Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (3)

Search Parameters:
Keywords = explicit control scheme (ECS)

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
28 pages, 4610 KB  
Article
Stabilization of the Cart–Inverted-Pendulum System Using State-Feedback Pole-Independent MPC Controllers
by Lotfi Messikh, El-Hadi Guechi and Sašo Blažič
Sensors 2022, 22(1), 243; https://doi.org/10.3390/s22010243 - 29 Dec 2021
Cited by 16 | Viewed by 6529
Abstract
In this paper, a pole-independent, single-input, multi-output explicit linear MPC controller is proposed to stabilize the fourth-order cart–inverted-pendulum system around the desired equilibrium points. To circumvent an obvious stability problem, a generalized prediction model is proposed that yields an MPC controller with four [...] Read more.
In this paper, a pole-independent, single-input, multi-output explicit linear MPC controller is proposed to stabilize the fourth-order cart–inverted-pendulum system around the desired equilibrium points. To circumvent an obvious stability problem, a generalized prediction model is proposed that yields an MPC controller with four tuning parameters. The first two parameters, namely the horizon time and the relative cart–pendulum weight factor, are automatically adjusted to ensure a priori prescribed system gain margin and fast pendulum response while the remaining two parameters, namely the pendulum and cart velocity weight factors, are maintained as free tuning parameters. The comparison of the proposed method with some optimal control methods in the absence of disturbance input shows an obvious advantage in the average peak efficiency in favor of the proposed SIMO MPC controller at the price of slightly reduced speed efficiency. Additionally, none of the compared controllers can achieve a system gain margin greater than 1.63, while the proposed one can go beyond that limit at the price of additional degradation in the speed efficiency. Full article
(This article belongs to the Topic Advanced Systems Engineering: Theory and Applications)
Show Figures

Figure 1

20 pages, 6557 KB  
Article
Developing Earthquake-Resistant Structural Design Standard for Malaysia Based on Eurocode 8: Challenges and Recommendations
by Daniel T. W. Looi, Nelson Lam and Hing-Ho Tsang
Standards 2021, 1(2), 134-153; https://doi.org/10.3390/standards1020012 - 1 Dec 2021
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 12996
Abstract
In late 2017, the Malaysian National Annex (NA) to Eurocode 8 (EC8) was released and enacted following some 13 years of deliberations and preparations. The authors of this paper aim to use this article to share their experiences and reflections during this period [...] Read more.
In late 2017, the Malaysian National Annex (NA) to Eurocode 8 (EC8) was released and enacted following some 13 years of deliberations and preparations. The authors of this paper aim to use this article to share their experiences and reflections during this period of developing the first national standard for the seismic design of buildings for Malaysia. To begin with, there were major challenges in implementing the 20-year-old EC8 framework for a country so far away from Europe. The first challenge was adapting the probabilistic seismic hazard assessment (PSHA) methodology in a low-to-moderate seismicity region where the paucity of representative seismic data presented a great deal of uncertainties. To address this situation, imposing a minimum level of seismic hazard was recommended. The second challenge was about dealing with the outdated EC8 site classification scheme, which poorly represents the potential effects of soil amplification in certain geological settings. To address this situation, an alternative site classification scheme in which the site natural period is an explicit modelling parameter was introduced. The third challenge was concerned with difficulties generated by the EC8 provisions mandating Ductility Class Medium (DCM) detailing in certain localities where the level of seismic hazard is predicted to exceed a certain threshold. To address this situation, the viable option of using strength to trade off for ductility was recommended, or in cases where ductility design is needed, a simplified set of code-compliant DCM designs was presented. The fourth challenge was about handling the requirements of EC8 that the majority of buildings are to involve dynamic analysis in their structural design when the majority of practising professionals did not have the skills of exercising proper use of the requisite software. To address this situation, a generalized force method was introduced to control the use dynamic analysis in commercial software. It is hoped that, through sharing the lessons learnt, code drafters for the future would be able to find ways of circumventing the multitude of challenges with clear thinking and pragmatism. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Feature Papers to Celebrate the Inaugural Issue of Standards)
Show Figures

Figure 1

25 pages, 46485 KB  
Article
Large Eddy Simulation with Energy-Conserving Schemes and the Smagorinsky Model: A Note on Accuracy and Computational Efficiency
by Dhruv Mehta, Ye Zhang, Alexander Van Zuijlen and Hester Bijl
Energies 2019, 12(1), 129; https://doi.org/10.3390/en12010129 - 31 Dec 2018
Cited by 6 | Viewed by 5490
Abstract
Despite advances in turbulence modelling, the Smagorinsky model remains a popular choice for large eddy simulation (LES) due to its simplicity and ease of use. The dissipation in turbulence energy that the model introduces, is proportional to the Smagorinsky constant, of which many [...] Read more.
Despite advances in turbulence modelling, the Smagorinsky model remains a popular choice for large eddy simulation (LES) due to its simplicity and ease of use. The dissipation in turbulence energy that the model introduces, is proportional to the Smagorinsky constant, of which many different values have been proposed. These values have been derived for certain simulated test-cases while using a specific set of numerical schemes, to obtain the correct dissipation in energy simply because an incorrect value of the Smagorinsky constant would lead to an incorrect dissipation. However, it is important to bear in mind that numerical codes may suffer from numerical or artificial dissipation, which occurs spuriously through a combination of spatio-temporal and iterative errors. The latter can be controlled through more iterations, the former however, depends on the grid resolution and the time step. Recent research suggests that a complete energy-conserving (EC) spatio-temporal discretisation guarantees zero numerical dissipation for any grid resolution and time step. Therefore, using an EC scheme would ensure that dissipation occurs primarily through the Smagorinsky model (and errors in its implementation) than through the discretisation of the Navier-Stokes (NS) equations. To evaluate the efficacy of these schemes for engineering applications, the article first discusses the use of an EC temporal discretisation as regards to accuracy and computational effort, to ascertain whether EC time advancement is advantageous or not. It was noticed that a simple non-EC explicit method with a smaller time step not only reduces the numerical dissipation to an acceptable level but is computationally cheaper than an implicit-EC scheme for wide range of time steps. Secondly, in terms of spatial discretisation on uniform grids (popular in LES), a simple central-difference scheme is as accurate as an EC spatial discretisation. Finally, following the removal of numerical dissipation with any of the methods mentioned above, one is able to choose a Smagorinsky constant that is nearly independent of the grid resolution (within realistic bounds, for OpenFOAM and an in-house code). This article provides impetus to the efficient use of the Smagorinsky model for LES in fields such as wind farm aerodynamics and atmospheric simulations, instead of more comprehensive and computationally demanding turbulence models. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Computational Fluid Dynamics (CFD) 2018)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop