Active Control of the Forced and Transient Response of a Finite Beam

When studying structural vibrations resulting from a concentrated source, many structures may be modelled as a finite beam excited by a point source. The theoretical limit on cancelling the resulting beam vibrations by utilizing another point source as an active controller is explored. Three different types of excitation are considered, harmonic, random, and transient. In each case, a cost function is defined and minimized for numerous parameter variations. For the case of harmonic excitation, the cost function is obtained by integrating the mean squared displacement over a region of the beam in which control is desired. A controller is then found to minimize this cost function in the control interval. The control interval and controller location are continuously varied for several frequencies of excitation. The results show that control over the entire beam length is possible only when the excitation frequency is near a resonant frequency of the beam, but control over a subregion may be obtained even between resonant frequencies at the cost of increasing the vibration outside of the control region. For random excitation, the cost function is realized by integrating the expected value of the displacement squared over the interval of the beam in which control is desired. This is shown to yield the identical cost function as obtained by integrating the cost function for harmonic excitation over all excitation frequencies. As a result, it is always possible to reduce the cost function for random excitation whether controlling the entire beam or just a subregion, without ever increasing the vibration outside the region in which control is desired. The last type of excitation considered is a single, transient pulse. A cost function representative of the beam vibration is obtained by integrating the transient displacement squared over a region of the beam and over all time. The form of the controller is chosen a priori as either one or two delayed pulses. Delays constrain the controller to be causal. The best possible control is then examined while varying the region of control and the controller location. It is found that control is always possible using either one or two control pulses. The two pulse controller gives better performance than a single pulse controller, but finding the optimal delay time for the additional controllers increases as the square of the number of control pulses.