Home

Search

Collections

Journals

About

Contact us

My IOPscience

Characterization analysis of a MR damper

This content has been downloaded from IOPscience. Please scroll down to see the full text.
2014 Smart Mater. Struct. 23 045025
(http://iopscience.iop.org/0964-1726/23/4/045025)
View the table of contents for this issue, or go to the journal homepage for more

Download details:
IP Address: 218.248.46.107
This content was downloaded on 25/02/2015 at 04:17

Please note that terms and conditions apply.

Smart Materials and Structures

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025 (12pp)

doi:10.1088/0964-1726/23/4/045025

Characterization analysis of a MR damper

J Berasategui, M J Elejabarrieta and M M Bou-Ali
Mechanical and Industrial Production Department, Faculty of Engineering, Mondragon Unibersitatea,
Loramendi 4, E-20500 Arrasate-Mondragn, Spain
E-mail: mjelejabarrieta@mondragon.edu
Received 2 October 2013, revised 2 January 2014
Accepted for publication 19 January 2014
Published 6 March 2014

Abstract

In this paper, it is shown that the MR dampers power dissipation capacity is determined by
the time spent in the pre- and the post-yield damping regimes. This time is determined by its
design, by the MR fluids rheological behavior and by the type of movement applied to the MR
damper. To analyze those working regimes, two types of movement with different amplitudes
have been applied to the MR damper at different magnetic field intensities and excitation
frequencies. The first movement is an imposed harmonic movement, and in the second, power
controlled unrestrained movement is obtained. These unrestrained conditions are equivalent to
those the MR damper handles in a real application. For all the analyzed conditions, the
obtained results have shown that when a harmonic movement is imposed on the damper, the
MR fluid is forced to work in the post-yield regime for the majority of the cycle. In contrast,
when the unrestrained response is measured, the pre-yield behavior becomes more significant.
As a result, for equal maximum displacement, the MR damper dissipates more power when a
harmonic movement is imposed compared to the unrestrained movement.
Keywords: MR damper, characterization, magnetorheology
(Some figures may appear in colour only in the online journal)

1. Introduction

Characterizing correctly the power dissipation capacity of

MR dampers is essential for successful implementation in industrial applications such as in the suspensions of vehicles [3],
landing gears of planes [9] or in washing machines [4]. Just as
in conventional dampers, the MR dampers are characterized
by forcedisplacement and forcevelocity curves [10]. As
MR dampers response is magnetic field dependent, tests at
different magnetic field intensities must be performed for their
complete characterization.
The most common method to obtain the characteristic
curves of a MR damper is to impose a harmonic movement [1114]. One of the advantages of this method is that the
damping force is the only output of the tests [15]. Therefore,
the MR dampers response can be easily compared for different
damper designs under the same working conditions.
Zubieta et al [16] have recently developed a damper
characterization method in which an oscillatory excitation
is introduced to the system, and no movement impositions
are applied. Therefore, the power controlled unrestrained
movement of the damper is obtained, both the kinematic curves
and the damping force being the outputs of the test. These

Magnetorheological (MR) dampers are used to optimize the

attenuation of undesired oscillatory movements [1]. As the
MR dampers present a structural simplicity, a fast adjustable
response and a low energy consumption [2], they have been
applied in many industrial sectors such as automotives [3],
home appliances [4], or civil engineering [5].
The control of the MR dampers response is obtained
through the adaptable rheological behavior of MR fluids,
which are ferrimagnetic or ferromagnetic particle suspensions
in a carrier fluid [6]. When subjected to an external magnetic
field, the magnetic particles align in the direction of the
magnetic flux forming chain-like structures [7]. Due to this
particle alignment, the rheological behavior of MR fluids is
changed from being nearly Newtonian in the absence of a
magnetic field, to being mostly determined by a yield stress
that increases according to the applied magnetic field [8]. This
yield stress defines the pre- and the post-yield flow regimes
of the MR fluid, and coherently, the pre- and the post-yield
working regimes of a MR damper [3].
0964-1726/14/045025+12$33.00

c 2014 IOP Publishing Ltd

Printed in the UK

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 1. Flow tests for MRF-122EG at different magnetic field intensities.

rheological behavior of this fluid has been characterized by

a rotational rheometer MCR-501 from Anton Paar equipped
with the MRD 70/1T magnetorheological cell and profiled
parallel plate measuring system (PP20/MRD/TI/P2).
MR fluids present a non-Newtonian behavior under an
external magnetic field [4]. Therefore, the conversion proposed
by DIN 58013 [19] between the physical data of the rheometer
(rotation speed and torque) and rheological parameters (shear
rate and shear stress) is not valid. In this work, the single point
conversion method has been applied according to equations (1)
and (2) [20].

working conditions are equivalent to those the MR damper

deals with when it is connected to a slender vibrating structure,
where the MR dampers movement is not controlled by the
vibration of the structure [17].
In this work, a MR damper prototype has been designed
and manufactured [18], and a commercial MR fluid from the
LORD corporation has been used. The characterization of
the MR damper has been analyzed experimentally applying
two types of movements: the conventional imposed harmonic
movement and the new unrestrained movement. For this
purpose two different testing procedures have been used.
By these procedures, which are described in detail, tests at
different magnetic fields with different movement amplitudes
and excitation frequencies have been performed, applying
different types of movements.
The MR dampers experimental response obtained with
the two applied types of movements has been analyzed
according to the MR fluids rheological behavior and to
the MR dampers design. A theoretical force value of the
initial movement resistance of the MR damper has been
established, taking into account the MR fluids yield stress
and the static friction force of the hydraulic seals. Using this
theoretical analysis, the MR dampers working regimes, the
pre-yield and the post-yield regions, have been determined.
From this analysis, the MR dampers response has been
analyzed according to the dampers design, the MR fluids
magnetorheological behavior, the applied movement and the
MR dampers working regimes.

Rrs

(1)

2rs
M,
R3

(2)

(rs ) =
and
(rs ) =

where R is the measuring plate radius, rs is a dimensionless

coefficient with a value of 0.755 according to Carvalho
et al [21], h is the gap, is the rotational speed, M is the
torque, is the shear rate and is the shear stress.
A flow test has been performed at a temperature of
25 C controlled by a thermostatic bath (F-25, Julabo). A
shear stress logarithmic slope has been applied to the sample
at four different magnetic field intensities between 0 and
175.07 kA m1 .
In figure 1, the flow curves of MRF-122EG for different
magnetic field intensities are shown. The experimental data
from the flow curves has been parameterized by fitting to
each curve the HerschelBulkley rheological model, equation (3) [22], to experimental data.

2. System description
2.1. MR fluid

= 0 + K n ,

The hydrocarbon-based MR fluid MRF-122EG from LORD

corporation has been used in this work. This fluid presents
low viscosity in the absence of a magnetic field (0.042
0.020 Pa s at 40 C) and a high solid content (72 wt%). The

(3)

where is the shear stress, 0 is the yield stress, K is the

consistency, is the shear rate, and n is the flow behavior
2

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 2. Schematic view of the MR damper.

this work. This problem has been studied by Linder et al [3],

obtaining the shear stress profile through the gap, equation (4).

Table 1. Yield stress, consistency and flow behavior index at

different magnetic field intensities.

Magnetic
field intensity
H (kA m1 )

Yield stress
0 (Pa)

Consistency
K (Pa sn )

Flow
behavior
index n

0
99.47
143.24
175.07

2.75
2975.25
5423.64
6929.32

0.369
30.619
40.556
93.999

0.816
0.573
0.523
0.468

(y) =

1P
(2y h),
2L

(4)

where is the shear stress, 1P is the pressure drop, L and h are

respectively the conduct length (25 mm) and height (1 mm)
and y is the vertical position in the conduct. As MR fluids
present a yield stress, 0 (table 1), a yield pressure drop must
be applied to overcome the MR fluids yield stress in at least
some point of the gap, and therefore, to obtain a fluid flow. This
minimum or yield pressure drop, 1P0 , is obtained equaling
the yield stress to the shear stress at y = 0 mm, equation (5).

index. The fitting obtained with this rheological model has

been satisfactory, with correlation coefficients above 0.98.
The parameters obtained by the fitting of the experimental
data are gathered in table 1. The high MR effect of the
MR fluid is noticeable with increasing yield stress values
according to the applied magnetic field, the yield stress
being nearly non-existent in the absence of a magnetic field.
The consistency also shows an increasing tendency with the
magnetic field intensity, in contrast to the flow behavior index.

1P 0 =

20 L
.
h

(5)

The pressure drop in the conduct entails a pressure

difference on both sides of the piston. As a result of this
pressure difference, a viscous damping force appears. Due
to the yield pressure drop, a viscous yield force, F0 , must be
applied to the MR damper to overcome the MR fluids yield
stress and thus, to obtain a fluid flow, equation (6).

2.2. MR damper

A MR damper has been designed and manufactured for this

work. The MR dampers design consists of a two rod piston
and fluid circulation through a bypass (figure 2). A rectangular
shaped conduct is located in the bypass, in which a pressure
driven flow is given. A magnetic field perpendicular to this flow
is applied in the conduct by permanent magnets. To enhance
the MR effect of the damper, low friction hydraulic seals have
been used and the remainder of the hydraulic circuit has been
designed to reduce viscous losses. Hydraulic seals have been
located between the piston and the main cylinder, and between
the two rods and the main cylinder.
The flow in the conduct is considered as a steady laminar
flow between infinite parallel plates neglecting the effect of
side walls [23]. The authors have checked that this approximation is valid in the magnetic field intensity range analyzed in

F0 = 1P 0 Ae =

20 L Ae
,
h

(6)

where Ae is the effective area of the piston (412.33 mm2 ). In

addition to the yield force, to have a damper motion it is also
necessary to overcome the static friction force of the hydraulic
seals. The static friction force due to the hydraulic seals of the
MR damper has been characterized previously by the authors
by characterizing this MR damper without any fluid inside the
damper by the procedure detailed in [16]. The static friction
force, which corresponds to the maximum damping force in
such conditions, has been modeled according to the frequency
as expressed in equation (7).
FF = 32 f 0.17 ,
3

(7)

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 3. Imposed harmonic movement: experimental setup.

where f is the excitation frequency. Therefore, by the sum of

the viscous yield force and the static friction force, the initial
movement resistance, Fmin , of the MR damper is obtained in
equation (8).
Fmin = F0 + FF .

Table 2. Magnetic field intensities applied in the MR damper.

(8)

As the viscous yield force, F0 , is determined by the

rheological behavior of the MR fluid and the friction force,
FF is excitation frequency dependent; the Fmin value is both
magnetic field and frequency dependent. This initial movement
resistance of the MR damper defines its working regimens.
When a force larger than Fmin is introduced to the damper,
both the viscous yield force and the static friction force are
overcome. As a result, when a larger force than Fmin is applied
to the MR damper, the damper works in the post-yield damping
region [3].

Number of
N750-RB magnets
on each side of the
conduct

Number of PET
spacers on each side
of the conduct

Magnetic
field intensity
H (kA m1 )

0
1
1
1

3
2
1

0
99.47
143.24
175.07

3.1. Imposed harmonic movement

A harmonic movement has been imposed in the MTS 810

material test system. A sinusoidal movement has been applied
to the damper by a hydraulic actuator controlled in closed
loop by a PID type controller (figure 3). Different movement
amplitudes have been tested (X 0 = 0.53 mm) in the 110 Hz
excitation frequency range. As the force transducer of the
MTS 810 is prepared for high loads (100 kN), it presents
a low resolution for the force range of the MR damper.
Therefore, the 1051V5 piezoelectric force transducer (Dytran)
has been used for measuring the damping force and the
B&K4371 accelerometer (Bruel and Kjaer) for measuring
the acceleration curve. The signals of the force transducer
and the accelerometer have been processed with the OROS
OR254II data acquisition system. From the acceleration curve,
the velocity and displacement curves have been obtained by
numerical integration following the trapezoidal rule.

3. Experimental procedure

Two different experimental procedures have been used to apply

two types of movements: imposed harmonic movement and
unrestrained movement. For both testing procedures, steady
state has been measured in the 110 Hz frequency range with
a sampling frequency of 512 Hz with the OROS OR254II data
acquisition system.
For both experimental procedures, the magnetic field in
the conduct has been applied by Neodymium block magnets
(N750-RB, Eclipse Magnetics Ltd) as shown in figure 2.
Establishing the gap between the magnets, the magnetic field
intensity in the conduct is controlled. The gap between the
magnets has been determined manually by PET spacers 1 mm
thick. Using symmetric configurations on both sides of the
conduct, four magnetic field intensities have been applied as
shown in table 2.

3.2. Unrestrained movement

A power controlled unrestrained response has been obtained by

applying an oscillatory excitation in open loop by the GW100
electrodynamic shaker (Gearing and Watson), figure 4. This
device is fed by a sinusoidal electric signal generator and
4

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 4. Unrestrained movement: experimental setup.

Figure 5. Imposed harmonic movement (X 0 = 3 mm; frequency 1 Hz) for different magnetic intensities from 0 kA m1 to 175.07 kA m1 ;
(a) displacement; (b) damping force.

its amplifier. Four input electric signal amplitudes (V0 =

0.251 V) in the 110 Hz frequency range have been applied
entailing different oscillatory excitation amplitudes in order
to obtain a wide range of movement amplitudes (X max =
0.064.25 mm). The 1051V5 piezoelectric force transducer
(Dytran) has been used for measuring the damping force
and the OFV-505 LR100 optical laser vibrometer (Polytec)
for measuring the velocity curve. The signals of the force
transducer and the optical laser vibrometer have been processed with the OROS OR254II data acquisition system. The
displacement curve has been obtained by numerical integration
following the trapezoidal rule.
The natural resonance frequency of the shaker has been
measured by the pluck test [24] obtaining a value of 24.07 Hz.
Therefore, it has been concluded that the shakers dynamics
do not influence the dampers characterization results in the
analyzed frequency range in this work (110 Hz).

Then, the MR dampers response is compared for the two

applied types of movements using the kinematic curves and
the damping force curves. The effects of the applied magnetic
field, the excitation frequency and the maximum displacement
are analyzed. Finally, the MR dampers power dissipation
capacity is analyzed depending on the magnetorheological
behavior of the MR fluid, on the MR dampers design and
on the applied movement type.
In figure 5, displacement and force curves are shown for
the imposed harmonic movement with a maximum displacement of 3 mm at 1 Hz. These types of tests are performed
habitually to characterize MR dampers, and therefore, the
results obtained in this work are comparable to those obtained
in numerous previous works in the bibliography [1013]. The
displacement curve is controlled by the test procedure, and
hence, tests performed at different magnetic field intensities
show identical displacement curves. The damping force amplitude increases according to the magnetic field intensity
due to the MR effect in the rheological behavior of the MR
fluid. The rectangular shape of the force curve is caused by
the predominant friction type damping. Superposed to this
primary rectangular shape, a small ellipse indicates viscous
damping [17].

4. Results and discussion

In this section, first the main characteristics of each testing

procedure adopted in this work are analyzed individually.
5

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 6. Unrestrained movement (V0 = 1.0 V; frequency 1 Hz) for different magnetic intensities from 0 kA m1 to 175.07 kA m1 ;

(a) displacement; (b) velocity; (c) damping force.

Figure 7. Unrestrained movement (V0 = 0.75 V) versus imposed harmonic movement (X 0 = 2.3 mm) at 99.47 kA m1 and 1 Hz;
(a) displacement; (b) velocity; (c) force.

performed at 1 Hz and 99.47 kA m1 are compared. The

unrestrained movement has been obtained for an input voltage
of 0.75 V. This test has presented a maximum displacement
of 2.30 mm. For a direct comparison of the MR dampers
response under different types of movements, a harmonic
movement with a maximum displacement of 2.3 mm has
been imposed. As shown in figure 7(a), both tests show the
same maximum displacement, but significant differences in the
shape of the curve are noticeable. In unrestrained conditions,
the displacement curve presents an initial interval in which
the slope is lower than in the imposed harmonic movement.
This interval in the displacement curve in the unrestrained
movement is a result of the predominant friction behavior of
the MR damper [25]. This is traduced in a low velocity interval
which is prolonged until the applied force overcomes the initial
movement resistance of the MR damper (figure 7(b)).

On the other hand, in figure 6, the unrestrained movement

of the MR damper is shown at 1 Hz for an input voltage of
1.0 V. In these tests, as no movement imposition is applied,
both the displacement and velocity curves are dependent on
the MR dampers behavior, and do not show a sinusoidal
shape. In addition, the damping force amplitude increases
according to the applied magnetic field (figure 6(c)). As the
unrestrained movement is power controlled, the increase of the
damping force brings a decrease in the maximum displacement
(figure 6(a)). The decreasing maximum displacement values
traduce in lower velocity values with increasing magnetic
fields (figure 6(b)).
Once the main characteristics of the testing procedures
have been analyzed, the MR dampers response has been
compared for both applied movement types. In figure 7, tests
6

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 8. Imposed harmonic movement (X 0 = 2.3 mm) and unrestrained movement (V0 = 0.75 V; X max = 2.30 mm) with 99.47 kA m1 at
1 Hz: pre-yield (white background) and post-yield damping region damping region (gray background); (a) damping force; (b) displacement;
(c) velocity.

These differences in the kinematic curves are turned into

the damping force curve (figure 7(c)). In the imposed harmonic
movement, the damping force transition from the negative
to positive (and vice versa) is given abruptly, as the initial
movement resistance of the MR damper is surpassed quickly
as the displacement curve increases quickly. In unrestrained
conditions, the lower slope of the displacement curve due to the
MR dampers initial movement resistance entails a progressive
increase of the damping force.
The MR dampers working regimes are analyzed next. The
MR dampers response has been analyzed taking into account
the theoretical analysis described previously. This way, the MR
dampers response has been related to the magnetorheological
behavior of the MR fluid in the pre- and the post-yield regimes.
For establishing the working regimes of the MR damper, the
following criterion has been used. If the damping force is

smaller than the theoretical value Fmin , the applied force is not
enough to overcome the MR fluids yield stress and the static
friction force of the hydraulic seal. Therefore, the damper is
working in the pre-yield damping region. Once the damping
force is larger than the Fmin , both the MR fluids yield stress
and the static friction force of the hydraulic seals are surpassed,
and thus the MR damper works in the post-yield damping
region [3].
For tests carried out under the same testing conditions
as in figure 7, the model-based estimated transition points
between the pre- and the post-yield are indicated in figure 8
by Fmin for the two applied types of movements. For these
testing conditions (H = 99.47 kA m1 and f = 1 Hz), the MR
fluid presents a 2975.25 Pa yield stress (table 1). This yield
stress value is traduced in a 61.34 N yield force according
to equation (6). In addition, the static friction force presents
7

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 9. Imposed harmonic movement (X 0 = 1 mm) and unrestrained movement (V0 = 0.75 V): working regimes of the MR damper at

1 Hz according to the magnetic field intensity (pre-yield: white background; post-yield: gray background).

a value of 32 N according to equation (7). By the sum of

both, the Fmin value is obtained, having a value of 93.34 N,
equation (8).
At the beginning of the cycle, for both types of movements
the MR damper is working in the pre-yield damping region
as the velocity starts from the zero value. When a harmonic
movement is imposed, the initial movement resistance of the
MR damper is quickly exceeded as the displacement curve
is imposed and increases quickly (figure 8(b)). Therefore,
an instantaneous increase of the damping force is given at
the beginning of each semi-cycle [26]. Consequently, when a
harmonic movement is imposed, the pre-yield interval is very
short and the post-yield damping region is predominant. On

the other hand, in the unrestrained movement, as no movement

imposition is applied, the initial movement resistance of
the MR damper causes a slow grow of the displacement
curve (figure 8(b)) and the damping force increase is given
progressively. Therefore, when the unrestrained movement is
applied the time spent to reach Fmin is larger than when a
harmonic movement is imposed. As a result, the significance
of the pre-yield damping region increases when no movement
imposition is applied. After regime transition to the post-yield
damping region, the maximum force value is reached for both
applied movements. The pre-yield region is again reached
when the velocity gets to the zero value for both testing
8

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 10. Imposed harmonic movement (X 0 = 0.5 mm) and unrestrained movement (V0 = 0.5 V): working regimes of the MR damper at
99.47 kA m1 according to the excitation frequency (pre-yield: white background; post-yield: gray background).

procedures. The behavior in the second semi-cycle is similar

as in the first semi-cycle.
Using the same criteria as in figure 8, the MR damping
working regimes are studied according to the magnetic field
intensity, excitation frequency and maximum displacement. In
figure 9, the working regimes of the MR damper are shown
for test performed at different magnetic field intensities at
1 Hz. All tests present the same static friction force as all
of them are performed at 1 Hz. Nevertheless, with larger
magnetic field intensities, the yield stress values of the MR
fluid increases (table 1), entailing a proportional growth of
the yield force (equation (6)). Therefore, the initial movement
resistance of the MR damper, Fmin , increases from 32.06 N at
0 kA m1 to 174.86 N at 175.07 kA m1 . For both applied
movements, the time spent in the pre-yield regime increases
according to the magnetic field intensity as the pre-yield region
is limited by the amount of the displacement of the piston, and
the MR fluids can afford more deformation in the pre-yield
with increasing magnetic field intensities [27]. Additionally,
as seen in figure 8, the time spent in the pre-yield regime
for all the tested magnetic field intensities is larger when
unrestrained movement is applied. This is due to the fact that

the displacement in the unrestrained movement does not grow

quickly (figure 7(b)) and the pre-yield end depends on the
amount of the displacement of the piston.
Next, the working regimes of the MR damper are analyzed
in figure 10 for the two applied types of movements for tests
performed at different excitation frequencies at 99.47 kA m1 .
The yield force due to the MR fluids yield stress is the
same for all tests as the same magnetic field intensity is
applied. The static friction force is slightly reduced according
the excitation frequency (equation (7)). Therefore, the initial
movement resistance, Fmin , of the MR damper decreases from
93.34 N at 1 Hz to 82.97 N at 10 Hz. With increasing excitation
frequencies the cycle time is reduced inversely.
It can be observed that the relative time spent in the
pre-yield regime is not influenced by the excitation frequency
as the pre-yield region limit depends on the amount of the
displacement of the piston [26]. Again, as seen in figures 8
and 9, the pre-yield regime is more dominant when unrestrained conditions are applied in the whole tested frequency
range.
In figure 11, the working regimes of the MR damper
are analyzed with the two applied types of movements with
9

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 11. Imposed harmonic movement (X 0 = 0.5 and 2 mm) and unrestrained movement (V0 = 0.75 and 1.0 V): working regimes of the
MR damper at 175.07 kA m1 and 1 Hz according to the maximum displacements (pre-yield: white background; post-yield: gray
background).

different maximum displacements at 175.07 kA m1 and

1 Hz. For all these tests the Fmin presents the value of
174.86 N. For both applied types of movements, the time
spent to reach the post-yield regime decreases with increasing
maximum displacements. This is due to the fact that the
post-yield regime is reached with the same displacement
amplitude independently of the excitation frequency for both
types of movements. As a result, the Fmin value is exceeded
in a shorter time with increasing maximum displacements
for both applied types of movements. Higher movement
amplitudes entail higher velocities of the damper, which leads
to moderately higher damping forces due to the low viscous
force contribution to the total damping force [26]. Once more,
as seen previously in figures 810, the pre-yield significance
is larger when unrestrained conditions are applied.
Finally, the MR dampers power dissipation capacity
is analyzed according to the applied movement type. In
figure 12(a) the forcedisplacement curves at 1 Hz are shown
for the same testing conditions as in figures 7 and 8. The
enclosed area by this curve represents the power dissipation
of the damper [9]. The dissipated power when a harmonic
movement is imposed is 28.41% larger than in the unrestrained
movement although both tests present approximately the same
maximum displacement. This is a result of the MR damper
reaching the post-yield damping region in a considerably
shorter time when a harmonic movement is imposed.
Given that the dampers are also characterized by force
velocity curves [10], in the figure 12(b) these curves are shown
for both types of movements. The forcevelocity curve for the

imposed harmonic movement shows a typical behavior of MR

dampers with a hysteresis caused by the pre-yield regime [28]
and with a relatively small post-yield viscous damping force
at high velocity values [17]. The forcevelocity curve in the
unrestrained movement shows a larger hysteresis than in the
harmonic movement since the pre-yield regime influence is
more significant. At high velocity values, the damping force
in the unrestrained movement presents different values with
increasing and decreasing velocities due to the inertia of the
analyzed system.
In figure 13, the dissipated power at 1 Hz is shown
according to the maximum displacement for both types of
movements and for two magnetic field intensities. In all cases,
the power dissipation of the MR damper increases linearly
according to the maximum displacement. In addition, for a
given magnetic field and maximum displacement, the dissipated power is considerably larger when a harmonic movement
is imposed. Furthermore, the MR dampers response can be
evaluated either by the dissipated power or by the maximum
displacement. This way, it can be concluded that, to have the
same power dissipation, it is necessary for a larger maximum
displacement when a harmonic movement is imposed compared to the unrestrained movement.
5. Conclusions

A theoretical analysis of the MR damper has been performed

taking into account the MR fluids yield stress and the static
friction force from the hydraulic seals. From this analysis, it
10

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

J Berasategui et al

Figure 12. Unrestrained movement (V0 = 0.75 V) and imposed harmonic movement (X 0 = 2.3 mm) at 99.47 kA m1 and 1 Hz;

(a) forcedisplacement; (b) forcevelocity.

damper is forced to work in the post-yield damping region

majority of the cycle. The time spent in the pre-yield has
been larger in unrestrained movements in the whole tested
applied magnetic field intensities range (0175.07 kA m1 ),
maximum displacements range (0.24.5 mm) and frequency
range (110 Hz).
The time spent in the pre-yield defines the power dissipation capacity of the MR damper. As the MR damper is forced
to work in the post-yield damping region when a harmonic
movement is imposed, the power dissipation capacity of the
MR damper is overestimated compared to unrestrained conditions, which are the conditions the MR damper handles when
it is connected to a slender vibrating structure.
The power dissipation capacity of the MR damper is
determined by the time spent in each working regime, pre-yield
or post-yield. This time is dependent on the MR dampers design, the MR fluids magnetorheological behavior, the applied
type of movement and the working conditions (frequency,
maximum displacement and magnetic field intensity).

Figure 13. Dissipated power at 1 Hz according to the maximum

displacement at 0 and 175.07 kA m1 : unrestrained movement

(V0 = 0.251 V); imposed harmonic movement (X 0 = 0.53 mm).

has been concluded that the MR damper presents an initial

movement resistance, and therefore, that a minimum force has
to be applied to obtain the dampers motion. This theoretical
analysis has been used to determine the working regimes of
the MR damper depending on the pre- and post-yield flow
behavior of the MR fluid.
Two experimental procedures have been used to analyze
the influence of the applied movement type on the time spent
in each working regime. On one hand, a harmonic movement
has been imposed and the MR effect has been measured in the
damping force curve. On the other hand, the power controlled
unrestrained movement has been obtained by introducing an
oscillatory excitation without movement imposition. For each
applied type of movement, the power dissipation capacity of
the MR damper has been analyzed according to the frequency,
the applied magnetic field and the displacement amplitude.
When the unrestrained movement is applied, as no movement imposition is carried out, the initial movement resistance
of the MR damper entails a slow displacement increase,
which is related to the pre-yield behavior of the MR fluid.
In contrast, when a harmonic movement is imposed, the MR

Acknowledgments

The present study has been partially supported by ACTIMAT and MAGNETOBUSH (UE2013-09) projects and the
Research Group program (IT557-10) from the Basque government, and by the MAGNETO (INNPACTO-020000-2010006) and AVISUINT (DPI 2012-36366) projects from the
Spanish government.
References
[1] Carlson J D and Chrzan M J 1994 Magnetorheological fluid
damper US Patent US5277281
[2] Symans M D and Constantinou M C 1999 Semi-active control
systems for seismic protection of structures: a
state-of-the-art review Eng. Struct. 21 46987
[3] Lindler J E, Dimock G A and Wereley N M 2000 Design of
magnetorheological automotive shock absorber Proc. SPIE
3985 42637
[4] Aydar G, Evrensel C A, Gordaninejad F and Fuchs A 2007 A
low force magneto-rheological fluid damper: design
11

Smart Mater. Struct. 23 (2014) 045025

[5]

[6]
[7]

[8]
[9]

[10]
[11]

[12]

[13]

[14]

[15]

[16]

J Berasategui et al

fabrication and characterization J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct.

18 115560
Dyke S J, Spencer B F, Sin M K and Carlson J D 1998 An
experimental study of MR dampers for seismic protection
Smart Mater. Struct. 7 693
Rabinow J 1948 The magnetic fluid clutch AIEE Trans.
67 130815
Goncalves F D, Koo J H and Ahmadian M 2006 A review of
the state of the art in magnetorheological fluid
technologiesPart I: MR fluid and MR fluid models Shock
Vib. Dig. 38 20319
Genc S and Phule P P 2002 Rheological properties of
magnetorheological fluids Smart Mater. Struct. 11 1406
Lee D Y, Nam Y J, Yamane R and Park M K 2009
Performance evaluation on vibration control of MR landing
gear J. Phys.: Conf. Ser. 149 012068
Dixon J C 1999 The Shock Absorber Handbook (USA: SAE
International)
Snyder R A, Kamath G M and Wereley N M 2001
Characterization and analysis of MR damper behavior
under sinusoidal loading AIAA J. 39 124053
Yi F, Dyke S J, Caicedo J M and Carlson J D 2001
Experimental verification of multi input seismic control
strategies for smart dampers J. Eng. Mech. 127 115264
Dominguez A, Sedaghati R and Stiharu I 2006 A new dynamic
hysteresis model for magnetorheological dampers Smart
Mater. Struct. 15 117989
Chooi W W and Oyadiji S O 2008 Design, modelling and
testing of magnetorheological (MR) dampers using
analytical flow solutions Comput. Struct. 86 47382
Kamath G M, Wereley N M and Jolly M R 1999
Characterization of magnetorheological helicopter lag
dampers J. Am. Helicopter Soc. 44 23448
Zubieta M, Elejabarrieta M J and Bou-Ali M M 2009
Characterization and modeling of the static and dynamic
friction in a damper Mech. Mach. Theory 44 15609

[17] Weber F, Distl H, Feltrin G and Motavalli M 2009 Cycle

energy control of magnetorheology dampers on cables
Smart Mater. Struct. 18 015005
[18] Zubieta M 2009 Analisis magnetohidrodinamico de un
amortiguador magnetoreologico: caracterizacion
experimental y modelo fsico Doctoral Thesis Mondragon
Unibertsitatea
[19] Deutsches Institut fur Normung 1976 Measurement of the
dynamic viscosity of newtonian fluids with rotational
viscometers (DIN 53018)
[20] Schummer P and Worthoff R H 1978 The single point
evaluation method for the flow curve of viscoelastic fluids
Chem. Eng. Sci. 33 75963
[21] Carvalho M S, Padmanabhan M and Macosko C W 1994
Single point correction for parallel disks rheometry
J. Rheol. 38 192536
[22] Mezger T G 2002 The Rheology Handbook (Germany:
Vincentz Verlag)
[23] Wang X and Gordanimejad F 2006 Study of
magnetorheological fluids at high shear rates Rheol. Acta
45 899908
[24] Lang G F 1997 Electrodynamic shaker fundamentals S V
Sound Vib. 31 1423
[25] Weber F, Hgsberg J and Krenk S 2010 Optimal tuning of
amplitude proportional Coulomb friction damper for
maximum cable damping J. Struct. Eng. 136 12334
[26] Boston C, Weber F and Guzzella L 2010 Modeling of
disc-type magnetorheological damper Smart Mater. Struct.
19 045005
[27] Gandhi F and Bullough W A 2005 On the phenomenological
modeling of ER and MR fluids pre-yield behavior J. Intell.
Mater. Syst. Struct. 16 23748
[28] Wang D H and Liao W H 2011 Magnetorheological fluid
damper: a review of parametric modeling Smart Mater.
Struct. 20 023001

12