1.

111Equation Chapter 1 Section 1Introduction:

Vibration control of flexible structures and space structures by passive means is difficult
due to the low natural frequencies and low environmental damping respectively. Various
exercise machines at space stations such as ergometers and treadmills tend to cause
disturbances at very low frequencies which might affect the sensitive microgravity
experiments[1]. PID control is one of the most used control algorithms in control systems.
Its effectiveness in the AVC is studied widely[2–4]. Generally, while designing the
controller a reduced order model of a continuous system is used for analysis. Increasing
the PID gains the amplitude of vibrations pertaining to first mode are reduced. But above
the certain threshold value of gain, system starts to vibrate at higher un-modelled
modes[5]. Resonant controller acts as a low pass filter and avoids the excitation of higher
modes of the system. In theory, this property of a resonant control allows to create
antiresonance and attenuate the vibrations at resonance completely without exciting the
unmodelled modes. Adding the first-order compensator in parallel to a feedback path of a
Positive Position feedback controller results in improved performance at a steady state[6].
The performance of the same modification is studied and verified experimentally, for
velocity and acceleration feedback[3,4]. Further studies implied that the combined
modified position feedback and modified velocity feedback gives better performance
compared to modified positive position feedback (MPPF)[9]. Another combination of
filters was proposed by Omidi, E. and Mahmoodi, N.[10]. The control strategy was
termed as Hybrid Positive feedback control where both velocity and displacement are
passed though the first and second order filters respectively. The performance of
proposed control strategy was studied and verified experimentally, for the MDOF model.
Wu, Y-S et al proposed a compensated Positive Position Feedback where an extra
second-order filter with a negative gain is added to the feedback path[11]. Added
compensator improves the performance in the low-frequency region with little influence
on performance in the amplification region. Sayed M, et al proposed a filter where the
parameters depend on the input signal and the control force is equal to the filter output to
the power of n[12]. The performance of the proposed method was studied for both
externally and parametrically excited duffing oscillator with n equals 2 and 3. In terms of
the effectiveness of the absorber, the Quadratic controller performs better as compared to
the cubic controller. But, in the case of a quadratic controller the stability region of the
whole system cannot be increased, and it depends on the system parameters only. The
cubic controller gives much control over the stability region. A linear control strategy
with a filtered acceleration and position feedback can suppress the self-excited
oscillations in a nonlinear system[13,14]. To attenuate the large amplitude oscillations to
a greater extent, a nonlinear control law can be used. Mondal, J. et al proposed a
nonlinear control strategy where the velocity signal is passed through a second-order
linear filter and the control force is set to be a nonlinear function of filter output[15].
When it comes to the implementation of controllers, a digital implementation is preferred
most of the time due to its flexibility and easy to implement characteristics. Digital
controllers take time to read, process and generate the output signal. Generally, the time
taken by sensors and DACs is very small and does not affect the system performance. But
processing can take a long time depending on the complexity of the controller and the
number of calculations to be performed at each iteration. Hence it would be appropriate to
design the controller by including the estimated time delay[13–15]. Chatterjee, S.
proposed a simple, memory-efficient time delayed recursive filter[16]. The proposed filter
controls the low frequency and resonant vibrations of a linear system as well as the
primary and subharmonic resonances of a forced duffing oscillator.
It has been found that fractional-order control is effective in control systems where the
goal is to attain the set reference point[17–21]. A little literature is available on the use of
fractional calculus in Active Vibration Control (AVC)[22–24]. The magnification due to
the fractional-order filter in the amplification region is greater compared to the integer-
order filter with the same level of attenuation in the isolation zone [22]. Hence the
fractional-order filter gives better performance in terms of reduced spillover effect.
For the chosen control strategy, various optimization techniques can be used to obtain the
controller parameters. Some of the most used designs are, Crossover design[15], H2
design[10], and H∞ design[10,25]. Crossover design improves the performance of the
controller in time domain and ensures a single peak in a frequency response. But it
requires high filter damping whereas H2 design splits the peaks and possess very low
filter damping[26]. Krenk, S. and Hogsberg, J. proposed a design procedure for the family
of resonant controllers such that the two modes of the system are separated and both
modes possess the same damping ratio[27]. These constraints result in a frequency
response with two distinct equal peaks. Den Hartog’s equal peak criteria is another
method for the equal peak design[28]. The objective of H∞ design is to minimize the
peak value of the frequency response curve. H∞ optimized controller gives better
performance compared to the H2 optimized controller[10].
 Another reason behind the effectiveness of resonant controllers is that the phase

difference between the input and output of the controller is at the filter frequency.
Which results in improved damping at the selected filter frequency. But in the presence of
significant delay, the deviation of phase from the expected value is proportional to the
frequency of oscillations and hence the system is prone to instability at higher frequencies
in the amplification region. There is not much freedom to modify the integer-order
control to overcome this problem. If the order of derivatives used in the control law is not
limited to the integer values, then there is a possibility of getting a better and more stable
frequency response. Fractional-order derivative shifts the harmonic signal by a pre-set
constant value which would neutralize the negative phase shift due to delay to some
extent resulting in an increased phase margin.
2. Mathematical Model
The non-dimensional equation of motion for an SDOF system with nonlinear stiffness and
damping is,

22\* MERGEFORMAT
()

Where, and are nondimensional excitation and control forces respectively.

The governing equation of the proposed controller and the control law is defined as

33\* MERGEFORMAT ()

The parameters used in the above equations are,

Since the process by which the control variable is obtained from the feedback signal is
purely linear, changing the orders of the operators in the process won’t affect the control

variable as well as the system response. The process includes three operators, pth order
derivative, a second-order filter and a qth order derivative. So, the system performance

depends on the sum of the orders of derivatives . It can be verified from the
analytical solution. While implementing, must be set to the nearest integer to . Once the
value of q is fixed, the value of p can be obtained using . Depending on the value of
, the control strategy can be classified as Position feedback, Velocity feedback or
acceleration feedback control for q equals to 0,1 and 2 respectively.

3. Static stability of the system:

When the system in the static condition is subjected to small fluctuations, effect of nonlinear
terms is negligible and hence nonlinear terms can be neglected. So, the linear stability
analysis of the system is sufficient to determine the static stability of the system.

44\* MERGEFORMAT ()
Applying Laplace transform, and simplifying yields the following transfer function

The characteristic equation of the above system is,

55\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

The system will be statically unstable if the roots of the above equation lie in the right half of
the complex plane. From the Argument principle, the difference between the number of zeros
and poles enclosed by a closed curve is given by
The characteristic equation for the above system does not have any poles so the integral over
the closed boundary gives the number of zeros in the region enclosed by the boundary. Since
the coefficients of the characteristic equation are real, the roots will be either complex
conjugates or will lie on the real axis i.e. the location of the poles will be symmetric about the
real axis. Hence stability can be determined by selecting only the first quadrant assuming that
there are no poles on the real and imaginary axes. Let the curves bounding the first quadrant

be , and as shown in Figure 1.

Figure 1:Mapping first quadrant from s-plane to E(s)-plane

In the above expression, each integral gives the change in argument as we move from starting

point to the ending point of the curve. A curve is a real axis in plane which is mapped to

a real axis in plane. Hence there will be no change in argument as we move along the

curve .

Since the curve is closed,

Where and denotes the real and imaginary parts of .

Let represents the curve .

So, along the curve , varies from to and .

Substituting it in 5

Applying limits on and evaluating ,

The function to be integrated to obtain the change in an argument along the curve is very
complicated and symbolical integration is not possible. So, the graphical method is used to

determine the stability of the system. The change in the argument of is as a point

moves on the curve in an anticlockwise direction i.e. one full rotation in the

anticlockwise direction. For a stable system, the change in the argument of across the

curve must be i.e. one full rotation in the clockwise direction. That means if

we map the curve in the plane, it must move around the origin. For a convex curve,
if the origin lies on the left side of the curve (starting from 0) i.e. inside the region formed by

the curve, then the system is stable. The equation of curve can be expressed as .
From the above expression,

For , as ,

And for , at ,

So, for , the curve starts from and moves in a clockwise direction until the
linear term becomes dominating and then start moving in the anticlockwise direction. In such
cases, the geometric approach fails to determine the stability correctly. For such cases, a
different starting point is selected as shown in Figure 2.

Figure 2: Modification in the geometric approach

The Principal Argument method used above is valid only if there are no zeros or poles on the
boundary. We have considered the positive real axis as one of the boundaries of the region
and due to the presence of delay, the system may possess a positive real pole.
For , as ,

And for , at ,

That means the system will have a positive real pole only if and . To check the
presence of a positive real root in such a case, the following equation is solved for .

Once the solution is obtained (say, ), is calculated. If , then the system is

unstable.

Figure 3:Effect of delay on stable region

In Figure 3, the area bounded by the two curves of the same colour is a stable region. It can
be observed that introducing delay results in an increased gain margin for . There is a
transition region where the signs of the gain change or switch for stable performance. We

have considered the weakly damped system , but if an undamped system is

considered then this transition region shrinks to a switching point. In Figure 3, the switching
point shifts towards the right as the delay increases. For , as delay increases, the gain
margin first increases and then decreases.

4. Nonlinear analysis using the method of multiple scales:

The filter equation is linear and hence at steady-state filter variables can be expressed in
terms of filter parameters and the system variable as follows,

Where,

The delayed term can be written as,

Substituting the above expression for the filter variable and rearranging the terms,

66\*
MERGEFORMAT ()
Where,
Let, and be two-time scales.

So, the solution of the above equation can be expressed as,

Neglecting the higher-order terms,

Substituting the above expression in the equation 6, and equating the coefficients of

Now, equating the coefficients of and simplifying one can get the following equations

77\
* MERGEFORMAT ()

88\*
MERGEFORMAT ()
Eliminating the secular terms from 7 and 8 and balncing the harmonics following slow flow
equations are obtained,

99\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

1010\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

1111\* MERGEFORMAT ()

1212\* MERGEFORMAT ()

At steady state,
Applying the steady state conditions in equations, 9, 10, 11 and 12

1313\* MERGEFORMAT ()

1414\* MERGEFORMAT ()

1515\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

1616\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

From above equations one can get the following polynomial, which is solved using
MATLAB and the results thus obtained are compared with the simulation.

1717\* MERGEFORMAT ()

Where,
And,

Linear Stability Analysis:

Rearranging the equations, 9, 10, 11 and 12

The stability of steady state solution is determined from the Jacobian of the above slow flow
equations which is given in Appendix.
 Figure 4: Verification of analytical solution using MATLAB Simulink

5. Performance Optimization
5.1. Cross-Over Design

In the Crossover design, all poles of the system are placed as far as possible from the
origin which is possible only if the poles are coinciding. The crossover design ensures
that the system possesses identical eigenvalues and a single peak in frequency response.

Using first-order Pade approximant for the exponential term one can get the following
equation,

Where the characteristic equation of the system is,

Above equation can be rewritten as,

 1818\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

Where,

For at least two roots of an equation to be coincident, the derivative of an equation

evaluated at the root must be zero.

i.e.,

But here, and are complex variables.

Let,

Substituting in 18 we get,

Equating real and imaginary parts on both sides following equations are obtained
 1919\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

The conditions for coincident roots are,

2020\* MERGEFORMAT
()
So, we get four equations with 6 variables including and , provided that the system

parameters are given. The other four parameters are , , and . In practice, there
will be constraints on the values of gain due to exciter dynamics as well as its saturation
limit. The lower bound on the time delay is also dependent on the hardware as well as the
efficiency of the code that is being used. Therefore, it will be appropriate to fix the gain
and time delay and get the optimized filter parameters for the selected value of .

To verify the results of the method used above. The poles of the system are calculated,
and it is observed that the complex poles are coinciding. To get the poles it is assumed
that is a rational number i.e., it can be expressed as the ratio of two integers and
(say)

Introducing a new variable such that,

So, the transfer function in the plane is,

The characteristic equation is now a simple polynomial, and its roots can be calculated
easily. The polynomial has roots. The -plane is divided into n-Riemann sheets such
that each point in the s-plane can be uniquely mapped to a single point in each Riemann
sheet. Only the roots from the first Riemann sheet have physical meaning and hence only
those roots are considered[29].

The frequency response and time response of the system for optimized and unoptimized
parameters are shown in Figures 5 and 6. In an optimized system, the oscillation dies out
quickly as compared to the unoptimized system.

Figure 5: Time response of an optimized and unoptimized system subjected to impulse input

The effective damping increases with an increase in linear gain and increases as
increases, attain maximum value, and then decreases. These results are verified using
simulation results and are shown in Figure 7. The maxima shift towards the higher values
of as the gain increases. Similarly, the peak amplitude decreases with increasing ,
attains minimum value and then increases as shown in Figure 10.
 Figure 6: Variation in effective damping

Figure 7: Time response of an uncontrolled system

 Figure 8 Effect of Gain on Peak of a Frequency Response Curve

The effect of delay on effective damping, peak amplitude, and area under the frequency
response curve is shown in Figures 11, 12, and 13 respectively. For ,
introducing delay results in reduced effective damping. But for higher values of , there
is not much change in the effective damping. For , increasing delay reduces the
effective damping up to a certain limit of , then starts increasing. For , there
exists a value of for which the effective damping is maximum. And that value shifts
towards the right as the delay is increased.

For , both peak amplitude and the area under the frequency response curve reduce as
the delay is increased which implies that introducing delay improves the performance as
well as stability of the controller for . For lower values of in the range
, there is not much variation in the peak amplitude as delay is increased. But
for , the increased delay results in a reduced peak amplitude. For , the area
under the frequency response curve increases as the delay is increased.
Figure 9: Effect of delay on Effective Damping

Figure 10: Effect of Delay on Peak amplitude

 Figure 11 Frequency response of the system for Fractional and Integer order feedback

Introducing nonlinear gain reduces the area under the frequency response curve for
But, the peak amplitude first reduces up to a certain limit of and then
increases as the nonlinear gain is increased.
 Figure 12:Effect of nonlinear gain on Peak Amplitude

A system with a crossover design reaches the steady-state quickly and hence is effective
for systems susceptible to frequent disturbances. If the system remains undisturbed for
most of the time other designs such as , and equal peak designs can give a better
frequency response.

Figure 13: Variation of optimal value of r

5.2. Equal Peak Design

The combined and equal peak design is used to obtain the filter parameters for better
frequency response. The cost functions used for the optimization are as follows.

Where, , are maxima and is a minimum.

The following equation is obtained from equation (4) for

 2121\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

Where,

It is of the form,

At peaks,

2222\* MERGEFORMAT ()

From Equations 15 and (7) one can get the frequencies at which the slope of the
frequency response curve is zero. The amplitude of response at these frequencies can be
obtained by solving equation (6).
 Figure 14: Frequency response of the system with crossover design and equal peak design

Figure 15: Effect of gain on the area under the frequency response curve (Equal Peak Design)
 Figure 16 Frequency response of the system for various values of filter damping

For a special case , the frequency response curve passes through two fixed points
irrespective of the filter damping as shown in the figure. The fixed point can be obtained
by finding the intersection points of frequency response curves of the system with zero
and infinite filter damping[28]. For zero filter damping, the relation between frequency
and amplitude is given by,

2323\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

Where , and

For infinite filter damping, the equation is,

2424\*
MERGEFORMAT ()
The points of the intersection will satisfy the equation 23 and 24. From which the
following expression for amplitude can be obtained,

2525\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

From 24 and 25 one can get the frequency and amplitude of a fixed point. Let the

frequencies obtained be , and the corresponding amplitudes are , respectively.

The conditions for the equal peak design are as follows,

2626\* MERGEFORMAT ()

And

2727\* MERGEFORMAT ()

The frequency response curve for nonzero finite damping is of form,

2828\* MERGEFORMAT ()

Where,

Differentiating equation 28 with respect to

For to be zero, must be equal to zero.

 Thus, the two cost functions for the optimization are chosen as,

Here the first cost function ensures that the peaks are at fixed points and the second cost
function ensures that the amplitude of fixed points are equal (i.e. equal peaks)

Figure 17 FRC of a system with equal peak design parameters

The fractional control improves the performance for both crossover design and equal peak
design as shown in Figures 10 and 17.

6. Bounded Control

In practice the control force exerted by the actuator is limited. Once the desired control force
exceeds this limit, even the linear system shows nonlinear behaviour. In such cases, the
system may become unstable and hence suitable control law needs to be chosen such that the
control force is always bounded irrespective of the amplitude of system response.
Where, is an Algebraic saturation function.

For the sinusoidal input, describing the function of the saturation function is
equivalent to a gain obtained by the following expression,

The filter equation is the same.

Where,

And as used in the previous section

Using the multiple time scale method, one can get the steady-state equations as

Eliminating the from the above equations we get,

2929\*
MERGEFORMAT ()

Now the linearized form of the system is given as,

The linearized system is similar to the system defined by the equation 4, but here the gain is
and is the saturation limit. Hence the optimized parameters are obtained by using the
method described in section 5.

Figure 18: Effect of delay on peak amplitude

The minimum force amplitude for which the actuator saturates can be obtained as shown
below. Since the algebraic saturation function tends to saturate at infinity, the percentage of
saturation is considered.
Substituting the above values in 29 the minimum excitation force at which actuator
saturates can be calculated.

Figure 19: effect of delay on minimum excitation force at which actuator saturates

7. Experimental setup
A cantilever beam with the first mode at 11.25 Hz, is used as a model. The experimental
setup is shown in Figures 20 and 21. The details about the instruments used are given in
Table 1. The sample time during the entire experiment was set to 1 millisecond. For the
implementation of fractional order derivative, the equivalent transfer function of 5 th order
was obtained using Crone’s method from ninteger toolbox[30]. Both the second-order
filter and filter equivalent to fractional-order derivative was discretized using the Tustin
method. For the experimental purpose, the microcontroller was used to give both
excitation and control signals. The gain of the power amplifier was set at the desired
position and that position was maintained throughout the experiments.
 Figure 20 Experimental Setup

Equipment Model Use

Accelerometers ADXL335(MEMS) Feedback
PCB Piezotronics Measurement
Microcontroller TI C2000 – F28379D Signal processing
Analyser B&K Pulse PC card front Real-time FFT and time
end history data
Power Amplifier B&K Type 2719 Signal Amplification
Vibration Exciter B&K Type 4808 Actuator
Table 1 List of Equipment and their use
 Figure 21 Block diagram of the experimental setup

8. Experimental Results
First, the delay was set to 14 milliseconds i.e., a nondimensional delay of 0.9896. For
selected gain and delay, the optimal value of r is calculated such that the peak value of the
frequency response function is minimum. The filter parameters were obtained from the
crossover design. The experimental results comparing integer-order control and fractional
order control are shown in Figures 22, 23 and 24. From Figures 22 and 23, it can be
observed that as the gain increases the optimal value of r also increases which is in
agreement with the analytical results shown in Figure 13.
Figure 22: Comparison of performances in the frequency domain (k = -0.04)

Figure 23: Comparison of performances in frequency domain( k = -0.08)

 Figure 24 Comparison of performances in the time domain

For both integer and fractional order control, increasing the gain improves the
performance of the controller as shown in Figures 25 and 26.

Figure 25 Effect of gain on frequency response for the integer value of r

 Figure 26 Effect of gain on frequency response for the fractional value of r

From Figure 27, it can be observed that introducing the delay results in performance
deterioration for the integer-order control. Also, it results in a reduced gain margin as
shown in Figure 3. Both crossover design and equal peak design are verified
experimentally and are shown in Figures 28 and 29. By considering the nonzero

values of i.e., the nonlinear control law, higher amplitude oscillations can be
suppressed further as shown in Figure 30.

From Table 2, we can conclude that the fractional-order control is better than the
integer-order control for high values of delay. Also, fractional order control seems to
be effective for high values of gain and zero delay as shown in Figure 31. So, the
above results can be summarized as shown in Table 3.

k = -0.04 (Crossover design)

r=2 r = 2.4
Experimenta
Analytical Analytical Experimental
l
0 0.0446 0.0475 0.0472 0.0596
0.9896 0.0577 0.0556 0.0485 0.0482
Table 2: Comparison of peak values for integer and fractional order control
 Gain
Low High
Delay Low Integer order Fractional
Order
High Fractional Fractional
Order order
Table 3: Criteria for choosing the fractional-order control

Figure 27 Effect of delay on Frequency response (r = 2)

Figure 28 Comparison of performances with Crossover Design and Equal Peak design (r = 2)

Figure 29 Comparison of performances with Crossover design and Equal Peak design(r = 2.5)
 Figure 30 Effect of Nonlinear gain on frequency response (r = 2)

Figure 31 Comparison of performances of fractional and integer-order control (k = -0.6)

9. Conclusion
In this paper, a generalized model of an SDOF system with nonlinear stiffness and
damping is considered. To control the vibrations due to external harmonic excitation, a
fractional-order control law is proposed. The approximate solution of the system of
equations is obtained from the method of multiple scales. The static stability of the
system is checked using the Argument principle. Optimization of filter parameters is done
by using the crossover design and Equal peak design. The performance of bounded
control is studied, it shows trends similar to the unbounded control. The effect of the gain
corresponding to the nonlinear term in control law is studied. Increasing this gain results
in the suppression of high amplitude oscillations near resonance without affecting the low
amplitude oscillations at other frequencies. Analytical results are verified with both
numerical simulation and experiments.
From the analytical solution and with the supporting experimental results we can
conclude that the fractional-order control gives better performance for the higher value of
delay and gain. This implies that it can be used in more complicated network control
strategies for the vibration control of multiple modes of the system, where more
processing time is required unlike the simpler AVC of the SDOF system. It can be also
used in applications where low-cost controllers with less computation power are used.
Appendix

Jacobian of slow flow equations

 References

[1] M.J.B. Rogers, K. Hrovat, M.E. Moskowitz, Effects of exercise equipment on the microgravity
environment, Advances in Space Research. 24 (1999) 1283–1287. https://doi.org/10.1016/S0273-
1177(99)00734-6.
[2] M.M. Jovanović, A.M. Simonović, N.D. Zorić, N.S. Lukić, S.N. Stupar, S.S. Ilić, Experimental
studies on active vibration control of a smart composite beam using a PID controller, Smart Materials
and Structures. 22 (2013). https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-1726/22/11/115038.
[3] S. Kumar, R. Srivastava, R.K. Srivastava, ACTIVE VIBRATION CONTROL OF SMART PIEZO
CANTILEVER BEAM USING PID CONTROLLER, n.d. http://www.ijret.org.
[4] S.M. Khot, N.P. Yelve, R. Tomar, S. Desai, S. Vittal, Active vibration control of cantilever beam by
using PID based output feedback controller, JVC/Journal of Vibration and Control. 18 (2012) 366–
372. https://doi.org/10.1177/1077546311406307.
[5] E. Eshraqi, M. Shahravi, M. Azimi, Consideration of spillover effect in active vibration suppression
of a smart composite plate using piezoelectric elements, Latin American Journal of Solids and
Structures. 13 (2016) 2343–2356. https://doi.org/10.1590/1679-78253089.
[6] S. Nima Mahmoodi, M. Ahmadian, Active vibration control with modified positive position feedback,
Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, Transactions of the ASME. 131 (2009) 1–8.
https://doi.org/10.1115/1.3089565.
[7] E. Omidi, R. Mccarty, S.N. Mahmoodi, Implementation of modified positive velocity feedback
controller for active vibration control in smart structures, 9057 (2014) 1–11.
https://doi.org/10.1117/12.2044478.
[8] S.N. Mahmoodi, M. Ahmadian, Modified acceleration feedback for active vibration control of
aerospace structures, Smart Materials and Structures. 19 (2010). https://doi.org/10.1088/0964-
1726/19/6/065015.
[9] E. Omidi, S.N. Mahmoodi, W.S. Shepard, Multi positive feedback control method for active vibration
suppression in flexible structures, Mechatronics. 33 (2016) 23–33.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechatronics.2015.12.003.
[10] E. Omidi, N. Mahmoodi, Hybrid Positive Feedback Control for Active Vibration Attenuation of
Flexible Structures, IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics. 20 (2015) 1790–1797.
https://doi.org/10.1109/TMECH.2014.2354599.
[11] Y. Wu, W. Zhang, X. Meng, Y. Su, Compensated positive position feedback for active control of
piezoelectric structures, Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures. 29 (2018) 397–410.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1045389X17708045.
[12] M. Sayed, M. Kamel, 1:2 and 1:3 internal resonance active absorber for non-linear vibrating system,
Applied Mathematical Modelling. 36 (2012) 310–332. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.apm.2011.05.057.
[13] A. Sarkar, J. Mondal, S. Chatterjee, Controlling self-excited vibration using positive position
feedback with time-delay, Journal of the Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering.
42 (2020). https://doi.org/10.1007/s40430-020-02544-7.
[14] A. Sarkar, J. Mondal, S. Chatterjee, Controlling self-excited vibration using acceleration feedback
with time-delay, International Journal of Dynamics and Control. 7 (2019) 1521–1531.
https://doi.org/10.1007/s40435-019-00577-y.
[15] J. Mondal, S. Chatterjee, Controlling self-excited vibration of a nonlinear beam by nonlinear resonant
velocity feedback with time-delay, International Journal of Non-Linear Mechanics. 131 (2021).
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ijnonlinmec.2021.103684.
[16] S. Chatterjee, Vibration control by recursive time-delayed acceleration feedback, Journal of Sound
and Vibration. 317 (2008) 67–90. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2008.03.020.
[17] C.A. Monje, B.M. Vinagre, V. Feliu, Y.Q. Chen, Tuning and auto-tuning of fractional order
controllers for industry applications, Control Engineering Practice. 16 (2008) 798–812.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2007.08.006.
[18] S.H. HosseinNia, I. Tejado, B.M. Vinagre, Fractional-order reset control: Application to a
servomotor, Mechatronics. 23 (2013) 781–788. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.mechatronics.2013.03.005.
[19] S.H. Hosseinnia, I. Tejado, D. Torres, B.M. Vinagre, V. Feliu, A General Form for Reset Control
Including Fractional Order Dynamics, n.d.
[20] S.H. Hosseinnia, I. Tejado, V. Milanés, J. Villagrá, B.M. Vinagre, Experimental application of hybrid
fractional-order adaptive cruise control at low speed, IEEE Transactions on Control Systems
Technology. 22 (2014) 2329–2336. https://doi.org/10.1109/TCST.2014.2308837.
[21] S. Kapoulea, C. Psychalinos, A.S. Elwakil, S.H. HosseinNia, Realizations of fractional-order PID
loop-shaping controller for mechatronic applications, Integration. 80 (2021) 5–12.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.vlsi.2021.04.009.
[22] L. Marinangeli, F. Alijani, S.H. HosseinNia, Fractional-order positive position feedback compensator
for active vibration control of a smart composite plate, Journal of Sound and Vibration. 412 (2018) 1–
16. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2017.09.009.
[23] D. Feliu-Talegon, A. San-Millan, V. Feliu-Batlle, Fractional-order integral resonant control of
collocated smart structures, Control Engineering Practice. 56 (2016) 210–223.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2016.07.016.
[24] H. Butler, C. de Hoon, Fractional-order filters for active damping in a lithographic tool, Control
Engineering Practice. 21 (2013) 413–419. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conengprac.2012.12.011.
[25] E. Omidi, S. Nima Mahmoodi, Vibration control of collocated smart structures using H ∞ modified
positive position and velocity feedback, JVC/Journal of Vibration and Control. 22 (2016) 2434–2442.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077546314548471.
[26] M.P. Bayon de Noyer, S. v. Hanagud, Comparison of H2 optimized design and cross-over point
design for acceleration feedback control, Collection of Technical Papers -
AIAA/ASME/ASCE/AHS/ASC Structures, Structural Dynamics and Materials Conference. 4 (1998)
3250–3258. https://doi.org/10.2514/6.1998-2091.
[27] S. Krenk, J. Høgsberg, Equal modal damping design for a family of resonant vibration control
formats, JVC/Journal of Vibration and Control. 19 (2013) 1294–1315.
https://doi.org/10.1177/1077546312446796.
[28] A.K. Mallik, S. Chatterjee, Principles of Passive and Active Vibration Control, Affiliated East-West
Press Private Limited, NEW DELHI, 2014.
[29] B.B. Alagoz, Hurwitz stability analysis of fractional order LTI systems according to principal
characteristic equations, ISA Transactions. 70 (2017) 7–15.
https://doi.org/10.1016/j.isatra.2017.06.005.
[30] Duarte Valério, ninteger, (2022).