4.6 Article

Signal Analysis and Waveform Reconstruction of Shock Waves Generated by Underwater Electrical Wire Explosions with Piezoelectric Pressure Probes

Journal

SENSORS
Volume 16, Issue 4, Pages -

Publisher

MDPI
DOI: 10.3390/s16040573

Keywords

shock wave measurement; pressure waveform reconstruction; PCB138 series pressure probe; Muller-plate needle hydrophone; incident angle; time of flight (TOF) method; FFT

Funding

  1. National High Technology Research and Development Program of China [2013AA064502]
  2. National Basic Research Program of China [2013CB228004]

Ask authors/readers for more resources

Underwater shock waves (SWs) generated by underwater electrical wire explosions (UEWEs) have been widely studied and applied. Precise measurement of this kind of SWs is important, but very difficult to accomplish due to their high peak pressure, steep rising edge and very short pulse width (on the order of tens of mu s). This paper aims to analyze the signals obtained by two kinds of commercial piezoelectric pressure probes, and reconstruct the correct pressure waveform from the distorted one measured by the pressure probes. It is found that both PCB138 and Muller-plate probes can be used to measure the relative SW pressure value because of their good uniformities and linearities, but none of them can obtain precise SW waveforms. In order to approach to the real SW signal better, we propose a new multi-exponential pressure waveform model, which has considered the faster pressure decay at the early stage and the slower pressure decay in longer times. Based on this model and the energy conservation law, the pressure waveform obtained by the PCB138 probe has been reconstructed, and the reconstruction accuracy has been verified by the signals obtained by the Muller-plate probe. Reconstruction results show that the measured SW peak pressures are smaller than the real signal. The waveform reconstruction method is both reasonable and reliable.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.6
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available