In this article, two novel linear parameter–varying modeling and control techniques are proposed for active flutter suppression of a smart airfoil model. The smart airfoil model is instrumented with a moving mass that can be used to actively control the airfoil pitching and plunging motions. The first linear parameter–varying modeling approach makes use of the moving mass position as a scheduling parameter, and the hard constraint at the boundaries is imposed by proper selection of the parameter-varying function. The second modeling technique utilizes nonlinear springs and dampers, which are added to both ends of the airfoil groove to confine the motion of the moving mass. A state-feedback-based linear parameter–varying gain-scheduling controller with the guaranteed performance is proposed by utilizing the dynamics of the moving mass. In this study, both the position of the moving mass and the free-stream airspeed are considered as the scheduling parameters. The numerical simulations demonstrate the effectiveness of the proposed linear parameter–varying control architectures by significantly improving the performance, while increasing the flutter speed and reducing the control effort.
BriatC. Linear parameter-varying and time-delay systems: analysis, observation, filtering & control. Berlin: Springer, 2014, p.3.
2.
ShammaJS. Analysis and design of gain scheduled control systems. PhD Thesis, Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Cambridge, MA, 1988.
3.
ApkarianPTuanHD. Parameterized LMIs in control theory. SIAM J Control Optim2000; 38(4): 1241–1264.
4.
RehmAAllgöwerF. Self-scheduled H∞ output feedback control of descriptor systems. Comput Chem Eng2000; 24(2–7): 279–284.
5.
MasubuchiIAkiyamaTSaekiM. Synthesis of output feedback gain-scheduling controllers based on descriptor LPV system representation. In: 42nd conference on decision and control, Maui, HI, 9–12 December 2003, vol. 6, pp.6115–6120. New York: IEEE.
6.
PackardA. Gain scheduling via linear fractional transformations. Syst Control Lett1994; 22(2): 79–92.
7.
ApkarianPGahinetP. A convex characterization of gain-scheduled H∞ controllers. IEEE T Automat Contr1995; 40(5): 853–864.
8.
ApkarianPAdamsRJ. Advanced gain-scheduling techniques for uncertain systems. IEEE T Contr Syst T1998; 6(1): 21–32.
9.
FerreresG. Computation of a flexible aircraft LPV/LFT model using interpolation. IEEE T Contr Syst T2011; 19(1): 132–139.
10.
SchererCWKoseIE. Gain-scheduled control synthesis using dynamic-scales. IEEE T Automat Contr2012; 57(9): 2219–2234.
11.
BamiehBGiarreL. Identification of linear parameter varying models. Int J Robust Nonlin2002; 12(9): 841–853.
12.
TóthRFeliciFHeubergerPSet al. Discrete time LPV I/O and state space representations, differences of behavior and pitfalls of interpolation. In: Proceedings of the European control conference, Kos, 2–5 July 2007, pp.5418–5425. New York: IEEE.
13.
TóthR. Modeling and identification of linear parameter-varying systems-an orthonormal basis function approach. PhD Thesis, Technische Universiteit Delft, Delft, 2008.
14.
CeroneVPigaDRegrutoDet al. Fixed order LPV controller design for LPV models in input-output form. In: 51st annual conference on decision and control (CDC), Maui, HI, 10–13 December 2012, pp.6297–6302. New York: IEEE.
15.
ApkarianPGahinetPBeckerG. Self-scheduled H∞ control of linear parameter-varying systems: a design example. Automatica1995; 31(9): 1251–1261.
16.
GeromelJCColaneriP. Robust stability of time varying polytopic systems. Syst Control Lett2006; 55(1): 81–85.
17.
BorgesRAPeresPL. H∞ LPV filtering for linear systems with arbitrarily time-varying parameters in polytopic domains. In: 45th conference on decision and control, San Diego, CA, 13–15 December 2006, pp.1692–1697. New York: IEEE.
18.
OliveiraRMontagnerVPeresPet al. LMI relaxations for H∞ control of time-varying polytopic systems by means of parameter-dependent quadratically stabilizing gains. IFAC Proc Vol2007; 40(20): 614–619.
19.
ChesiGGarulliATesiAet al. Homogeneous polynomial forms for robustness analysis of uncertain systems, vol. 390. Berlin: Springer Science & Business Media, 2009.
20.
ChestaL.A parametric study of wing store flutter. In: AGARD Specialists meeting on wing-with-stores-flutter, Paris, France, April1975. AD-A010672, pp. 7.1–7.12. NTIS.
21.
KarpelM. Design for active and passive flutter suppression and gust alleviation, vol. 3482. National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Scientific and Technical Information Branch, 1981. Virginia: NASA Langley Research Center.
22.
ReedWHIIICazierFJrFoughnerJTJr. Passive control of wing/store flutter. Technical Report, National Aeronautics and Space Administration, Hampton, VA, 1980.
23.
YangZCZhaoLC. Wing-store flutter analysis of an airfoil in incompressible flow. J Aircraft1989; 26(6): 583–587.
24.
HanJHTaniJQiuJ. Active flutter suppression of a lifting surface using piezoelectric actuation and modern control theory. J Sound Vib2006; 291(3): 706–722.
25.
De MarquiCBeloEMarquesF. A flutter suppression active controller. Proc IMechE, Part G: J Aerospace Engineering2005; 219(1): 19–33.
26.
ZhangKBehalA. Continuous robust control for aeroelastic vibration control of a 2-D airfoil under unsteady flow. J Vib Control2016; 22(12): 2841–2860.
27.
TriplettWEKappusHPFLandyRJ. Active flutter suppression systems for military aircraft. A feasibility study. Technical Report, DTIC Document, Fort Belvoir, VA, 1973.
28.
RubilloCMarzoccaPBolltE. Active aeroelastic control of lifting surfaces via jet reaction limiter control. Int J Bifurcat Chaos2006; 16(9): 2559–2574.
29.
LeeHTKrooIBieniawskiS. Flutter suppression for high aspect ratio flexible wings using microflaps. In: 43rd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics, and materials conference, Denver, CO, 22–25 April 2002, p.1717. Reston, VA: AIAA.
30.
Van WingerdenJWGebraadPVerhaegenM. LPV identification of an aeroelastic flutter model. In: 49th conference on decision and control (CDC), Atlanta, GA, 15–17 December 2010, pp.6839–6844. New York: IEEE.
31.
BarkerJMBalasGJ. Comparing linear parameter-varying gain-scheduled control techniques for active flutter suppression. J Guid Control Dynam2000; 23(5): 948–955.
32.
LauEKrenerA. LPV control of two dimensional wing flutter. In: Proceedings of the 38th conference on decision and control, Phoenix, AZ, 7–10 December 1999, vol. 3, pp.3005–3010. New York: IEEE.
33.
ChenGLiYJianSet al. Linear parameter varying control for active flutter suppression based on adaptive reduced order model. In: 52nd AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC structures, structural dynamics and materials conference 19th AIAA/ASME/AHS adaptive structures conference, Denver, CO, 4–7 April 2011, p.1773. Reston, VA: AIAA.
34.
BalasGMorenoCSeilerP. Robust aeroservoelastic control utilizing physics-based aerodynamic sensing. In: AIAA guidance, navigation, and control conference, 13–16 August, 2012, Minneapolis, Minnesota, p.4897.
35.
Al-JibooryAKZhuGGChoiJ. Guaranteed performance state-feedback gain-scheduling control with uncertain scheduling parameters. J Dyn Syst Meas Contr2016; 138(1): 014502.
36.
Al-JibooryAKZhuGGSweiSSMet al. LPV modeling of a flexible wing aircraft using modal alignment and adaptive gridding methods. Aerosp Sci Technol2017; 66: 92–102.
37.
WhiteAPZhuGGChoiJ. Linear parameter-varying control for engineering applications. Berlin, Springer: Springer Science and Business Media, 2013.
38.
HanXLiuZLiHet al. Output feedback controller design for polynomial linear parameter varying system via parameter-dependent Lyapunov functions. Adv Mech Eng2017; 9(2): 1687814017690327.
39.
RotondoDNejjariFPuigV. Quasi-LPV modeling, identification and control of a twin rotor mimo system. Contr Eng Prac2013; 21(6): 829–846.
40.
PolatIEskinatEKoseI. Dynamic output feedback control of quasi-LPV mechanical systems. IET Control Theory A2007; 1(4): 1114–1121.
41.
NejjariFRotondoDPuigVet al. Quasi-LPV modelling and non-linear identification of a twin rotor system. In: 2012 20th Mediterranean conference on control & automation (MED), Barcelona, 3–6 July 2012, pp.229–234. New York: IEEE.
42.
SweiSSMJiangYT. On the efficacy of the smart airfoil model in active flutter suppression. In: Second international conference on motion and vibration control, 30 August–3 September 1994. Yokohama, Japan: The Japan Society of Mechanical Engineers. pp.593–598.
43.
SweiSSMAyoubiMA. LMI-based fuzzy optimal variance control of airfoil model subject to input constraints. In: International conference on fuzzy systems (FUZZ-IEEE), Naples, 9–12 July 2017, pp.1–6. New York: IEEE.
44.
KarpelM. Design for active flutter suppression and gust alleviation using state-space aeroelastic modeling. J Aircraft1982; 19(3): 221–227.
45.
KwiatkowskiAWernerH. PCA-based parameter set mappings for LPV models with fewer parameters and less overbounding. IEEE T Contr Syst Technol2008; 16(4): 781–788.
46.
OliveiraRCBlimanPAPeresPL. Robust LMIs with parameters in multi-simplex: existence of solutions and applications. In: 47th conference on decision and control, CDC, Cancun, Mexico, 9–11 December 2008, pp.2226–2231. New York: IEEE.
47.
OliveiraRCDe OliveiraMCPeresPL. Robust state feedback LMI methods for continuous-time linear systems: discussions, extensions and numerical comparisons. In: International symposium on computer-aided control system design (CACSD), Denver, CO, 28–30 September 2011, pp.1038–1043. New York: IEEE.
48.
OliveiraRCBlimanPAPeresPL. Selective gain-scheduling for continuous-time linear systems with parameters in multi-simplex. In: European control conference (ECC), Budapest, 23–26 August 2009, pp.213–218. New York: IEEE.
49.
LacerdaMJTognettiESOliveiraRCet al. A new approach to handle additive and multiplicative uncertainties in the measurement for LPV filtering. Int J Syst Sci2016; 47: 1042–1053.
50.
SatoM. Design method of gain-scheduled controllers not depending on derivatives of parameters. Int J Control2008; 81(6): 1013–1025.
OliveiraRCPeresPL. Parameter-dependent LMIs in robust analysis: characterization of homogeneous polynomially parameter-dependent solutions via LMI relaxations. IEEE T Automat Contr2007; 52(7): 1334–1340.
53.
SchererCWHolCW. Matrix sum-of-squares relaxations for robust semi-definite programs. Math Program2006; 107(1–2): 189–211.
54.
PeaucelleDSatoM. LMI tests for positive definite polynomials: slack variable approach. IEEE T Automat Contr2009; 54(4): 886–891.
55.
AgulhariCMde OliveiraRPeresPL. Robust LMI parser: a computational package to construct LMI conditions for uncertain systems. In: Proceedings of the XIX Brazilian conference on automation (CBA 2012), Campina Grande, 2–6 September 2012, Brazilian Society for Automation (SBA).
56.
LöfbergJ. YALMIP: a toolbox for modeling and optimization in MATLAB. In: International symposium on computer aided control systems design, New Orleans, LA, 2–4 September 2004, pp.284–289. New York: IEEE.
57.
SturmJF. Using SeDuMi 1.02, a Matlab toolbox for optimization over symmetric cones. Optim Methods Soft1999; 11(1–4): 625–653.
