Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751

www.elsevier.com/locate/compositesb

Control of the dynamic characteristics of passive magnetic composites

J. Oh, M. Ruzzene, A. Baz*
Mechanical Engineering Department, University of Maryland, College Park, MD 20742, USA

Abstract
The fundamentals of controlling structural vibration of plates treated with a new class of Passive Magnetic Composites (PMCs) are
studied. The effectiveness of the PMC treatments in enhancing the damping of characteristics of plates is demonstrated theoretically and
experimentally.
The equations governing the magneto-elastic characteristics of plates treated with PMCs are presented. A finite element model is then
developed to describe the static and the dynamic characteristics of the different configurations of the PMCs. The model is validated
experimentally at various operating conditions. The obtained results suggest the potential of the new class of PMCs as an effective and
simple means for controlling structural vibrations. q 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Passive magnetic composites

1. Introduction specially arranged network of permanent magnet strips. The

Passive visco-elastic damping treatments have been
extensively utilized for damping out the vibration of a
wide variety of flexible structures. These treatments are
simple to apply and extremely reliable in operation [1]. In
the last 10 years, however, there has been a considerable
interest in augmenting the passive treatments with active
components such as piezo-electric materials. Examples of
the resulting hybrid treatment include the Active
Constrained Layer Damping (ACLD) [1,2], the Active
Piezoelectic-Damping Composites (APDC) [3,4] and the
Active Compressional Constrained Layer Damping
(ACCLD) treatments [5]. Although the ACLD, APDC and
ACCLD concepts have all proved to be effective in damping
out structural vibrations, they require amplifiers and control
circuits to manipulate the signals to the piezo-sensors,
piezo-actuators and electromagnetic actuators.
In order to eliminate the need for the piezo films, the
associated circuitry and any sort of external energy, the
concept of the Magnetic Constrained Layer Damping
(MCLD) is introduced [6–8].
In this paper, another class of Passive Magnetic Compo-
site (PMC) treatments is presented where damping charac-
teristics are enhanced without sensors, actuators, associated
circuitry as well as any external energy sources.
In the PMC treatments, the compression and shear damp-
ing of the visco-elastic layers is passively controlled by a
* Corresponding author. Tel.: 11-301-405-5216; fax: 11-301-405-8331.
E-mail address: baz@eng.umd.edu (A. Baz)
1359-8368/99/$ - see front matter q 1999 Elsevier Science Ltd. All rights reserved.
PII: S1359-836 8(99)00036-0
combined visco-elastic layer and magnetic strips make
PMCs act as a distributed Den Hartog vibration damper
where multi-dimensional and multi-modal vibrations can
be damped out. The effectiveness of the PMC treatments
in enhancing the damping of the base structure is demon-
strated both theoretically and experimentally.
In particular, a finite element model is developed to
describe the dynamic behavior of magnetic strips embedded
in a visco-elastic matrix. The model is used to predict the
stiffness and mass matrices of the permanent magnetic
composites as functions of the magnetic properties of the
strips and of the complex modulus of the visco-elastic layer.
These matrices account for the coupling between the perma-
nent magnets, the visco-elastic material and the base elastic
structure. Such coupling is determined for different config-
urations of the magnetic strips, i.e. the magnetic strips being
arranged in repulsion and attraction. The analysis is guided
by the theory of magneto-elasticity developed by Moon [9]
and Miya et al. [10,11] for untreated and undamped base
structures.
The predictions of the finite element model are validated
by comparing the predicted dynamic characteristics, such as
natural frequencies, mode shapes and modal loss factors,
with those obtained experimentally.
The performance of plate/PMC systems is also compared
with the performance of plates which are passively treated
with visco-elastic layers constrained with non-magnetic
strips of similar mass and elastic properties as those used
in the PMCs. Such comparison is essential to establish the
merits of this new treatment and to quantify the effect of the
740 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751
Fig. 1. Concept of PMC treatments of a plate.
interactions between the magnetic strips on the performance
of the PMCs.
This paper is organized into five sections and one appen-
dix. In Section 1, a brief introduction is given. The concept
of PMCs is presented in Section 2. In Section 3, the finite
element formulation used to model the coupling between
the structure dynamics and the magnetic forces is presented.
The experimental performance of the plane/PMCs is
presented in Section 4 together with the comparisons with
the theoretical predictions. In Section 5, the conclusions of
the present study and recommendations for future work are
given.
2. Concept of passive magnetic composite treatment
The concept of PMCs can be best understood by consid-
ering its simplified representation shown in Fig. 1. In Fig.
1(a), the undeflected configuration of the plate/PMC system
is presented. This structure can be viewed as a simple Den
Hartog absorber, consisting of mass, spring and viscous
damper mounted to the base structure, as shown in Fig.
1(b). The PMC treatment is a sandwich damping system,
where the damping is obtained from the combined compres-
sion and shear deformation of the visco-elastic layer.
Increasing these deformations is essential to enhancing the
energy dissipation characteristics of the damping treatment.
Such an increase is achieved by replacing the conventional
Fig. 2. Schematic drawing of the PMC treatments of a plate.
constraining layers by a properly arranged network of
magnetic constraining layers.
Two possible arrangements of the magnetic constraining
layers are considered where the interlayer interaction is
generated by either the repulsion or attraction of these
layers.
3. Finite element modeling of passive magnetic
composites treatment for plates
A theory for a four-layer laminated plate treated with
PMCs is developed in this section. The first and third layers
are magnetized strips, the second layer is a visco-elastic
layer while the fourth is the base as shown in Fig. 2.
It is assumed that the thickness of the base structure is
very small compared to that of the two magnetic layers and
of the visco-elastic layer. The visco-elastic layer is assumed
to experience bending, compression and shear strains. A
finite element model is developed here to describe the inter-
action between the visco-elastic layer, the base plate and the
magnetized layers.
3.1. Basic assumptions
In Fig. 2, The magnetic layer 2 and the base plate are
considered to be perfectly bonded together so that they can
be reduced to a single equivalent layer. Accordingly, the
 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751 741

Fig. 3. Operating principles of the PMC treatments with plate.

original four-layer sandwiched plate reduces to an equiva- the base plate/magnetic layer to the interface with the visco-
lent three-layer plate. In addition, it is assumed that the elastic layer.
shear strains in the constraining layers and in the base The longitudinal displacements u2 and v2 of the visco-
plate and the longitudinal stresses in the visco-elastic elastic core can be expressed as:
layer are negligible. The magnetized layers and the base    
1 h w1;x 1 w3;x
plate are assumed to be elastic while the constrained layer u2 ˆ u1 1 u3 1 1 2 D ; …4†
2 2 2
is assumed to be perfectly visco-elastic. Further the trans-
verse displacement of the constraining layer 1 and of the and
base plate are assumed to be different so that the effect of the    
1 h w1;y 1 w3;y
compression of the visco-elastic layer may be considered. In v2 ˆ v1 1 v3 1 1 2 D : …5†
2 2 2
addition, both the transverse and longitudinal displacements
in the visco-elastic core have been assumed to vary linearly
across the thickness. 3.3. Equations of motion of the plate/PMC system

The Finite Element model describing the behavior of

3.2. Kinematic relationships plate/PMC system is developed using Hamilton’s Principle
[12]:
From the geometry presented in Fig. 3 along with the
concept of the PMCs, the shear strains gx ; gy in x and y Zt2
d…T 2 U 1 Wm † dt ˆ 0 …6†
directions in the visco-elastic core due to the presence of t1
the constraining layers can be expressed as follows:
where T and U denote the total kinetic and strain energies of
 
1 d the structure and Wm is the work done by non conservative
gx ˆ u 2 u3 1 …w1x 1 w3x † ; …1†
h2 1 2 external forces, i.e. the magnetic forces. The expressions for
the strain energies U and the kinetic energies T associated
and with the various layers of the plate/PMC system are
  presented in Appendix A.
1 d
gy ˆ v1 2 v3 1 …w1y 1 w3y † : …2†
h2 2 3.4. Effects of the magnetic forces on the plate/PMC system
where u1 and v1 are, respectively, the longitudinal displace-
The procedure for the calculation of the magnetic forces
ments of the magnetic layer 1 along the x and y directions
presented by Coulomb and Meunier [13] is applied to the
and u3 and v3 are the corresponding displacements of the
determination of the interaction between the two magnetic
base structure. Also, h2 denotes the thickness of the visco-
constraining layers. These forces have components along
elastic layer while the slope of the deflection line of the
the x, y directions and an out-of-plane component along
visco-elastic core has been expressed as the average of the
the transverse direction z.
slopes w1;x w3;x and w1;y w3;y : The subscripts x, y in Eqs. (1)
The magnetic forces are in general nonlinear functions of
and (2) denote partial differentiation with respect to x and y.
the distance between the interacting magnets [14,15]. The
The parameter d in Eqs. (1) and (2) is given by:
components of the magnetic force along the x and y direc-
d ˆ h2 1 1
h1 1 D …3† tions will stretch the magnetic layers in the longitudinal
2
direction, but will not cause any changes in the transverse
where D represents the distance from the neutral plane of spacing between the magnetic layers.
742 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751

Fig. 4. Finite element model of the plate with PMC treatments.

The magnetic force in the z direction results in a relative
displacement of the constraining layers along z, therefore
changing the spacing between the interacting magnets and
influencing the magnetic properties of the region. Since
these displacements are reasonably small, the magnetic
forces can be linearized around the initial thickness of the
visco-elastic core using the following approximation:
2Fm0
Fm ˆ Fm0 1 …w 2 w3 † …
2…w1 2 w3 † 1
where Fm denotes the total magnetic force and Fm0 is the
static term corresponding to the initial distance between the
constraining magnetized layers.
The magnetic forces, calculated using the virtual work
method, is obtained as the derivative of the magnetic
energy with respect to the displacement of the movable
part immersed in the magnetic field [13]. In the PMC
treatment, only the relative vertical displacement …w1 2
w3 † of the magnetized layers gives a relevant contribu-
tion and therefore only the component of Fm along the
z direction performs work. Therefore, the work done
by the magnetic forces in the PMC treatment can be
expressed as follows:
3.5. Degrees of freedom and shape functions
Fig. 4 shows a schematic drawing of the plate/PMC
system discretized into N finite elements. The elements
considered here are two-dimensional quadrilateral elements
that are bounded by four nodal points. Each node has 10
degrees of freedom to describe the longitudinal displace-
ments u1 v1, the vertical deflection w1 and the slopes w1;x ;
w1;y of the constraining layer 1 and the longitudinal displa-
7†
cement u3 and v3, the transverse displacement w3 and the
slopes w3;x ; w3;y of the base plate/magnetic layer. The spatial
distributions of the longitudinal displacements are assumed
to be given by:
u1 ˆ a1 1 a2 x 1 a3 y 1 a4 xy;
v1 ˆ a5 1 a6 x 1 a7 y 1 a8 xy; …10†
u3 ˆ a9 1 a10 x 1 a11 y 1 a12 xy;
and
v3 ˆ a13 1 a14 x 1 a15 y 1 a16 xy:
while those for the transverse deflections are:

Za Zb F w1 ˆ a17 1 a18 x 1 a19 y 1 a20 x2 1 a21 xy 1 a22 y2

mz
Wm ˆ …w1 2 w3 † dx dy …8†
0 0 i bi
a
1a23 x3 1 a24 x2 y 1 a25 xy2 1 a26 y3 1 a27 x3 y 1 a28 xy3 ;
where F mz denotes the z components of the magnetic force
and
expressed in Eq. (7). Also, a and b denote the dimensions of
the sides of the PMC treatment as shown in Fig. (4). w3 ˆ a29 1 a30 x 1 a31 y 1 a32 x2 1 a33 xy 1 a34 y2 1 a35 x3
Considering only the z component in Eq. (7), Eq. (8) can
be rewritten as follows: 1 a36 x2 y 1 a37 xy2 1 a38 y3 1 a39 x3 y 1 a40 xy3 ;
"
1 Za Zb where the constants {a1 ; a2 ; a3 ; …; a40 } ˆ {a} are deter-
Wm ˆ Fm0z …w1 2 w3 † dx dy mined in terms of the 40 components of the nodal deflection
a i bi 0 0
vector {d…e† } for the i-th element bounded by the nodes 1–4,
# as shown in Fig. 4. The deflection vector {d…e† } is given by:
Za Zb 2Fm0z
1 …w 2 w3 †2 dx dy …9†
0 0 2…w1 2 w3 † 1 {d…e† } ˆ {d…1† ; d…2† ; d…3† ; d…4† }T …11†
 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751 743

Fig. 5. Configuration of the magnets in PMC treatments: (a) attraction, (b) repulsion.

where: displacements:

{d…j† } ˆ {u…j† …j† …j† …j† …j† …j† …j† …j† …j† …j†
1 ; v1 ; w1 ; u3 ; v3 ; w3 ; w1;x ; w3;x ; w1;y ; w3;y }
{d…e† } ˆ T{a1 ; a2 ; a3 ; …; a40 }T …14†
where T is a transformation matrix obtained imposing the
for …j† ˆ 1; 2…; 4
value of the shape functions at the boundaries of the
The deflection vector {d}; at any location …x; y† inside the ith element. The deflection at any location of the element can
element can be expressed as a function of the nodal displa- therefore be expressed as a function of the nodal displace-
cements: ments using N and T matrices:

{d} ˆ {u1 ; v1 ; w1 ; u3 ; v3 ; w3 ; w1;x ; w1;y ; w3;x ; w3;y ; } {d} ˆ NT21 {d…e† } …15†
where N is:
ˆ ‰{N1 }; {N2 }; {N3 }; {N4 }; {N5 }; {N6 }; {N7 }; {N8 }; {N9 };
N ˆ ‰{N1 }; {N2 }; {N3 }; {N4 }; {N5 }; {N6 }; {N7 }; {N8 };
T
{N10 }Š {a} …12†
{N9 }; {N10 }; ŠT …16†
where {N1 }; {N2 }; …; {N10 } are the spatial interpolating
vectors corresponding to u1 ; v1 ; w1 ; u3 ; v3 ; w3 ; w1;x ; w1;y ; w3;x 3.6. Equation of motion
and w3;y ; respectively. In particular:
2{N3 } 2{N6 } 2{N3 } The dynamics of the plate/PMC element is described by
{N7 } ˆ ; {N8 } ˆ ; {N9 } ˆ the following equation of motion:
2x 2x 2y
M…e† {d }T 1 …K…e† 2 K…e† …e† …e† …e†
m †{d } ˆ Fm0z {b } …17†
2{N6 }
and {N10 } ˆ ; …13†
2y where M (e) and K (e) denote the element mass and stiffness
matrices, whose derivation is described in Appendix A.
In Eq. (11), {d…e† } is the nodal deflection vector. Each Also, Km(e) is the additional matrix derived from the dynamic
(e)
constant ai can be expressed in terms of the nodal term of the magnetic forces given in Appendix A, Fm0z is the

Fig. 6. Layout of the PMCs.

744 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751

Table 2
Material properties and thickness of layers

Layer Thickness (m) Young’s modulus (Pa) Density (kg/m 3)

Aluminum 5:08 × 1024 7.1E10 2700

Visco-elastic 1:524 × 1023 0.5E6 a 150
Magnet 1:52 × 1023 0.6E9 3543

4. Performance of passive magnetic composites

In this section, the experimental performance of PMCs is

Fig. 7. Photograph of dynamic measurements set-up.
static magnetic force on the element and {b (e)} is a vector
defining the degrees of freedom on which the magnetic
forces are acting. These forces are added to the equation
of motion for the sake of completion, but, since they are
static forces, their presence does not affect the dynamical
behavior of the plate.
The overall mass and stiffness matrices M and K can be
obtained by assembling the matrices of the individual
elements. Applying the proper boundary conditions yields
the overall equations of motion of the entire plate.
determined and compared with the theoretical predictions as
obtained from the finite element model described in Section
3. Comparisons with Passive Nonmagnetic Composite
(PNMC) treatment are also presented to emphasize the
merits of the PMCs as an effective means for dissipating
the vibrational energy of plates. The performance of the
PMCs is studied considering the magnetic strips in attrac-
tion and repulsion. For each treatment, the magnetic strips
are magnetized across the thickness and arrangements of the
magnetic poles are zigzagged as shown in Fig. 5.
Experimental plates are treated with PMC treatment, and
their performances are monitored under various types of
external random noise excitations to evaluate the effective-
ness of the PMCs in attenuating the structural vibrations.
The modal properties and amplitudes of vibrations for the
treated plates are measured and compared with the corre-
sponding characteristics of plates treated with PNMC.
Table 3
Magnetic properties of the different layers

Table 1 Layer Relative permeability (N/A 2) Coercive force (A/m)

Main geometrical properties of the PMC treatment
Aluminum 1
Length L (m) Width W (m) Thickness T (m) Visco-elastic 1
Magnetic 1.1579 151 197.5
0.165 0.127 0.457 Vacuum air 4p × 1027

Fig. 8. Experimental set-up for dynamic measurements.

 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751
Fig. 9. Effect of PMCs with random excitation using accelerometer excita-
tion voltage: (a) 2 V; (b) 1 V; (c) 0.5 V.
4.1. Material properties
The layout of the proposed PMCs treatment is shown in
Fig. 6. The magnetic strips are bonded to the visco-elastic
layer using Neoprene Adhesive F-1 (Carboline Co. St.
Louis, Missouri 63144). The three-layer magnetic compo-
site is then bonded to a vibrating base plate (Alloy 3003
Aluminum Sheet) to act as a smart damping treatment
with built-in actuation capabilities. The main geometrical
dimensions of the PMC treatment used for the test is listed
in Table 1.
745
The visco-elastic damping layer sheet (Neoprene Poto-
mac Rubber Inc., Upper Marlboro, MD) is constrained by
two layers of magnetic strips (Master Magnetics, Inc. Castle
Rock, CO). The mechanical properties and geometrical
parameters of the different layers are given in Tables 2
and 3. The elastic modulus of the visco-elastic material is
represented by a complex number:E ˆ E 0 …1 1 ih† where:
E 0 is the p  modulus, h is the loss factor of the material
storage
and i ˆ 21: Note that the storage modulus, E 0 , and the
loss factor, h , of the visco-elastic layer are temperature and
frequency dependent [16].
4.2. Experimental set-up
The experimental set-up used for monitoring the
dynamics of the PMC/plate system is shown in Figs. 7
and 8. The test plate is acoustically excited by a speaker
driven by the signal source of a FFT analyzer (Model
CF910, ONO Sokki) through a Hi/Lo filter (Model 432,
WaveTek) and a power Amplifier (Model 6260, JBL. Urel
Electronic Co.).
The amplitude of vibration of the plate near the lower left
corner of the treatment is monitored by an Accelerometer
(Model 303A03, PCB Piezotronics Company). The output
signal of the accelerometer is sampled by the FFT analyzer
(Model CF910, ONO Sokki) to determine the amplitude and
frequency content of the vibrations. The accelerometer has
an accuracy of 0.1 mm over a frequency band between 0–
10 000 Hz.
4.3. Experimental results
4.3.1. Results of dynamic tests
The performance of the PMCs is studied with the
magnetic strips arranged both in attraction and in repulsion.
The test plates are subjected to random excitation. The
experimental results are presented for different excitation
levels (excitation input voltages 2, 1 and 0.5 V). The ampli-
tude of vibrations of the plate is measured using excitations
by an acoustic speaker. In this section, a comparison
between the amplitudes of vibration of plates with PNMC
and PMC treatment is presented. A detailed quantitative
analysis of the experimental results is given in Tables 4
and 5. The comparison between the natural frequencies,
loss factors and attenuations for the PNMC and PMCs
at room temperature (258C) is shown in Tables 4–9. It
is evident that the PMC treatment is very effective in
attenuating the structural vibration of the plate over the
considered frequency range. Fig. 9 shows the effect of vary-
ing the excitation voltages on the amplitude of vibrations
when random noise excitation is used. Note that the PMCs
are capable of attenuating the plate vibration even for low
excitation amplitudes. In addition, it can be highlighted that
the magnetic strips in attraction are more effective than
those in repulsion as shown in Tables 4–7.
746 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751

Table 4
Natural frequency and amplitude attenuation of the first three modes (random excitation–excitation voltage 2 V)

Mode Nonmagnetic (PNMC) Magnetic attraction (PMCs) Magnetic repulsion (PMCs)

Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Attenuation (%) Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Attenuation (%)

1 31.5 0.01148 27 0.00309 73.08 28.5 0.00684 40.42

2 62.0 0.06383 56.6 0.01950 69.45 51.5 0.01135 83.42
3 67.5 0.018441 63 0.01109 39.76 58 0.01567 14.88

Table 5
Natural frequency and amplitude attenuation of the first three modes (random excitation–excitation voltage 1 V)

Mode Nonmagnetic (PNMC) Magnetic attraction (PMCs) Magnetic repulsion (PMCs)

Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Attenuation (%) Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Attenuation (%)

1 31.5 0.00575 27 0.00188 67.30 28.5 0.00351 38.96

2 62.0 0.03199 56 0.01012 68.37 51.5 0.00569 82.21
3 67.5 0.00933 63.5 0.00501 46.30 58 0.00841 9.86

Table 6
Natural frequency and amplitude attenuation of the first three modes (random excitation–excitation voltage 0.5 V)

Mode Nonmagnetic (PNMC) Magnetic attraction (PMCs) Magnetic repulsion (PMCs)

Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Attenuation (%) Frequency (Hz) Amplitude (g) Attenuation (%)

1 31.5 0.00263 27 0.00188 58.94 28 0.00168 36.12

2 62.0 0.01585 56 0.00501 68.39 51.5 0.00295 81.39
3 67.5 0.00452 63 0.00282 37.61 58 0.00422 6.64

Table 7
Loss frequency of the first three modes (random excitation–excitation voltage 2 V)

Mode Nonmagnetic (PNMC) Magnetic attraction (PMCs) Magnetic repulsion (PMCs)

Loss factor (h ) Loss factor (h ) Loss factor (h )

1 0.0346 0.0898 0.0462

2 0.0255 0.0531 0.0619
3 0.0343 0.0423 0.0492

Table 8
Loss frequency of the first three modes (random excitation–excitation voltage 1 V)

Mode Nonmagnetic (PNMC) Magnetic attraction (PMCs) Magnetic repulsion (PMCs)

Loss factor (h ) Loss factor (h ) Loss factor (h )

1 0.0334 0.0577 0.0504

2 0.0260 0.0475 0.0638
3 0.0348 0.0669 0.0429

Table 9
Loss frequency of the first three modes (random excitation–excitation voltage 0.5 V)

Mode Nonmagnetic (PNMC) Magnetic attraction (PMCs) Magnetic repulsion (PMCs)

Loss factor (h ) Loss factor (h ) Loss factor (h )

1 0.0387 0.0745 0.0561

2 0.0293 0.0466 0.0557
3 0.0408 0.0534 0.0433
 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751 747

Fig. 10. PMC treatments in repulsion: (a) comparison between experimental and theoretical natural frequencies; and (b) loss factors.

4.4. Comparison between theoretical and experimental
results
The theoretical modal parameters predicted by the finite
element model, for the PMCs are verified against experi-
mental results. A comparison between the experimental and
theoretical natural frequencies and loss factors is presented
in Figs. 10 and 11. The figures clearly indicate the good
agreement between theoretical predictions and the experi-
mental results.
The theoretical predictions presented in this study are
obtained using a finite element mesh consisting of 1248
elements (48 in x direction and 26 in y direction) with ai ˆ
0:25 in: and bi ˆ 0:46 in:
5. Conclusions
In this paper a new class of control of Passive
Magnetic Composite (PMCs) treatments has been intro-
duced. The fundamentals of controlling the dynamic
characteristics of plates with this treatment, consisting
of integrated arrays of visco-elastic damping layers that
are completely controlled passively by a network of
permanent magnets, have been studied. The damping char-
ecteristics of the treatment have been evaluated both for
magnets in attraction and repulsion. The proposed PMC
treatments allow for eliminating the need for the sensors,
actuators, associated circuitry as well as any external energy
sources.
A finite element model has been developed to describe
the dynamic characteristics of magnetic composites. The
accuracy and efficiency of the developed finite element
model are tested by considering several examples of the
PMC treatment plates. Excellent agreement is obtained
between the predictions of the finite element and the experi-
mental results. The performance of the PMC treatments for
plates indicate that magnets in the attraction configurations
are much more effective in reducing the vibration than the
magnets in repulsion.
Several issues need further investigations such as
optimization of the PMC treatment; different boundary
conditions and different operating temperatures should
be taken into consideration as well as the effect of the

Fig. 11. PMC treatments in attraction: (a) comparison between experimental and theoretical natural frequencies; and (b) loss factors.
748 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751

different parameters and stacking sequence of the A.1.2. Extension of the base plate/magnetic layer 3
permanent magnets. Investigation of the effect of
coupling the plate/PMC systems with acoustic cavities " !2 ! !
is also a natural extension of the present study. More- Ep D Za Zb 2u3 2u3 2v3
U2 ˆ 12n3
over, the analytical solutions and finite element analy- 2…1 2 n23 † 0 0 2x 2x 2y
sis of partially or fully treated more general and !2 !2 #
complicated structures, such as cylindrical shells, are 2v3 1 2 n3 2v3 2u
1 1 1 3 dx dy
needed. 2y 2 2x 2y
…A3†
p
Acknowledgements where E and D are Young’s modulus and thickness of the
plate/magnetic layer, respectively. Note that Ep ˆ …E3 h3 1
This research has been funded by a grant from Army E1 h1 †=D; E3 and h3 being the Young’s modulus and thick-
Research office #DAAG55-97-1-0144. Special thanks are ness of the base plate and n 3 is the Poission’s ratio. Introdu-
due to Dr Gary Anderson for his invaluable technical cing the shape functions and considering Eq. (A3), U2 can
inputs. be expressed as:
"
Ep D Za Zb
…e† T 21T
U2 ˆ {d } T ‰{N3;x }T {N3;x }
2…1 2 n23 † 0 0
Appendix A. Energies of passive magnetic composites
1 2n3 {N3;x }T {N3;y } 1 {N2;y }T {N2;y }
In this appendix, the explicit expressions for the terms
appearing in Eq. (6) are presented. 1 2 n1
1 {N11 }T {N11 }Š dx dy T 21 {d…e† }
2
A.1. Strain energy 1 {N4;y }T {N4;y }
#
A.1.1. Extension of the magnetized constraining layer 1 1 2 n3
1 {N12 } {N12 } dx dyT 21 {d…e† }
T
…A4†
2
" !2 ! !
E1 h1 Za Zb 2u1 2u1 2v1 where {N12} is:
U1 ˆ 12n1
2…1 2 n21 † 0 0 2x 2x 2y
{N12 } ˆ {N3;y } 1 {N4;x }
!2 !2 #
2v1 1 2 n1 2v1 2u
1 1 1 1 dx dy A.1.3. Extension of the visco-elastic layer
2y 2 2x 2y
…A1† " !2 ! !
E2 h2 Za Zb 2u3 2u2 2v2
U3 ˆ 12n2
where E1 and h1 are Young’s modulus and thickness of the 2…1 2 n22 † 0 0 2x 2x 2y
constraining layer 1 and the constant n 1 is the Poisson’s
!2 !2 #
ratio. The parameters a and b are the geometrical dimen- 2v2 1 2 n2 2v2 2u
sions of the plate, in x and y directions, respectively. Intro- 1 1 1 2 dx dy
2y 2 2x 2y
ducing the shape functions given in Eq. (15) and considering
Eq. (A1), U1 can be expressed as: …A5†
" where E2 and h2 are Young’s modulus and thickness of the
E 1 h1 Za Zb
U1 ˆ …e† T 21T
{d } T {N1;x }T {N1;x } visco-elastic layer and n 2 is the Poisson’s ratio. Introducing
2…1 2 n21 † 0 0 the shape functions and considering Eq. (A5), U3 can be
expressed as:
1 2n1 {N1;x }T {N2;y } 1 {N2;y }T {N2;y } "
E 2 h2 Za Zb
…e† T 21T
U3 ˆ {d } T {N13;x }T {N13;x }
# 2…1 2 n22 † 0 0
1 2 n1
1 {N11 } {N11 } dx dyT 21 {d…e† }
T
…A2†
2
1 2n2 {N13;x }T {N14;y } 1 {N14;y }T {N14;y }
where {N11 } is: #
1 2 n2
1 {N15 } {N15 } dx dyT 21 {d…e† }
T
…A6†
{N11 } ˆ {N1;y } 1 {N2;x } 2
 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751 749

where {N13} represents an interpolating vector obtained the linear behavior of the visco-elastic layer being charac-
considering Eq. (4) and {N14} is corresponding to Eq. (5), terized by the complex modulus Ep ˆ Ep0 …1 1 hc i† with hc
while {N15} is expressed as: and i denoting the elastic loss factor and 21; respectively.
{N15 } ˆ {N13;y } 1 {N14;x } Introducing the shape functions and considering Eq. (A11),
U6 can be expressed as:
E 02 h32 Za Zb
A.1.4. Bending of the magnetized constraining layer 1 U6 ˆ {d…e† }T T 21
T
‰{N16;xx }T {N16;xx }
" 2 !2 ! 2 ! 24…1 2 n2 †2
0 0
E1 h31 Za Zb 2 w1 22 w1 2 w1
U4 ˆ 12n1 1 2n2 {N16;xx }T {N16;yy } 1 {N16;yy }T {N16;yy } 1 2…1
24…1 2 n21 † 0 0 22 x 2x2 2y2

!2 !2 # 2 n3 †{N16;xy }T {N16;xy }Š dx dyT 21 {d…e† } …A12†

2 w1
2
2 w1 2
1 12…1 2 n1 † dx dy …A7† where {N16} is:
2y2 2x2y "
1
where w1 is the vertical deflection of the constraining layer. {N16;xy } ˆ {N1;x } 1 {N2;y } 2 {N4;x } 2 {N5;y }
h2
Introducing the shape functions and considering Eq. (A7),
! !#
U4 can be expressed as: h1 {N3;xy } 1 {N6;xy }
E1 h31 Za Zb 12 1D
U4 ˆ {d …e† T 21T
} T ‰{N3;xx }T {N3;xx } 2 2
24…1 2 n21 † 0 0
the subscripts x and y denoting partial differentiation with
1 2n2 {N3;xx }T {N3;yy } 1 {N3;yy }T {N3;yy } 1 2…1 respect to x or y.

2 n2 †{N3;xy }T {N3;xy }Š dx dyT 21 {d…e† } …A8† A.1.7. Shear of the visco-elastic layer

A.1.5. Bending of the base plate/magnetic layer 3 G2 h2 Z a Z b 2 2

U7 ˆ …gx gx † dx dy …A13†
2 0 0
" !2 !
E3 h33 1 E1 h31 Za Zb 22 w3 22 w3 where G2 is the storage shear modulus of the visco-elastic
U5 ˆ 12n3
24…1 2 n23 † 0 0 22 x 2x2 layer, the linear behavior of the visco-elastic layer being
characterized by the complex shear modulus Gp ˆ G…1 1
! !2 !2 # hg i†: The quantities gx and gy are the shear strains given in
22 w3 22 w1 22 w1 Eqs. (1) and (2). Introducing the shape functions and consid-
 1 12…1 2 n1 † dx dy
2y2 2y2 2x2y ering Eq. (A13), U7 can be expressed as:
…A9† Gh Za Zb
U7 ˆ 2 2 {d…e† }T T 21
T

where w3 is vertical deflection of the plate/magnetic layer. ‰{N17 }T {N17 }

2 0 0
Introducing the shape functions and considering Eq. (A9),
U5 can be expressed as: 1 {N18 }T {N18 }Š dx dy T 21 {d…e† } …A14†
E h3 1 E1 h31 …e† T 21T Za Zb
U5 ˆ 3 3 {d } T ‰{N6;xx }T {N6;xx } where {N17} and {N18} are interpolating vectors, as
24…1 2 n23 † 0 0 given by Eqs. (1) and (2). It can be written as:
 
1 2n3 {N6;xx }T {N6;yy } 1 {N6;yy }T {N6;yy } 1 2…1 {N17 } ˆ
1 d
{N1 } 2 {N4 } 1 …{N3;x } 2 {N6;x }†
h2 2
2 n3 †{N6;xy }T {N6;xy }Š dx dyT 21 {d…e† } …A10†   …A15†
1 d
{N18 } ˆ {N2 } 2 {N5 } 1 …{N3;y } 2 {N6;y }†
h2 2
A.1.6. Bending of the visco-elastic layer
" !2 ! ! A.1.8. Compression of the visco-elastic layer
E 02 h32 Za Zb 22 w2 2 2 w2 22 w2
U6 ˆ 12n2
24…1 2 n2 † 0 0
2 22 x 2x3 2y2 E 02 Za Zb
!2 !2 # U8 ˆ …w 2 w3 †2 dx dy …A16†
2h2 0 0 1
22 w2 22 w2
1 12…1 2 n2 † dx dy …A11†
2y2 2x2y The compression and the shear of the visco-elastic layer
determine the dissipation effects in the structure. Introdu-
where E2 0 is the storage modulus of the visco-elastic layer, cing the shape functions and considering Eq. (A16), U8 can
750 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751

be expressed as: A.2.4. Bending of the base plate/magnetic layer

E 02 Za Zb
{d…e† }T T 21 ‰{N19 }T {N19 } dx dy T 21 {d…e† }Š
T
U8 ˆ
2h2 0 0 …r1 h1 1 r3 h3 †
…A17† T4 ˆ
2
where {N19} is a vector obtained by considering the Za Zb
 {d_ …e† }T T 21 ‰{N6 }T {N6 }Š dx dyT 21 {d_ …e† }
T
difference between the transverse displacements of the
constraining layer 1 and the base plate/magnetic layer. It 0 0

can be expressed as: …A23†

{N19 } ˆ {N3 } 2 {N6 }
The total strain energy U (e) associated with extension,
bending, shear and compression of the plate with PMCs A.2.5. Extension of the visco-elastic layer
treatment is:
X
8
1 …e† T …e† …e† r2 h2 _ …e† T 21T Za Zb
U …e† ˆ Ui…e† ˆ {d } K {d } …A18† T5 ˆ {d } T ‰{N13 }T {N13 }
iˆ1
2 2 0 0
(e)
where K is the element stiffness matrix. 1 {N14 }T {N14 }Š dx dy T 21 {d_ …e† } …A24†

A.2. Kinetic energy where r 2 is the density of the visco-elastic layer. From Eqs.
(4) and (5), {N13} and {N14} are interpolating vectors
The kinetic energy, Ti ; for the i-th layer of the plate with
expressed by:
PMC treatment is given by:
   
r h Za Zb 2 1 h {N3;x } 1 {N6;x }
Ti ˆ i i …wi;t 1 u2i;t 1 v2i;t † dx dy …A19† {N13 } ˆ {N1 } 2 {N4 } 1 1 2 D ;
2 0 0 2 2 2
where ri is the density of each layer and the subscript t
denotes partial differentiation with respect to time. In Eq. and
(A19), the rotary inertias are neglected in all layers.    
From Eq. (A19), the kinetic energies of the each layer can 1 h {N3;y } 1 {N6;y }
{N14 } ˆ {N2 } 2 {N5 } 1 1 2 D :
be expressed in Finite Element formulation as follows. 2 2 2

A.2.1. Extension of the constraining layer 1

r1 h1 _ …e† T 21T Za Zb
A.2.6. Bending of the visco-elastic layer
T1 ˆ {d } T ‰{N1 }T {N1 }
2 0 0

r2 h2 _ …e† T 21T Za Zb
1 {N2 }T {N2 }Š dx dyT 21 {d_ …e† } …A20† T6 ˆ {d } T ‰{N20 }T {N20 }Š dx dyT 21 {d_ …e† }
2 0 0
where r 1 is the density of the constraining layer 1. The …A25†
superscript dot denotes differentiation with respect to time.
where {N20} is an interpolating vector written as:
A.2.2. Bending of the constructing layer 1
{N20 } ˆ 1
2 ‰{N3 } 1 {N6 }Š
r1 h1 _ …e† T 21 Za Zb
‰{N3 }T {N3 }Š dx dy T 21 {d_ …e† }
T
T2 ˆ {d } T Hence, The total kinetic energy T (e) of the element is
2 0 0
given by:
…A21†
X
6
1 _ …e† T …e† _ …e†
T …e† ˆ Ti ˆ {d } M {d }
A.2.3. Extension of the base plate/magnetic layer iˆ1
2

…r h 1 r3 h3 † _ …e† T 21T Za Zb where M (e) is the element mass matrix.

T3 ˆ 1 1 {d } T ‰{N4 }T {N4 }
2 0 0

1 {N5 }T {N5 }Š dx dy T 21 {d_ …e† } …A22† A.3. Work done by the magnetic forces

where r 3 is the density of the base plate. From Eq. (9), and introducing the shape function can be
 J. Oh et al. / Composites: Part B 30 (1999) 739–751 751

expressed: an acoustic cavity using active piezoelectric damping composites.

Proceedings of Smart Materials and Structures Conference, San
1 …e† Za Zb
…{N18 }T † dx dy T 21 {d…e† }
Diego, CA 1997;3039:70–90.
Wm ˆ ‰F
ab m0z 0 0 [5] Omer A, Baz A. Vibration control of plates using compressional
constrained layer damping treatments. ASME 17th Biennial Vibration
…e†
2Fmz and Noise Conference. Las Vegas, Nevada, September 1999.
{d…e† }T T 21
T
2 [6] Baz A. Magnetic constrained layer damping. Eleventh Symposium on
2…w1 2 w3 † Structural Dynamics & Control, May 12–14. Blacksburg, VA, 1997.
Za Zb p. 333–43.
 …{N18 }T {N18 }† dx dyT 21 {d…e† }Š …A26† [7] Ebrahim A, Baz A. Vibration control of plates using magnetic
0 0 constrained layer damping. Proceedings of Smart Structures and
Material Conference 1998;3327:138–58.
which can be written in compact form as follows: [8] Ruzzene M, Oh J., Baz A. Finite element modeling of magnetic
Za Zb constrained layer damping. Third ARO Workshop on Smart Struc-
…e†
Wm ˆ Fm0z …{N18 }T † dx dy T 21 {d…e† } tures, Blacksburg, VA, 27–29 August 1997.
0 0 [9] Moon F. Magneto-solid mechanics, New York: Wiley, 1984.
[10] Miya K, Hara K, Tabata Y. Finite element analysis of experiment on
…e†
2Fmz dynamic behavior of cylinder due to electromagnetic force. Nuclear
1 {d…e† }T K…e† …e†
m {d } …A27†
2…w1 2 w3 † Engineering & Design 1975;59:401–10.
[11] Miya K, Uesaka M. An application of finite element method to
magnetomechnics of superconducing magnets for magnetic fusion
reactors. Nuclear Engineering, & Design 1982;72:275–96.
References [12] Meirovitch L. Analytical methods in vibrations, New York: Macmil-
lan, 1967.
[1] Baz A. Active Constrained layer damping. US Patent 5,485,053. Jan. [13] Coulomb JL, Meunier G. Finite element implementation of virtual
1996. work principle for magnetic or electric force and torque computation.
[2] Baz A, Ro J. Actively controlled constrained layer damping. Sound & IEEE Transactions on Magnetics 1984;20(5):1894–6.
Vibration Magazine 1994;28(3):18–21. [14] Brown WF. Magnetoelastic interactions, New York: Springer, 1966.
[3] Gentilman R, Fiore DF, Pham HT, French KW, Bowen LJ. Fabrica- [15] Griffith DJ. Introduction to electrodynamics, New Delhi: Prentice-
tion and properties of 1-3 PZT polymer composites. Ceramic Trans- Hall of India, 1995.
actions 1994;43:239–47. [16] Nashif A, Jones D, Henderson J. Vibration damping, New York:
[4] Shields W, Ro J, Baz A. Control of sound radiation from a plate into Wiley, 1985.