18th IEEE International Conference on Control Applications
Part of 2009 IEEE Multi-conference on Systems and Control
Saint Petersburg, Russia, July 8-10, 2009
Adaptive Control of Structures with MR Damper
Şaban Çetin, Erkan Zergeroğlu, Selim Sivrioğlu and İsmail Yüksek
Abstract—In this study, an adaptive control scheme is
designed for vibration isolation of SDOF structural system
using a semi-active MR (magnetorheological) damper. The
main goal of using a MR damper system is for structural
protection against earthquake excitation and wind loading.
A structural system excited by an earthquake and
controlled by using MR damper is modeled as a semi-active
controlled, seismically excited and a nonlinear system with
SDOF. A nonlinear observer is used to estimate of the
unmeasurable internal state variable. Unknown parameters
of MR damper are obtained by adaptation rules. The
necessary input voltage to MR damper so as to generate
desired damping force is derived by the adaptive control.
Finally, response of semi-actively controlled building is
obtained by simulation.
I. INTRODUCTION
Significant progress has been made over the last three
decades on structural protection against earthquake and
strong wind loading. After Yao’s case study about
structural control [1], many control algorithms and
devices such as MR dampers have been investigated to
earthquake hazard mitigation [2-12].
MR dampers are nonlinear semi-active control devices
that have significant potential to mitigate vibration and
shocks. MR dampers exhibit hysteretic behaviors when
subjected to load. Due to their mechanical simplicity,
high dynamic range, low power requirements, low cost,
large force capacity, and robustness, these devices are
suitable for many applications [9-10]. Although they can
only remove the energy from system, recent studies have
shown that the MR dampers can achieve the majority of
the performance of fully active systems [3,6,7].
In order to describe the dynamic behaviour of MR
dampers, several models have been proposed. Several
quasistatic models have been researched [7,26-28].
Although these models are useful for MR damper design,
they are not sufficient to describe the MR damper
nonlinear behaviour under dynamic loading, especially
the force–velocity behaviour [10]. To overcome this,
different dynamic models have been developed such as
This work was supported in part by the İstanbul Metropolitan
Municipality under Grant Project İstanbul.
1
Ş. Çetin and İ. Yüksek are with the Faculty of Mecahnical
Engineering, Yildiz Technical University, İstanbul, 34349, Türkiye
(e-mail: {scetin , yukseki }@yildiz.edu.tr ).
2
E. Zergeroğlu and S. Sivrioğlu are with the Faculty of
Engineering, Gebze Institute of Thecnology, Gebze, 41400, Türkiye
(e-mail: ezerger@bilmuh.gyte.edu.tr and s.selim@gyte.edu.tr)
978-1-4244-4602-5/09/$25.00 ©2009 IEEE
the phenomenological model proposed by Spencer et al.
based on a Bouc–Wen hysteresis model [4]. Although
Bouc-Wen model can accurately predict MR damper
dynamics, in most cases they are complex and difficult to
use in control design and parameter adaptation schemes.
An alternative modeling is based on LuGre friction
model [11,19,29-31].
Nonlinearities and hysteresis dynamics in structures
incorporating semiactive devices have considerable
effects on the control performance. Various control
algorithms used with the semiactive devices can be found
in the literature such as Lyapunov method [6,13,14],
decentralized bang bang control [6,14,15], clipped
optimal control [3], modulated homogeneous friction
method [16], maximum energy dissipation [15], optimal
control [9,17], stochastic optimal control [18], H∞ control
[19], backstepping control [20], adaptive control [11, 21],
sliding mode control [22], robust control [23], fuzzy logic
[24,25], genetic algorithms [25]. Results of these studies
show that the performance of the controlled system is
highly dependent on the choice of control algorithm.
In this paper a new nonlinear adaptive controller is
proposed for vibration attenuation of SDOF structural
system using a MR damper. A structural system excited
by an earthquake and controlled by using MR damper is
modeled as a semi-active controlled, seismically excited
and a nonlinear system with SDOF. The rest of the paper
is organized as follows. In Section 2, mathematical model
of SDOF semiactive structural system model is
represented. MR damper model is given in Section 3.
Section 4 shows the general structure of control scheme.
Section 5 discusses the simulation results. Finally Section
6 provides conclusions.
II. MATHEMATICAL MODEL OF STRUCTURAL MODEL
Consider a single degree of freedom semi-active
structure model depicted in Figure 1. The MR damper
installed between the ground and the floor via a rigid
brace. Because of the stiffness of brace is usually strong,
the stiffness of brace can be neglected. The dynamical
differential equation of motion of this semi-actively
controlled SDOF structural system can be given as:
M
x
+ Bx
+ Kx = − f − M
x
g (1)
where f represent control force produced by MR damper;
M, B and K are the mass, damping and stiffness
60
coefficients of the structure, respectively;
x
g is the in previous semi-active control studies [11,19]. Here, f is
the control force produced by MR damper; z denotes an
earthquake acceleration excitation; x is the horizontal
internal state variable related to the MR fluid deformation
displacement of the structure. In this paper, only
and v is the applied voltage that acts as the control input.
horizontal motion is considered, torsional and vertical
The internal state variable z cannot be measured directly
motions are not considered.
because MR fluid is actually enclosed within the damper
cylinder. The other parameters are defined in Table I.

TABLE I
PARAMETERS OF THE MR DAMPER
Symb
Quantity Unit Value
ol
σ0 stiffness of z(t) influenced by
N/(m.V) 28815
v(t)
σ1 damping coefficient of z(t) N.s/m 0.131
Fig. 1 SDOF structure model with MR damper
σ2 viscous damping coefficient N.s/m 29.6
σa stiffness of z(t) N/m 30542
III. MR DAMPER MODEL σb viscous damping coefficient N.s/(m.V
influenced by v(t) ) 16.3
The MR damper typically consist of a hydraulic
cylinder which houses the piston, the magnetic circuit, an a0 constant value V/N 3198
accumulator and MR fluid containing micron-sized
magnetically polarizable ferrous particles. Figure 2 is
depicted the schematic drawing of MR damper. The 60
0V
damper piston contains damper coil and annular flow 40 2V
channels. 20
4V
Force [N]

-20

-40

-60
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7 0.8 0.9 1
Time [s]

(a)
60
0V
40 2V
4V
20
Force [N]

-20
Fig. 2 Schematic drawing of MR damper
-40

-60
-0.015 -0.01 -0.005 0 0.005 0.01 0.015
Displacement [m]

(b)
60
In order to describe the dynamic behaviors of MR 0V
40
dampers, several models have been proposed. These 2V
4V
20
include the LuGre friction model [11, 19, 29-31]. In the
Force [N]

problem considered here, the governing equation of 0

produced force by the MR damper is expressed as -20

-40

f = σ a z + σ 0 zv + σ 1 z
+ σ 2 x
+ σ b x
v (2) -60

-0.1 -0.05 0 0.05 0.1 0.15
Velocity [m/s]

z
= x
− a 0 x
z (3) (c)
Fig. 3 Response of MR damper due to a sinusoidal input
These equations are modified LuGre dynamic friction (a) Force vs. time response (b) Force-displacement response
model described in Reference [31], which has been used (c) Force-velocity response

61
 The force versus time, force-velocity, and force-
displacement characteristics of the MR damper due to a 2
Hz sinus wave excitation with amplitude of 0.1 m is
depicted in Fig. 3. As shown in Figure 3, each plot
includes five curves that correspond to the damper
behavior for various input voltages applied to the MR
damper is maintained at a constant level of 0, 2 and 4 V.
The flow properties of MR fluids depend on magnetic
field. The magnetic field is generated by input voltage in
a magnetic coil installed at rod head. The parameter
values of the MR damper model used in the simulation
are chosen as shown in Table I [11].

IV. ADAPTIVE CONTROL DESIGN

The overall structure of proposed controller is
presented in Figure 4. Combining (2) and (3), the MR
damper force is defined as
f = σ a z + σ 0 zv − σ 1 a 0 x
z + (σ 1 + σ 2 ) x
+ σ b x
v
Equation (4) can be written as a multiplication and
summation of vectors in the following form
Fig. 4 Block diagram of the overall adaptive controlled structure
fˆ = θˆ11 zˆ − θˆ13 x
.zˆ + θˆ21 x
+ (θˆ12 zˆ + θˆ22 x
)v (10)
(4)
where ẑ is the estimate of the internal state variable
which is obtained by an observer later. We define the
tracking error signal as follows

e = x − xd (11)
 σa 
σ 1 + σ 2 
f = z vz − x
z  σ 0  + [x
x
v ] 
[ ]  (5)
 σb  Note that the desired input x d is zero for the structural
σ 1 a 0 
system. If we define a new variable r for the error

A more compact form of above equation is given as

r = e
+ α .e (12)

f = ρ1θ 1T + ρ 2θ 2 T (6)
Then the aim of control is that
where the known regression (or signal) vectors ρ1 , ρ 2 e=x  e, e
→ 0
 r →0 ⇒
and the uncertain parameter vectors θ 1 , θ 2 are defined as r = x
+ αx  x, x
→ 0
(13)

ρ1 = [z v.z − x
.z ] ρ 2 = [x
x
.v ] (7) ~

The estimation error θ is defined as the difference
θ1 = [σ a σ 0 σ 1 .a0 ] θ 2 = [σ 1 + σ 2 σ b ] between the true value of the parameter θ and the
estimated value of the parameter θ̂ that is
The estimated force is defined as
~
θ = θ − θˆ (14)
fˆ = ρˆ 1θˆ1T + ρ 2θˆ2 T (8)
We consider the error dynamics defined as
In matrix form, equation (8) is written as
x + α x
)
Mr
= M (


 σˆ a  = M α x
− Bx
− Kx − Mx

g − f + ˆf − ˆf (15)
σ +σ2 
ˆf =  zˆ vzˆ − x
zˆ   σˆ  +
  
  0  [ x
x
.v ]  1  (9) Yϕ
  σˆ b 
σ1a0  where regression signal vector Y and unknown parameter
vector φ are defined as
Finally it can be written as

62
Y =  x
α −


xg − x
− x  z
 = z
− z
ˆ = − a0 x
z (23)
T
(16)
ϕ = [M B K]
where a0 is assumed to be known. A candidate Lyapunov
Substituting (6), (8) and (9) into (15) we obtain the function is defined as
error dynamics as
1 1 2 1 ~T −1 ~ 1 ~ T −1 ~
V = Mr 2 + ~z + φ Γφ φ + θ 2 Γ2 θ 2
Mr
= Yφ − θˆ11 zˆ + θˆ13 x
.zˆ − θˆ21x
− (θˆ12 zˆ + θˆ22 x
)v 2 2 2 2

χ 1 1 ~ 2 1 1 ~ 2 1 1 ~ 2
+ θ11 + θ12 + θ13 (24)
− [+ ρ 2θ 2T − ρˆ1θˆ1T − ρ 2θˆ2T
ρ1θ1T ] (17)
2 γ1 2 γ2 2 γ3
~ 1 1 1
= Yφ + χ − (θˆ12 zˆ + θˆ22 x
)v − ρ 2θ 2T
   + θ11 ( ~
z − ζ 1 ) 2 + θ12 (~z − ζ 2 ) 2 + θ13 (~z − ζ 3 ) 2
ux 2 2 2

[
− θ11z − θ11zˆ + θ12vz − θˆ12vzˆ − θ13 x
z + θˆ13 x
zˆ
ˆ ] where Γφ ∈ ℜ 3x3 and Γ2 ∈ ℜ 2 x 2 are positive definite
diagonal adaptation gain matrices; γ 1 , γ 2 and γ 3 are the
From the subsequent stability analysis designing the
control input u x in the form of positive adaptation gains. The derivative of candidate
Lyapunov function (24) is obtained as

u x = Kr + χ + Yφˆ − θˆ11ζ 1 − θˆ12ζ 2 + θˆ13 x
ζ 3 (18) ~ ~
~ ~

V
= Mrr
+ ~z .~z
+ φ T Γφ −1φ + θ 2 T Γ2 −1θ 2
Here, the input voltage is derived as 1 ~ ~
1 ~ ~
1 ~ ~

+ θ 11θ 11 + θ 12θ 12 + θ 13θ 13 (25)
γ1 γ2 γ3
Kr + χ + Yφˆ − θˆ11ζ 1 + θˆ13 x
ζ 3
v= (19) + θ 11 ( ~
z − ζ 1 )(~
z
− ζ
1 ) 
θˆ12 zˆ + θˆ22 x
+ θˆ12ζ 2 

  + θ 12 (~
z − ζ 2 )(~z
− ζ
2 )  P
β 
+ θ 13 (~z − ζ 3 )(~
z
− ζ
3 ) 
where ζ 1 , ζ 2 , ζ 3 are auxiliary filters and K is a positive
constant control gain with β ≠ 0 . Closed loop error Substituting (20) and (23) into (25), the derivative of
dynamics can be written as Lyapunov function becomes
~ ~T
Mr
= − Kr + Yφ − ρ 2θ 2 { ~ ~ ~
V
= r − K .r + Y .φ − ρ 2 .θ 2T − θ11.( zˆ + ζ 1 )
[ ]
− θ11z − θˆ11 ( zˆ + ζ 1 ) ± θ11 ( zˆ + ζ 1 ) (20)
~
− θ11.( ~z − ζ 1 ) − θ12 .v.( zˆ + ζ 2 ) − θ12 .v.( ~
z − ζ 2)
− [θ ˆ ]
12 vz − θ12 v( zˆ + ζ 2 ) ± θ12 v( zˆ + ζ 2 )
~ ~
+ θ13. x
.( zˆ + ζ 3 ) + θ13. x
.( z − ζ 3 )
(26)

+ [θ ]
x
z − θˆ13 x
( zˆ + ζ 3 ) ± θ13 x
( zˆ + ζ 3 ) ~ ~
~ ~

13 z .{− a0 x
~
+~ z }+ φ T Γφ −1φ + θ 2T Γ2 −1θ 2
~ 1 ~ ~
1 ~ ~
1 ~ ~

where φ = φ − φˆ is the parameter estimation error. + θ11θ11 + θ12θ12 + θ13θ13 + P
γ1 γ2 γ3
Rearranging (20),

~ ~T ~ Therefore we can design the adaptation rules in the

Mr
= − Kr + Yφ − ρ 2θ 2 − θ11 ( zˆ + ζ 1 ) following form
~
− θ11 (~
z − ζ 1 ) − θ12 v( zˆ + ζ 2 ) − θ12 v( ~
z − ζ 2 ) (21) ~


φ = −φˆ = −Γφ Y T r
~
+ θ13 x
( zˆ + ζ 3 ) + θ13 x
(~
z −ζ3) ~


θ 2 = −θˆ2 = Γ2 ρ 2T r
~

(27)
The estimate of internal state variable ẑ is defined as θ11 = −θˆ11 = γ 1 ( zˆ + ζ 1 )r
~


θ12 = −θˆ12 = γ 2v( zˆ + ζ 2 )r
ẑ
= x
− a 0 x
ẑ (22)
~


and the estimation error as follows θ13 = −θˆ13 = −γ 3 x
( zˆ + ζ 3 )r

63
 Then substituting these adaptation rules into (26), we 4
Earthquake Excitation

have
3

V
= − Kr 2 − rθ11 ( ~
z − ζ 1) 2

Accleration [m/s2]
− rθ12v( z − ζ 2 ) + rθ13. x
(~
~ z − ζ 3) 1
(28)
− a0 x
z + θ11 ( ~
~2 z − ζ 1 )(~
z
− ζ
1 ) 0

+ θ12 ( ~
z − ζ 2 )(~
z
− ζ
2 ) + θ13 ( ~
z − ζ 3 )(~
z
− ζ
3 )
-1

-2

Finally, the designed filter is as follows -3

0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]

ζ
1 = − a 0 x
ζ 1 − r Fig. 5 . Earthquake excitation (El centro)

ζ
2 = − a 0 x
ζ 2 − v.r (29) Accleration Response

8

ζ
3 = −a 0 x
ζ 3 + x
r 6
Uncontrolled Case
With Proposed Controller

4
Substituting these filters into (28) leads to that

Accleration [m/s2]
2

V
= − Kr 2 − a0 x
~z 2 − θ11a0 x
( ~z − ζ 1 )2 − θ12a0 x
( ~
z − ζ 2 )2 0

− θ13a0 x
( ~
z − ζ 3 )2 -2

(30) -4

-6
Due to last three parameters are always negative, the
derivative of Lyapunov function becomes -8
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]

V
≤ − Kr 2 − a0 x
z 2 (31) Fig 6. Acceleration of the structure

-3
We can conclude that when the control gain K is 5
x 10 Displacement Response

selected positive, V ∈ L∞ r → 0 and 4

Uncontrolled Case
With Proposed Controller
~
z → 0 as t → ∞ hence the system is stable. 3

2
Displacement [m]

0
V. SIMULATIONS AND DISCUSSION
-1

-2
In order to verify the effectiveness of the proposed
-3
controller, the following numerical simulations are
-4
performed with MATLAB-Simulink environment. The
approximated parameters of the structure; mass of the -5
0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
Time [s]
system is 2.8 kg, damping coefficient is 4.9 Ns/m and the
stiffness coefficient is 5815 N/m. In the simulation, we Fig 7. Displacement of the structure
use the NS component of the 1940 El Centro seismic data
as ground acceleration shown in Figure 5.
In Figure 6 the accelerations of the structure are
In the simulation, the performance of the proposed compared. The displacement of the structure is given in
controller was compared with uncontrolled case. Figure 7. As it can be seen from Figure 6, the proposed
Comparisons between controlled and uncontrolled case controller achieved a good performance to reduce
are evaluated in terms of acceleration and displacement acceleration of the system. Adaptive controller provided
of the structure. The results of the simulations are a large amount of decrease in displacement of the
reported in Figures 6-7. structure.

64
 VI. CONCLUSION
In this study, the design of an adaptive control
scheme for the vibration isolation of a SDOF structural
system using a semi-active MR damper is presented. The
stabilization of the structural system is provided with the
proposed control. The performance of the proposed
controller is compared with uncontrolled case. The aim
of this controller is earthquake hazard mitigation of
structural systems and to ensure the safety of systems.
Simulation results show that the adaptive controller
scheme is able to achieve good performance in the SDOF
structural system despite the parametric uncertainty.
However the proposed control requires the exact
knowledge of the internal parameter of a0 of MR damper.
REFERENCES
[1] J. T. P. Yao, “Concept of structural control”, ASCE J. Struct.
Div. 98, 1567-1574, 1972.
[2] Housner GW et al. “Structural control: past, present, and
future”, J Engng Mech ASCE 1997;123(9):897–971.
[3] Dyke S.J., Spencer Jr. B.F., Sain M.K. and Carlson J.D.,
“Modeling and Control of Magnetorheological Dampers for
Seismic Response Reduction”, Smart Mat. Strc. 5, 565-575,
1996.
[4] Spencer B.F. Jr., Dyke S.J., Sain M.K. and Carlson J.D.,
“Phenomenological model of a Magnetorheological Damper”,
Journal of Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, Vol. 123, No.3,
pp.230-238, 1997.
[5] Wereley N.M., Pang L., Kamath G.M., “Idealized hysteresis
modeling of electrorheological and magnetorheological
dampers”, J. Intell Mater Syst Struct, 9(8):642–9, 1998.
[6] J Jansen M.L. and Dyke S.J., “Semiactive Control strategies
for MR Dampers: Comparative Study”, Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, ASCE, Vol. 126, No.8, pp.795-803,
August 2000.
[7] Yang G., Spencer Jr. B.F., Carlson J.D. and Sain M.K.
“Large-scale MR Fluid Dampers: Modeling and Dynamic
Performance Considerations”, Engineering Structures, 24,
309-323, 2002.
[8] Alvarez L. and Jimenez R., “Real time identification of
magneto-rheological dampers”, 15th Triennial World
Congress, Barcelona, Spain, 2002.
[9] Aldemir U., “Optimal Control of Structures with
Semiactive-tune Mass Dampers”, Journal of Sound and
Vibration, 266, 847-874, 2003.
[10] J Yang G, Spencer BF, Jung H-J, Carlson JD. “Dynamic
Modeling of large-scale magnetorheological damper systems
for civil engineering application”, Journal of Engineering
Mechanics (ASCE) 2004; 130(9):1107–1114.
[11] Terasawa T., Sakai C., Ohmori H. and Sano A., “Adaptive
Identification of MR Damper for Vibration Control”, 43rd
IEEE Conference on Decision and Control , Atlantis, Paradise
Island, Bahamas, December 14-17 2004.
[12] Jung Hyung-Jo, Choi Kang-Min, Spencer Jr. Billie F., and Lee
In-Won “Applicatin of some semiactive control algorithms to
a smart base-isolated building employing MR dampers”,
Structural Control and Health Monitoring, 13:693-704, 2006.
[13] Leitmann, G., “Semiactive control for vibration attenuation”,
Journal of Intelligent Mat. Struct., 5, 841-846, September
1994.
65
[14] Dyke S.J. and Spencer Jr. B.F., “A Comparison of Semiactive
Control Strategies for the MR Damper”, IEEE, 1997.
[15] McClamroch, N.H. and Gavin, H.P. “Closed Loop Structural
Control Using Electrorheological Dampers,” Proc. of the
Amer. Ctrl. Conf., Seattle, Washington, pp. 4173-77 1995.
[16] Inaudi, J. A., ‘‘Modulated homogeneous friction: A
semi-active damping strategy’’ Earthquake Engrg. and Struct.
Dyn., 26(3), 361–376, 1997.
[17] Gavin H.P. and Aldemir U., “Optimal Control of Earthquake
Response Semiactive Isolation”, Journal of Engineering
Mechanics, Vol.131, No.8, August 1, 2005.
[18] Ying Z.G., Zhu W.Q. and Soong T.T., “A Stochastic Optimal
Semi-Active Control Strategy for ER/MR Dampers”, Journal
of Sound and Vibration, 259(1), 45-62, 2003.
[19] Sakai C.,Terasawa T. and Sano A., “Integration of Bilinear
H∞ Control and Adaptive Inverse Control for Semi-Active
Vibration Isolation of Structures”, Proceedings of the 44th
IEEE Conference on Decision and the European Control
Conference 2005 Seville, Spain, December12-15, 2005.
[20] Villamizar Rodolfo, Ningsu Luo, Dyke Shirley J. and Vehi
Josep “Experimental Verification of Backstepping Controllers
for Magnetorheological MR Dampers in Structural Control”,
Proceedings of 13th Mediterranean Conference on Control
and Automation, Limassol, Cyprus, June 27-29, 2005.
[21] Song X., Ahmadian M., Southward S. and Miller L.R., “An
Adaptive Semiactive Control Algorithm for
Magnetorheological Suspension Systems”, Journal of
Vibration and Acoustics, Vol.127, 493-502, 2005.
[22] Neelakatan V.J. and Washington G.N., “Vibration Control of
Structural Systems using MR Dampers and a ‘Modified’
Sliding Mode Control Technique”, Journal of Intelligent
Material Systems and Structures, Vol.0-2007.
[23] Zribi M. and Karkoub M., “Robust Control of a Car
Suspension System using Magnetorheological Dampers”,
Journal of Vibration and Control, 10:507-524, 2004.
[24] Choi KM, Cho SW, Jung HJ, Lee IW. “Semiactive fuzzy
control for seismic response reduction using MR dampers”,
Earthquake Engineering and Structural Dynamics,
33(6):723–736, , 2004.
[25] Yan G., and Zhou L.J., “Integrated Fuzzy Logic and Genetic
Algorithms for Multi-Objective Control of Structures using
MR Dampers”, Journal of Sound and Vibration, 296, 368-382,
2006.
[26] Gavin, H. P., Hanson, R. D., and Filisko, F. E.,
‘‘Electrorheological dampers, part 1: Analysis and design.’’ J.
Appl. Mech., ASME 63, 669–675, 1996.
[27] Kamath, G. M., Hurt, M. K., and Wereley, N. M., ‘‘Analysis
and testing of Bingham plastic behavior in semi-active
electrorheological fluid dampers’’ Smart M. Str.,5, 576–90,
1996.
[28] Wereley N M and Pang L., “Nondimensional analysis of
semi-active electrorheological and magnetorheological
dampers using approximate parallel plate models”, Smart
Mater. Struct. 7 732–43, 1998.
[29] Jimenez R. and Alvarez L., "Real time identification of
structures with magnetorheological dampers", Proceedings of
the 41st IEEE Conference on Decision and Control, pp.
1017-1022, 2002.
[30] Jimenez R. And Alvarez-Icaza L., “LuGre friction model for a
magnetorheological damper”, Structural control and health
monitoring, 12:91-116, 2005.
[31] Sakai C., Ohmori H. and Sano A., “Modeling of MR Damper
with Hysteresis for Adaptive Vibration Control”, Proceedings
of the 42nd IEEE Conference on Decision and Control Maui,
Hawaii USA, December 2003.