J.

Alanoly
Research Scientist.

S. Sankar
Professor and Director.
CONCAVE Research Centre,
Department of Mechanical Engineering,
Concordia University,
Montreal, Canada H3G1M8

A New Concept in Semi-Active

Vibration Isolation
Semi-active suspensions can achieve performance close to that of active suspensions
with much lower cost and complexity. They use an active damper in parallel with a
passive spring. The forces in the damper are generated merely by the modulation of
fluid-flow orifices based on a control scheme involving feedback variables. This
paper presents an original control strategy employing only directly measurable
variables in vehicle applications. The relative displacement and relative velocity
across the suspension are the only feedback signals and the damper force can be continuously modulated (as opposed to on-off control). Vibration isolation performance of the new semi-active scheme is compared to semi-active sky-hook suspension, as well as passive and active suspensions.

1 Introduction
X
Suspensions are an integral part of any ground vehicle.
They perform the important task of isolating the passenger
and cargo from terrain-induced shock and vibration. A vehicle
Active force
) generator
suspension unit usually consists of a spring and damper. Normally they are "passive units" because they do not require any
4-'
external power. By using hydraulic or pneumatic power and
(a)
(b)
<>
sophisticated control devices, it is possible to make "active
suspensions" which could give substantially improved perfor- Fig. 1 Schematic of (a) passive, (b) active, and (c) semi-active isolators
mance over passive ones. But they are more complex, expensive, and less reliable than passive suspensions.
input). For the passive system of equation (1), the
A compromise between the active and passive types is the transmissibility, Tis given by
"semi-active" suspension system. In this system, virtually no
external power is required. Desired forces are generated in a
1+
damper by modulating orifice areas for fluid flow. However,
like an active suspension system, this also requires an in(2)
T=strumentation package and control devices. It has been shown
that a semi-active suspension can provide a performance
superior to that of a passive one without the cost and complexFigure 2 shows this transmissibility plotted for several values
ity of a fully active suspension.
of damping ratio, f. This plot illustrates the fundamental performance characteristics of most passive suspensions, both
2 Passive and Active Isolators
linear and nonlinear.
In Fig. 1, a single-degree-of-freedom vehicle model is shown
Based on this transmissibility plot, it can be seen that lower
with (a) passive, (b) active, and (c) semi-active suspensions. damping gives good isolation at high frequencies but poor
The passive system using linear elements has the equation of resonance characteristics. However, higher damping results in
motion
good resonance isolation at the expense of high frequency perx+2fa(x-y) +o>2(x-y) = 0
(1) formance [1].
When active suspensions are used the suspension force can
where
be generated based on any number of control strategies [2].
u>l = k/m and f=c/2\km
Using optimal control theory and a commonly used quadratic
Its vibration isolation can be characterized by acceleration performance criterion it was shown [3] that an optimum
transmissibility (defined as the ratio of the steady-state peak single-degree-of-freedom isolator must generate suspension
response acceleration to peak input acceleration for sinusoidal force as
Fs/m=-2fanx-o>Hx-y)
(3)
leading to a sprung mass equation of motion as
x + 2frx + u2{x-y)=Q
(4)
Contributed by the Design Automation Committee and presented at the
Design Engineering Technical Conference, Columbus, Ohio, October 5-8,1986,
The
optimum
value
of
damping
ratio,
f,
is
1/V2.
The
of THE AMERICAN SOCIETY OF MECHANICAL ENGINEERS. Manuscript received at
transmissibility of this system is given by
ASME Headquarters, July 9, 1986. Paper No. 86-DET-28.
c

['-)]>

242/Vol. 109, JUNE 1987

Transactions of the ASME

Copyright 1987 by ASME

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/18/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

10.0

=ML
-A
1

! \ > -5=0.1

\ \
1.0

1.0

0.25

0.5
0.707( optimal)
1.0

5-1.0

0.7070.1

0.5

0.25

0.1

-|

0.1

IC

K^
Vtt,

^s

J~l\"

0.0

\
0.001

\
0.01

1.0

0.1

10.0

1.0

ai/co

Fig. 2

T=-

Fig. 3

Transmissibility of passive isolator

[-)H*3 :

(5)

and is shown plotted in Fig. 3. It should be noted from this

figure that the optimum transmissibility has no resonance
amplification and that its performance is much superior to any
passive system throughout the frequency range. However, the
implementation of this active isolator requires accurate
measurement of sprung mass absolute velocity, as well as servoactuators and power supply.

Semi-active suspensions represent a compromise between

passive and active ones. The concept of semi-active suspension
was first proposed by Crosby and Karnopp [4] in 1973. This
scheme does not require hydraulic power. Forces are
generated in a damper by modulating its fluid-flow orifices.
The damper force has the form
F

*-

2fax,

x(x-y)>0

0,

x(x-y)<0

(6)

This scheme was shown to give a response close to that of an

active suspension [4, 5]. To implement this control logic, one
needs a servovalve with a very large bandwidth as well as the
measurement of absolute and relative velocities. However, the
accurate measurement of the absolute velocity of a moving
vehicle is a near impossible task. This is due to the fact that, in
road vehicle suspension applications, the significant vibration
levels occur below 10 Hz [6]. Since no inertial frame is
available for a moving vehicle, absolute velocity measurement
has to be obtained by integrating the acceleration signal. The
measurement of very low frequency acceleration signals as
well as the integration procedure are hampered by hardware
limitations [7]. Therefore, this scheme has not been successfully implemented for vehicle suspensions to date. However,
several theoretical results have been presented for vehicle applications including air-cushion vehicles, military tanks and

u)/u

10.0

Transmissibility of active isolator

agricultural tractors [8-14]. The concept was also applied to

the control of structural vibrations of vehicles and buildings
[15-17]. In all these instances, it has been claimed that the
semi-active isolator is superior to a passive system and that its
performance is comparable to that of an active one. Experimental results also have been presented for laboratory
prototypes [16-18].
The control scheme in equation (6) requires a continuous
modulation of damper orifice area. A simpler on-off scheme
was proposed and experimental results were presented [8, 13,
14, 21]. In this case, the damper force and the control logic
were governed by

3 Semi-Active Isolators

F.-

V-

F1,-

2fa(x-y),

x(x-y)>0

(7)
x(x-y)<0
0,
The difference between equations (6) and (7) is that, in the
latter, the force is proportional to the relative velocity across
the damper. Thus this scheme can be implemented using an
on-off damper. Experimental results reported indicate that the
on-off semi-active isolator is superior to passive one.
Rakheja [22] and Rakheja and Sankar [23] have proposed
an on-off semi-active damper based a different control
scheme. The control requires the measurement of relative
velocity and relative displacement, both of which are directly
measurable even in vehicle applications. The scheme is
C2^u{x-y)\x~y\,
(x-y)(x-y)<0
F'd = \
(8)
\2$2u>n(x-y)\x-y\,
(x-y)(x-y)>0
We will refer to the three semi-active control schemes,
represented by equations (6)-(8), as Type 1, Type 2, and Type
3 semi-active suspensions, respectively. In all these cases, the
damper force is determined by one of two expressions depending on the sign of a certain function. This function will be called the "condition function." Types 1 and 2 are based on the
same condition function. The former employs continuous
control of damper forces while the latter uses on-off control.
Type 3 is an on-off semi-active damper based on a different
condition function [refer to equation (8)]. A continuous con-

Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design

JUNE 1987, Vol. 109/243

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/18/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

1
v

advantage of the present system is that it requires only the

measurement of relative displacement and relative velocity.
These quantities can be measured directly even for a moving
vehicle suspension.
5 Solution Procedure and Performance Characterization

5.1 Simulation. The equations of motion of the semiactive suspension system described in equation (9) have step
1 discontinuities and hence are nonlinear. A direct and fast way
of solving the system equations is by computer simulation.
1 This is the approach used by previous investigators [4, 22]. In
simulation, the differential equations are solved as an initialvalue problem for a given set of parameters. When a frequency domain performance measure is desired (such as
' transmissibility), the simulation is carried out at each discrete
frequency. The simulation proceeds in time until a steady state
is reached. The response variables are then evaluated and the
process is repeated for the next frequency.
During numerical integration, the discontinuities in the
equation require special treatment. Otherwise the integration
algorithm will be very inefficient and will cause inaccurate
results [24]. Several researchers have studied the problem of
numerical integration of ODE's with discontinuities [24-27],
Their basic approach is to incorporate a zero-finder in the integration procedure. At each integration step, a test is performed to detect the change in sign of the condition function.
If no change occurs, the integration proceeds. Otherwise a
zero-finder determines accurately the time, r*, when the condiFig. 4 Steady-state response of Type 4 system at (a) u/w = 0.5,
tion function is zero. The integration then stops with the old
(b) w/u = 1.0, and (c) u/u = 5.0; z = x - y
set of system functions and restarts with the appropriate new
set. In the present study, a fourth-order Runge-Kutta method
trol scheme based on this condition function is the new semi- was used for numerical integration in conjunction with a
active concept being proposed in this paper. This scheme will bisection algorithm as the zero-finder.
be referred to as a Type 4 system.
5.2 Bifurcation Analysis. Bifurcation, or branching of
solutions, is a phenomenon that occurs in nonlinear systems.
Some engineering problems where this occurs include
4 Type 4 Semi-Active Isolator
nonlinear oscillators, such as, Duffing spring [28], impact
It is observed that the damping force in a passive damper oscillators [29, 30], buckling of structures, etc. [31, 32].
tends to increase the acceleration of the sprung mass during
In the case of a Type 4 semi-active system, it was observed
part of a vibration cycle. This happens when the spring force in simulation runs that the periodic solutions did not exist for
and the damper force have the same direction. Therefore it is certain values of parameters. This suggested a bifurcation
proposed that a semi-active damper be used which gives zero problem. It is not easy to examine bifurcation and stability
(or a very low) damping during this part of the cycle. When problems using simulation techniques. Therefore the study
the spring force and the damper force are in opposite direc- was done with the help of a bifurcation analysis software
tions, the damper can generate a force with the same package called AUTO [33, 34]. AUTO solves the system as a
magnitude as the spring force but opposing it. This way the boundary-layer problem and determines stability of periodic
net force acting on the mass will be zero for this part of the solutions under perturbations. Details regarding the use of this
vibration cycle. This idea is the basis of the Type 4 semi-active software for semi-active suspensions can be found in [35].
scheme.
Thus for a Type 4 system
5.3 Performance Characterization. Since the semi-active
system is nonlinear with step changes in damper force, the ac2
f -aco (x-y),
(x-y)(x-y)<0
celeration response will have discontinuities. Previous reF'd = \
(9) searchers [5] have used displacement transmissibility (ratio of
L
0,
(X-y)(X-y)>Q
the peak displacement response to the input amplitude) to
where a is the gain.
characterize the suspension performance. Since the human
As in the case of the Type 1 system [4], the possibility of body or a suspended mass is sensitive to inertial forces, the
damper lockup exists when (x y) (xy) = 0. In this situa- characterization in terms of acceleration would be more aption, two special cases arise. In the first case (xy) = 0, in propriate. In this study, the ratio of the root-mean-square
which case, the damping force F'd = 0. The second case occurs (rms) value of the response acceleration to the rms-value of the
when (x y) = 0 and (xy) ^ 0. In this case, the system will input acceleration is taken as the transmissibility.
lockup if the desired force Fd, (F'd = aoi2, (x y)) is greater
than the lockup force, which is
6 Results and Discussion
Fd=-y-o>2(x-y)
(10)
Figure 4 shows the steady-state response of a Type 4 system
It is possible to implement this scheme using a servoactuator at 3 frequencies for a = 1. At oi/o> = 0.5, Fig. 4(a), the
to control the damper orifice. This would be similar to the im- damper operates in three phases: (a) exactly opposing the
plementation of a Type 1 semi-active damper reported by spring force, (b) zero force and (c) lockup force. The lockup
Boonchanta [20]. From the control point of view, the obvious condition occurs only at low frequencies. This type of system
244/Vol. 109, JUNE 1987

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/18/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

Table 1

10.0

Upper bound on a for stable solutions

Frequency Ratio, OJ/V

0.5

1.366

1.02

1.474

2.55

1.857

3.96

1.86

6.384

1.88

10.0

2.00

. Acct leration
r1.0

Vel(icitj

-]?*
Displacement-

\\

"A>\

0.1

10.0

0.01
0.1

1.0

10.0

m/m

/^Acceleration

Fig. 5 The rms transmissibility ot Type 4 system for a = 1.0

_
1.0
10.0

-s
H>?

'"^.-Disp , V e l .
<s

>

^\
t\

L \_

y>

1.0

-~

\\
\\

1
i

t r P a ss i v e',
\ V Pas s i v e ,

\\
\\\

c=0.1
i i I 1
c=1.0

1- Type 4,a=l .0

0.1

\' 4 xs.

>-V
^ Av s N
e=0. 707 - P / A v^

\ \

\s\ ^-

s.

Active,

V"

\J r^ \
^

1.0

0.1

\ -\l \
\
\x

*
S;
v^-I~

\\

\ \ \

0.01
0.1

1.0

to/to

0.01

10.0

Fig. 6 Comparison of rms acceleration transmissibilities of Type 4

semi-active system with active and passive systems

has a unique behavior in that for nearly half of the time the
mass acceleration is zero. This, in turn, leads to good isolation
characteristics.
Figure 5 shows the rms transmissibility of a Type 4 system.
The acceleration transmissibility is higher than the displacement and velocity transmissibilities. This will in fact be the
case for most semi-active systems because of the discon-

Fig. 7

1.0

w/w

10.0

The rms transmissibility of Type 4 system for a = 1.3

tinuities in the damper force. The rms transmissibility shows

the excellent isolation characteristics of this system. This acceleration transmissibility has a peak value of 1.84 at /co =
0.5 and reduces to 0.007 at co/a> = 10.
Comparison of this system to active and passive isolators is
shown in Fig. 6. Compared to the passive isolator, a Type 4
system has a far superior performance for co/o> greater than
0.95. At wAo = 10, the isolation is almost 1.5 times better
than that of an undamped passive isolator. However, there is a
price to be paid in terms of inferior low frequency performance. Figure 6 also shows that a Type 4 system is superior to
the optimum active isolator for o>/o> greater than 1.24. This
result is extremely encouraging because it is achieved through
semi-active control.
The damper force gain, a, is an important parameter affecting the system performance. When looking at the steadystate time plots of the system, it was felt that a larger than uni-

Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design

JUNE 1987, Vol. 109/245

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/18/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

1
i

.. 1

1
1

f\
i

/
/

a=0.

__

1.0"
1.3

\J>

S,^5

-L-NNA

" " T r
V

X1.
X\
L

V"T

r3,\
U-V

0.1

1.0

to/id

10.0

Fig. 8 Type 4 sys'tem rms acceleration transmissibility for variation in

gain, a

bound on the parameter, a, for stable periodic solutions to exist. For higher values of a, the solutions would not persist
under small perturbations. Table 1 shows the upper bound on
a for some frequencies.
The system is stable throughout the frequency range for a
= 1.3. Simulation was carried out with a = 1.3. Figure 7
shows the transmissibility plot. It is obvious that this value of
a gives a better performance than the unity gain system, Fig.
5. The rms acceleration transmissibility has a peak of 1.19, but
outperforms even active suspensions at high frequencies.
Figure 8 shows the transmissibility for various values of the
gain a. As a is increased, the resonant peak decreases and the
isolation performance improves. However, there is a limit on
maximum a for stability as established earlier.
Figure 9 shows the rms acceleration transmissibility of a
Type 1 system for various values of the damping ratio, *. It
can be seen that higher values of f improves isolation at high
frequencies. But this also leads to deterioration at the very low
frequency end due to the sharper discontinuities in the damper
force. It was noted in [5] that as f -~ oo, the high frequency
performance approaches that of an active isolator with u =
0.6 -4kJrn and f = 1.0. This performance would be superior
to that of a Type 4 isolator with a = 1 . 3 . However, for more
reasonable, finite values of f, a Type 4 system performs better
than a Type 1 system. It is also important to point out that the
main advantage of a Type 4 system over Type 1, or its fully active counterpart, is that Type 4 control logic only involves
directly measurable variables such as relative velocity and
relative displacement.
7

10.0

Conclusion
Active suspensions can achieve the kind of performance not
possible with passive ones. However, their cost and complexity, together with requirements on power and increased weight,
limits their applications. This is especially true in the area of
vehicle suspensions. Semi-active suspensions have been proposed as a compromise between active and passive suspensions. They do not require much power and are less complex
than active suspensions. The new concept in semi-active vibration control proposed in this paper is shown to give performance comparable to that of a fully active isolator. The control scheme's main attraction is that it uses only relative velocity and relative displacement measurements, both of which are
easily measured in vehicle suspensions.

_.

- C=0.25

==s^
v

C=l.

0.5

0.707

-'v7^~

A^ ~S\\

\\ \
N

^L

References

. .-

-"~

VT
X

0- 1

1.0

u/ai

10.0

Fig. 9 Type 1 system rms acceleration transmissibility for variation in

damping ratio, f

ty value of a will give better isolation. To test this, a was set to

2.0 and simulation was carried out, but the computer run indicated that the system failed to achieve periodic oscillations.
It was recognized that the periodic solutions may be
unstable at certain values of gain. To study this in more detail,
the software package AUTO [33, 34] was used. From this
analysis, it was found that at each frequency, there is an upper
246/Vol. 109, JUNE 1987

1 Thomson, W. T., Theory of Vibration With Application, Prentice-Hall,

Inc., Englewood Cliffs, NJ, 1972.
2 Goodall, R. M., and Kortum, W., "Active Controls in Ground Transport a t i o n - A Review of the State-of-the-Art and Future Potential," Vehicle
System Dynamics, 12(4-5), August 1983, pp. 225-257.
3 Bender, E. K., "Optimum Linear Preview Control With Application to
Vehicle Suspension," ASME Journal of Basic Engineering, 90(2), June 1968,
pp. 213-221.
4 Crosby, M. J., and Karnopp, D. C , "The Active D a m p e r - A New Concept for Shock and Vibration Control," The Shock and Vibration Bulletin,
43(4), June 1973, pp. 119-133.
5 Karnopp, D. C , Crosby, M. J., and Harwood, R. A., "Vibration Control
Using Semi-Active Force Generators," ASME Journal of Engineering for Industry, 96(2), May 1974, pp. 619-626.
6 Healey, A. J., Nathan, E., and Smith, C. C , "An Analytical and Experimental Study of Automobile Dynamics With Random Roadway Inputs,"
ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, December
1977, pp. 284-292.
7 Margolis, D. L., "The Response of Active and Semi-Active Suspensions
to Realistic Feedback Signals," Vehicle System Dynamics, 11(5-6), December
1982, pp. 267-282.
8 Margolis, D. L., Tylee, J. L., and Hrovat, D., "Heave Mode Dynamics of
Tracked ACV With Semi-Active Airbag Secondary Suspension," ASME Journal of Dynamic Systems, Measurement and Control, 97(4), December 1975, pp.
399-407.
9 Margolis, D. L., "Semi-Active Suspensions for Military Ground Vehicles
Under Off-Road Conditions," presented at the 52nd Symposium on Shock and
Vibration, New Orleans, October 1981.

Transactions of the ASME

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/18/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use

10 Margolis, D. L., "Semi-Active Heave and Pitch Control for Ground

Vehicles," Vehicle System Dynamics, 11(1), February 1982, pp. 31-42.
11 Margolis, D. L., "Semi-Active Control of Wheel Hop in Ground
Vehicles," Vehicle System Dynamics, 12(6), December 1983, pp. 317-330.
12 Kim, K., "Ride Simulation of Passive Active and Semi-Active Seat
Suspensions for Off-Road Vehicles," PhD Thesis, University of Illinois at
Urbana-Champaign, 1981.
13 Roley, D. G., "Tractor Cab Suspension Performance Modeling," PhD
Thesis, University of California, Davis, CA, June 1975.
14 Roley, D. G., "Performance Characteristics of Cab Suspension Models,"
presented at the 1975 Winter Meeting of American Society of Agricultural
Engineers, Paper No. 75-1517, December 1975.
15 Allan, R. R., and Karnopp, D. C , "Semi-Active Control of Ground
Vehicle Structure Dynamics," AIAA Paper No. 75-821, presented at the 16th
Structural Dynamics and Material Conference, Denver, CO, May 1975.
16 Karnopp, D. C , and Allan, R. R., "Semi-Active Control of Multimode
Vibratory Systems Using ILSM Concept," ASME Journal of Engineering for
Industry, August 1976, pp. 914-918.
17 Hrovat, D., Barak, P., and Rabins, M., "Semi-Active Versus Passive or
Active Tuned, Mass Dampers for Structural Control," ASCE Journal of
Engineering Mechanics, 109(3), June 1983, pp. 691-705.
18 Krasnicki, E. J., "Comparison of Analytical and Experimental Results of
Semi-Active Vibration Isolator," The Shock and Vibration Bulletin, 50(4),
September 1980, pp. 69-76.
19 Hrovat, D., and Margolis, D. L., "An Experimental Comparison Between Semi-Active and Passive Suspensions for Air-Cushion Vehicles," International Journal of Vehicle Design, 2(3), August 1981, pp. 308-321.
20 Boonchanta, P., "Comparison of Active Passive and Semi-Active Suspensions for Ground Vehicles," PhD Thesis, University of California, Davis, CA,
1982.
21 Krasnicki, E. J., "The Experimental Performance of an ON-OFF Active
Damper," The Shock and Vibration Bulletin, 51(1), May 1981, pp. 125-131.
22 Rakheja, S., "Computer-Aided Dynamic Analysis and Optimal Design of
Suspension Systems for Off-Road Tractors," PhD Thesis, Concordia University, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 1983.
23 Rakheja, S., and Sankar, S., "Vibration and Shock Isolation Perfor-

mance of a Semi-Active 'On-Off Damper," ASME Paper No. 85-DET-15,

presented at the ASME Design Engineering Technical Conference, Cincinnati,
OH, September 10-13, 1985.
24 Carver, M. B., "Efficient Integration Over Discontinuities in Ordinary
Differential Equation Simulations," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation, XX, 1978, pp. 190-196.
25 Ellison, D., "Efficient Automatic Integration of Ordinary Differential
Equations With Discontinuities," Mathematics and Computers in Simulation,
XXIII, 1981, pp. 12-20.
26 Li, Bo-Hu, Yang, W. H., and Ye, Xin-An, "An Effective Method for a
System of Ordinary Differential Equations With Right-Hand Side Containing
Discontinuities," Proceedings of the 10th /MACS World Congress, Concordia
University, Montreal, August 1982, Vol. 1, pp. 6-9.
27 Borthwick, W. K. D., "The Numerical Solution of Discontinuous Structural Systems," Proceedings of the 2nd International Conference on Recent Advances in Structural Dynamics, University of Southampton, England, April
1984, Vol. 1, pp. 307-316.
28 Guckenheimer, J., and Holmes, P. J., Nonlinear Oscillations, Dynamical
Systems and Bifurcations of Vector Fields, Springer-Verlag, New York, 1983.
29 Shaw, S. W., and Holmes, P. J., "A Periodically Forced Piecewise Linear
Oscillator," Journal of Sound and Vibration, 90(1), 1983, pp. 129-155.
30 Bapat, C. N., " A Study of Vibroimpact Systems," PhD Thesis, University of Manitoba, 1981.
31 Thompson, J. M. T., Instabilities and Catastrophes in Science and
Engineering, Wiley, New York, 1982.
32 Huseyin, K., "Vibration and Stability of Mechanical Systems: III,"
Shock and Vibration Digest, 16(7), July 1984, pp. 15-22.
33 Doedel, E. J., "AUTO: A Program for the Automatic Bifurcation
Analysis of Autonomous Systems," Proceedings of 10th Manitoba Conference
on Numerical Methods and Computation, Congress Number 30, 1981, pp.
265-284.
34 Doedel, E. J., AUTO User Manual, Version September 1984, Concordia
University, Montreal, Canada, 1984.
35 Alanoly, J., "Vibration Isolation Characteristics of a Class of SemiActive Suspensions," M. Eng. Thesis, Concordia University, Montreal,
Canada, December 1985.

Journal of Mechanisms, Transmissions, and Automation in Design

JUNE 1987, Vol. 109/247

Downloaded From: http://mechanicaldesign.asmedigitalcollection.asme.org/ on 09/18/2015 Terms of Use: http://www.asme.org/about-asme/terms-of-use