MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W1969547495 · doi:10.1177/1077546308094246

Direct Optimal Vibration Control of a Piezoelastic Plate

2009· article· en· W1969547495 on OpenAlexaff
A. Chellabi, Yury Stepanenko, S. Dost

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Vibration and Control · 2009
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicAeroelasticity and Vibration Control
Canadian institutionsUniversity of VictoriaBritish Columbia Institute of Technology
Fundersnot available
KeywordsOptimal controlControl theory (sociology)Controller (irrigation)MathematicsAlgebraic equationParametric statisticsLinear-quadratic regulatorVibrationVibration controlActive vibration controlActuatorMathematical optimizationNonlinear systemComputer scienceControl (management)Physics

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

An optimal control method for distributed parameter systems is developed and applied to active vibration control of a plate. Piezoelectric material is used as an actuator. The structural dynamics are modeled using the space—time assumed mode expansion technique (a Rayleigh—Ritz method applied to both time and space variables). In particular, the generalized coordinates (both mechanical and electrical) and all generalized forces are described in terms of expansion functions. Using Hamilton's law of varying action along with the space—time assumed mode expansion results in algebraic equations of motion. These are then used as the constraint equations in the optimal controller design. Using space—time expansion, the usual variational optimal control problem is transformed into an equivalent algebraic problem. Optimal solutions are then obtained in a closed form and the solution is global within the time period considered. The solution procedure does not lead to a Riccati equation as is the case in the conventional optimal control solutions. The direct optimal control problem of a vibrating plate is illustrated through simulations where a parametric study is undertaken to check the controller performance. This study shows that the developed optimal control method is simple and the structure—control interaction is an inherent property of the method.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Simulation or modeling · Consensus signal: Simulation or modeling
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: none
Teacher disagreement score0.003
Threshold uncertainty score0.005

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.001
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0010.001
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.005
GPT teacher head0.197
Teacher spread0.192 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designSimulation or modeling
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations15
Published2009
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Vibration and ControlSame topicAeroelasticity and Vibration ControlFrench-language works237,207