Weber transforms Couette flow superposed with Poiseuille flow Bingham constitutive model Direct and inverse model 

References

  1. 1.
    Dyke SJ, Spencer BF Jr, Sain MK, Carlson JD (1997) An experimental study of MR dampers for seismic protection. Smart Mater Struct 7(6): 93–703. http://iopscience.iop.org/0964-1726/7/5/012 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Symans MD, Constantinou MC (1999) Semiactive control systems for seismic protection of structures: a state of the art review. Eng Struct 21(6):469–487.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00225-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Carlson JD, Catanzarite DM, St Claire K (1996) Commercial magnetorheological devices. Int J Mod Phys B 10(23–24):2857–2865.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0141-0296(97)00225-3 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Poynor JC (2001) Innovative designs for magneto-rheological dampers. Master dissertation, Virginia Polytechnic Institute and State UniversityGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Butz T, Von Stryk O (2002) Modelling and simulation of electro- and magnetorheological fluid dampers. ZAMM 82:3–20.  https://doi.org/10.1002/1521-4001(200201)82:1 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhao Y, Choi YT, Wereley NM (2004) Semi-active damping of ground resonance in helicopters using magnetorheological dampers. J Am Helicopter Soc 49(4):468–482.  https://doi.org/10.4050/JAHS.49.468 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Choi Y-T, Wereley NM, Jeon Y-S (2005) Semi-active vibration isolation using magnetorheological isolators. AIAA J Aircr 42(5):1244–1251.  https://doi.org/10.2514/1.7919 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Carlson JD, Catanzarite DM, St Claire KA (1996) Commercial magneto-rheological fluid devices. Int J Mod Phys B 10(23–24):2857–2865.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979296001306 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Carlson JD, Jolly MR (2000) MR fluid, foam and elastomer devices. Mechatronics 10:555–569.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0957-4158(99)00064-1 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Philips RW (1969) Engineering application of fluids with a variable yield stress. PhD thesis, University Of California Berkley, CAGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Kamath GM, Hurt KM, Wereley NM (1996) Analysis and testing of bingham plastic behavior in semi-active electrorheological fluid dampers. Smart Mater Struct 5(5):576–590.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/5/5/007 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Lee DY, Wereley NM (1999) Quasi steady Herschel–Bulkley analysis of electro- and magneto-rheological flow mode dampers. J Int Mater Syst Struct 10:761–769.  https://doi.org/10.1117/12.384565 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Norris JA, Ahmedian M (2008) Behaviour of magnetorheological fluids subject to impact and shock loading. Commun Non-Linear Mech Numer Simul 13(9):1978–1985.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2007.03.028 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Li WH (2000) Rheology of MR fluids and MR damper dynamic response: experimental and modelling approaches. PhD dissertation, School of Mechanical and Production Engineering, The Nanyang Technological University, SingaporeGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Facey WB, Rosenfeld NC, Choi Y-T, Wereley NM (2005) Design and testing of a compact magnetorheological damper for high impulsive loads. Int J Mod Phys B 19(7, 8 & 9):1549–1555.  https://doi.org/10.1142/S0217979205030578 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Wang X, Gordaninijad F (2007) Flow analysis and modeling of filed controllable, electro- and magneto-rheological fluid dampers. J Appl Mech 74:13–22. NIST: 6192, 35400014325006.0030CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Chooi WW, Oyadiji SO (2008) Design, modelling and testing of magnetorheological (MR) dampers using analytical flow solutions. Comput Struct 86:473–482.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2007.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Bhatnagar RM (2016) An overview of modelling and design of electro/magneto-rheological (ER/MR) fluid based devices. Curr Smart Mater 1(1):3–34MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Zalewski R, Nachman J, Shillor M, Bajkowski J (2014) Dynamic model for a magnetorheological damper. Appl Math Model 38(9–10):2366–2376MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Zao X, Wu S, Pan H (2018) A hybrid model of magnetorheological dampers based on generalized hysteretic biviscous operators. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 29:1–7Google Scholar
  21. 21.
    Boada MJL, Boada BL, Diaz V (2017) A novel inverse dynamic model for a magnetorheological damper based on network inversion. J Vib Control 24:1–20MathSciNetGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Huilgol RR (2002) Variational inequalities in the flows of yield stress fluids including inertia: theory and applications. Phys Fluids 14:1269–1284.  https://doi.org/10.1063/1.1448347 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Wereley NM, Pang L (1998) Non-dimensional analysis of semi-active electrorheological and magnetorheological dampers using approximate parallel plate models. Smart Mater Struct 7(5):732–743.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/7/5/015 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Mao M, Choi YT, Wereley NM (2005) Effective design strategy for a magnetorheological damper using a nonlinear flow model. Proc SPIE 5760:446–455.  https://doi.org/10.1117/12.601061 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  25. 25.
    Garg VK, Rouleau WT (1972) Linear spatial stability of pipe poiseuille flow. J Fluid Mech 54(1):113–127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Frigaard A, Howison SD, Sobey IJ (1994) On the stability of poiseuille flow of a bingham fluid. J Fluid Mech 263:133–150MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Nouar C, Frigaard IA (2001) Nonlinear stability of poiseuille flow of a bingham fluid: theoretical results and comparison with phenomenological criteria. J Non-Newton Fluid Mech 100(1–3):127–149.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0377-0257(01)00144-6 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hedström BOA (1952) Flow of plastic materials in pipes. Ind Eng Chem 44(3):652–656.  https://doi.org/10.1021/ie50507a056 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Graczykowski C, Pawłowski P (2017) Exact physical model of magnetorheological damper. Appl Math Model 47:400–424MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    Novak Z, Gajdeczko B (1983) Laminar entrance region flow of the bingham fluid. Acta Mech 49:191–200CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Poole RJ, Chhabra RP (2010) Development length requirement for fully developed Laminar pipe flow of Yield stress fluids. J Fluid Eng 132(3):034501–034505CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Lipscomb GG, Denn MM (1984) Flow of Bingham fluids in complex geometries. J Non-Newton Fluid Mech 14:337–346.  https://doi.org/10.1016/0377-0257(84)80052-X CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Friedrich C (1991) Relaxation and retardation functions of the maxwell model with fractional derivatives. Rheol Acta 30:151–158CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. 34.
    Fetecau C, Fetecau C (2005) Starting solutions for some unsteady unidirectional flows of a second grade fluid. Int J Eng Sci 43:781–789.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijengsci.2004.12.009 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Fetecau C, Fetecau C (2006) Starting solutions for motion of a second grade fluid due to longitudinal and torsional oscillations of a circular cylinder. Int J Eng Sci 44:788–796.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijengsci.2006.04.010 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. 36.
    Fetecau C, Corina Fetecau, Vieru D (2007) On some helical flows of Oldroyd-B fluids. Acta Mech 189:53–63.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cnsns.2010.07.004 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  37. 37.
    Hayat T, Khan M, Ayub M (2006) Some analytical solutions for second grade fluid flows for cylindrical geometries. Math Comput Model 43:16–29.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mcm.2005.04.009 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  38. 38.
    Hayat T, Khan M, Siddiqui AM, Asghar S (2004) Transient flows of a second grade fluid. Int J Non-Linear Mech 39:1621–1631MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. 39.
    Bagley RL (1983) A theoretical basis for the application of fractional calculus to viscoelasticity. J Rheol 27:201–210CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. 40.
    Wang S, Xu M (2009) Couette flow of two kinds of fractional viscolelastic fluids in an annulus. Nonlinear Anal Real World Appl 10:1087–1096.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.nonrwa.2007.11.027 MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. 41.
    Tan W, Pan W, Xu M (2003) A note on unsteady flows of a viscoelastic fluid with the fractional maxwell model between two parallel plates. Int J Non-Linear Mech 38:645–650.  https://doi.org/10.1016/S0020-7462(01)00121-4 CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  42. 42.
    Özisik MN (1980) Heat conduction. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  43. 43.
    Farjoud A, Ahmedian M, Craft M, Burke W (2012) Nonlinear modelling and experimental characterisation of hydraulic dampers: effects of shim stack and orifice parameters on damper performance. Nonlinear Dyn 67:1437–1456CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. 44.
    Sims ND, Peel DJ, Stanway R, Johnson AR, Bullough WA (2000) The electrorheological long-stroke damper: a new modelling technique with experimental validation. J Sound Vib 229(2):207–227.  https://doi.org/10.1006/jsvi.1999.2487 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. 45.
    Batterbee DC, Sims ND, Stanway R, Rennison M (2007) Magnetorheological landing gear: 1. A design methodology. Smart Mater Struct 16:2429–2440.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/16/6/046 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. 46.
    Cesmeci S, Tehsin E (2010) Modelling and testing of field controllable magnetorheological fluid damper. Int J Mech Sci 52:1036–1040.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2007.02.002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. 47.
    Ehrgott RC, Masri SF (1992) Modelling the oscillatory dynamic behavior of ER materials. Smart Mater Struct 8(5):602–615.  https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/1/4/002 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. 48.
    Gavin H, Hoagg J, Dobossy M (2001) Optimal design of MR dampers. In: Proceedings of US Japan workshop on smart structures for improved seismic performance in urban regions (Seattle, WA, Aug 2001), 225–236Google Scholar
  49. 49.
    Press WH, Teukolsky SA, Vetterling WT, Flannery BP (1993) Numerical recipes in C-art of scientific computing, 2nd edn. Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, pp 370–395zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  50. 50.
    Bhatnagar RM (2005) Noise reduction in linear variable differential transformer data of recoil motion measurement by numerical methods. Proc Inst Mech Eng Part C J Mech Eng Sci 220(159):159–166.  https://doi.org/10.1243/09544062JMES140 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. 51.
    Peng Y, Yang J, Li J (2017) Parameter identification of modified Bouc–Wen model and analysis of size effect of magnetorheological dampers. J Intell Mater Syst Struct [Internet].  https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X17740963 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. 52.
    Yu J, Dong X, Zhang Z (2017) A novel model of magnetorheological damper with hysteresis division. Smart Mater Struct 26(10):105042CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. 53.
    Yang MG, Li CY, Chen ZQ (2013) A new simple non-linear hysteretic model for MR damper and verification of seismic response reduction experiment. Eng Struct 52:434–445CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  54. 54.
    Xu M, Tan W (2001) Theoretical analysis of the velocity field, stress field and vortex sheet of generalized second order fluid with fractional anomalous diffusions. Sci China Ser A 44:1387–1399CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. 55.
    Choi Y-T, Wereley NM (2002) Comparative analysis of the time response of electrorheological and magnetorheological dampers using nondimensional parameters. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 13(7/8):443–452.  https://doi.org/10.1106/104538902028557 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Royal School of Engineering &TechnologyRoyal Global UniversityGuwahatiIndia

Personalised recommendations