Article

Journal of Vibration and Control

2020, Vol. 0(0) 1–14

High-frequency robust position control of © The Author(s) 2020

Article reuse guidelines:
sagepub.com/journals-permissions
a nonlinear piezoelectric bending actuator DOI: 10.1177/1077546319900851
journals.sagepub.com/home/jvc

Pouyan Shahabi, Hamed Ghafarirad and Afshin Taghvaeipour

Abstract
Piezoelectric bending actuators have been widely used in a variety of micro- and nano-applications, including atomic force
microscopy, micro assembly, cell manipulation, and in general, micro electromechanical systems. However, their control
algorithms at low frequencies suffer from nonlinearities such as hysteresis in high voltages and creep in long-time static
applications. Also, in high-frequency applications, especially near the actuator natural frequencies, the actuator dynamic is
greatly affected by the material nonlinearity. Therefore, the control approaches based on the linear dynamic modeling
cannot be effective at high frequencies. Thus, the position control of the foregoing actuators become challenging, and it has
been of researchers’ interests in the last decade. In this article, the robust position control of a bimorph piezoelectric
bending actuators is investigated. In this regard, based on the nonlinear constitutive equations and the Euler–Bernoulli beam
theory, a nonlinear dynamic model is presented. Then, to track a desired motion trajectory, an observer-based robust
position control algorithm is proposed. The proposed control methodology is able to accommodate parametric un-
certainties and other un-modeled dynamics. Also, it ensures the elimination of the position tracking error in the presence of
the estimated states. Finally, the tracking ability of the controller is demonstrated in an experimental study. The ex-
perimental results show that the identification of the system is properly conducted with the average error of 5.5%. Also, the
efficiency of the robust controller is proved with the error of 3.7% and 4.9% in the position tracking of the actuator inside
and outside of the identified region, respectively.

Keywords
Piezoelectric bending actuator, material nonlinearity, nonlinear dynamic, position control, high gain observer

1. Introduction with these issues, the nonlinearities should be taken into

In the last decade, piezoelectric bending structures have
been widely used as sensors and actuators (Jemai et al.,
2017; Yu and He, 2013). Specially, as an actuator, several
micro- and nano-systems have benefited from these smart
structures (Jain et al., 2015; Mehrdad Pourkiaee et al.,
2017). In addition to higher natural frequency and
smaller dimensions, fine time response and high maneu-
verability have significantly elevated the usage of piezo-
electric bending actuators. Therefore, in the recent years,
the control of these actuators has been of researchers’
interest for which several position and force control al-
gorithms have been proposed (Khadraoui et al., 2014;
Mirafzal et al., 2016; Sadek et al., 2009; Shirazi et al.,
2012).
Generally, piezoelectric actuators are controlled at low
frequencies and high-input voltages. In these conditions,
piezoelectric nonlinearities such as “hysteresis” in high
voltages and “creep” in low-frequency applications can
degrade the control performance (Ghafarirad et al., 2014b;
Rakotondrabe et al., 2010; Zhang and Xu, 2017). To cope
account in the actuator dynamic model and the corre-
sponding controller design (Chao et al., 2011; Ghafarirad
et al., 2014a). In some researches, the nonlinearities were
assumed as a disturbance, and robust control methods were
proposed for the position control (Jingang et al., 2009;
Qingsong and Minping, 2014). In this regard, the authors
used a linear dynamic model, which is coupled with
nonlinear functions expressing hysteresis and creep phe-
nomena (Chao et al., 2011; Ghafarirad et al., 2014a).
In addition to low-frequency applications, piezoelectric
materials have been extensively used in high-frequency
Mechanical Engineering Department, Amirkabir University of Technology
(Tehran Polytechnic), Iran
Received: 31 July 2019; accepted: 20 December 2019
Corresponding author:
Hamed Ghafarirad, Mechanical Engineering Department, Amirkabir
University of Technology, No. 350, Hafez Ave., Valiasr Square, Tehran
1591634311, Iran.
Email: Ghafarirad@aut.ac.ir
2 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

position control systems as well (Andreaus et al., 2004; controller and observer, the actuator is precisely tracked and
Dell’Isola et al., 2004; Liu et al., 2016; Liu et al., 2017; desired trajectory inside and outside of the identification
Thomas et al., 2011). However, in such applications, near domain.
the fundamental natural frequency, the actuator shows
a special nonlinear behavior, so called material non-
2. Nonlinear dynamic modeling
linearities (Leadenham and Erturk, 2015b). These non-
linearities demonstrate a softening effect in the frequency A piezoelectric bimorph actuator, which is made of an
responses of the actuator (Leadenham and Erturk, 2019; Tan electrically inactive brass shim of density ρb with thickness
et al., 2018b). As a result, the actuator behavior significantly of tb and symmetric anti-parallel polarized piezoceramic
deviates from the one obtained by conventional linear laminates with density of ρp and thickness of tp , is illustrated
models, and hence, the control approaches which are based in Figure 1. The cross section of the actuator is rectangular
on the linear dynamic model fail to operate properly. with the width of Y .
Recently, many researches aimed at deriving a proper
nonlinear dynamic model to accurately describe the be- 2.1. Material nonlinearity
havior of piezoelectric materials at high frequencies.
Stanton et al. comprehensively investigated the nonlinear A bimorph piezoelectric actuator behaves linearly at fre-
energy harvesting of piezoelectric cantilevered beam quencies far from the resonance while a low-amplitude
(Stanton et al., 2010a). By resorting to energy methods, the input voltage is applied. However, when the applied volt-
authors proposed a dynamic model in which the unknown age attains frequency close to the resonance, the actuator
nonlinear parameters were attained by resonating the pie- behavior is no more predictable with a linear model. This
zoelectric beam near its first natural frequency. As an im- deviation is depicted in Figure 2 where the linear and
portant achievement, it is reported that the linear damping nonlinear frequency responses of a commercial bimorph
model fails to describe the behavior of a piezoelectric piezoelectric actuator (T226-H4-203X) are compared with
cantilevered beam at high frequencies. Alternatively, the experimental results.
a quadratic fluid damping model was used to consider the
energy dissipation at high frequencies (Stanton et al.,
2010a). In a different study, Stanton et al. tried to predict
the nonlinear non-conservative behavior of piezoelectric
energy harvesters with a proof mass at tip of the beam
(Stanton et al., 2012). In this work, the authors considered
a damping model which depends on the beam deflection
(Stanton et al., 2012). Recently, the nonlinear behavior of
a piezoelectric bimorph cantilevered beam was studied by Figure 1. Illustration of a symmetric bimorph actuator con-
Leadenham and Erturk (2015a). The authors investigated nected in series to a power supplier.
the behavior of a piezo beam under electrical and me-
chanical excitations for different applications such as en-
ergy harvesting, sensing, and actuating.
This article mainly targets at the high-frequency position
control of a piezoelectric bending actuator. As the corre-
sponding nonlinear constitutive equations depend signifi-
cantly on the dimensions, the electrical input amplitude, the
strain magnitude and, etc., they are obtained empirically.
Next, based on the obtained equations, the Euler–Bernoulli
beam theory is used for the nonlinear dynamic model near
the first natural frequency. Then, a sliding mode position
control is proposed to follow a desired motion trajectory in
the presence of un-modeled dynamics and disturbances.
Because of the necessity of actuator velocity estimation in
a control problem, this state is evaluated at high frequencies
by means of a high-gain reduced-order observer. By re-
sorting to the Lyapunov stability theorem, the overall
closed-loop stability is also theoretically proven in the
presence of estimated states. Finally, the nonlinear mod-
eling accuracy and high-frequency position control per-
formance are evaluated experimentally. With the designed Figure 2. Piezoelectric actuator frequency response for V = 3 V.
Shahabi et al. 3

As it is obvious in Figure 2, a linear model cannot predict actuator is composed of the linear bending energy of
the actual behavior of the actuator near the resonance substrate, and the energy related to the nonlinear stress–
frequency. In such cases, it is predicted that because of high strain behavior of piezoceramic laminates, namely
strains, the material linear models are no longer valid, and
thus, a nonlinear model should be considered. Z l
2 2 Z "
2 4
2 6 #
1 ∂w ∂w ∂w
In case of piezoelectric materials, the conservative po- U ¼ CIe dx  α þβ dx
2 0 ∂x 2 ∂x 2 ∂x2
tential density is expressed in terms of an electric enthalpy
Z
2 
function. In linear models, because of the linear constitutive 1X 3
2  l ∂w
relations for the electromechanical behavior of piezoelectric  e31i Yi tio  tiu2
E3 dx
2 i¼1 0 ∂x2
actuators, the electric enthalpy function is quadratic, such as
X 3 Z l
1 1 1S
He linear ¼ cE11 S12  e31 E3 S1  εS33 E32 (1) þ ε33i ½tio  tiu wi E3i2
dx
2 2 i¼1
2 0

To consider the nonlinear electromechanical behavior of (5)

the piezoelectric material, in this study, a nonlinear enthalpy
function with the elastic nonlinearities up to fifth order is where subscripts o and u denote the top and bottom of the
used. Moreover, because of the low amplitude of the electric ith layer, the coefficients are defined as
field near the natural frequency, the nonlinear dielectric and
coupling terms are vanished (Stanton et al., 2010a, 2012). cb Yt 3 1 E h 3 i
CIe ¼ cb Ib þ cp Ip ¼ þ Yc11 4tp þ 6tp2 tb þ 3tb2 tp
Therefore, for a bending actuator actuated in the 31-mode, 12 6
the following electric enthalpy function is considered (6)
1 1
He nonlinear ¼ cE11 S12  e31 E3 S1  εS33 E32 Y  
2 2 α¼ c111 5tb4 tp þ 20tb3 tp2 þ 40tb2 tp3 þ 40tb tp4 þ 16tp5
1 1 160
þ c111 S14 þ c11111 S16 (2) (7)
4 6
where cE11 is the elastic modulus at a constant electric field, 
Y
S1 is the strain, c111 and c11111 are the nonlinear stiffness β¼ c11111 7tb6 tp þ 42tb5 tp2 þ 140tb4 tp3 þ 280tb3 tp4
coefficients, e31 is the piezoelectric constant, E3 is the 1344  (8)
electric field, and εS33 is the permittivity at constant strain. As þ 336tb2 tp5 þ 224tb tp6 þ 64tp5
it can be seen, the stiffness nonlinearities with odd power do
not appear in equation (2) because of the symmetric con- As a common tool in the dynamic analysis of continuous
figuration of piezoelectric layers with respect to the neutral systems, Hamilton’s principle is used to derive the equation
axis. of motion of the actuator, namely
Z t1
2.2. The dynamic equation ðδL  δW Þ dt ¼ 0 (9)
t0
Although the material nonlinearity is taken into account in
the actuator modeling because of large strains, the de-
formation can be still assumed small, and hence, the Euler– where δ is the variational derivative and
 ∂the Lagrangian

function is defined as L ¼ T  U ¼ f ∂w
2

Bernoulli beam theory is incorporated. In this theory, the ;

∂t ∂x2
w
; E 3i . Here,

linear strain-displacement relation is considered, namely the nonconservative work W comprises the works done by
the applied voltage and the dissipative frictional forces,

2 
∂w namely
S1 ¼ z (3)
∂x2
Z
 X3 Z hio Z Y Z l

l
∂w ∂U
where w ¼ wðx; tÞ denotes the transverse deflection of the W ¼ μ wdx  σ dxdydz
actuator. The total kinetic energy of the actuator can be also 0 ∂t i¼1 hiu 0 0 ∂z
cast in the following format (10)
Z l
2
1 ∂w where μ denotes the coefficient of friction and σ is the
T ¼ ρAe dx (4) surface charge density. Substituting equation (10) into (9),
2 0 ∂t
applying the calculus of variations and using the integration
where ρAe ¼ Y ðρb tb þ 2ρp tp Þ is the mass per unit length of by parts, the nonlinear equation of motion of the actuator is
the actuator. The total potential energy stored within the obtained as
4 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)


CIe w0000 þ ρAe w€ þ μw_ þ 12α 2w00 w0002 þ w0000 w002 q€1 þ 2ξ 1 ω1 q_1 þ ω21 q1 þ k1 q31 þ k2 q51
Z l
 d d (14)
þ 30β 6w003 w0002 þ w0000 w004 ¼ Mp V ðtÞ Gðx  lÞ ¼ Mp V ðtÞ φj ðxÞ Gðx  lÞ
dx 0 dx
(11)
in which
in which Mp ¼ Ye31 ðtp þ tb Þ and GðxÞ refers to the Dirac Z l  
delta function. k1 ¼ 12α φ φ002 φ0000 þ 2φ00 φ0002 dx (15)
0

2.3. The discretization of the dynamic equation Z l  

The obtained nonlinear partial differential equation can be k2 ¼ 30β φ 6φ003 φ0002 þ φ004 φ0000 dx (16)
0
readily solved by means of numerical methods, such as the
Galerkin’s method (Vidoli and Dell’Isola, 2001). In this Based on the following identity equation
method, the solution is assumed as a summation of finite Z c
number of linear mode shapes multiplied by a time- GðnÞ ðx  bÞf ðxÞdx ¼ ð1Þ f ðnÞ ðbÞ a ≤ b ≤ c
n
(17)
dependent modal coordinates, namely a

X
n Equation (14) can be written in the following format
wðx; tÞ ¼ φi ðxÞ qi ðtÞ (12)
i¼0
q€ þ 2ξωn q_ þ ω2n q þ k1 q3 þ k2 q5 ¼ mpi V ðtÞ (18)

As shown in Figure 2, the actuator frequency response where

obtained from the experiments deviates from the one at-
tained from the linear modeling around the natural fre-
quency. It is notable that the actuator behaves linearly far
from the natural frequency. Therefore, the proposed non-
linear model is only for frequencies around the resonance.
Because of the major effect of the first vibrational mode
around the first resonance, the single mode assumption can
be properly considered. In addition, the piezoelectric ac-
tuator is assumed to be excited harmonically with a fre-
quency near the resonance. Thus, it can be assumed that the
dynamic of the actuator is mostly governed by the first mode
shape. In such cases, the single mode assumption can ac-
curately predict the steady-state solution (Stanton et al.,
2010a; Tan et al., 2018a). From the modal analysis of
an Euler–Bernoulli undamped beam with the fixed-free
boundary conditions, the first mode shape is obtained as
φ1 ðxÞ ¼ η1 φ1 ðxÞ ¼ η1 ½cosðγ1 xÞ  coshðγ1 xÞ
cosðγ1 lÞ þ coshðγ1 lÞ
 ½sinðγ1 xÞ  sinhðγ1 xÞ
sinðγ1 lÞ þ sinhðγ1 lÞ
where
sffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
CIe
γ1 ¼ 1:8751; ω1 ¼ γ21 ; η1 ¼ sffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
Z l
ρAe
ρAe φ21 ðxÞdx
0 nonlinear model can be achieved. However, this model still
By substituting equation (12) into (11), multiplying by
φn ðxÞ and integrating over the actuator length, the nonlinear
ordinary differential equation of motion near the funda-
mental frequency is obtained as below

∂φi ðxÞ
mpi ¼ Mp (19)
∂x x¼L
Stanton et al. proved that a piezoelectric bending actuator
under a weak electric field exhibits nonlinear damping
behavior (Stanton et al., 2010a, 2010b, 2012). In accor-
dance with the mentioned research, in this study, a nonlinear
damping model that was first introduced by Stanton et al.
(2012) is incorporated, namely
D ¼ μ þ μ1 q2 (20)
where μ is the linear damping ðμ ¼ 2ξωn Þ and μ1 should be
identified empirically. Thus, the nonlinear differential
equation of motion of the actuator is modified to the fol-
lowing format

q€ þ μ þ μ1 q2 q_ þ ω2n q þ k1 q3 þ k2 q5 ¼ mpi V ðtÞ (21)
This nonlinear equation can be solved analytically by
means of perturbation based methods, and hereafter, the
nonlinear coefficients, i.e. μ1 , k1 , and k2 , can be identified by
(13)
experiments.
3. The actuator position control
1
If the nonlinear coefficients are properly identified, a good
agreement between the experimental data and the proposed
cannot describe the nonlinear behavior of the piezoelectric
actuator without error. On the other hand, implementing
a control system will be always affected by some external
disturbances. Therefore, to accurately control the position
of the actuator over a desired trajectory, a robust algorithm,
Shahabi et al. 5

such as sliding mode control, should be proposed. This s_ ¼ ΛT E_ ¼ eðnÞ þ ΛTu E

controller would tolerate dynamic uncertainties and dis-  T (30)
ΛTu ¼ 0; cn1 λn1 ; …; c1 λ
turbances with specified bounds.
To design a sliding mode controller, first, a class of nth To control the position of the actuator, the following
order nonlinear system is considered control law is proposed
1
 
xðnÞ ¼ f0 ðX ; uÞ þ d ¼ f ðX Þ þ bðX ÞuðtÞ þ d (22) u ¼ ^b  ^f þ xd  ΛTu E  K sgnðsÞ
ðnÞ
(31)
_ …; xðn1Þ T is the system state vector, u is
where X ¼ ½x; x;
The first part of the proposed control law is compen-
the control input, and d is the external disturbances and
sating the matched uncertainties, and the second part keeps
modeling imprecision vector. Also, f is denoting an un-
the plant trajectory
pffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
ffi on the sliding surface. In equation (35),
known function which is bounded by a known nonlinear ^b ¼ bmax bmin is an estimate of b and K is a positive
function, namely
constant. If β is defined as
 
^f ðX Þ  f ðX Þ ≤ FðX Þ (23) rffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi
bmax ^b
β¼ β1 ≤ ≤ β (32)
where ^f is an estimate of f . The disturbance d and func- bmin b
tion b are assumed to be bounded as follows
and by substituting equation (31) into (22), the closed-loop
0 < bmin < bðX Þ < bmax and jdj < δ (24) dynamic system can be expressed as
 1   
xðnÞ ¼ f þ b ^b  ^f þ xd  ΛTu E  K sgnðsÞ þ d
For the actuator in this study, the order of nonlinear ðnÞ

system is two ðn ¼ 2Þ, and the state variable vector is  1  1

 
s_ ¼ f  b^b ^f þ 1  b^b
ðnÞ
_ T ; also, the functions f ðX Þ and bðX Þ are defined as
¼ ½q; q xd þ ΛTu E
 1
 b^b K sgnðsÞ þ d (33)
f ðX Þ ¼  μ þ μ1 q2 q_  ω2n q  k1 q3  k2 q5 (25)
Now, to ensure that the proposed control law can impose
bðX Þ ¼ mpi the sliding condition, first, a positive Lyapunov function is
chosen such as
It has to be ensured that even in the presence of unknown
factors, such as external disturbances and modeling errors, 1
V ¼ s2 (34)
the state vector X will track a given trajectory Xd in the state 2
space properly. This given trajectory can be expressed as
Next, by resorting to equation (37), its time derivative is
a vector in the state space, namely
cast in the following format
h iT
ðn1Þ
Xd ¼ xd ; x_d ; …; xd h  
1  1
(26) 1 d 2
_ ¼ f  b^b ^f þ 1  b^b
ðnÞ
s ¼ ss xd þ ΛTu E
Thus, the tracking error vector and the sliding surface
2 dt
1
i
 b^b K sgnðsÞ þ d s (35)
can be defined as
 T According to the Lyapunov theorem, the stability of
_ …; eðn1Þ
E ¼ X  Xd ¼ e; e; (27)
system can be achieved if equation (40) always attains
a negative value. This can happen if the gain K obeys the

n1
d following inequality
sðEÞ ¼ þλ e ¼ ΛT E (28)
dt
K ≥ βðη þ δ þ FÞ þ ðβ  1Þj^uj (36)
 T
Λ ¼ cn1 λn1 ; …; c1 λ; c0
where η is a positive constant, namely
where ci is the polynomial coefficient which is obtained as

 1 d 2
n1 ðn  1Þ! s ¼ ss_ ≤ ηjsj (37)
ci ¼ ¼ i ¼ 0; 1; …; n  1 2 dt
i ðn  i  1Þ!i!
(29) In other words, in the presence of the controller, the state
variables will converge to a desired trajectory in a finite
Using the above equations, the time derivative of the time, which can be decreased by choosing a large η. It is
sliding surface s can be expressed in the format below worth mentioning that the chattering behavior, if it ever
6 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

happens, can also be eliminated if the sign function in x1 ¼ q (40)

equation (36) is replaced with a boundary layer saturation
function, i.e. boundary layer sliding mode control (Khalil,
x2 ¼ q_ (41)
2014).
 
3.1. Reduced-order observer design f0 X^ ; u ¼  μ þ μ1 x21 ^x2  ω2n x1  k1 x31  k2 x51 þ mpi u
(42)
According to equation (31), the proposed control signal
contains the velocity of piezoelectric actuator which should It has to be ensured that the corresponding factors of
be measured or estimated. Because of the high-frequency modeling errors and external disturbances do not affect the
nature of the position signal, the velocity can be estimated performance of the observer. In this regard, first, the ve-
by means of a high-gain reduced-order observer. The dy- locity estimation error is defined as
namic of this observer can be defined as (Khalil, 2014)
~x2 ¼ x2  ^x2 (43)

w_ ¼ hðw þ hyÞ þ f0 X^ ; u (38)
Next, the error dynamic is achieved with the observer
dynamic (equations (38) and (39)) being considered in the
^x2 ¼ w þ hy (39) actuator dynamic (equation (22)), namely
Here, ^x2 is the estimated velocity, h is the observer gain, w ~x_ 2 ¼ x_2  ^x_ 2 ¼ ðf0 ðX ; uÞ þ dÞ  ðw_ þ hyÞ
_
is the state variable of the observer dynamic, and y ¼ x1 is  
¼ ðf0 ðX ; uÞ þ dÞ  h^x2 þ f0 X^ ; u þ hx_1
the measured system output. Also, f0 ðX^ ; uÞ is the nominal
¼ δðx  ~xÞ  h~x2 (44)
function of the actuator dynamic which is expressed as
in which
Table 1. Geometric and material properties of the PZT-5H bi- 
morph cantilevered actuator. δðx; ~xÞ ¼ f0 ðX ; uÞ  f0 X^ ; u þ d (45)

Parameters PZT-5H Brass By rearranging equation (44), the observer error dynamic
can be simplified as
Length ðlÞ (mm) 24.53 24.53
Width ðYÞ (mm) 6.4 6.4 ~x_ 2 þ h~x2 ¼ δðx; ~xÞ (46)
Thickness ðtÞ (mm) 0.265 0.140
Mass density ðρÞ (kg/m3) 7500 9000 According to the conditions presented in equations (23)
Elastic modulus ðcE ; cb Þ (GPa) 51.51 105 and (24), the error function δðx; ~xÞ stays bounded, which
Piezoelectric constant ðe31 Þ ðC=m2 Þ 13.11 — means that the state variables can be estimated accurately. In
addition, if the observer variable h is chosen to be large
Permittivity constant ðε33 Þ (nF/m) 25.5 —
enough, the effect of error modeling on the performance of

Figure 3. The experimental setup.

Shahabi et al.
Figure 4. Theoretical agreement upon optimizing nonlinear parameters to reflect experimental observations.
the observer is decreased, and consequently, it increases the
precision of the estimated velocity.
3.2. The global stability analysis
In the presence of a designed sliding mode controller, the
state variables should converge to the sliding surface in
a finite time, and accordingly, they have to follow a desired
7
signal and its derivatives. However, an observer can change
the dynamic of a system; therefore, the stability of system
with this new dynamic should be investigated. In this re-
gard, the following dynamic is considered
yðnÞ ¼ f ð  Þ þ gð  Þum (47)
where u is an input and y is the measurable output of
a system. The functions f and g may depend on u, y, their
8 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

derivatives, and disturbances. If it is assumed that z1 ¼ u, If the following assumptions hold, it can be concluded
z2 ¼ u1 ,…, zm ¼ um1 , and x1 ¼ y; x2 ¼ y1 ,…, xn ¼ yn1 , that the control system stays stable with the presence of an
and also, v ¼ um is considered as a control input of the observer.
augmented system, the augmented system in the state space
can be expressed as Assumption 1. For all ðx; z; dÞ 2 U × Γ1 , where Γ1 is
a known compact subset of Rp
x_i ¼ xiþ1 1≤i≤n  1 (48)
jgðx; z; dÞj ≥ kg > 0 (53)
x_n ¼ f ðx; z; dÞ þ gðx; z; dÞv (49) This assumption implies that the system has to be in
minimum phase and it does not comprise an internal dy-
z_j ¼ zjþ1 1≤j≤m  1 (50) namic. To investigate this assumption for the foregoing
control system, it can be written that
z_m ¼ v (51) y ¼ x1 (54)

y ¼ x1 (52) y_ ¼ x_1 ¼ x2 (55)


y€ ¼ x_2 ¼  μ þ μ1 x21 ^x2  ω2n x1  k1 x31  k2 x51 þ mpi u
(56)

Because the second derivative of the output depends on

the input, the system has a relative degree of two in R2 , and
thus, it is a minimum-phase system. Therefore, the first
assumption is valid.

Assumption 2. The dynamic system can be transformed to

a normal form of equations (61–64) by a diffeomorphism
transformation
x_i ¼ xiþ1 1≤i≤n  1 (57)

Figure 5. The phase plots obtained from experiment and the x_n ¼ f ðx; η; dÞ þ gðx; η; dÞv (58)
theoretical framework.

Figure 6. The phase plots from the linear and nonlinear models in different input voltages.
Shahabi et al. 9

η_ ¼ fðx; η; wÞ (59) Assumption 4. There exists a scalar locally nonnegative

y ¼ x1 (60)
_ T.
where η ¼ ½η1 ; η2 ; …; ηm T and w ¼ ½d; d
According to (Oh and Khalil, 1997), if Assumption 1
holds globally, then one can easily prove the global exis-
tence of such diffeomorphism. Therefore, in the system
under study, the Assumption 2 holds as well.
Assumption 3. There exists a C 1 function W : Dη → Rþ
and class κ functions, αi : ½0; dn Þ → Rþ , i = 1,2,3, and
γ1 : ½0 ≤ dr Þ → Rþ such that
α1 ðkηkÞ ≤ W ðηÞ ≤ α2 ðkηkÞ (61)
Lipschitz function ρðx; zÞ and a nonnegative constant k such
that
jf ðx; z; dÞ  f0 ðx; zÞj ≤ ρðx; zÞ (64)
This assumption implies that jδðxÞj ≤ ρðx; zÞ which guar-
antees the existence of bounded uncertainties. Because of the
physics of the problem, the uncertainties due to disturbances
and modeling imprecisions have finite magnitudes. Thus, this
assumption is satisfied as well.
Assumption 5. There exists a nonnegative constant k re-
specting the following inequality
gðx; z; dÞg1 ðx; zÞ 1 ≤ k (65)
0

As in the foregoing case study it is considered that

∂W gðx; z; dÞ ¼ g0 ðx; zÞ, equation (65) is satisfied for all values
fðx; η; wÞ ≤ α3 ðkηkÞ (62)
∂η of k.
Having all five assumptions satisfied, the stability of the

  system under study, with the designed sliding mode con-
 x 
"kηk ≥ γ1  
 w  (63) troller and velocity observer, is guaranteed.

This assumption is, in fact, equivalent to the input-to- 4. Experimental results

state stability condition which is satisfied for minimum-
phase systems. 4.1. Experimental setup
In this part, the suggested mathematical framework is ex-
perimentally validated on a bimorph piezoelectric actuator

Table 2. Controller and observer gain.

Controller gain Observer gain
K h
75,000 2,800

Figure 7. The linear and nonlinear models and the experimental

data in a constant excitation frequency (a) ω ¼ 2580 rad=s, (b) Figure 8. Experimental setup in presence of controller and
ω ¼ 2637 rad=s. observer.
10 Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)

(T226-H4-203X). The actuator consists of a brass substrate
which is covered by two lead zirconate titanate identical
layers (series connection). The physical properties of the
layers are listed in Table 1, and the fundamental frequency
of the actuator is equal to 2637 rad/s.
The experimental setup includes an amplifier (EPA-104-
230), and two data acquisition cards (PCI-1710 and PCI-
1716) which can capture data with a frequency of 20 kHz
(Figure 3). Moreover, the deflection of the actuator’s tip is
measured by means of a laser displacement sensor (op-
toNCDT 2300) with a resolution of 10 nm.
The achieved nonlinear dynamic model was experimen-
tally identified to find the actuator nonlinear parameters.
Then, the experiments were conducted to guarantee the
performance of the designed controller in the tracking of
different position trajectories.
4.2. Nonlinear dynamic identification
Now, the proposed dynamic model can be validated, and the
nonlinear parameters can be evaluated by means of the
available experimental setup. In this regard, a sinusoidal
input voltage is applied on the piezoelectric actuator. The
frequency of the input signal should be near the first res-
onance frequency, such as 2512, 2580, 2637, 2680, and
2736 rad/s. Whereas the laser displacement sensor is set on

Figure 9. Observer performance in comparison of position time derivative.

Figure 10. Observer performance in comparison of position time derivative.

Shahabi et al. 11

Figure 11. Position tracking results (a) Tracking of xd ¼ 20 sinð2500tÞ. (b) Tracking of xd ¼ 30 sinð2630tÞ. (c) Tracking of xd ¼ 40 sin
ð2700tÞ. (d) Tracking of xd ¼ 60 sinð2800tÞ.
12
Figure 12. Tracking of xd ¼ 95 sinð2500tÞ.
the tip of the actuator, the steady-state displacements are
recorded at nine different input voltages with the sampling
time of 0.0001 s. The average of all peak displacements over
the time response of the actuator is depicted as an amplitude
on the frequency response plot. Most of the previous re-
searches used the amplitude of the frequency responses to
identify the nonlinear model. Indeed, the phase responses
were generally ignored. However, the main target of this
study is to evaluate the nonlinear parameters by considering
the amplitude and the phase frequency responses, simul-
taneously. Therefore, the phase values should be obtained
experimentally at different frequencies and amplitudes. As
a result, the following values are obtained for the unknown
nonlinear parameters
k1 ¼ 6:94 × 1017
k2 ¼ 1:443 × 1028
μ1 ¼ 6:28 × 1013
The plots which are shown in Figure 4 illustrate that the
nonlinear parameters are identified correctly, and also, the
suggested model properly predicts the vibration ampli-
tude for different input voltages.
As it is observed in Figure 5, the experimental data are
also in a good agreement with the theoretical results to
estimate the response phase.
The results showed that, within the identification do-
main, the suggested mathematical framework accurately
predicts the overall dynamic behavior of the actuator near
the resonant actuation with the maximum error of 7% and
the average error of 5.5%.
To clarify the difference between the linear and non-
linear models, the corresponding phase responses are also
shown in Figure 6.
The deviation of the linear model from the nonlinear
one are also illustrated at some frequencies before and
after resonance in Figure 7.
Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)
Table 3. Steady state tracking errors.
Desired trajectory Error (%)
r ¼ 20 sinð2500tÞ 5.6
r ¼ 30 sinð2630tÞ 4.3
r ¼ 40 sinð2700tÞ 1.8
r ¼ 60 sinð2800tÞ 3.1
r ¼ 95 sinð2500tÞ 4.9
4.3. Observer-based position control
In this section, the obtained mathematical model of ac-
tuator, with the designed controller and observer, is im-
plemented in MATLAB Simulink, and unknown gains are
determined in accordance with the constraints by con-
ducting numerical iterations. These parameters are pre-
sented in Table 2.
Figure 8 depicts the experimental setup with the de-
signed observer and controller in the loop.
To evaluate the performance of observer, the observer
output signal is compared with the time derivative of
actuator position, which is shown in Figures 9 and 10.
After implementing the controller with a proper gain,
different signal trajectories with frequencies near the
resonance are applied to the actuator. Figure 11 shows the
corresponding results for the tracking of different desired
trajectories.
Moreover, to evaluate the accuracy of dynamic model
and the performance of designed controller and observer,
the tracking is also conducted outside of the identification
range; the corresponding result is shown in Figure 12.
As it is observed, the tracking error in this set of ex-
periments is in the range of 1–6% of maximum amplitude.
Also Table 3 shows the steady state errors of the foregoing
experiments.
It should be noted that the maximum and the average
steady-state errors for different input signals within the
identification range are obtained as 5.6% and 3.7%,
Shahabi et al.
Figure 13. Control effort for tracking xd ¼ 95 sinð2500tÞ.
respectively. Moreover, outside of the identification range,
the suggested control approach is able to track a desired
trajectory with the steady state error of 4.9%. Finally, the
control effort for the tracking of one of the desired tra-
jectories such as xd ¼ 95 sinð2500tÞ is shown in Figure 13.
5. Conclusion
In this work, a nonlinear mathematical framework was first
developed and experimentally validated for a piezoelectric
bimorph actuator which is excited at high frequencies near
its first bending mode natural frequency. This nonlinear
mathematical framework was obtained by resorting to
Hamilton’s principles, Galerkin’s method, and the single
mode assumption. The nonlinear parameter identification
was conducted by means of amplitude and phase frequency
responses, simultaneously. Then, to control the actuator
position at high frequencies, a boundary layer sliding mode
controller was used. The corresponding control law was
derived based on the Lyapunov theorem so that the stability
of the system can be guaranteed. Then, the stability of the
system was evaluated in the presence of a high-gain
reduced-order observer as well. Finally, the precision and
feasibility of the suggested control method were tested by
means of tracking different trajectories, even outside of the
identification range.
The results showed that within the identification domain,
the suggested mathematical framework accurately predicts
the overall dynamic behavior of the actuator near the res-
onant actuation with the maximum error of 7% and the
average error of 5.5%. Also, the experimental control results
indicated that the suggested control system not only has
satisfactory performance but also attenuate the chattering
effects in the control effort. The maximum and average
steady state errors for different tested input signals within
the identification range were obtained as 5.6% and 3.7%,
respectively. Moreover, for the out of identification range,
13
the suggested control approach was resulted in 4.9% steady-
state error which is quite acceptable.
Declaration of conflicting interests
The author(s) declared no potential conflicts of interest with
respect to the research, authorship, and/or publication of this
article.
Funding
The author(s) received no financial support for the research, au-
thorship, and/or publication of this article.
ORCID iDs
Pouyan Shahabi  https://orcid.org/0000-0002-6665-3907
Hamed Ghafarirad  https://orcid.org/0000-0001-7292-143X
References
Andreaus U, Dell’Isola F and Porfiri M (2004) Piezoelectric
passive distributed controllers for beam flexural vibrations.
Journal of Vibration and Control 10: 625–659.
Chao PC-P, Liao P-Y, Tsai M-Y, et al. (2011) Robust control design
for precision positioning of a generic piezoelectric system with
consideration of microscopic hysteresis effects. Microsystem
Technologies 17: 1009–1023.
dell’Isola F, Maurini C and Porfiri M (2004) Passive damping of
beam vibrations through distributed electric networks and
piezoelectric transducers: prototype design and experimental
validation. Smart Materials and Structures 13: 299.
Ghafarirad H, Rezaei SM, Sarhan AAD, et al. (2014a) Continuous
dynamic modelling of bimorph piezoelectric cantilevered ac-
tuators considering hysteresis effect and dynamic behaviour
analysis. Mathematical and Computer Modelling of Dynamical
Systems 21: 130–152.
Ghafarirad H, Rezaei SM, Zareinejad M, et al. (2014b) Disturbance
rejection-based robust control for micropositioning of piezo-
electric actuators. Comptes Rendus Mécanique 342: 32–45.
14
Jain RK, Majumder S, Ghosh B, et al. (2015) Design and
manufacturing of mobile micro manipulation system with
a compliant piezoelectric actuator based micro gripper. Journal
of Manufacturing Systems 35: 76–91.
Jemai A, Najar F and Chafra M (2017) Parametric analysis of
multilayered unimorph piezoelectric vibration energy har-
vesters. Journal of Vibration and Control 23: 2538–2553.
Jingang Y, Chang S and Yantao S. (2009) Disturbance-observer-
based hysteresis compensation for piezoelectric actuators.
IEEE/ASME Transactions on Mechatronics 14: 456–464.
Khadraoui S, Rakotondrabe M and Lutz P (2014) Interval force/
position modeling and control of a microgripper composed of
two collaborative piezoelectric actuators and its automation.
International Journal of Control, Automation and Systems 12:
358–371.
Khalil HK (2014) Nonlinear Control. London: Pearson Higher
Education.
Leadenham S and Erturk A (2015a) Nonlinear M-shaped broad-
band piezoelectric energy harvester for very low base accel-
erations: primary and secondary resonances. Smart Materials
and Structures 24: 055021.
Leadenham S and Erturk A (2015b) Unified nonlinear elec-
troelastic dynamics of a bimorph piezoelectric cantilever for
energy harvesting, sensing, and actuation. Nonlinear Dynamics
79: 1727–1743.
Leadenham S and Erturk A (2019) Mechanically and electrically
nonlinear non-ideal piezoelectric energy harvesting framework
with experimental validations. Nonlinear Dynamics: 1–17.
Liu J, Chen X, Gao J, et al. (2016) Multiple-source multiple-
harmonic active vibration control of variable section cylindrical
structures: a numerical study. Mechanical Systems and Signal
Processing 81: 461–474.
Liu J, Chen X, Yang L, et al. (2017) Analysis and compensation of
reference frequency mismatch in multiple-frequency feedfor-
ward active noise and vibration control system. Journal of
Sound and Vibration 409: 145–164.
Mehrdad Pourkiaee S, Khadem SE and Shahgholi M (2017)
Nonlinear vibration and stability analysis of an electrically
actuated piezoelectric nanobeam considering surface effects
and intermolecular interactions. Journal of Vibration and
Control 23: 1873–1889.
Mirafzal SH, Khorasani AM and Ghasemi AH (2016) Optimizing
time delay feedback for active vibration control of a cantilever
beam using a genetic algorithm. Journal of Vibration and
Control 22: 4047–4061.
Oh S and Khalil HK (1997) Nonlinear output-feedback tracking
using high-gain observer and variable structure control. Au-
tomatica 33: 1845–1856.
Journal of Vibration and Control 0(0)
Qingsong X and Minping J (2014) Model reference adaptive
control with perturbation estimation for a micropositioning
system. IEEE Transactions on Control Systems Technology 22:
352–359.
Rakotondrabe M, Clévy C and Lutz P (2010) Complete open loop
control of hysteretic, creeped, and oscillating piezoelectric
cantilevers. IEEE Transactions on Automation Science and
Engineering 7: 440–450.
Sadek I, Kucuk I, Zeini E, et al. (2009) Optimal boundary control
of dynamics responses of piezo actuating micro-beams. Ap-
plied Mathematical Modelling 33: 3343–3353.
Shirazi MJ, Salarieh H, Alasty A, et al. (2012) Tip tracking
control of a micro-cantilever Timoshenko beam via piezo-
electric actuator. Journal of Vibration and Control 19:
1561–1574.
Stanton SC, Erturk A, Mann BP, et al. (2010a) Nonlinear pie-
zoelectricity in electroelastic energy harvesters: modeling and
experimental identification. Journal of Applied Physics 108:
074903.
Stanton SC, Erturk A, Mann BP, et al. (2010b) Resonant mani-
festation of intrinsic nonlinearity within electroelastic micro-
power generators. Applied Physics Letters 97: 254101.
Stanton SC, Erturk A, Mann BP, et al. (2012) Nonlinear non-
conservative behavior and modeling of piezoelectric energy
harvesters including proof mass effects. Journal of Intelligent
Material Systems and Structures 23: 183–199.
Tan D, Yavarow P and Erturk A (2018a) Nonlinear elastodynamics
of piezoelectric macro-fiber composites with interdigitated
electrodes for resonant actuation. Composite Structures 187:
137–143.
Tan D, Yavarow P and Erturk A (2018b) Resonant nonlinearities of
piezoelectric macro-fiber composite cantilevers with in-
terdigitated electrodes in energy harvesting. Nonlinear Dy-
namics 92: 1935–1945.
Thomas O, Ducarne J and Deü J-F. (2011) Performance of pie-
zoelectric shunts for vibration reduction. Smart Materials and
Structures 21: 015008.
Vidoli S and Dell’Isola F (2001) Vibration control in plates by
uniformly distributed PZT actuators interconnected via electric
networks. European Journal of Mechanics – A/Solids 20:
435–456.
Yu S and He S (2013) Accurate free vibration analysis of cantilever
piezoelectric panel carrying a rigid mass. Journal of Vibration
and Control 19: 1187–1198.
Zhang Y and Xu Q (2017) Adaptive sliding mode control with
parameter estimation and Kalman filter for precision motion
control of a piezo-driven microgripper. IEEE Transactions on
Control Systems Technology 25: 728–735.