Advertisement

Hybrid MPC: An Application to Semiactive Control of Structures

  • Wael M. Elhaddad
  • Erik A. Johnson
Conference paper
Part of the Conference Proceedings of the Society for Experimental Mechanics Series book series (CPSEMS)

Abstract

In clipped LQR, a common strategy for semiactive structural control, a primary feedback controller is designed using LQR and a secondary controller clips forces that the semiactive control device cannot realize. However, when the primary controller commands highly non-dissipative forces, the frequent clipping may render a controller far from being optimal. A hybrid system model is better suited for semiactive control as it accurately models the passivity constraints by introducing auxiliary variables into the system model. In this paper, a hybrid model predictive control (MPC) scheme, which uses a system model with both continuous and discrete variables, is used for semiactive control of structures. Optimizing this control results in a mixed integer quadratic programming problem, which can be solved numerically to find the optimal control input. It is shown that hybrid MPC produces nonlinear state feedback control laws that achieve significantly better performance for some control objectives (e.g., the reduction of absolute acceleration). Responses of a typical structure to historical earthquakes, and response statistics from a Monte Carlo simulation with stochastic excitation, are computed. Compared to clipped LQR, hybrid MPC is found to be more consistent in the reduction of the objective functions, although it is more computationally expensive.

Keywords

Structural control Semiactive dampers Hybrid systems Model predictive control Clipped LQR 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors gratefully acknowledge the partial support of this work by the National Science Foundation, through awards CMMI 08-26634 and 11-00528, and by a USC Viterbi Doctoral Fellowship. Any opinions, findings, and conclusions or recommendations expressed in this material are those of the authors and do not necessarily reflect the views of the National Science Foundation or of the University of Southern California.

References

  1. 1.
    Spencer BF Jr, Nagarajaiah S (2003) State of the art of structural control. J Struct Eng 129(7):845–856CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Spencer BF Jr, Sain MK (1997) Controlling buildings: a new frontier in feedback. Contr. Syst. IEEE 17(6):19–35CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Soong TT, Dargush GF (1997) Passive energy dissipation systems in structural engineering. Wiley, ChichesterGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Housner GW, Bergman LA, Caughey TK, Chassiakos AG, Claus RO, Masri SF, Skelton RE, Soong TT, Spencer BF Jr, Yao JTP (1997) Structural control: past, present, and future. J Eng Mech 123(9):897–971CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Symans MD, Constantinou MC (1999) Semi-active control systems for seismic protection of structures: a state-of-the-art review. Eng Struct 21(6):469–487CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Soong TT, Spencer BF Jr (2002) Supplemental energy dissipation: state-of-the-art and state-of-the-practice. Eng Struct 24(3):243–259CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Dyke SJ, Spencer BF, Sain MK, Carlson JD (1996) Modeling and control of magnetorheological dampers for seismic response reduction. Smart Mater Struct 5(5):565–575CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Jansen LM, Dyke SJ (2000) Semiactive control strategies for MR dampers: comparative study. J Eng Mech 126(8):795–803CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Sun L, Goto Y (1994) Application of fuzzy theory to variable dampers for bridge vibration control. In: Proceedings of the 1st world conference on structural control, pp WP1:31–40, Los Angeles, CA, August 1994Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gavin H (2001) Control of seismically excited vibration using electrorheological materials and Lyapunov methods. IEEE Trans Contr Syst Tech 9(1):27–36CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Wang X, Gordaninejad F (2002) Lyapunov-based control of a bridge using magneto-rheological fluid dampers. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 13(7–8):415–419CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Iemura H, Pradono MH (2009) Advances in the development of pseudo-negative-stiffness dampers for seismic response control. Struct Contr Health Monit 16(7–8):784–799Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Scruggs JT, Taflanidis AA, Iwan WD (2007) Non-linear stochastic controllers for semiactive and regenerative systems with guaranteed quadratic performance bounds Part 1: state feedback control. Struct Contr Health Monit 14(8):1101–1120CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Scruggs JT, Taflanidis AA, Iwan WD (2007) Non-linear stochastic controllers for semiactive and regenerative systems with guaranteed quadratic performance bounds Part 2: output feedback control. Struct Contr Health Monit 14(8):1121–1137CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Johnson EA, Erkus B (2007) Dissipativity and performance analysis of smart dampers via LMI synthesis. Struct Contr Health Monit 14(3): 471–496CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Johnson EA, Baker GA, Spencer BF Jr, Fujino Y (2007) Semiactive damping of stay cables. J Eng Mech 133(1):1–11CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Ramallo JC, Johnson EA, Spencer BF Jr (2002) “Smart” base isolation systems. J Eng Mech 128(10):1088–1099CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Qin SJ, Badgwell TA (2003) A survey of industrial model predictive control technology. Contr Eng Pract 11(7):733–764CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mei G, Kareem A, Kantor JC (2001) Real-time model predictive control of structures under earthquakes. Earthquake Eng Struct Dynam 30(7):995–1019CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Mei G, Kareem A, Kantor JC (2002) Model predictive control of structures under earthquakes using acceleration feedback. J Eng Mech 128(5):574–585CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Bemporad A, Morari M (1999) Control of systems integrating logic, dynamics, and constraints. Automatica 35(3):407–427MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Sontag E (1981) Nonlinear regulation: the piecewise linear approach. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 26(2):346–358MathSciNetzbMATHCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Alur R, Courcoubetis C, Henzinger T, Ho P (1993) Hybrid automata: an algorithmic approach to the specification and verification of hybrid systems. In: Grossman R, Nerode A, Ravn A, Rischel H (eds) Hybrid systems. Lecture notes in computer science, vol 736. Springer, Berlin, pp 209–229Google Scholar
  24. 24.
    Bemporad A (2002) An efficient technique for translating mixed logical dynamical systems into piecewise affine systems. In: Proceedings of the 41st IEEE conference on decision and control, 2002, vol 2, pp 1970–1975, 2002Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Heemels WPMH, De Schutter B, Bemporad A (2001) On the equivalence of classes of hybrid dynamical models. In: Proceedings of the 40th IEEE conference on decision and control, 2001, vol 1, pp 364–369, 2001Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Van de Water H, Willems J (1981) The certainty equivalence property in stochastic control theory. IEEE Trans Automat Contr 26(5):1080–1087CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Chow GP (1976) Analysis and control of dynamic economic systems. Wiley, New YorkGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Hespanha JP (2009) Linear systems theory. Princeton Press, PrincetonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Giorgetti N, Bemporad A, Tseng HE, Hrovat D (2005) Hybrid model predictive control application towards optimal semi-active suspension. In: Proceedings of the IEEE international symposium on industrial electronics, 2005. ISIE 2005, vol 1, pp 391–398, 2005Google Scholar
  30. 30.
    Löfberg J (2004) YALMIP: a toolbox for modeling and optimization in MATLAB. In: 2004 IEEE international symposium on computer aided control systems design, pp 284–289, 2004Google Scholar
  31. 31.
    IBM (2012) IBM ILOG CPLEX Optimizer. http://www.ibm.com/software/integration/optimization/cplex-optimizer/. Accessed 9 Sept 2012
  32. 32.
    Gurobi (2012) Gurobi Optimizer Reference Manual. http://www.gurobi.com. Accessed 9 Sept 2012

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc. 2013

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Sonny Astani Department of Civil and Environmental EngineeringUniversity of Southern CaliforniaLos AngelesUSA

Personalised recommendations