Review Article

Linear Closed-Loop Control of Fluid Instabilities and Noise-Induced Perturbations: A Review of Approaches and Tools1

[+] Author and Article Information
Denis Sipp

ONERA-The French Aerospace Lab,
Meudon F-92190, France
e-mail: denis.sipp@onera.fr

Peter J. Schmid

Department of Mathematics,
Imperial College London,
London SW7 2AZ, UK
e-mail: pjschmid@imperial.ac.uk

Manuscript received September 20, 2015; final manuscript received March 13, 2016; published online May 3, 2016. Assoc. Editor: Jörg Schumacher.

Appl. Mech. Rev 68(2), 020801 (May 03, 2016) (26 pages) Paper No: AMR-15-1112; doi: 10.1115/1.4033345 History: Received September 20, 2015; Revised March 13, 2016

This review article is concerned with the design of linear reduced-order models and control laws for closed-loop control of instabilities in transitional flows. For oscillator flows, such as open-cavity flows, we suggest the use of optimal control techniques with Galerkin models based on unstable global modes and balanced modes. Particular attention has to be paid to stability–robustness properties of the control law. Specifically, we show that large delays and strong amplification between the control input and the estimation sensor may be detrimental both to performance and robustness. For amplifier flows, such as backward-facing step flow, the requirement to account for the upstream disturbance environment rules out Galerkin models. In this case, an upstream sensor is introduced to detect incoming perturbations, and identification methods are used to fit a model structure to available input–output data. Control laws, obtained by direct inversion of the input–output relations, are found to be robust when applied to the large-scale numerical simulation. All the concepts are presented in a step-by-step manner, and numerical codes are provided for the interested reader.

Copyright © 2016 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Bewley, T. , 2001, “ Flow Control: New Challenges for a New Renaissance,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 37(1), pp. 21–58. [CrossRef]
Collis, S. , Joslin, R. , Seifert, A. , and Theofilis, V. , 2004, “ Issues in Active Flow Control: Theory, Control, Simulation, and Experiment,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 40(4), pp. 237–289. [CrossRef]
Kim, J. , and Bewley, T. , 2007, “ A Linear Systems Approach to Flow Control,” Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 39(1), pp. 383–417. [CrossRef]
Cattafesta, L. , Song, Q. , Williams, D. , Rowley, C. , and Alvi, F. , 2008, “ Active Control of Flow-Induced Cavity Oscillations,” Prog. Aerosp. Sci., 44(7), pp. 479–502. [CrossRef]
Sipp, D. , Marquet, O. , Meliga, P. , and Barbagallo, A. , 2010, “ Dynamics and Control of Global Instabilities in Open-Flows: A Linearized Approach,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 63(3), p. 030801. [CrossRef]
Brunton, S. , and Noack, B. , 2015, “ Closed-Loop Turbulence Control: Progress and Challenges,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 67(5), p. 050801. [CrossRef]
Gad-el Hak, M. , 2001, The MEMS Handbook, CRC Press, Boca Raton, FL.
Rathnasingham, R. , and Breuer, K. , 2003, “ Active Control of Turbulent Boundary Layers,” J. Fluid Mech., 495, pp. 209–233. [CrossRef]
Erdmann, R. , Pätzold, A. , Engert, M. , Peltzer, I. , and Nitsche, W. , 2011, “ On Active Control of Laminar–Turbulent Transition on Two-Dimensional Wings,” Philos. Trans. R. Soc. London A, 369(1940), pp. 1382–1395. [CrossRef]
Juillet, F. , McKeon, B. , and Schmid, P. , 2014, “ Experimental Control of Natural Perturbations in Channel Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 752, pp. 296–309. [CrossRef]
Cattafesta, L. , Garg, S. , Choudhari, M. , and Li, F. , 1997, “ Active Control of Flow Induced Cavity Resonance,” AIAA Paper No. 97-1804.
Mongeau, L. , Kook, H. , and Franchek, M. , 1998, “ Active Control of Flow-Induced Cavity Resonance,” AIAA/CEAS Paper No. 98-2349.
Williams, D. , and Morrow, J. , 2001, “ Adaptive Control of Multiple Acoustic Modes in Cavities,” AIAA Paper No. 2001-2769.
Williams, D. , Rowley, C. , Colonius, T. , Murray, R. , MacMartin, D. , Fabris, D. , and Albertson, J. , 2002, “ Model-Based Control of Cavity Oscillations. Part I: Experiments,” AIAA Paper No. 2002-0971.
Kegerise, M. , Cattafesta, L. , and Ha, C. , 2002, “ Adaptive Identification and Control of Flow-Induced Cavity Oscillations,” AIAA Paper No. 2002-3158.
Cabell, R. , Kegerise, M. , Cox, D. , and Gibbs, G. , 2006, “ Experimental Feedback Control of Flow-Induced Cavity Tones,” AIAA J., 44(8), pp. 1807–1816. [CrossRef]
Samimy, M. , Debiasi, M. , Caraballo, E. , Serrani, A. , Yuan, X. , Little, J. , and Myatt, J. , 2007, “ Feedback Control of Subsonic Cavity Flows Using Reduced-Order Models,” J. Fluid Mech., 579, pp. 315–346. [CrossRef]
Becker, R. , Garwon, M. , Guknecht, C. , Barwolff, G. , and King, R. , 2005, “ Robust Control of Separated Shear Flows in Simulation and Experiment,” J Process Control, 15(6), pp. 691–700. [CrossRef]
Henning, L. , and King, R. , 2007, “ Robust Multivariable Closed-Loop Control of a Turbulent Backward-Facing Step Flow,” J. Aircr., 44(1), pp. 201–208. [CrossRef]
Pastoor, M. , Henning, L. , Noack, B. , King, R. , and Tadmor, G. , 2008, “ Feedback Shear Layer Control for Bluff Body Drag Reduction,” J. Fluid Mech., 608, pp. 161–196. [CrossRef]
Gautier, N. , and Aider, J.-L. , 2014, “ Feed-Forward Control of a Perturbed Backward-Facing Step Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 759, pp. 181–196. [CrossRef]
Gautier, N. , Aider, J.-L. , Duriez, T. , Noack, B. , Segond, M. , and Abel, M. , 2015, “ Closed-Loop Separation Control Using Machine Learning,” J. Fluid Mech., 770, pp. 442–457. [CrossRef]
Gharib, M. , 1987, “ Response of the Cavity Shear Layer Oscillations to External Forcing,” AIAA J., 25(1), pp. 43–47. [CrossRef]
Roussopoulos, K. , and Monkewitz, P. , 1996, “ Nonlinear Modelling of Vortex Shedding Control in Cylinder Wakes,” Physica D, 97(1), pp. 264–273. [CrossRef]
Illingworth, S. , Naito, H. , and Fukagata, K. , 2014, “ Active Control of Vortex Shedding: An Explanation of the Gain Window,” Phys. Rev. E, 90(4), p. 043014. [CrossRef]
Yan, P. , Debiasi, M. , Yuan, X. , Little, J. , Ozbay, H. , and Samimy, M. , 2006, “ Experimental Study of Linear Closed-Loop Control of Subsonic Cavity Flow,” AIAA J., 44(5), pp. 929–938. [CrossRef]
Kestens, T. , and Nicoud, F. , 1998, “ Active Control of an Unsteady Flow Over a Rectangular Cavity,” AIAA Paper No. 98-2348.
Fabbiane, N. , Semeraro, O. , Bagheri, S. , and Henningson, D. , 2014, “ Adaptive and Model-Based Control Theory Applied to Convectively Unstable Flows,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 66(6), p. 060801.
Fabbiane, N. , Simon, B. , Fischer, F. , Grundmann, S. , Bagheri, S. , and Henningson, D. , 2015, “ On the Role of Adaptivity for Robust Laminar Flow Control,” J. Fluid Mech., 767, pp. R1–R2. [CrossRef]
Gunzburger, M. , 2003, Perspectives in Flow Control and Optimization, Vol. 5, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
Skogestad, S. , and Postlethwaite, I. , 2007, Multivariable Feedback Control: Analysis and Design, Vol. 2, Wiley, New York.
Joshi, S. , Speyer, J. , and Kim, J. , 1997, “ A Systems Theory Approach to the Feedback Stabilization of Infinitesimal and Finite-Amplitude Disturbances in Plane Poiseuille Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 332, pp. 157–184.
Bewley, T. , and Liu, S. , 1998, “ Optimal and Robust Control and Estimation of Linear Paths to Transition,” J. Fluid Mech., 365, pp. 305–349. [CrossRef]
Cortelezzi, L. , Speyer, J. , Lee, K. , and Kim, J. , 1998, “ Robust Reduced-Order Control of Turbulent Channel Flows Via Distributed Sensors and Actuators,” 37th IEEE Conference on Decision and Control (CDC), Tampa, FL, Dec. 16–18, Vol. 2, pp. 1906–1911.
Lee, K. , Cortelezzi, L. , Kim, J. , and Speyer, J. , 2001, “ Application of Reduced-Order Controller to Turbulent Flows for Drag Reduction,” Phys. Fluids, 13(5), pp. 1321–1330. [CrossRef]
Lauga, E. , and Bewley, T. , 2004, “ Performance of a Linear Robust Control Strategy on a Nonlinear Model of Spatially Developing Flows,” J. Fluid Mech., 512, pp. 343–374. [CrossRef]
Gavarini, M. , Bottaro, A. , and Nieuwstadt, F. , 2005, “ Optimal and Robust Control of Streaks in Pipe Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 537, pp. 187–219. [CrossRef]
Laub, A. , Heath, M. , Paige, C. , and Ward, R. , 1987, “ Computation of System Balancing Transformations and Other Applications of Simultaneous Diagonalization Algorithms,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 32(2), pp. 115–122. [CrossRef]
Willcox, K. , and Peraire, J. , 2002, “ Balanced Model Reduction Via the Proper Orthogonal Decomposition,” AIAA J., 40(11), pp. 2323–2330. [CrossRef]
Rowley, C. , 2005, “ Model Reduction for Fluids, Using Balanced Proper Orthogonal Decomposition,” Int. J. Bifurcation Chaos, 15(3), pp. 997–1013. [CrossRef]
Ilak, M. , and Rowley, C. , 2008, “ Modeling of Transitional Channel Flow Using Balanced Proper Orthogonal Decomposition,” Phys. Fluids, 20(3), p. 034103. [CrossRef]
Bagheri, S. , Henningson, D. , Hoepffner, J. , and Schmid, P. , 2009, “ Input-Output Analysis and Control Design Applied to a Linear Model of Spatially Developing Flows,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 62(2), p. 020803. [CrossRef]
Barbagallo, A. , Sipp, D. , and Schmid, P. , 2009, “ Closed-Loop Control of an Open Cavity Flow Using Reduced-Order Models,” J. Fluid Mech., 641(1), pp. 1–50. [CrossRef]
Ahuja, S. , and Rowley, C. , 2010, “ Feedback Control of Unstable Steady States of Flow Past a Flat Plate Using Reduced-Order Estimators,” J. Fluid Mech., 645, pp. 447–478. [CrossRef]
Van Dooren, P. , Gallivan, K. , and Absil, P.-A. , 2008, “ H2-Optimal Model Reduction of MIMO Systems,” Appl. Math. Lett., 21(12), pp. 1267–1273. [CrossRef]
Gugercin, S. , Antoulas, A. , and Beattie, C. , 2008, “ H2 Model Reduction for Large-Scale Linear Dynamical Systems,” SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 30(2), pp. 609–638. [CrossRef]
Juang, J. , and Pappa, R. , 1985, “ An Eigensystem Realization Algorithm for Modal Parameter Identification and Model Reduction,” J. Guid. Control Dyn., 8(5), pp. 620–627. [CrossRef]
Guzmán Iñigo, J. , 2015, “ Estimation and Control of Noise Amplifier Flows Using Data-Based Approaches,” Ph.D. thesis, Ecole Polytechnique, Palaiseau, France.
Van Overschee, P. , and De Moor, B. , 1996, Subspace Identification for Linear Systems, Kluwer Academic Publishers, Dordrecht, the Netherlands.
Guzmán Iñigo, J. , Sipp, D. , and Schmid, P. , 2014, “ A Dynamic Observer to Capture and Control Perturbation Energy in Noise Amplifiers,” J. Fluid Mech., 758, pp. 728–753. [CrossRef]
Ljung, L. , 1999, System Identification: Theory for the User, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Ma, Z. , Ahuja, S. , and Rowley, C. , 2011, “ Reduced-Order Models for Control of Fluids Using the Eigensystem Realization Algorithm,” Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn., 25(1–4), pp. 233–247. [CrossRef]
Belson, B. , Semeraro, O. , Rowley, C. , and Henningson, D. , 2013, “ Feedback Control of Instabilities in the Two-Dimensional Blasius Boundary Layer: The Role of Sensors and Actuators,” Phys. Fluids, 25(5), p. 054106. [CrossRef]
Huang, S.-C. , and Kim, J. , 2008, “ Control and System Identification of a Separated Flow,” Phys. Fluids, 20(10), p. 101509. [CrossRef]
Hervé, A. , Sipp, D. , Schmid, P. , and Samuelides, M. , 2012, “ A Physics-Based Approach to Flow Control Using System Identification,” J. Fluid Mech., 702, pp. 26–58. [CrossRef]
Dovetta, N. , Schmid, P. , and Sipp, D. , 2016, “ Uncertainty Propagation in Model Extraction by System Identification and Its Implication for Control Design,” J. Fluid Mech., 791, pp. 214–236. [CrossRef]
Juang, J. , 1994, Applied System Identification, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Brunton, S. , Dawson, S. , and Rowley, C. , 2014, “ State-Space Model Identification and Feedback Control of Unsteady Aerodynamic Forces,” J. Fluids Struct., 50, pp. 253–270. [CrossRef]
Juillet, F. , Schmid, P. , and Huerre, P. , 2013, “ Control of Amplifier Flows Using Subspace Identification Techniques,” J. Fluid Mech., 725, pp. 522–565. [CrossRef]
Illingworth, S. , Morgans, A. , and Rowley, C. , 2011, “ Feedback Control of Flow Resonances Using Balanced Reduced-Order Models,” J. Sound Vib., 330(8), pp. 1567–1581. [CrossRef]
Illingworth, S. , Morgans, A. , and Rowley, C. , 2012, “ Feedback Control of Cavity Flow Oscillations Using Simple Linear Models,” J. Fluid Mech., 709, pp. 223–248. [CrossRef]
Dahan, J. , Morgans, A. , and Lardeau, S. , 2012, “ Feedback Control for Form-Drag Reduction on a Bluff Body With a Blunt Trailing Edge,” J. Fluid Mech., 704, pp. 360–387. [CrossRef]
Gelb, A. , and Vander-Velde, W. , 1968, Multiple-Input Describing Functions and Nonlinear System Design, McGraw-Hill, New York.
Ionita, A. , and Antoulas, A. , 2014, “ Data-Driven Parametrized Model Reduction in the Loewner Framework,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 36(3), pp. A984–A1007. [CrossRef]
Rowley, C. , Williams, D. , Colonius, T. , Murray, R. , MacMartin, D. , and Fabris, D. , 2002, “ Model-Based Control of Cavity Oscillations. Part II: System Identification and Analysis,” AIAA Paper No. 2002-972.
Rowley, C. , Williams, D. , Colonius, T. , Murray, R. , and MacMynowski, D. , 2006, “ Linear Models for Control of Cavity Flow Oscillations,” J. Fluid Mech., 547, pp. 317–330. [CrossRef]
Poussot-Vassal, C. , and Sipp, D. , 2015, “ Parametric Reduced Order Dynamical Model Construction of a Fluid Flow Control Problem,” IFAC, 48(26), pp. 133–138.
Bewley, T. , Temam, R. , and Ziane, M. , 2000, “ A General Framework for Robust Control in Fluid Mechanics,” Physica D, 138(3), pp. 360–392. [CrossRef]
Bewley, T. , Moin, P. , and Temam, R. , 2001, “ DNS-Based Predictive Control of Turbulence: An Optimal Benchmark for Feedback Algorithms,” J. Fluid Mech., 447, pp. 179–225. [CrossRef]
Wei, M. , and Freund, J. , 2006, “ A Noise-Controlled Free Shear Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 546, pp. 123–152. [CrossRef]
Cherubini, S. , Robinet, J.-C. , and De Palma, P. , 2013, “ Nonlinear Control of Unsteady Finite-Amplitude Perturbations in the Blasius Boundary-Layer Flow,” J. Fluid Mech., 737, pp. 440–465. [CrossRef]
Zuccher, S. , Luchini, P. , and Bottaro, A. , 2004, “ Algebraic Growth in a Blasius Boundary Layer: Optimal and Robust Control by Mean Suction in the Nonlinear Regime,” J. Fluid Mech., 513, pp. 135–160. [CrossRef]
Aubry, N. , Holmes, P. , Lumley, J. , and Stone, E. , 1988, “ The Dynamics of Coherent Structures in the Wall Region of a Turbulent Boundary Layer,” J. Fluid Mech., 192, pp. 115–173. [CrossRef]
Berkooz, G. , Holmes, P. , and Lumley, J. , 1993, “ The Proper Orthogonal Decomposition in the Analysis of Turbulent Flows,” Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 25(1), pp. 539–575. [CrossRef]
Noack, B. , Afanasiev, K. , Morzynski, M. , Tadmor, G. , and Thiele, F. , 2003, “ A Hierarchy of Low-Dimensional Models for the Transient and Post-Transient Cylinder Wake,” J. Fluid Mech., 497, pp. 335–363. [CrossRef]
King, R. , Seibold, M. , Lehmann, O. , Noack, B. , Morzyński, M. , and Tadmor, G. , 2005, “ Nonlinear Flow Control Based on a Low Dimensional Model of Fluid Flow,” Control and Observer Design for Nonlinear Finite and Infinite Dimensional Systems, Springer, Berlin, pp. 369–386.
Couplet, M. , Basdevant, C. , and Sagaut, P. , 2005, “ Calibrated Reduced-Order POD-Galerkin System for Fluid Flow Modelling,” J. Comput. Phys., 207(1), pp. 192–220. [CrossRef]
Bergmann, M. , Cordier, L. , and Brancher, J. , 2005, “ Optimal Rotary Control of the Cylinder Wake Using Proper Orthogonal Decomposition Reduced-Order Model,” Phys. Fluids, 17(9), p. 097101. [CrossRef]
Bergmann, M. , and Cordier, L. , 2008, “ Optimal Control of the Cylinder Wake in the Laminar Regime by Trust-Region Methods and POD Reduced-Order Models,” J. Comput. Phys., 227(16), pp. 7813–7840. [CrossRef]
Bergmann, M. , Bruneau, C.-H. , and Iollo, A. , 2009, “ Enablers for Robust POD models,” J. Comput. Phys., 228(2), pp. 516–538. [CrossRef]
Gillies, E. , 1998, “ Low-Dimensional Control of the Circular Cylinder Wake,” J. Fluid Mech., 371(1), pp. 157–178. [CrossRef]
Cordier, L. , Noack, B. , Tissot, G. , Lehnasch, G. , Delville, J. , Balajewicz, M. , Daviller, G. , and Niven, R. , 2013, “ Identification Strategies for Model-Based Control,” Exp. Fluids, 54(8), pp. 1–21. [CrossRef]
Chaturantabut, S. , and Sorensen, D. , 2010, “ Nonlinear Model Reduction Via Discrete Empirical Interpolation,” SIAM J. Sci. Comput., 32(5), pp. 2737–2764. [CrossRef]
Fosas de Pando, M. , Schmid, P. , and Sipp, D. , 2013, “ Nonlinear Model-Order Reduction for Oscillator Flows Using POD-DEIM,” 66th Annual Meeting of the APS Division of Fluid Dynamics, Pittsburgh, PA, Nov. 24–26, Paper No. M25.00006.
Ştefănescu, R. , Sandu, A. , and Navon, I. , 2015, “ POD/DEIM Reduced-Order Strategies for Efficient Four Dimensional Variational Data Assimilation,” J. Comput. Phys., 295, pp. 569–595. [CrossRef]
Dandois, J. , and Pamart, P. , 2013, “ NARX Modeling and Extremum-Seeking Control of a Separation,” Aerosp. Lab J., 6, epub.
Burl, J. , 1999, Linear Optimal Control, Addison-Wesley Longman, Menlo Park, CA.
Cortelezzi, L. , Lee, K. , Kim, J. , and Speyer, J. , 1998, “ Skin-Friction Drag Reduction Via Robust Reduced-Order Linear Feedback Control,” Int. J. Comput. Fluid Dyn., 11(1–2), pp. 79–92. [CrossRef]
Bagheri, S. , Brandt, L. , and Henningson, D. , 2009, “ Input–Output Analysis, Model Reduction and Control of the Flat-Plate Boundary Layer,” J. Fluid Mech., 620(1), pp. 263–298. [CrossRef]
Barbagallo, A. , Dergham, G. , Sipp, D. , Schmid, P. , and Robinet, J.-C. , 2012. “ Closed-Loop Control of Unsteadiness Over a Rounded Backward-Facing Step,” J. Fluid Mech., 703, pp. 326–362. [CrossRef]
Zhao, H. , and Bau, H. , 2006, “ Limitations of Linear Control of Thermal Convection in a Porous Medium,” Phys. Fluids, 18(7), p. 074109. [CrossRef]
Horowitz, I. , 1993, Quantitative Feedback Design. QFT Publications, Boulder, CO.
Vinnicombe, G. , 2001. Uncertainty and Feedback: H Loop-Shaping and the ν-Gap Metric, World Scientific, Singapore.
Kook, H. , Mongeau, L. , and Franchek, M. , 2002, “ Active Control of Pressure Fluctuations Due to Flow Over Helmholtz Resonators,” J. Sound Vib., 255(1), pp. 61–76. [CrossRef]
Doyle, J. , 1978, “ Guaranteed Margins for LQG Regulators,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 23(4), pp. 756–757. [CrossRef]
Zames, G. , 1981, “ Feedback and Optimal Sensitivity: Model Reference Transformations, Multiplicative Seminorms, and Approximate Inverses,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 26(2), pp. 301–320. [CrossRef]
Zhou, K. , Doyle, J. , and Glover, K. , 1996, Robust and Optimal Control, Vol. 40, Prentice Hall, Upper Saddle River, NJ.
Apkarian, P. , and Noll, D. , 2006, “ Nonsmooth H Synthesis,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 51(2), pp. 382. [CrossRef]
Petersen, I. , and Tempo, R. , 2014, “ Robust Control of Uncertain Systems: Classical Results and Recent Developments,” Automatica, 50(5), pp. 1315–1335. [CrossRef]
Jones, B. , Heins, P. , Kerrigan, E. , Morrison, J. , and Sharma, A. , 2015, “ Modelling for Robust Feedback Control of Fluid Flows,” J. Fluid Mech., 769, pp. 687–722. [CrossRef]
Aleksić-Roeßner, K. , King, R. , Lehmann, O. , Tadmor, G. , and Morzyński, M. , 2014, “ On the Need of Nonlinear Control for Efficient Model-Based Wake Stabilization,” Theor. Comput. Fluid Dyn., 28(1), pp. 23–49. [CrossRef]
Tachim Medjo, T. , 2001, “ Robust Control Problems in Fluid Mechanics,” Physica D, 149(4), pp. 278–292. [CrossRef]
Hu, C. , and Temam, R. , 2001, “ Robust Boundary Control for the Kuramoto-Sivashinsky Equation,” Conference on Optimal Control and Partial Differential Equation, Paris, Dec. 4, 2000, pp. 353–362.
Tachim Medjo, T. , and Tcheugoue Tebou, L. , 2004, “ Adjoint-Based Iterative Method for Robust Control Problems in Fluid Mechanics,” SIAM J. Numer. Anal., 42(1), pp. 302–325. [CrossRef]
Tachim Medjo, T. , and Tchegoue Tebou, L. , 2005, “ Robust Control Problems in Fluid Flows,” Discrete Control Dyn. Syst., 12(3), pp. 437–463.
Huerre, P. , and Rossi, M. , 1998, “ Hydrodynamic Instabilities in Open Flows,” Collection Alea Saclay Monographs and Texts in Statistical Physics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, pp. 81–294.
Schmid, P. , 2007, “ Nonmodal Stability Theory,” Ann. Rev. Fluid Mech., 39(1), pp. 129–162. [CrossRef]
Sipp, D. , and Lebedev, A. , 2007, “ Global Stability of Base and Mean Flows: A General Approach and Its Applications to Cylinder and Open Cavity Flows,” J. Fluid Mech., 593, pp. 333–358. [CrossRef]
Blackburn, H. , Barkley, D. , and Sherwin, S. , 2008, “ Convective Instability and Transient Growth in Flow Over a Backward-Facing Step,” J. Fluid Mech., 603, pp. 271–304. [CrossRef]
Barbagallo, A. , Sipp, D. , and Schmid, P. , 2011, “ Input–Output Measures for Model Reduction and Closed-Loop Control: Application to Global Modes,” J. Fluid Mech., 685, pp. 23–53. [CrossRef]
Matsumoto, J. , and Kawahara, M. , 2000, “ Stable Shape Identification for Fluid-Structure Interaction Problem Using MINI Element,” ASME J. Appl. Mech., 3, pp. 263–274. [CrossRef]
Amestoy, P. , Duff, I. , L'Excellent, J.-Y. , and Koster, J. , 2001, “ A Fully Asynchronous Multifrontal Solver Using Distributed Dynamic Scheduling,” SIAM J. Matrix Anal. Appl., 23(1), pp. 15–41. [CrossRef]
Lehoucq, R. , Sorensen, D. , and Yang, C. , 1998, ARPACK Users' Guide: Solution of Large-Scale Eigenvalue Problems With Implicitly Restarted Arnoldi Methods, Vol. 6, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
Antoulas, A. , 2005, Approximation of Large-Scale Dynamical Systems, SIAM, Philadelphia, PA.
Kwakernaak, H. , and Sivan, R. , 1972, “ The Maximally Achievable Accuracy of Linear Optimal Regulators and Linear Optimal Filters,” IEEE Trans. Autom. Control, 17(1), pp. 79–86. [CrossRef]
Chen, K. , and Rowley, C. , 2011, “ H2 Optimal Actuator and Sensor Placement in the Linearised Complex Ginzburg-Landau System,” J. Fluid Mech., 681, pp. 241–260. [CrossRef]
Dreyfus, G. , Martinez, J.-M. , Samuelides, M. , Gordon, M. , Badran, F. , and Thiria, S. , 2011, Apprentissage statistique: Réseaux de neurones-Cartes topologiques-Machines à vecteurs Supports, Eyrolles, Paris.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Block diagram of a typical feedback control setup, including plant, compensator, external disturbance sources (w,g), control signal u, measurement signal y, and objective output z

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

Sketch of flow over an open cavity (a) and a backward-facing step (b)—two generic flow configurations representing an oscillator and noise-amplifier flow, respectively. The actuator (u), flow sensor (y), and performance sensor (z) are marked by colored symbols for each configuration. External upstream disturbance sources are indicated by w in the case of an amplifier flow. (a) Feedback configuration and (b) feed-forward configuration.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

(a) Eigenvalues for flow over an open cavity for four different Reynolds numbers, displayed in the complex frequency (ω)–growth-rate (σ) plane. (b) Principal global modes for flow over an open square cavity at Re=7500, visualized by contours of streamwise velocity. (c) Corresponding adjoint global mode.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Modulus of transfer functions for different compositions of the Galerkin bases for flow over an open cavity at Re = 7500. The bases are composed of eight global modes (8 GM) and a varying number of balanced (bPOD) modes.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Block diagram of a typical feedback control setup for oscillator flows, including plant, compensator, external noise sources (w,g), control signal u, measurement signal y, and objective output z

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

(a) Principal balanced mode and (b) associated adjoint balanced mode, visualized by contours of the streamwise velocity component. The actuator and sensor locations are indicated by black symbols.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Sketch of model reduction procedure (Galerkin projection) for the system matrix. Unstable global modes are indicated in red (direct modes in Vu and adjoint modes in Wu), and balanced modes are indicated in green (direct modes in Vs and adjoint modes in Ws). The reduced system matrix A¯ consists of a diagonal submatrix containing the unstable eigenvalues (red symbols) and a dense submatrix (dark blue) describing the reduced stable subspace dynamics.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Modulus of the closed-loop transfer function between sensor noise g and objective signal z (blue curve) and between sensor noise g and control signal u (red curve) for open-cavity flow at Re = 7500 with (l2=∞ and G/W=∞) (SGL).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Block diagram illustrating the compensator design process (a) and the application of the reduced-order compensator to the full plant (b). The performance and robustness of the design are evaluated for the configuration on the right.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Objective sensor signal z (a) and control signal u (b) for compensated flow over an open cavity at Re = 7500 in the SGL. The simulation has been initialized with the most unstable global mode, whose amplitude has been chosen sufficiently small such that the entire simulation remains in the linear regime. No disturbance/noise sources w and g have been applied.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Objective sensor signal z (a) and control signal u (b) for compensated flow over an open cavity applying a compensator designed for Re = 7500 in the SGL to a flow at a Reynolds number of Re = 7000. The initial condition consists of the most unstable global mode, with a sufficiently low amplitude for the simulation to remain in the linear regime.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Closed-loop perturbed system. The closed-loop system is composed of the actual cavity flow Tyu and the controller Kuy. The actual transfer function Tyu is slightly different from the reduced transfer function T¯yu by a multiplicative factor 1+Δ. The perturbation Δ displays one input (the control signal zd = u) and one output (the actuator noise wd). We have also indicated an additional input to the closed-loop system, wy, which is required for well-posedness of the H∞ design framework.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Modulus of the open-loop transfer function Tyu (solid black line), including GM a+(ω) and a−(ω) (dashed lines), for flow over an open cavity at Re = 7500 stabilized by (a) an SGL-compensator and (b) an MG-compensator. Note that the open-loop transfer function for Re = 7000, included in red, is contained within the bounds over the entire frequency range only for the MG-compensator.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 14

Contours of gain margins GM+ (a) and GM (b) and PM (c) in the  log10(G/W)−log10(ℓ2) plane for flow over an open cavity at Re = 7500. Dark contours indicate good robustness properties. The white contour levels represent the least stable eigenvalue of the flow-field at Re = 7000 coupled to a compensator designed at Re = 7500. The white bullet point indicates the coordinates (G/W=1587−ℓ2=2041) corresponding to the LTR calculations.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 15

Time signal of objective measurement z (a) and control u (b) for cavity flow at Re = 7000 stabilized by an LTR-compensator designed for Re = 7500

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 16

Temporal evolution of the perturbation kinetic energy for increasing amplitudes of the initial condition, contrasting the performance of SGL-compensation and robustified LTR-compensation (G/W=1587−ℓ2=2041), for cavity flow at Re = 7500

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 17

Objective measurement z = y ((a) and (c)) and associated control signal u ((b) and (d)) for control of an open cavity flow at Re = 6000. (a) and (b) SGL-compensator (l2=∞ and G/W=∞). (c) and (d) LTR-compensator with (l2=200 and G/W=250).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 18

Impulse responses between u and y. (a)–(d) for different Reynolds numbers, the shear-stress sensor being located at xs=1.05. (f)–(i) For different locations of the estimation sensor (the Reynolds number being equal to Re = 7000). Zeros of the open-loop transfer function T¯yu. (e) For different Reynolds numbers, the shear-stress sensor being located at xs=1.05. (j) For different locations of the estimation sensor (the Reynolds number being equal to Re = 7000).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 19

Gain margin GM in the  log10(G/W)−log10(ℓ2) plane. (a)–(d) For different Reynolds numbers, the shear-stress sensor being located at xs=1.05. (e)–(h) For different locations xs of the estimation sensor y: (e) xs=0.75, (f) xs=0.5, (g) xs=0.25, and (h) xs=0.15. The actuator is located at x=−0.1, and the Reynolds number is equal to Re = 7000.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 20

Sketch indicating the transfer of information to be modeled by the ARMAX structure. Transfer of information (1) from the control u to the performance sensor z, (2) from the upstream sensor y to the performance sensor z, (3) the observable part of the disturbance environment w measured by y, and (4) the part of w, unobservable by y but impacting the performance sensor z.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 21

Learning data set consisting of the recorded measurements from the upstream estimation sensor y (a), input signal u (b), and downstream performance sensor z (c). The validation of the model is shown in (d) where the predicted output (solid black line), for a forcing different from the learning set and for a different disturbance environment, is compared to the true signal (red symbols) from the full system. The sensor measurements y and z and the actuator signal u were considered noise-free.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 22

(a) Spectrum magnitude of clean signal z (red) and clean signal y (black) in simulation without control u = 0. The blue lines relate to the chosen u-signals. The solid lines correspond to the raw signals and the dotted lines to the filtered ones. The vertical solid line refers to ωc=2, the dashed-line to ωS, and the dashed–dotted line to ωDNS. (b) Autocorrelation function of the z-signal (red) and cross-correlation functions of the u (black) and y (blue) signals with the z-signal in simulation with control u.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 23

Impulse responses (a) from u to z in open-loop (black solid line), from y to z in open-loop (red solid-line) and from y to z in closed-loop (dashed-red line). The impulse response of the control law from y to u is shown in (b).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 24

Magnitude (a) and phase (b) of the control law between y and u. The red line refers to the (original) control law obtained for the sampling time ΔtS=0.1, while the black line corresponds to the resampled law (bilinear transform) at the DNS time step ΔtDNS=2×10−3. The vertical solid line refers to ωc=2, the dashed line to ωS, and the dashed–dotted line to ωDNS. Note that the controller is also used to filter the high frequencies present in the y signal, which justifies that the control law must be resampled with respect to the acquisition time ΔtDNS.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 25

(a) Control signal u(t) versus time. (b) Performance sensor z(t). (c) Global perturbation energy E(t). In all the plots, the black (respectively, red) line represents the uncontrolled (respectively, controlled) case.



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