0
Research Papers

Experimental Testing and Validation of a Magnetorheological (MR) Damper Model

[+] Author and Article Information
Weng Wai Chooi

Dynamics and Aeroelasticity Research Group, School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, University of Manchester, Manchester M60 1QD, UK

S. Olutunde Oyadiji1

Dynamics and Aeroelasticity Research Group, School of Mechanical, Aerospace and Civil Engineering, University of Manchester, Manchester M60 1QD, UKs.o.oyadiji@manchester.ac.uk

1

Corresponding author.

J. Vib. Acoust 131(6), 061003 (Oct 27, 2009) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.3142885 History: Received January 12, 2008; Revised January 26, 2009; Published October 27, 2009

The focus of this paper is on the experimental validation of a mathematical model that was developed for the flow of magnetorheological (MR) fluids through the annular gap in a MR damper. Unlike previous work by other researchers, which approximate the flow of the MR fluid through this annulus as a flow of fluid through two infinitely wide parallel plates, the model presented represents accurately the annular flow. In this paper, the mathematical model is validated via experimental testing and analysis of a double-tube MR damper fabricated at the University of Manchester, UK. The experimental setup and the procedures for executing the tests on the MR damper according to established standards for the testing of conventional automotive dampers are given. This involved sets of many isofrequency sinusoidal tests of various displacement amplitudes. Predictions from theoretical simulations based on the mathematical model are validated using the data collected from the experiments. It was found that the modeling procedure represents the MR damper very satisfactorily.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2009 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

The MR damper setup on the hydraulic test machine and the schematic layout of the experimental equipment

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Example of test data before filtering

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Frictional force of the MR damper

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Typical time histories measured by the pressure transducers for a 0.5 Hz sinusoidal test with 1.0 A current: (a) pressure in the rebound chamber, (b) pressure in the compression chamber, and (c) damping force measured by the load cell (solid curve) and damping force estimated from the pressure data (dotted curve) using Eq. 1

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Comparison between the damper forces measured directly by the load cell (solid lines) and the damper forces computed from the measured pressures in the rebound and compression chambers (dotted lines): (a) 0.5 A current applied to damper and (b) 2.0 A current applied to damper

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Assembly of the pressure transducers on the MR damper

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Graphs of damper force for four amplitudes of oscillation at 1.0 Hz with 2.0 A current: (a) time histories, (b) work diagram, (c) characteristic diagram

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Peak force against displacement amplitude at 1.0 Hz with 2.0 A current

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Damper force for various currents at 0.5 Hz with 6 mm peak-to-peak displacement amplitude

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Simulation results and experimental data for a 0.5 Hz frequency of oscillation with 3 mm displacement amplitude. The experimental velocity data shown here are obtained via numerical differentiation of the displacement data.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

(a) Experimental data of displacement and the differentiated velocity. (b) The velocity data are curve-fitted with a high order polynomial and reproduced. This removes irregularities that are seen in (a).

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Improved simulation results for a 0.5 Hz frequency of oscillation with 3 mm displacement amplitude. The experimental velocity data shown here are smoothed to remove irregularities that occur during numerical differentiation.

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

(a) Experimental data of pressures in compression (dotted line) and gas (solid line) chambers, (b) comparison between the difference in pressure between compression and gas chambers (solid line) with the theoretical estimate (dotted line)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In