Potential Formulation for Charge or Current-Controlled Piezoelectric Smart Composites and Stabilization Results: Electrostatic Versus Quasi-Static Versus Fully-Dynamic Approaches
From MaRDI portal
Publication:4629858
DOI10.1109/TAC.2018.2836864zbMath1482.74073OpenAlexW2804355564WikidataQ129808252 ScholiaQ129808252MaRDI QIDQ4629858
Publication date: 28 March 2019
Published in: IEEE Transactions on Automatic Control (Search for Journal in Brave)
Full work available at URL: https://doi.org/10.1109/tac.2018.2836864
Stabilization of systems by feedback (93D15) Composite and mixture properties (74E30) Electromagnetic effects in solid mechanics (74F15) Electro- and magnetostatics (78A30)
Related Items (10)
Global attractors for a novel nonlinear piezoelectric beam model with dynamic electromagnetic effects and viscoelastic memory ⋮ Uniform boundary observability of Finite Difference approximations of non-compactly coupled piezoelectric beam equations ⋮ Stability results for piezoelectric beams with long‐range memory effects in the boundary ⋮ Long-time behavior of a nonlinearly-damped three-layer Rao-Nakra sandwich beam ⋮ Stabilization results of a piezoelectric beams with partial viscous dampings and under Lorenz gauge condition ⋮ Modeling and stabilization of current-controlled piezo-electric beams with dynamic electromagnetic field ⋮ A novel sensor design for a cantilevered Mead-Marcus-type sandwich beam model by the order-reduction technique ⋮ Stabilization results for well-posed potential formulations of a current-controlled piezoelectric beam and their approximations ⋮ Exponential stability results for the boundary-controlled fully-dynamic piezoelectric beams with various distributed and boundary delays ⋮ Optimization of non-cylindrical domains for the exact null controllability of the 1D wave equation
This page was built for publication: Potential Formulation for Charge or Current-Controlled Piezoelectric Smart Composites and Stabilization Results: Electrostatic Versus Quasi-Static Versus Fully-Dynamic Approaches
