Magnetorheological (MR) dampers are important devices for reducing and controlling vibration. Dynamic response time is one of the key factors that determines the control ability and application of the MR damper. Metal foam MR dampers are potentially superior to conventional dampers due to their low cost and fast response. The dynamic response time of metal foam MR dampers is distinct from conventional dampers. In this paper, the effects of different metal foam materials on the dynamic response time of metal foam dampers are studied. Three response time parameters were defined, and an experimental system including a DC motor, force sensor, damper, and time relay was designed to collect dynamic response time parameter values using metal foam Cu and Ni, respectively. The experimental results show that the response time of MR dampers is faster using Ni rather than Cu metal foam due to the different permeability of the materials. The magnetic resistance model and Ansys simulation further prove that magnetic flux density is the main contributor to the differences in response time.
CarlsonJ.D. and JollyM.R., MR fluid, foam and elastomer devices, Mechatronics (2000), doi:10.1016/S0957-4158(99)00064-1.
2.
TaoR., Super-strong magnetorheological fluids, J. Phys. Condens. Matter (2001), doi:10.1088/0953-8984/13/50/202.
3.
YaoX.Y.YuM. and FuJ., Magnetic-enhanced normal force of magnetorheological fluids, Smart Mater. Struct. (2015), doi:10.1088/0964-1726/24/3/035001.
4.
CarlsonJ.D. and SpencerB.F., Magneto-rheological fluid dampers for semi-active seismic control, in: Proc. 3rd Int. Conf. Motion Vib. Control, 1996.
5.
ChoiS.-B.NamM.-H. and LeeB.-K., Vibration control of a MR seat damper for commercial vehicles, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. (2000), doi:10.1106/AERG-3QKV-31V8-F250.
6.
ChoiY.-T. and WereleyN.M., Biodynamic response mitigation to shock loads using magnetorheological helicopter crew seat suspensions, J. Aircr. (2005), doi:10.2514/1.6839.
7.
McManusS.J.St. ClairK.A.BoileauP.É.BoutinJ. and RakhejaS., Evaluation of vibration and shock attenuation performance of a suspension seat with a semi-active magnetorheological fluid damper, J. Sound Vib. (2002), doi:10.1006/jsvi.2001.4262.
8.
ChoiS.B.LiW.YuM.DuH.FuJ. and DoP.X., State of the art of control schemes for smart systems featuring magneto-rheological materials, Smart Mater. Struct. (2016), doi:10.1088/0964-1726/25/4/043001.
9.
DykeS.J.SpencerB.F.SainM.K. and CarlsonJ.D., An experimental study of MR dampers for seismic protection, Smart Mater. Struct. (1998), doi:10.1088/0964-1726/7/5/012.
10.
YangG.SpencerB.F.JungH.-J. and CarlsonJ.D., Dynamic modeling of large-scale magnetorheological damper systems for civil engineering applications, J. Eng. Mech.130(9) (2004), doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399.
11.
YoshidaO. and DykeS.J., Seismic control of a nonlinear benchmark building using smart dampers, J. Eng. Mech.130(4) (2004), doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399.
12.
DasD.DattaT.K. and MadanA., Semiactive fuzzy control of the seismic response of building frames with MR dampers, Earthq. Eng. Struct. Dyn. (2012), doi:10.1002/eqe.1120.
13.
HuG.LuY.SunS. and LiW., Performance analysis of a magnetorheological damper with energy harvesting ability, Shock Vib. (2016), doi:10.1155/2016/2959763.
14.
JansenL.M. and DykeS.J., Semiactive control strategies for MR dampers: Comparative study, J. Eng. Mech.126(8) (2000), 795, doi:10.1061/(ASCE)0733-9399.
15.
YangG.SpencerB.F.CarlsonJ.D. and SainM.K., Large-scale MR fluid dampers: Modeling and dynamic performance considerations, Eng. Struct. (2002), doi:10.1016/S0141-0296(01)00097-9.
16.
YangJ.SunS.LiW.DuH.AliciG. and NakanoM., Development of a linear damper working with magnetorheological shear thickening fluids, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. (2015), doi:10.1177/1045389X15577653.
17.
ZhangX.ZhangX.ZhaoY.ZhaoJ. and XuZ., Experimental and numerical studies on a composite MR damper considering magnetic saturation effect, Eng. Struct. (2017), doi:10.1016/j.engstruct.2016.11.055.
18.
LiB.LiuJ.SongZ. and HuY., Modelling and optimisation of a five dimensional vibration isolator, Int. J. Mater. Prod. Technol. (2016), doi:10.1504/IJMPT.2016.076420.
19.
YanW.YuJ.TangQ.ZhangH.CaoJ. and WangE., Analysis and mitigation on conducted electromagnetic interference of semi-active control strategy for magneto-rheological damper, Int. J. Appl. Electromagn. Mech.50 (2016), 247–254.
20.
YangB.LuoJ. and DongL., Magnetic circuit FEM analysis and optimum design for MR damper, Int. J. Appl. Electromagn. Mech.33 (2010), 207–216.
21.
DuE.XuX.HuangK.TangH. and TaoR., Bunker diesel viscosity is dramatically reduced by electrorheological treatment, Int. J. Mod. Phys. B (2017), 1850012.
22.
DuE.ZhaoQ.XiaoY.CaiL. and TaoR., Electric field suppressed turbulence and reduced viscosity of asphaltene base crude oil sample, Fuel220 (2018), 358–362.
23.
Lord Corporation, MR 180KN Damper, Product Bulletin, (n.d.).
24.
KooJ.-H.FernandoM.A. and GoncalvesD., Experimental approach for finding the response time of MR dampers for vehicle applications, ASME Proc. Mech. Vib. Noise3 (2003), 425–430, doi:10.1115/DETC2003/VIB-48349.
25.
KooJ.H.GoncalvesF.D. and AhmadianM., Investigation of the response time of magnetorheological fluid dampers, in: 2004, 5386–5389.
26.
YangG.RamalloJ.C. and Spencer Jr.B.F., Dynamic Performance of large-scale MR fluid dampers, Proc. 14th ASCE Eng. Mech. Conf. (2000).
27.
GuanX.GuoP. and OuJ., Study of the response time of MR dampers, in: 2009: p. 74930U–7493–9.
28.
ChooiW.W. and OyadijiS.O., The relative transient response of MR fluids subjected to magnetic fields under constant shear conditions, Proc. SPIE - Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. (2005), doi:10.1117/12.600923.
29.
SahinH.GordaninejadF.WangX. and LiuY., Response time of magnetorheological fluids and magnetorheological valves under various flow conditions, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. (2012), doi:10.1177/1045389X12447984.
30.
UlicnyJ.C.GoldenM.A.NamuduriC.S. and KlingenbergD.J., Transient response of magnetorheological fluids: Shear flow between concentric cylinders, J. Rheol. (N. Y. N. Y).49 (2005), 87–104, doi:10.1122/1.1803576.
31.
KooJ.H.GoncalvesF.D. and AhmadianM., A comprehensive analysis of the response time of MR dampers, Smart Mater. Struct. (2006), doi:10.1088/0964-1726/15/2/015.
32.
MileckiA., Investigation of dynamic properties and control method influences on MR fluid dampers’ performance, J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct.13 (2002), 453–458, doi:10.1106/104538902028558.
33.
SodaS.KusumotoH.ChataniR.IwataN.FujitaniH.ShiozakiY. and HiwatashiT., Semi-active seismic response control of base-isolated building with MR damper, in: 2003: pp. 5052–5058.
34.
LiuX.GaoX.LiF.YuH. and YeD., Shear performance of a metal foam magnetorheological fluid damper, IEEE Trans. Magn.PP (2014), 1–1, doi:10.1109/TMAG.2014.2343938.
35.
YaoX.LiuC.LiangH.QinH.YuQ. and LiC., Normal force of magnetorheological fluids with foam metal under oscillatory shear modes, J. Magn. Magn. Mater. (2016), doi:10.1016/j.jmmm.2015.12.014.
36.
YaoX.ChenZ.QinH.YuQ. and LiC., Delay time of magnetorheological fluids in porous foam metal, Optoelectron. Adv. Mater. Rapid Commun. (2016).
37.
YanY.X.HuiL.X.YuM.FuJ. and DongL.H., Dynamic response time of a metal foam magneto-rheological damper, Smart Mater. Struct. (2013), doi:10.1088/0964-1726/22/2/025026.
38.
YaoX. and PengZ., Gap-related magnetic characteristics of magnetorheological dampers with porous metal foam,12 (2018), 759–763.
