Mathematical Modeling and

Simulation of SAS System With

Magnetorheological (MR) Damper

MA417 University of Agder-Spring 2013

Mathematics
for
Mechatronics Oreste Niyonsaba
Dimuthu Dharshana Arachchige
Subodha Tharangi Ireshika

Slide 1
Overview

• Vibration isolation
• MR dampers and SAS test rig
• Mathematical modeling and stability
• MR damper models
• Vibration response analysis
• Experimental comparison
• Conclusion

Slide 2
Vibration Isolation
• In most mechanical systems the excess
energy that is created becomes vibration
• Vibration leads to
• excessive wear of bearings
• formation of cracks
• loosening of fasteners
• structural and mechanical failures
• frequent and costly maintenance of machines
• discomfort to humans
• A vibration isolation system is needed to
reduce vibrations
Slide 3
Isolation systems

Passive: Semi-active: Active:

• No need of • Excellent • Control forces
external power compromise change with
source between passive excitation and
• Simple, and active response
inexpensive and systems characteristics
reliable isolation • Require low • Need of external
• Inherent power for signal energy source
performance processing • Can supply and
limitations • Improved dissipate energy
vibration
isolation

Slide 4
Magneto-Rheological (MR Dampers)

MR Fluid
MR fluid is composed of oil and varying percentages of iron particles that
have been coated with an anti-coagulant material

Without Magnetic field With Magnetic field

Slide 5
Modes of operation of MR fluid

a.Valve mode

b.Shear mode

c.Squeeze mode

Slide 6
MR Rotary damper and SAS test rig.

active MR fluid area

output axis
magnetic circuit(rotor)
magnetic circuit(stator)
coil
magnetic flux line

Viscosity is changed due to the generated magnetic field of

the coil, affecting to control the torque of the output axis

Semi Active Suspension (SAS)

system with MR rotary brake

Slide 7
Mathematical modeling of the
SAS system
Analysis of the upper beam

Analysis of the lower beam

Slide 8
Stability investigation
Current input to the MR damper 0A

0.4 2.5

0.3 2

1.5
0.2
Alpha1Dot(Rad/s)

Alpha2Dot(Rad/s)
1

0.1
0.5

0 0

-0.5
-0.1

-1
-0.2
-1.5

-0.3 -2
-4 -3 -2 -1 0 1 2 20 25 30 35 40 45 50
Alpha1(Deg) Alpha2(Degree)

Equilibrium points

Slide 9
MR Damper models
a. The Bouc-Wen model

x Torque (T) generated by the MR damper,

γ=1, β=737,δ=843, n=1.9,

C1=0.0015, C2=17, α1=1,α2=17 [9]

Slide 10
Hysteresis behavior
Effect of the control current
Torque Vs Angular Displacement Torque Vs Angular Velocity
100 100
i=0 i=0
80 i=1 80 i=1
i=2 i=2
60 60
i=3 i=3

40 40

20 20
Torque(Nm)

Torque(Nm)
0 0

-20 -20

-40 -40

-60 -60

-80 -80

-100 -100
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Angular Displacement(rad) Angular Velocity(rad/s)

Current Torque

Slide 11
Effect of MR Damper parameters on..
1. Displacement Hysteresis for 2A
Torque Vs Angular Displacement for different gamma values(i=2) Torque Vs Angular Displacement for different delta values(i=2)
60 60
gamma=0.2 delta=600
gamma=1 delta=700
40 gamma=5 40 delta=843
gamma=7 delta=900

20 20
Torque(Nm)

Torque(Nm)
0 0

-20 -20

-40 -40

-60 -60
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Angular Displacement(rad) Angular Displacement(rad)
Torque Vs Angular Displacement for different n values(i=2)
Torque Vs Angular Displacement for different beta values(i=2)
80
80
n=1
beta=500
60 n=1.9
60 beta=600
n=5
beta=737
n=8
40 beta=900
40

20
20
Torque(Nm)

Torque(Nm)

0
0

-20
-20

-40
-40

-60
-60

-80
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 -80
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Angular Displacement(rad)
Angular Displacement(rad) Slide 12
Effect of MR Damper parameters on..
2. Velocity Hysteresis for 2A
Torque Vs Angular Velocity for different gamma values(i=2) Torque Vs Angular Velocity for different beta values(i=2)
60 60
gamma=0.2 delta=600
gamma=1 delta=700
40 gamma=5 40 delta=843
gamma=7 delta=900

20 20
Torque(Nm)

Torque(Nm)
0 0

-20 -20

-40 -40

-60 -60
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Angular Velocity(rad/s) Angular Velocity(rad/s)

Torque Vs Angular Velocity for different beta values(i=2) Torque Vs Angular Velocity for different n values(i=2)
80 80
beta=500 n=1
60 beta=600 60 n=1.9
beta=737 n=5
beta=900 n=8
40 40

20 20
Torque(Nm)
Torque(Nm)

0 0

-20 -20

-40 -40

-60 -60

-80 -80
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 Slide
1 13
Effect of MR damper parameters on the
vibration response

Vibration Response Vs Time for different gamma values(i=0.25A) Vibration Response Vs Time for different n values(i=0.25A) Vibration Response Vs Time for different delta values(i=0.25A)
50 50 50
gamma=0.2 n=1 delta=600
gamma=1 n=1.9 delta=843
45 45 45
gamma=7 n=8 delta=900

40 40 40
Vibration(Degrees)

Vibration(Degrees)
Vibration(Degrees)
35 35 35

30 30 30

25 25 25

20 20 20

15 15 15
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Time(Time) Time(Time) Time(Time)

Vibration Response Vs Time for different beta values(i=0.25A) Vibration Response Vs Time for different alpha2 values(i=0.25A) Vibration Response Vs Time for different C2 values(i=0.25A)
50 50 45
beta=500 alpha2=12 c2=6
beta=737 alpha2=17 c2=10.5
45 45 c2=20
beta=900 alpha2=20 40

40 40
35

Vibration(Degrees)
Vibration(Degrees)

Vibration(Degrees)

35 35
30

30 30

25
25 25

20
20 20

15 15 15
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Time(S) Time(Time) Time(Time) Slide 14
Comparison:
experiment and computer simulations

a. Bouc-Wen

Displacement Vs Time(i=.25) Displacement Vs Time(i=1A)

50 45
Theoratical Theoratical
45 Experimental Experimental
40

40
Displacement(Degrees)

Displacement(Degrees)
35

35
30
30

25
25

20 20

15 15
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time(s) Time(s)

Slide 15
Dhal model
T K x (i)  K y (i) z T : exerted torque of the MR brake
θ : angle
z (  z) i : control current
z : dynamic hysteresis coefficient
Kx K a Kb i Kx ,Ky, α: parameters which controls the
shape of the hysteric.
Ky K1 K 2 i

K1 5, K 2 1.5, K a 0.001, K b 0.001, 5

Slide 16
Hysteresis behavior
• Effect of the control current
Torque Vs Angular Displacement Torque Vs Angular Velocity
10 10

8 8

6 6

4 4

2 2
Torque (Nm)

Torque (Nm)
0 0

-2 -2

-4 -4

-6 i=0 -6 i=0
i=1 i=1
-8 i=2 -8 i=2
i=3 i=3
-10 -10
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Angular Displacement (rad) Angular Velocity (rad/s)

Slide 17
Effect of MR damper parameters on..
• Displacement hysteresis for 2 A
Torque Vs Angular Displacement for different K1 values(i=2) Torque Vs Angular Displacement for different Ka values (i=2)
15 20

15
10
10

5
5

Torque (Nm)
Torque (Nm)

0 0

-5
-5
-10
K1=0 Ka=0.001
-10 Ka=1
K1=5 -15
K1=7 Ka=5
K1=10 Ka=10
-15 -20
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 1.2 1.4 1.6 1.8 2
Angular Displacement (rad) Angular Displacement (rad)
Torque Vs Angular Displacement for different Alpha values (i=2)
10

2
Torque (Nm)

-2

-4

-6 Alpha=1
Alpha=5
-8 Alpha=10
Alpha=15
-10
-0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
Angular Displacement (rad) Slide 18
Effect of MR damper parameters on..
• Velocity hysteresis for 2A
Torque Vs Angular Velocity for different K1 values (i=2) Torque Vs Angular Velocity for different Ka values (i=2)
15 20

15
10
10

5
5

Torque (Nm)
Torque (Nm)

0 0

-5
-5
-10
K1=0 Ka=0.001
-10 Ka=1
K1=5 -15
K1=7 Ka=5
K1=10 Ka=10
-15 -20
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1 -1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Angular Velocity (rad/s) Angular Velocity (rad/s)
Torque Vs Angular Velocity for different Alpha values (i=0)
6

2
Torque (Nm)

-2

Alpha=1
-4 Alpha=5
Alpha=10
Alpha=15
-6
-1 -0.8 -0.6 -0.4 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
Angular Velocity (rad/s)
Slide 19
Effect of MR damper parameters on the
vibration response
Vibration Response Vs Time for different K1 values (i=1)
50
K1=0
K1=5
45 K1=7

Vibration Response (Degrees))

40

35

30

25

20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s)

Vibration Response Vs Time for different Ka values(i=1) Vibration Response Vs Time for different Alpha values (i=1)
50 50
Ka=0.001 Alpha=0
Ka=0 Alpha=5
Ka=10 45 Alpha=7
45

Vibration Response (Degrees))

Vibration Response (Degrees))

40 40

35 35

30 30

25 25

20 20
0 5 10 15 20 25 30 0 5 10 15 20 25 30
Time (s) Time (s) Slide 20
Experimental task for hysteresis
measurement

Torque from the MR damper,

d 1 d 2 d2 2 d 2
M MR J2 M spring k2 RG2 cos 2
dt dt dt 2 dt
d 1 d 2 d2 2
M MR J2 r2 k s los (r2 sin 2 r1 sin 1 )2 r1 cos 1 r2 cos 2
dt dt dt 2
d 2
k2 RG2 cos 2
dt Slide 21
Hysteresis behavior of the MR damper

• Displacement Hysteresis
Torque Vs Displacement (i=0.25) Torque Vs Displacement (i=1) Torque Vs Displacement (i=1.5)
20 20 20

10 10 10

0 0 0

-10 -10 -10

Torque (Nm)

Torque (Nm)

Torque (Nm)
-20 -20 -20

-30 -30 -30

-40 -40 -40

-50 -50 -50

-60 -60 -60

-0.3 -0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 -0.4 -0.3 -0.2 -0.1 0 0.1 0.2 0.3 -0.3 -0.25 -0.2 -0.15 -0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2
Displacement (rad) Displacement (rad) Displacement (rad)

• Velocity Hysteresis Torque Vs Velocity (i=1)

Torque Vs Velocity (i=0.25) Torque Vs Velocity (i=1.5)
20 20 20

10 10 10

0 0 0

-10 -10 -10

Torque (Nm)
Torque (Nm)

Torque (Nm)
-20 -20 -20

-30 -30 -30

-40 -40 -40

-50 -50 -50

-60 -60 -60

-2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 -2 -1.5 -1 -0.5 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
Velocity (rad/s) Velocity (rad/s) Velocity (rad/s) Slide 22
Comparison: experiment and computer
simulations
b. Dhal

Displacement Vs Time(i=0.25) Displacement Vs Time(i=1)

50 50
Theoritical Theoritical
Experiment Experiment
45 45

40 40
Displacement (Degrees)

Displacement (Degrees)
35 35

30 30

25 25

20 20

15 15
0 5 10 15 20 25 0 5 10 15 20 25
Time (s) Time (s)

Slide 23
Conclusion

• Easy to analyze MR damper with SAS test rig which

supports Matlab Simulink environment.
• Both theoretical and experimental models, magnitude of
torque in hysteresis behavior lies in a common range.
• If model parameters are diligently tuned, a similar vibration
response can be obtained for both theoretical and
experimental models.
• Bouc-Wen model stands taller as far as the more realistic,
accurate results are concerned.
• Semi-active dampers provide remarkable improvements
over passive suspensions.

Slide 24
Thank You...!

Slide 25
Reference Slides

26