Effect of Modified Bouc-Wen Model Parameters

on Dynamic Hysteresis of Magnetorheological

Dampers

M.Abdelhamed.I1,W.G.Ata2, A.M.Salem3.
1
MSC Student, Tanks Dept., Military Technical College.
2
Lecturer, Tanks Dept., Military Technical College.
3
Associate Professor, Military Technical College.

Abstract. Magnetorheological (MR) dampers are a semi active control device that
fast becoming a key instrument in vibration mitigation. The unique properties of MR
fluids are used to control the damping force without consuming large power source.
Despite MR dampers are safety, efficacy, and robustness, they poses nonlinearity.
According to make a fully use of these properties, it is need to accurately model the
hysteresis of MR damper. Modified Bouc-wen model is one of models presented by
Spenser which perfectly capture the MR damper hysteresis. In this paper, modified
Bouc-Wen model is illustrated and its dynamic characteristic are simulated using
MATLAB Simulink environment. Each value of model parameter is changed
increasing and decreasing to study the effect of this on hysteresis of the damper. A
comparative study is carried out using the relation between force, velocity, and
displacement to determine the hysteresis change with time. The results show that some
parameters have a significant effect on the nonlinear part of MR damper dynamics
while others influence the linear part of the damper behavior.

1. Introduction:

Vibration suppression is a classical issue in mechanical engineering so, preventing the harmful
band of vibration excitation from affecting sprung structure is considered as a basic property of
suspension system. Usually rid-comfort and vehicle handling are optimized to choose suitable
suspension component and the conflict between them consider as classical problem in this field[1].
Suspension system differ according to their construction to passive, active and semi active
suspension. Passive suspension has a certain value of damping force still constant during operation.
However, in the active suspension the system generates damping force according to excitation
applied on it. This variation of damping force provide the opportunity to increase rid comfort and
vehicle handling in most operation situation. Semi-active suspension could act as passive
suspension when damper is not energized and could vary the value of damping force during
energizing[2]. It earns this unique feature from magneto-rheological (MR) damper . This device
considered as a fail-safe actuator. Damping force magnitude changing with respect to electric
power (voltage or current) applied on damper terminals. The construction of MR damper usually
consist from hydraulic cylinder, piston contains coils for generating magnetic field, accumulator.
MR fluid consist of polarized particles affected by magnetic field in micron size suspended in a
carrying medium like water, mineral or silica oil. This type of fluids are not sensitive for impurities

`
 moreover, the yield strength of this fluid could be controlled by changing the magnetic flux
intensity during millisecond[3].

The high nonlinear behavior is the stamp of these type of actuator so it is important to get
accurate model for this actuator[4]. However, MR fluid dampers have a lot of advantage as
mechanical simplicity, high dynamic range, low power requirement, large force capacity and
robustness. Moreover, MR fluid could change from free-flowing liquid to semi solid in
millisecond[5]. Usually MR dampers models differ from each other in accuracy, robustness and
simplicity. Parametric and non-parametric approach usually used for modelling the nonlinear
dynamics of MR damper. The parametric modelling is distinguished by equations contain physical
terms to characterize the system behavior. On the other hand, nonparametric approach employs
analytical expression based on testing data result and device principle for working[6]. First, some
parametric models is explained. Bingham model is used at first to characterize the rheological
response of ER fluids then it used for MR fluid damper too. Simply, Bingham model consist of
viscous damper integrated with element represent Coulomb friction. In comparing this model with
parameter model the relation between forces, displacement is acceptable but force, velocity not
accurately matches specially in the region where velocity is near to zero so this model is used when
there is a significant need for a simple model just for response analysis not for control [7]. Bingham
model is developed by Gamota and Filisko by adding stander model with linear solid in series with
Bingham model (dashpot parallel with friction element) and by comparing simulation result with
experimental one the force - displacement curve is acceptable and it also possess the force-velocity
dynamics. However, the model consist of extremely stiff mathematical equation that difficult to
deal with them numerically[8]. Another model that is numerically tractable for simulating the
system hysteresis is Bouc-Wen model. This model can predict a wide range of damper nonlinear
hysteresis dynamics. Model parameter can be adjusted to make it possible to control the linearity
and transition smoothness from region of preyield to region of postyield. Moreover, the
accumulator force is exist in model in the form of initial deflection and linear spring. By making
comparison between the simulation result and experimental data, the Bouc-Wen model can
accurately predict force - displacement accurately and it possesses closely the force – velocity
behavior. However, in the region where velocity and acceleration have opposite signs and force
value is small the Bouc-Wen model like Bingham model dose not matches accurately[9]. So a Bou-
Wen model was modified to better predict the damper dynamics. In the next section the model will
be explained in details.

Nonparametric model as mentioned above it deals with system input and output regardless of
system principle of work. The input and output is defined according to model type whether forward
and inverse. In forward model the input is displacement and volt and output is damper force.
However in inverse model the input is displacement and damper force and output is voltage.
Different model have been designed with nonparametric concept using interpolation technique,
neural based technique, black box and system identification[10].

In this article, a comparison between the experimental result obtained from testing damper RD-
8040-1 MR damper that developed by Lord Corporation and simulated result for MBW model with
two group of parameters is done. Then, parametric study is held also to the modified Bouc-Wen
model 14 parameters to recognize the effect of each parameter on hysteresis. A semulink model has
made to simulate the modified Bouc-Wen model equation and parameter values will be changed up
and down until reached 50% of its original value by 10% step to study the effect of each parameter
on damper dynamics. Finally the parameter will changed manually to validate experimental data
with simulation data.

`
2. Modified Bouc-Wen model:

The shortage in Bouc-Wen model motivate researcher to overcome this error to accurately simulate
the MR damper perfectly. In (1997) a new version called Modified Bouc-Wen model is developed by
Spenser. The modification of model is represented as an extra internal degree of freedom that contain
an external element dashpot and spring as shown in Fig 1.1. The following equation mathematically
describe the MR damper response according to Modified Bouc-Wen model[6, 11].

f =c 1 ( ẏ )+ k 1 ( x−x 0) (1)
n n−1
ż= A( ẋ− ẏ)−β ( ẋ− ẏ)|z| −γz |ẋ− ẏ||z| (2)
ẏ=( c 0−c 1 )−1 ( c0 ẋ+ k 0 ( x− y ) +αz) (3)
α =α (u )=α a +α b u (5)
c 1=c1 ( u )=c1 a +c 1 b u (6)
c 0=c 0 ( u ) =c oa+ c ob u (7)
u̇=−(u−v ) (8)

Where:

v Voltage applied to the current driver

f The resulting force from MR damper
y Internal dynamic variable
c oa,c ob,c 1 a,c 1 b Viscous coefficient
z Hysteresis variable
α a, α b,β, A, γ, n, Characterization parameter for MR damper
k 1,k o Elastic element coefficient

Fig (1): modified bouc-wen model

The advantage of using the modified model is to get more accuracy especially in the region where
velocity and acceleration have opposite sign. As a result, complexity increased by an extended number
of parameter which increase the difficulty in identification.
The modified Bouc-Wen model equations have been simulated in MATLAB Simulink
environment as show in Fig (). Using this software we can get the value of damper force according to
input excitation. Also we can represent the result as figures represent force against velocity, force with
time, displacement with time or force.

`
 Determining the values of system parameter is necessary to minimize the error between the
experimental results and data from simulation model when parametric model is selected. Many
optimization methods used to select the 14 parameter values. Finally two sets of parameter values[12,
13] is exesit and these both sets are supposed to represent the damper hysteresis accurately as shown
in table1.1.
Parameter Spenser (MBW 1) Lai (MBW 2) Unite
A 301 58 -
β 3630000 2059020 m−2
n 2 2 m−2
𝜂 190 196 -
 3630000 136320 s −1

c oa 2100 784 N.s/m

c ob 350 1803 N.s/m.V
c1a 28300 14649 N.s/m
c1b 295 34622 N.s/m.V
αa 14000 12441 N/m
αb 69500 38430 N/m.V
ko 4690 3610 N/m
k1 500 840 N/m
xo 0.134 0.0245 m

3. Experimental work:

`
 Figure (2): MR fluid damper with control box and cables.

The magneto-rheological damper used for obtaining the experimental result is RD-8040-1which is a
fixed orifice damper filled with MR fluid developed by Lord Corporation as shown in figure (2)

Force transducer

Tested MR damper

Actuator

Manual control unit

Figure (5): Damper test system (793) used to identify MR damper characteristics.

The damper test system fig(5) was developed by MTS company which has an upper crosshead frame
contain force transducer and fixation joint for on of damper end. The lower crosshead is connected to
excitation system and also with fixation joint. Excitation is adjusted by using control unite. A 12V DC
power supply is used to provide current for MR damper.
The damper testing is done on off and on state. With fixed amplitude 5 mm and frequency 1HZ,
1.5HZ, 2HZ, 2.5HZ and two values of current zero at off state and 0.5 A at on state experiments were
done. The result reached from damper test system were saved at excel sheets. With aid of MATLAB
Simulink environment a comparison held between experimental result and simulated result from
modified Bouc-Wen model with two sets of parameter mentioned above. The comparison as shown in
figures.

`
 force aganist velocity
100
MBW1
MBW2
50 EXP

-50
force (N)

-100

-150

-200

-250
-0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
velocity (m/s)
0A,5mm,1HZ
force aganist velocity
150
MBW1
MBW2
100
EXP

50

0
force (N)

-50

-100

-150

-200

-250

-300
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
velocity (m/s)
0A, 5mm, 1.5HZ

`
 force aganist velocity
150
MBW1
MBW2
100 EXP

50

0
force (N)

-50

-100

-150

-200

-250

-300
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
velocity (m/s)
0A, 5mm, 2HZ
force aganist velocity
200
MBW1
MBW2
EXP
100

0
force (N)

-100

-200

-300

-400
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
velocity (m/s)
0A, 5mm, 2.5HZ

`
 force aganist velocity
800
MBW1
MBW2
600
EXP

400

200
force (N)

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000
-0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
velocity (m/s)
0.5A, 5mm, 1HZ
force aganist velocity
800
MBW1
MBW2
600
EXP

400

200
force (N)

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000
-0.05 -0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04 0.05
velocity (m/s)
0.5A, 5mm, 1.5HZ

`
 force aganist velocity
800
MBW1
MBW2
600 EXP

400

200
force (N)

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
velocity (m/s)
0.5A, 5mm, 2 HZ
force aganist velocity
1000
MBW1
MBW2
800
EXP

600

400

200
force (N)

-200

-400

-600

-800

-1000
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
velocity (m/s)
0.5A, 5mm, 2.5HZ

`
Finally comparison prove that modified Bouc-Wen parameter not valid for all MR damper so we need
to study the effect of each parameter on the shape of dynamic hysteresis.

4. Sensitivity analysis of model constant:

For each parameter the original value as mentioned in the above table was varied increasing and
decreasing to study the effect of each parameter on the damper dynamics. Using comparison chart for
each parameter it was clear the effect of each one.
As shown in Figures, the effect of β mainly effect on the length of linear part and keeping the same
geometry of damper dynamics. Increasing the value of β decreasing the length of linear part that result
in decreasing the total damper force. The parameter γ have almost the same effect of parameter β but
not the same degree of sensitivity affects the force value. Parameter 𝜂 have almost no remarkable
effect on dynamic hysteresis when we change it’s value as other parameter. The parameter Cia mainly
affect the slope of linear part of hysteresis and damper force value. Increasing the parameter value
increase both damping force and linear part slope and vise verse. The parameter Cib has a very slight
effect on hysteresis as shown but it’s also function on voltage value. The parameter Coa is mainly
effect on the slope of the nonlinear part of damper dynamics. Increasing the value of Coa increase the
slope of the nonlinear part and vise verse. The parameter Cob have the same effect of parameter Coa
but with slight change in slope in addition the value of volt applied change the effect sensitivity but
with the same direction in increasing and decreasing. The parameter Ko is effecting the width of
nonlinear part curve. Increasing the value of ko increase the width of nonlinear part curve and vise
verse. The parameter (n) controlling the ration between linear and nonlinear part. It must be noted hear
that (n) is a power in model equation so it has a great effect on considering the system linear or
nonlinear. Decreasing n the damper force decreased linear part length decreased and nonlinear part
length increased and vice verse. When n value increased more than 2.5 the nonlinear part disappear
and damper behavior become linear. For parameter αa increasing the value of parameter increasing
force value with the same shape of hysteresis. The parameter A affect the linear part of hysteresis
curve. Decreasing the value of A result in decreasing the length of linear part so the damper force
decreased and the gab between them become wider. The parameter αb have the same effect of A with
different ratio and affected by the voltage value. Also the parameter Ki and Xo have effect of A
parameter with lower ratio and sensitivity. The parameter Xo also result in shifting the hysteresis up
and down about the original axcies of plot.

`
`
5. Model parameter modification:

According to sensitivity analysis and model equation construction the 14 parameters devided into
two group first control the shape of hysteresis in off state when there is no current or volt applied and
the other group affect the behavior when damper energized. it must be noted here the technique used
in obtaining this values of parameter is the manually change of value and there is no optimization
technique used. The parameter A,β,γ,n.Ko,K1,Xo are the parameter control the hysteresis shape on off
state and Coa,Cob,C1a,C1b, αa,αb are the parameter affected by voltage value. The modification is
held on the experimental result at excitation value 5mm amplitude and 1HZ frequency and 0A, 0.5A.
after several trials the following value reached and the result shown on figures.

Parameter Modified parameters Unite

A 63 -
β 1963086 m−2
n 206320 m−2
𝜂 2 -
 194 s−1

c oa 783 N.s/m
c ob 2603 N.s/m.V
c1a 15649 N.s/m
c1b 45072 N.s/m.V

`
 αa 10441 N/m
αb 45430 N/m.V
ko 1750 N/m
k1 317 N/m
xo 0.0032 m

force aganist velocity

100
MBW
80 EXP

60

40

20
force (N)

-20

-40

-60

-80

-100
-0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
velocity (m/s)

`
 force aganist velocity
600
MBW
EXP 0.5A

400

200
force (N)

-200

-400

-600
-0.04 -0.03 -0.02 -0.01 0 0.01 0.02 0.03 0.04
velocity (m/s)
And the model tested at 5mm, 2HZ as excitation with 0A, 0.5A.
force aganist velocity
150
MBW
EXP 0A

100

50
force (N)

-50

-100

-150
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
velocity (m/s)

`
 force aganist velocity
800
MBW
EXP 0.5A
600

400

200
force (N)

-200

-400

-600

-800
-0.08 -0.06 -0.04 -0.02 0 0.02 0.04 0.06 0.08
velocity (m/s)

6. Conclusion:

MR dampers have a lot of advantage with high nonlinearity behavior. Modified Bouc-Wen model is
one of the most important parametric models used to identify the damper hysteresis. After
experimental work and comparison by two group of parameters the model didn’t perfectly fit the
damper dynamics. A parametric study was held to study the effect of each parameter on hysteresis
shape then the model manually modified to reach the behavior of tested damper. The model was
validated by applying a new trial on with different excitation and the result was acceptable.

References:
[1] X.-X. Bai, P. Chen, and L.-J. Qian, “Principle and validation of modified hysteretic models for
magnetorheological dampers,” Smart Materials and Structures, vol. 24, no. 8, pp. 085014,
2015.
[2] L. Balamurugan, J. Jancirani, and M. Eltantawie, “Generalized magnetorheological (MR)
damper model and its application in semi-active control of vehicle suspension system,”
International Journal of Automotive Technology, vol. 15, no. 3, pp. 419-427, 2014.
[3] A. Domínguez-González, I. Stiharu, and R. Sedaghati, “Practical hysteresis model for
magnetorheological dampers,” Journal of Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, vol. 25,
no. 8, pp. 967-979, 2014.
[4] X. Zhao, W. Qin, S. Wu, and H. Pan, "A Dynamic Hysteresis Model for MR Dampers Based
on Particle Swarm Optimization." pp. 395-398.

`
[5] J. Yu, X. Dong, and Z. Zhang, “A novel model of magnetorheological damper with hysteresis
division,” Smart Materials and Structures, vol. 26, no. 10, pp. 105042, 2017.
[6] A.-A. Zamani, S. Tavakoli, S. Etedali, and J. Sadeghi, “Modeling of a magneto-rheological
damper: An improved multi-state-dependent parameter estimation approach,” Journal of
Intelligent Material Systems and Structures, vol. 30, no. 8, pp. 1178-1188, 2019.
[7] A. Rossi, F. Orsini, A. Scorza, F. Botta, N. Belfiore, and S. Sciuto, “A review on parametric
dynamic models of magnetorheological dampers and their characterization methods,”
Actuators, vol. 7, no. 2, pp. 16, 2018.
[8] Y. Peng, J. Yang, and J. Li, “Parameter identification of modified Bouc–Wen model and
analysis of size effect of magnetorheological dampers,” Journal of Intelligent Material
Systems and Structures, vol. 29, no. 7, pp. 1464-1480, 2018.
[9] C.-M. Chang, S. Strano, and M. Terzo, “Modelling of hysteresis in vibration control systems
by means of the Bouc-Wen model,” Shock and Vibration, vol. 2016, 2016.
[10] H. Metered, “Application of nonparametric magnetorheological damper model in vehicle
semi-active suspension system,” SAE International Journal of Passenger Cars-Mechanical
Systems, vol. 5, no. 2012-01-0977, pp. 715-726, 2012.
[11] İ. Şahin, T. Engin, and Ş. Çeşmeci, “Comparison of some existing parametric models for
magnetorheological fluid dampers,” Smart materials and structures, vol. 19, no. 3, pp.
035012, 2010.
[12] C. Y. Lai, and W.-H. Liao, “Vibration control of a suspension system via a
magnetorheological fluid damper,” Modal Analysis, vol. 8, no. 4, pp. 527-547, 2002.
[13] B. Spencer Jr, S. Dyke, M. Sain, and J. Carlson, “Phenomenological model for
magnetorheological dampers,” Journal of engineering mechanics, vol. 123, no. 3, pp. 230-
238, 1997.