Rectangular plate with velocity feedback loops using

triangularly shaped piezoceramic actuators:

Experimental control performance
Yohko Aoki,a兲 Paolo Gardonio,b兲 and Stephen J. Elliottc兲
Institute of Sound and Vibration, Highfield, SO17 1BJ, Southampton, United Kingdom
共Received 6 August 2007; revised 13 December 2007; accepted 26 December 2007兲
This paper presents experimental results on the implementation of decentralized velocity feedback
control on a new smart panel in order to produce active damping. The panel is equipped with 16
triangularly shaped piezoceramic patch actuators along its border and accelerometer sensors located
at the top vertex of the triangular actuators. The primary objective of this paper is to demonstrate the
vibration and sound radiation control using the new smart panel. Narrow frequency band
experimental results highlight that the 16 control units can produce reductions up to 15 dB at
resonance frequencies between 100 and 700 Hz in terms of both structural vibration and sound
power radiation. © 2008 Acoustical Society of America. 关DOI: 10.1121/1.2835663兴
PACS number共s兲: 43.40.Vn, 43.50.Ki 关KAC兴 Pages: 1421–1426

I. INTRODUCTION This paper presents experimental work on a novel

Active control of sound radiation from vibrating struc-
tures has been an area of intensive research in the past de-
cades. Active structural acoustic control 共ASAC兲 aims to
minimize the sound radiation by modifying the response of
the structure through structural inputs rather than by exciting
the acoustic medium.1,2 The appeal of ASAC systems is that
sensor and actuator transducers are embedded to the radiat-
ing structure, so that a lightweight and compact smart struc-
ture is achieved. However, so far, the complexity of the sen-
sor and actuator transducers necessary to implement ASAC
has prevented the development of a practical smart panel.
During the past five years, an alternative approach has
been suggested, where the sensor and actuator transducer are
arranged in closely located pairs for the implementation of
decentralized velocity feedback control loops.3 In this case,
the system achieves active vibration control at the error sen-
sor positions. However, provided moderated feedback con-
trol gains are implemented, active damping can be generated
on the whole panel, which reduces the response and sound
radiation of well separated resonances of low order modes.
Thus, the arrays of decentralized velocity feedback loops can
be effectively used to reduce the vibration and sound radia-
tion induced by broadband disturbances at low audio fre-
quencies.
Recently Gardonio et al.4 have carried out analytical and
experimental studies regarding the suppression of the struc-
tural vibration and sound radiation from a flat panel using 16
square piezoceramic actuators and closely located acceler-
ometer sensor pairs distributed over the whole panel, as
shown in Fig. 1共a兲. These 16 sensor–actuator pairs are used
to implement decentralized velocity feedback control loops,
which significantly reduce the vibration and sound radiation
of the panel at low frequency resonances.
a兲
Electronic mail: ya@isvr.soton.ac.uk
b兲
Electronic mail: pg@isvr.soton.ac.uk
c兲
Electronic mail: sje@isvr.soton.ac.uk
configuration5 using 16 triangularly shaped piezoceramic ac-
tuators arranged along the borders of the panel, and acceler-
ometer sensors on the top vertices of the actuators, as illus-
trated in Fig. 1共b兲. This arrangement has the advantage in
that it is not invasive, and thus this configuration could be
used in a wider class of applications, including the windows
of transportation vehicles, such as aircrafts, helicopters, cars,
trucks, coaches, etc. A theoretical study6 has shown that this
sensor–actuator pair enables the implementation of stable
feedback control loops with rather high gain.
This paper is organized in four sections. Following this
introduction section, Sec. II describes the experimental setup
used to assess the control performance of the new smart
panel with triangular piezoceramic actuators. The stability
properties of the control systems are discussed using the gen-
eralized Nyquist criteria. Section III presents the experimen-
tal results of both vibration and sound radiation reductions.
Finally in Sec. IV, the principal characteristics of the control
performance are reviewed to highlight the advantages of the
proposed control arrangement.
II. EXPERIMENTAL SETUP
A. Multi-input–multi-output system
The smart panel built for this study consists of a rectan-
gular aluminum panel with 16 control units. As shown in
Fig. 2, the smart panel is clamped by a rigid aluminum
frame, which is mounted on the open side of a Perspex box
in order to measure the sound radiation by the panel. The box
is composed of 30 mm thick Perspex plates, so that the
sound transmission through the lateral walls of the box is
much lower than that through the smart panel in the fre-
quency range of interest.4 The smart panel is excited either
by an acoustic field generated by a loudspeaker placed in the
box 共see Fig. 2 and Table I兲, or by a point force generated by
a shaker 共LDS v201兲 acting to the aluminum panel 共see Fig.
1 and Table I兲.

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 123 共3兲, March 2008 0001-4966/2008/123共3兲/1421/6/$23.00 © 2008 Acoustical Society of America 1421
 (a)
h h
h h h h
h h h h
h h h h
y h h h h
x h h h
Each control unit is composed of an isosceles triangular
piezoceramic patch actuator and a high sensitivity induc-
tively coupled plasma accelerometer error sensor 共PCB Pi-
ezotronics, model 352C67兲. All 16 piezoceramic patches
were made of Pz27 material, produced by E.P. Electronic
Component LTD. The patch actuators are bonded to the inner
side of the panel via a thin layer of nonconductive glue to
ensure that the piezoceramic transducers and the plate are not
connected electrically. The error sensors are located on the
opposite side of the panel at the top vertices of the triangular
actuators. As illustrated in Fig. 1共b兲, these 16 piezoceramic
patches are evenly distributed along the perimeter of the
panel, with the base edges aligned along the border of the
panel. The physical properties and geometry of the test rig
and the piezoceramic actuators are summarized in Tables I
and II, respectively.
When the feedback control loops are closed, the error
sensor output signals are fed to analog integrators with an
identical amplification gain in order to provide the feedback
controllers with velocity signals. These integrated signals are
then again amplified by charge amplifiers with an identical
amplification gain in order to drive the piezoceramic actua-
tors with the magnified velocity signals. As shown in Fig. 3,
this decentralized multiple-input–multiple-output 共MIMO兲
control system can be formulated in terms of a classic dis-
turbance rejection block diagram. Provided that the control
system is stable, the vector of the spectra for the residual
signals at the sensors output y共j␻兲 = 关y 1y 2 ¯ y 16兴T is given by
y共j␻兲 = 关I + G共j␻兲H共j␻兲兴−1G p共j␻兲f p共j␻兲, 共1兲
where ␻ is the circular frequency, j = 冑−1, and I is the 16 by
16 identity matrix. G共j␻兲 is a fully populated matrix with the
FIG. 2. 共Color online兲 Smart panel mounted on a Perspex box.
1422 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 123, No. 3, March 2008
(b)
h h
h
FIG. 1. Smart panels with 16 decentralized velocity
feedback control units using 共a兲 square piezocer-
h
amic patch actuators and 共b兲 triangularly shaped pi-
ezoceramic patch actuators. The position of the pri-
h
mary force excitation is shown as a solid circle.
h
h
transfer functions between the sensor signals y共j␻兲兩 fp=0,
whereas no primary excitation is applied to the panel, and the
actuator control signals u共j␻兲 = 关u1u2 ¯ u16兴T. G p共j␻兲 is a
vector of the transfer functions between the sensor outputs
y共j␻兲兩H=0, whereas no control excitation is applied to the
panel, and the primary disturbance input signal f p共j␻兲, which
is either the driving voltage of the loudspeaker Vin or the
applied force to the panel generated by the shaker Fin.
For decentralized control, H共j␻兲 is a diagonal matrix of
fixed control gains for each control unit, including the trans-
fer function of the analog controller. In this study the decen-
tralized controller has the same gain h0 in each control loop.
Thus, the feedback transfer matrix H共j␻兲 is given by
H共j␻兲 = h0HT共j␻兲I, where HT共j␻兲 is the transfer function of
the analog controller. The identical control gain h0 is chosen
to be the highest possible value for which the system remains
stable.
B. MIMO stability
Velocity feedback control using collocated and dual
sensor–actuator is unconditionally stable, even for multiple
channels.3,7 In this case, the fixed feedback gains can, in
principle, be increased without limit, so that the signals from
the error sensors can be driven to zero. However, as dis-
cussed by Gardonio et al.,5 the triangularly shaped piezoce-
ramic actuator and the velocity sensor pairs considered in
this study are strictly not dual or collocated, such that the
MIMO decentralized control system is only conditionally
stable. Therefore, the control performance is limited by the
maximum stable control gain that can be implemented in the
feedback loops.
TABLE I. Geometry and physical properies of the smart panel and the
Perspex box.
Parameter Values
Dimension 共mm兲 414⫻ 314
Thickness 共mm兲 1.0
Density 共kg/ m3兲 2700
Young’s modulas 共GPa兲 70
Poisson’s ratio 0.33
Loss factora 0.05
Loudspeaker location Box
Shaker position 共x , y兲 共mm兲 共86.1, 111.4兲
Inner dimension 共mm兲 414⫻ 314⫻ 400
Wall thickness 共mm兲 30
Reference 12.
Aoki et al.: Triangularly shaped piezoceramic actuators
 The stability of MIMO decentralized control system can
be assessed using the generalized Nyquist criteria.8 Assum-
ing that the open loop system is stable, this criteria states that
the closed loop system depicted in Fig. 3 is stable if and only
if the locus of the determinant of the measured return matrix,
det关I + G共j ␻兲H共j␻兲兴, does not encircle the origin, nor passes
through the origin, as the angular frequency ␻ varies be-
tween −⬁ and +⬁.
Figure 4 shows the locus of det关I + G共j␻兲H共j␻兲兴 be-
tween 25 Hz and 42 kHz. The locus between 25 and 700 Hz
is plotted by a faint line, and the locus for frequencies above
700 Hz is plotted by a dotted line. The locus is characterized
by a series of large circles at low frequency, which are de-
termined by the resonant response of the plate. At low fre-
quencies, the circles start close to the point 共1, 0j兲. As the
frequency rises, the circles tend to drift away from 共1, 0j兲,
and around 700 Hz the locus moves into the left-hand side of
the vertical axis passing through the point 共1, 0j兲 due to
propagation delays between the sensor and the actuator pairs.
This plot indicates that the decentralized feedback control
system under study is only conditionally stable, and gener-
ates positive feedback effects at high frequencies. In general
the positive feedback are generated by the noncollocation
and nonduality properties of each sensor–actuator pair,
which originates both self-control spillover effects on each
feedback loop and cross control spillover effects between
neighbor feedback loops.
III. CONTROL IMPLEMENTATION
This section presents the experimental results for the
control performance of the new smart panel. In Sec. III A,
the control performance is discussed with reference to the
vibration level of the panel in the frequency range 0 – 1 kHz.
Sections III B and III C present the reduction in terms of the
total radiated sound power in the same frequency range.
For both cases, the control performance is discussed in
two stages: the passive effect produced by the sensor–
actuator transducers, and the active control effect of the 16
decentralized control loops. The passive control performance
is assessed by comparing the responses and sound radiation
produced by the panel without transducers 共faint lines兲, and
the panel with transducers but no feedback control 共thick
fp(j)
Gp(j)

u(jw) 
G(j)
y(j)
-H(j)
FIG. 3. Disturbance rejection block diagram of the velocity feedback con-
trol system.
with transducers but no feedback control 共thick solid lines兲
and the panel with transducers and decentralized velocity
feedback control 共dotted lines兲.
A. Structural vibration
Figure 5 shows the measured narrow band spatially av-
eraged spectra of the out-of-plane vibration levels of the
panel per unit acoustic primary excitation input Vin 关Fig.
5共a兲兴 and structural primary excitation input Fin 关Fig. 5共b兲兴.
The spectra have been derived by remotely measuring the
velocity of the panel at 165 points evenly distributed over the
panel surface using a scanning laser vibrometer.
Comparing the two plots in Fig. 5, it can be observed
that, when the panel is excited by a point force generated by
a shaker, the response of the panel is characterized by a
rather large number of resonant peaks. In contrast, when the
panel is excited by acoustic field, the spectra show fewer
sharp resonant peaks, mainly at the first, third, and fifth reso-
nance frequencies, which correspond to the odd modes,
共1,1兲, 共3,1兲, and 共1,3兲 of the panel, respectively. The peaks of
the second and fourth resonances, which are controlled by
共2,1兲 and 共1,2兲 vibration modes, are relatively low. This is
due to the fact that the shaker excites nearly all structural
1
0.8
0.6
0.4

solid lines兲. The active control effect is assessed by compar- 0.2

ing the responses and sound radiation produced by the panel
imag.

TABLE II. Geometry and physical properties of the triangularly shaped −0.2
piezoceramic actuators.
−0.4
Parameter Values
−0.6
Base and height 共mm兲 40⫻ 40
Thickness 共mm兲 1.0 −0.8
Density 共kg/ m3兲 7700
Poisson’s ratio 0.39 −1
Elastic compliances sE11 17 0 0.5 1 1.5 2
共10−12 m2 / N兲 sE33 23 real
Piezoelectric charge d31 170
coefficient 共10−12 m / V兲 d33 425 FIG. 4. 共Color online兲 Locus of det关I + G共j␻兲H共j␻兲兴 between 25 and
700 Hz 共faint line兲 and between 700 Hz and 42 kHz 共dotted line兲.

J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 123, No. 3, March 2008 Aoki et al.: Triangularly shaped piezoceramic actuators 1423
(a) −20
Spacially averaged velocity [dB rel. 1m s −1 / V ]
−30
−40
−50
−60
−70
−80
0 100
0
(b)
Spacially averaged velocity [dB rel. 1m s −1 / N ]
−10
−20
−30
−40
−50
−60
0 100
FIG. 5. 共Color online兲 Narrow band spectra of 共a兲 the spatially averaged
velocity of the panel, measured between 0 and 1 kHz, per unit voltage
driving the loudspeaker and 共b兲 per unit force generated by the shaker;
measured using the panel 共1兲 without transducers 共faint line兲, 共2兲 with trans-
ducers but no feedback control 共thick solid line兲, and 共3兲 with transducers
and feedback control 共dotted line兲.
modes of the panel, whereas the acoustic field generated by
the loudspeaker efficiently excites only specific structural
modes of the panel that are well coupled to the acoustic
modes of the cavity underneath the panel.1
The faint and thick solid lines in Fig. 5 show that, when
a set of 16 control units is bonded on the panel, the reso-
nance frequencies are shifted toward higher frequencies, and
the amplitudes of the peaks are reduced by approximately
3 dB with acoustic excitation, and by a maximum 10 dB
with structural excitation. A significant increase in the natural
frequencies is generated by piezoceramic actuators, which
generate a local stiffness effect on the panel especially at low
frequencies.9 The response at resonant frequencies is re-
duced, because the bonding layer between the actuator and
the panel adds damping to the panel. The sensor–actuator
control units also produce mass loading effects on the panel
in the mass controlled frequency zone, i.e., high frequencies,
which are above the frequency range considered in this
study.9
The thick solid and dotted lines in Fig. 5 show that the
active control system smooths the resonant peaks between
100 and 700 Hz by approximately 6 – 18 dB, except for the
resonance peaks at around 390, 445, and 500 Hz. These non-
controlled peaks are dominated by the resonances of the cav-
1424 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 123, No. 3, March 2008
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Frequency [Hz]
200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 FIG. 6. 共Color online兲 Vibratory fields of the panel excited by the loud-
Frequency [Hz]
speaker at the 258 Hz resonance frequency, where the response is controlled
by 共3,1兲 natural mode of the smart panel; without the control 共left column兲
and with control 共right column兲 at phases ␸ = 0° 共top兲, ␸ = 120° 共middle兲, and
␸ = 240° 共bottom兲.
ity beneath the panel. In fact, the first three predicted natural
frequencies of the rigid walled cavity underneath the panel
are calculated as 414.3, 476.4, and 546.2 Hz, which corre-
spond to the 共1,0,0兲, 共0,0,1兲, and 共0,1,0兲 acoustic modes,
respectively.10 The measured resonant frequencies are
slightly lower than the predicted ones, because the cavity
does not have perfectly rigid walls, especially due to the
smart panel on the top side. This cavity–plate coupling11
problem is particularly strong with this test rig setup. There-
fore, it is expected that in applications where the panel has
no backing cavity, and is excited by an acoustic disturbance
that comes from a free field or a very large enclosure with
diffuse acoustic fields, the control performances would be
higher than those shown in Fig. 5. At frequencies higher than
700 Hz, the response of the panel slightly increases when
control loops are closed, because of the positive feedback
control effect mentioned in Sec. II B.
When active control is implemented, the spectrum of the
vibration level has fewer peaks, as active damping can effec-
tively reduce the response at resonances of the panel. This is
confirmed by comparing the vibratory field of the panel at
resonant frequency with and without control. Figure 6 shows
the vibratory field of the smart panel excited by the acoustic
field produced by the loudspeaker in the cavity at 258 Hz,
which is the resonant frequency corresponding to the 共3,1兲
natural mode of the panel. The pictures on the left-hand side
show the vibratory fields of the panel without control at
Aoki et al.: Triangularly shaped piezoceramic actuators
(a) 60
(a) 60

W/V]
50 50

Sound power level LΠ [dB rel. 10−12 W / V]

−12
Total radiated sound power [dB rel. 10
40 40

30 30

20 20

10 10

0 0
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000 50 63 80 100 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800
Frequency [Hz] Center frequency [Hz]
(b) 70

(b)
60
W/N]

60

50
−12

Sound power level L [dB rel. 10−12 W / N]

Total radiated sound power [dB rel. 10

50

40

40

30

Π
30

20

20

10

10
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800 900 1000
Frequency [Hz] 0
50 63 80 100 125 160 200 250 315 400 500 630 800
Center frequency [Hz]
FIG. 7. 共Color online兲 Narrow band spectra of the total radiated sound
power, measured between 0 and 1 kHz, 共a兲 per unit voltage driving the FIG. 8. 共Color online兲 Total radiated sound power in one-third octave bands
loudspeaker and 共b兲 per unit force generated by the shaker; measured using between 50 and 800 Hz center bands 共a兲 per unit voltage driving the loud-
the panel 共1兲 without transducers 共faint line兲, 共2兲 with transducers but no speaker and 共b兲 per unit force generated by the shaker; Measured using the
feedback control 共thick solid line兲, and 共3兲 with transducers and feedback panel without transducers 共first column兲, with transducers but no feedback
control 共dotted line兲. control 共middle column兲, and with transducers and feedback control 共last
column兲.

phases ␸ = 0° 共top兲, ␸ = 120° 共middle兲, and ␸ = 240° 共bottom兲.

The right-hand side pictures show the vibratory fields with efficiently,11 the sound power responses are characterized by
decentralized MIMO velocity feedback control with a 10 a smaller number of resonances compared with the spectra
times small scale. The left-hand side pictures indicate that for the structural response shown in Fig. 5.
the response of the plate at 258 Hz is dominated by the 共3,1兲 The thick solid lines in Fig. 7 again show that, when the
natural mode shape of the panel. In contrast, the right-hand 16 transducer pairs are attached to the panel, the resonances
side pictures highlight that when active damping is applied to are shifted up in frequency, and the amplitudes of the spectra
the panel, the response is not characterized by the 共3,1兲 natu- are reduced. The dotted lines in Fig. 7 show that the active
ral mode shape. Although the 共3,1兲 natural mode shape is control system reduces the resonant peaks between 100 and
still present, the residual effects from the neighboring modes 500 Hz by a maximum 15 dB, for both acoustic and struc-
are observed especially in the middle picture in the right- tural excitations. At higher resonance frequencies, between
hand column of Fig. 6. 500 and 700 Hz, although the control system suppresses the
vibration of the structure, the sound power reduction is rela-
tively poor. At frequencies higher than around 700 Hz, no
B. Total radiated sound power—narrow band analysis
active control effect is observed.
Figure 7 shows the measured narrow band total radiated
sound power per unit acoustic primary excitation input Vin
C. Total radiated sound power—one-third octave
关Fig. 7共a兲兴 and structural primary excitation input Fin 关Fig.
band analysis
7共b兲兴. The spectra have been calculated using the far field
sound pressure levels measured in a large anechoic chamber The previous subsection presented a narrow band fre-
by nine free-field microphones 共Bruel & Kjaer, Type 4165兲 quency analysis, which is useful in understanding the control
placed around the test rig, according to ISO 3744.1 The test performance. When acoustic noise is measured, however, it
rig has been placed on the solid floor in order to get a baf- is customary to analyze the continuous spectrum sound in
fling effect. As even modes of the panel do not radiate sound constant percentage bandwidths, because the hearing system

J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 123, No. 3, March 2008 Aoki et al.: Triangularly shaped piezoceramic actuators 1425
is responsive to frequency bands rather than individual fre-
quencies. Therefore, in this section, one-third octave
spectra10 is used to evaluate the control performance in terms
of the total radiated sound power per unit acoustic primary
excitation input Vin 关Fig. 8共a兲兴 and structural primary excita-
tion input Fin 关Fig. 8共b兲兴. The primary excitation sources are
driven by a pink noise signal between 0 and 1 kHz in order
to give equal energy in all octave bands.
The two plots in Fig. 8 highlight that when the 16 trans-
ducers are attached to the panel the radiated sound power is
significantly reduced, by 5 – 15 dB at the first three one-third
octave bands for both acoustic and structural primary excita-
tion. These reductions are generated by the shift of the reso-
nant frequencies due to the increased stiffness of the panel.
When active control is implemented, the radiated sound
power is reduced by 1 – 7 dB for the fourth to the eleventh
one-third octave band in both plots. No control effect is
found in the first three one-third octave bands, where the
response of the panel is not characterized by resonances, and
thus cannot be controlled by implementing active damping.
At higher frequencies, very little or no control effect is ob-
served.
IV. CONCLUSIONS
This paper summarizes the experimental results of a
study to assess the control effectiveness of a smart panel
using triangularly shaped piezoceramic actuator and acceler-
ometer sensor pairs. Sixteen decentralized velocity feedback
control loops have been implemented in order to generate
active damping and to reduce both the response and the
sound radiation via the panel at resonant frequencies.
The experimental results have highlighted that, when the
control transducers are attached to the thin aluminum panel,
its natural frequencies are shifted up due to the passive stiff-
ening effect of the piezoceramic patch actuators, and the am-
plitudes of the resonant peaks are slightly reduced due to
passive damping effects generated by the bonding layer and
the dissipative effects induced by the short circuited piezo-
ceramic actuators. The closed loop experimental results have
highlighted that significant control effects are obtained in the
frequency band between 100 and 700 Hz with reductions of
up to 15 dB at the resonant peaks in both structural vibration
and sound radiation, except for some resonance frequencies
1426 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 123, No. 3, March 2008
controlled by resonances of the cavity under the panel. At
frequencies higher than around 700 Hz, the vibration level
and the radiated sound power slightly increases.
These results have been obtained from a prototype smart
panel. It is believed that the control performance can be fur-
ther enhanced by properly designing the size and shape of
the triangular piezoceramic actuators in such a way as to
improve the limit of the stable control gain and extend the
frequency range where the response of the panel can be re-
duced by the decentralized velocity feedback control.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
This project has been carried out with joint support from
InMAR European Commission project and RENAULT. One
of the authors 共Y.A.兲 was also supported by Nakajima Foun-
dation, Japan.
1
F. J. Fahy and P. Gardonio, Sound and Structural Vibration, 2nd ed. 共Aca-
demic, London, 2006兲.
2
C. R. Fuller, S. J. Elliott, and P. A. Nelson, The Active Control of Vibration
共Academic, New York, 1997兲.
3
S. J. Elliott, P. Gardonio, T. C. Sors, and M. J. Brennan, “Active vibroa-
coustic control with multiple local feedback loops,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
111, 908–915 共2002兲.
4
P. Gardonio, E. Bianchi, and S. J. Elliott, “Smart panel with multiple
decentralized units for the control of sound transmission, Part I: Theoret-
ical predictions,” J. Sound Vib. 274, 163–192 共2004兲; “Smart panel with
multiple decentralized units for the control of sound transmission, Part II:
Design of the decentralised control units,” J. Sound Vib. 274, 193–213
共2004兲; “Smart panel with multiple decentralized units for the control of
sound transmission, Part III: Control system implementation,” J. Sound
Vib. 274, 215–232 共2004兲.
5
P. Gardonio and S. J. Elliott, “Smart panels with velocity feedback control
systems using triangularly shaped strain actuators,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
117, 2046–2064 共2005兲.
6
J. M. Sullivan, J. E. Hubbard, Jr., and S. E. Burke, “Modeling approach for
two-dimensional distributed transducers of arbitrary spatial distribution,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 99, 2965–2974 共1996兲.
7
M. J. Balas, “Feedback-control of flexible system,” IEEE Trans. Autom.
Control 23, 673–679 共1978兲.
8
S. Skogestad and I. Postlethwaite, Multivariable Feedback Control;
Analysis and Design, 2nd ed. 共Wiley, New York 2005兲.
9
Y. Aoki, P. Gardonio, and S. J. Elliott, “Modeling of piezoceramic patch
actuator for velocity feedback control,” Smart Mater. Struct. 17, 015052
共2008兲.
10
D. A. Bies and C. H. Hansen, Engineering Noise Control; Theory and
Practice, 3rd ed. 共E & FN Spon, London, 2003兲.
11
I. L. Ver, Noise and Vibration Control Engineering: Principles and Appli-
cations 共Wiley, New York 2005兲.
12
S. S. Rao, Mechanical Vibrations, 3rd ed. 共Addison-Wesley, Reading, MA,
1995兲.
Aoki et al.: Triangularly shaped piezoceramic actuators