Hostname: page-component-6898cfcb55-zsp5v Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-11T09:22:26.166Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false

Linear feedback stabilization of point-vortex equilibria near a Kasper wing

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  18 August 2017

R. Nelson*
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Imperial College London, 180 Queen’s Gate, London SW7 2AZ, UK
B. Protas
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics and Statistics, McMaster University, Hamilton, Ontario L85 4K1, Canada
T. Sakajo
Affiliation:
Department of Mathematics, Kyoto University, Kitashirakawa Oiwake-cho, Sakyo-ku, Kyoto, 606-8502, Japan
*
†Email address for correspondence: rnelson@ic.ac.uk

Abstract

This paper concerns feedback stabilization of point-vortex equilibria above an inclined thin plate and a three-plate configuration known as the Kasper wing in the presence of an oncoming uniform flow. The flow is assumed to be potential and is modelled by the two-dimensional incompressible Euler equations. Actuation has the form of blowing and suction localized on the main plate and is represented in terms of a sink–source singularity, whereas measurement of pressure across the plate serves as system output. We focus on point-vortex equilibria forming a one-parameter family with locus approaching the trailing edge of the main plate and show that these equilibria are either unstable or neutrally stable. Using methods of linear control theory we find that the system dynamics linearized around these equilibria is both controllable and observable for almost all actuator and sensor locations. The design of the feedback control is based on the linear–quadratic–Gaussian (LQG) compensator. Computational results demonstrate the effectiveness of this control and the key finding of this study is that Kasper wing configurations are in general not only more controllable than their single-plate counterparts, but also exhibit larger basins of attraction under LQG feedback control. The feedback control is then applied to systems with additional perturbations added to the flow in the form of random fluctuations of the angle of attack and a vorticity shedding mechanism. Another important observation is that, in the presence of these additional perturbations, the control remains robust, provided the system does not deviate too far from its original state. Furthermore, except in a few isolated cases, introducing a vorticity-shedding mechanism enhanced the effectiveness of the control. Physical interpretation is provided for the results of the controllability and observability analysis as well as the response of the feedback control to different perturbations.

Information

Type
Papers
Copyright
© 2017 Cambridge University Press 
Figure 0

Figure 1.(a) Schematic of the flow configuration. The thick dashed lines correspond to the auxiliary plates present in the Kasper wing system (with $M=2$) but not in the single-plate system (with $M=0$). (b) Schematic of a typical pre-image domain.

Figure 1

Table 1.Solutions of equations (2.20) for three different values of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}$.

Figure 2

Figure 2.Rear tip equilibria and their linear stability for (a) $M=0$ (b) $M=2$, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}=\unicode[STIX]{x03C0}/12$, (c) $M=2$, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}=\unicode[STIX]{x03C0}/6$ and (d) $M=2$, $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}=5\unicode[STIX]{x03C0}/12$. Thick solid lines represent plates, whereas thin solid and dashed curves represent, respectively, the neutrally stable and unstable parts of the loci. The dotted horizontal lines separate the sections of the equilibrium loci characterized by linear instability and neutral stability. Square and triangle symbols represent, respectively, the locations of neutrally stable and unstable equilibria that will be subject to further analysis (information regarding these equilibria is summarized below in table 2).

Figure 3

Figure 3.Lift $F_{N}$ against $\text{Im}(z_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}})$. The solid curve represents the single-plate configuration (with $M=0$), the dotted curve the configuration with $M=2$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}=\unicode[STIX]{x03C0}/12$, the dashed curve the configuration with $M=2$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}=\unicode[STIX]{x03C0}/6$ and the dot-dash curve the configuration with $M=2$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x1D719}=5\unicode[STIX]{x03C0}/12$.

Figure 4

Figure 4.Trajectories (represented by the solid curves) of the solutions of system (2.9) in (a) case #3 and (b) case #4 (see table 2) in which the equilibria $z_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}}$ are perturbed to $z_{\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FC}}+\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}$, where $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=0.005\text{i}$, corresponding to the time interval $0\leqslant t\leqslant 50$. The dotted rectangles represent the regions magnified in the insets. In the magnified regions the solid circle marks the unperturbed equilibrium.

Figure 5

Table 2.Summary information about the different flow cases which will be analysed in the subsequent sections.

Figure 6

Figure 5.(a–g) The streamline patterns $\unicode[STIX]{x1D713}=\text{Im}[W]$ corresponding to the vortex equilibria from table 2.

Figure 7

Figure 6.(a) Dependence of the absolute value of the control residuals $|b_{1}|$ (solid curve) and $|b_{2}|$ (dashed curve) on the actuator location $x_{a}$ in case #1. The maxima of the residuals $|b_{1}|$ and $|b_{2}|$ occur at $x_{a}=0.571$ and $x_{a}=0.564$, respectively. The dotted vertical line indicates the $x$-coordinate of the point-vortex equilibrium. (b) Same as (a), but for the observability residuals $|c_{1}|$ and $|c_{2}|$. The maxima of the residuals $|c_{1}|$ and $|c_{2}|$ occur at $x_{m}=0.648$ and $x_{m}=0.487$, respectively.

Figure 8

Figure 7.(a) Dependence of the absolute value of the control residuals $|b_{1}|$ and $|b_{2}|$ on the actuator location $x_{a}$ in case #2 (the values of $|b_{1}|$ and $|b_{2}|$ are essentially the same in this configuration). The maximum value of the control residuals occurs at $x_{a}=0.358$. The dotted vertical line indicates the $x$-coordinate of the point-vortex equilibrium. (b) Same as (a), but for the observability residual. Here the maximum value occurs at $x_{m}=0.113$.

Figure 9

Figure 8.(a) Dependence of the absolute value of the control residuals $|b_{1}|$ and $|b_{2}|$ on the actuator location $x_{a}$ in case #3 (the values of $|b_{1}|$ and $|b_{2}|$ are essentially the same in this configuration). The maximum value of the control residuals occurs at $x_{a}=0.497$. The dotted vertical line indicates the $x$-coordinate of the point-vortex equilibrium. (b) Same as (a), but for the observability residual. Here the maximum value occurs at $x_{m}=0.413$.

Figure 10

Figure 9.(a) Dependence of the absolute value of the control residuals $|b_{1}|$ and $|b_{2}|$ on the actuator location $x_{a}$ in case #4 (the values of $|b_{1}|$ and $|b_{2}|$ are essentially the same in this configuration). The maximum value of the control residuals occurs at $x_{a}=0.334$. The dotted vertical line indicates the $x$-coordinate of the point-vortex equilibrium. (b) Same as (a), but for the observability residual. Here the maximum value occurs at $x_{m}=0.087$.

Figure 11

Table 3.Summary of the actuator and sensor placement in each case together with the corresponding maximum values of the controllability and observability residuals.

Figure 12

Figure 10.Schematic of a compensator composed of an estimator and a controller.

Figure 13

Figure 11.The first, second and third row correspond to cases #1, #3 and #5: (a,c,e) the uncontrolled vortex trajectory is represented by the dashed curve, the trajectory with LQG-based stabilization by the solid curve and the estimator trajectory by the dotted curve. The solid circular symbol represents the unperturbed equilibrium position and the square the initial perturbed position. (b,d,f) The corresponding linearized measurement $Y(t)$ (solid curve) and control intensity $m(t)$ (dashed curve).

Figure 14

Figure 12.The first, second and third row correspond to cases #2, #4 and #6: (a,c,e) the uncontrolled vortex trajectory is represented by the dashed curve, the trajectory with LQG-based stabilization by the solid curve and the estimator trajectory by the dotted curve. The solid circular symbol represents the unperturbed equilibrium position and the square the initial perturbed position. (b,d,f) The corresponding linearized measurement $Y(t)$ (solid curve) and control intensity $m(t)$ (dashed curve).

Figure 15

Figure 13.Case #7: (a) the uncontrolled vortex trajectory is represented by the dashed curve, the trajectory with LQG-based stabilization by the solid curve and the estimator trajectory by the dotted curve. The solid circular symbol represents the unperturbed equilibrium position and the square the initial perturbed position. (b) The corresponding measurement $Y(t)$ (solid curve) and control intensity $m(t)$ (dashed curve).

Figure 16

Figure 14.Time evolution of the magnitude of the perturbation for: (a) case #1 (solid curve), case #3 (dotted curve) and case #5 (dashed curve), (b) case #2 (solid curve), case #4 (dotted curve) and case #6 (dashed curve).

Figure 17

Figure 15.(a–f) Basins of attraction for cases #1–6 respectively. Thick solid lines represent the plates, dotted curves the basins when $R=1$ and solid curves the basins when $R=100$ (cf. (4.1)). The actuator and sensor locations are indicated by the triangle and square symbols respectively.

Figure 18

Figure 16.Case #5 with an initial perturbation of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=-2.0$. (a) The vortex trajectory with LQG-based stabilization is represented by the solid curve, the estimator trajectory by the dotted curve and the uncontrolled trajectory by the dashed curve. The solid circular symbol represents the unperturbed equilibrium position and the square the initial perturbed position. (b) The corresponding measurement $Y(t)$ (solid curve) and control intensity $m(t)$ (dashed curve).

Figure 19

Figure 17.(a) Vortex trajectories (solid curve) and estimator trajectories (dotted curve) for initial perturbation $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=-0.1\text{i}$ and disturbances with $\unicode[STIX]{x0394}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}\sim {\mathcal{N}}(0,0.2)$ in a case #1. The square symbol indicates the initial position of the perturbed vortex and the solid circle the equilibrium position in the absence of any stochastic forcing. (b) The corresponding time histories of the measurement (solid curve) and control magnitude (dashed curve). (c,d) Same as (a,b), but for a case #4 configuration with $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=0.075\text{i}$ and $\unicode[STIX]{x0394}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}\sim {\mathcal{N}}(0,0.4)$; in (c) the inset represents a magnification of the neighbourhood of the equilibrium.

Figure 20

Figure 18.(a) Vortex trajectories (solid curve) and estimator trajectories (dotted curve) for initial perturbation $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=-0.25$ and disturbances with $\unicode[STIX]{x0394}\unicode[STIX]{x1D712}\sim {\mathcal{N}}(0.1,0.1)$ in a case #1. The square symbol indicates the initial position of the perturbed vortex and the solid circle the equilibrium position in the absence of any stochastic forcing. (b) The corresponding time histories of the measurement (solid curve) and control magnitude (dashed curve). (c,d) Same as (a,b), but for a case #5. The inset in (c) shows a magnification of the region close the uncontrolled vortex equilibrium.

Figure 21

Figure 19.(a) Case #1 configuration with initial perturbation $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=0.3$. The dashed curve represents the controlled vortex trajectory starting from the outside of the basin of attraction in the absence of shedding, the thin solid curve the controlled trajectory in the presence of shedding and the dotted curve the estimator trajectory in the presence of shedding. The solid circular symbol represents the unperturbed equilibrium position and the square the initial perturbed position. (b) The corresponding time history of the measurements $Y(t)$ (solid curve) and control intensity $m(t)$ (dashed curve) in the presence of shedding. (c) The corresponding circulation of the most recently shed vortex at $z_{i1}$. (d–f) Same as (a–c) but for a case #5 configuration with $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=0.52\text{i}$. Additionally, in (d) the thicker solid lines represent the plate boundaries and in (f) the solid, dotted and dashed curves represents the circulations of the most recently shed vortices at $z_{i1}$, $z_{i2}$ and $z_{i3}$ respectively.

Figure 22

Figure 20.(a) Case #4 configuration with initial perturbation of $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=0.1\text{i}$. The dashed curve represents the controlled vortex trajectory in the absence of shedding, the thin solid curve the controlled trajectory in the presence of shedding and the dotted curve the estimator trajectory in the presence of shedding. The thicker solid lines represent the plate boundaries, the solid circular symbol the unperturbed equilibrium position and the square the initial perturbed position. The inset shows a magnification of the region close the vortex equilibrium. (b) The corresponding time histories of the measurements $Y(t)$ (solid curve) and control intensity $m(t)$ (dashed curve) in the presence of shedding. (c) The corresponding circulations of the most recently shed vortices at $z_{i1}$ (solid curve), $z_{i2}$ (dotted curve) and $z_{i3}$ (dashed curve). (d–f) Same as (a–c) but for a case #1 configuration with $\unicode[STIX]{x1D6FF}=0.375\exp (-0.13\text{i}\unicode[STIX]{x03C0})$. The inset shows the region close to the unperturbed equilibrium.