Skip to main content
Log in

Optimal-control methods for two new classes of smart obstacles in time-dependent acoustic scattering

  • Original Article
  • Published:
Journal of Engineering Mathematics Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Time-dependent acoustic scattering problems involving “smart” obstacles are considered. When hit by an incident acoustic field, smart obstacles react in an attempt to pursue a preassigned goal. Let \(\mathbb{R}^3\) be the three-dimensional real Euclidean space, and let \(\Omega \subset \mathbb{R}^3\) be a bounded simply connected open set with a Lipschitz boundary characterized by a constant acoustic boundary impedance χ, immersed in an isotropic and homogeneous medium that fills \(\mathbb{R}^{3}\backslash\Omega\). The closure of Ω will be denoted as \(\overline{\Omega}\). When hit by an incident field, the obstacle Ω pursues the preassigned goal through the action of a control input acting on its boundary (i.e., a quantity with dimensions of a pressure divided by a time). The obstacles considered in this paper monitor the control input acting on their boundaries in order to achieve one of the following goals: (i) be furtive in a given set of the frequency space, and (ii) appear in a given set of the frequency space and outside a given set of \(\mathbb{R}^3\) containing Ω and Ω G as similar as possible to a “ghost” obstacle Ω G having boundary acoustic impedance χ G . It is assumed that \(\overline{\Omega}\cap\overline{\Omega}_G=\emptyset\) and \(\Omega_G \neq \emptyset\). The problem corresponding to the first goal will be called the definite-band furtivity problem, and the problem corresponding to the second goal will be called the definite-band ghost-obstacle problem. These two goals define two classes of smart obstacles. In this paper, these problems are modeled as optimal-control problems for the wave equation introducing a control input acting on the boundary of Ω for time \(t \in \mathbb{R}\). The cost functionals proposed depend on the value of the control input on the boundary of the obstacle and on the value of the scattered acoustic field generated by the obstacle on the boundary in the “furtivity case”, and on the boundary of a suitable set containing Ω and Ω G in the “ghost-obstacle case”. Under some assumptions, the use of the Pontryagin maximum principle allows us to formulate the first-order optimality conditions for the definite-band furtivity problem and for the definite-band ghost-obstacle problem as exterior problems outside the obstacle for a system of two coupled wave equations. Numerical methods to solve these exterior problems are developed by extending previous work. These methods belong to the class of the operator-expansion methods that are highly parallelizable. Numerical experiments proving the validity of the control problems proposed as mathematical models of the definite-band furtivity problem and definite-band ghost obstacle problem are presented. The numerical results obtained with a parallel implementation of the numerical methods developed are discussed and their properties are established. The speed-up factors obtained using parallel computing are really impressive. The website: http://www.econ.univpm.it/recchioni/w11 contains animations and virtual reality applications relative to the numerical experiments.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. Mariani F, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (2001) The use of the Pontryagin maximum principle in a furtivity problem in time-dependent acoustic obstacle scattering. Waves Random Media 11:549–575

    Article  MATH  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  2. Fatone L, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (2003) Some control problems for the Maxwell equations related to furtivity and masking problems in electromagnetic obstacle scattering. In: Cohen GC, Heikkola E, Joly P, Neittaanmaki P (eds) Mathematical and numerical aspects of wave propagation. Waves 2003. Springer Verlag, Berlin, pp 189–194

    Google Scholar 

  3. Fatone L, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (2004) Furtivity and masking problems in time dependent electromagnetic obstacle scattering. J Optimiz Theory Appl 121:223–257

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  4. Fatone L, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (2004) A masking problem in time dependent acoustic obstacle scattering. ARLO – Acoust Res Lett Online 5(2):25–30

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  5. Fatone L, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (2005) Mathematical models of “active” obstacles in acoustic scattering. In: Cagnol J, Zolesio JP (eds) Control and boundary analysis. Lecture notes in pure and applied mathematics vol 240. Marcel Dekker/CRC Press Boca Raton, Fl. USA, pp 119–129

    Google Scholar 

  6. Chambers B (1999) A smart radar absorber. J Smart Mater Struct 8:64–72

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. Ford KL, Chambers B (2000) A smart microwave absorber. IEE Electron Lett 36:50–52

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. Chambers B, Tennant A (2002) General analysis of the phase-switched screen Part 1: The single layer case. Proc IEE Part F – Radar Sonar Navig 149:243–247

    Article  Google Scholar 

  9. Chambers B, Tennant A (2002) Influence of switching waveform characteristics on the performance of a single layer phase-switched. IEEE Trans Electromagn Compat 44:434–441

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. Neçcas J (1967) Les méthodes directes en théorie des équations elliptiques. Masson & Cie. Publ, Paris

    Google Scholar 

  11. Mecocci E, Misici L, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (2000) A new formalism for time dependent wave scattering from a bounded obstacle. J Acoust Soc Am 107: 1825–1840

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  12. Colton D, Kress R (1983) Integral equation methods in scattering theory. J. Wiley & Sons, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  13. Knowles G (1981) An introduction to applied control. New York, Academic Press

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  14. Lions JL (1971) Optimal control of systems governed by partial differential equations. Springer Verlag, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  15. Balakrishnan AV (1976) Applied functional analysis. Springer Verlag, New York

    MATH  Google Scholar 

  16. Milder DM (1991) An improved formalism for wave scattering from rough surface. J Acoust Soc Amer 89:529–541

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. Milder DM (1996) Role of the admittance operator in rough-surface scattering. J Acoust Soc Amer 100:759–768

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  18. Milder DM (1996) An improved formalism for electromagnetic scattering from a perfectly conducting rough surface. Radio Sci 31:1369–1376

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  19. Smith RA (1996) The operator expansion formalism for electromagnetic scattering from rough dielectric surfaces. Radio Sci 31:1377–1385

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  20. Milder DM (1998) An improved formulation of coherent forward scatterer from random rough surfaces. Waves Random Media 8:67–78

    Article  MATH  ADS  Google Scholar 

  21. Piccolo S, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (1996) The time harmonic electromagnetic field in a disturbed half-space: an existence theorem and a computational method. J Math Phys 37:2762–2786

    Article  MATH  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  22. Misici L, Pacelli G, Zirilli F (1998) A new formalism for wave scattering from a bounded obstacle. J Acoust Soc Amer 103:106–113

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  23. Fatone L, Pignotti C, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (1999) Time harmonic electromagnetic scattering from a bounded obstacle: an existence theorem and a computational methods. J Math Phys 40:4859–4887

    Article  MATH  ADS  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  24. Mariani F, Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (2002) A perturbative approach to acoustic scattering from a vibrating bounded obstacle. J Comput Acoust 10:349–384

    Article  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  25. Mayne DQ, Michalska H (1990) Receding horizon control of nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 35:814–824

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  26. Michalska H, Mayne DQ (1993) Robust receding horizon control of constrained nonlinear systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 38:1623–1633

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  27. De Nicolao G, Magni L, Scattolini R (1998) Stabilizing receding-horizon control of nonlinear time-varying systems. IEEE Trans Autom Control 43:1030–1036

    Article  MATH  Google Scholar 

  28. Armaou A, Christofides PD (2002) Dynamic optimization of dissipative PDE systems using nonlinear order reduction. Chem Enging Sci 57:5083–5114

    Article  Google Scholar 

  29. Bendersky F, Christofides PD (2000) Optimization of transport-reaction processes using nonlinear model reduction. Chem Enging Sci 55:4349–4366

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Recchioni MC, Zirilli F (2003) The use of wavelets in the operator expansion method for time dependent acoustic obstacle scattering. Siam J Sci Comput 25:1158–1186

    Article  MATH  MathSciNet  Google Scholar 

  31. Pontryagin LS, Boltiamskii VG, Gamkrelidze RV, F (1974) Théorie mathématique des processus optimaux. Editions Mir Moscou

  32. Yosida K (1995) Functional analysis. Springer Verlag, Berlin

    Google Scholar 

  33. Colton D, Kress R (1992) Inverse acoustic and electromagnetic scattering theory. Springer Verlag, Berlin

    MATH  Google Scholar 

Download references

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

Authors

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Francesco Zirilli.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Cite this article

Fatone, L., Pacelli, G., Recchioni, M.C. et al. Optimal-control methods for two new classes of smart obstacles in time-dependent acoustic scattering. J Eng Math 56, 385–413 (2006). https://doi.org/10.1007/s10665-006-9046-1

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s10665-006-9046-1

Keywords

Navigation