4.7 Article

Experimental comparison of various excitation and acquisition techniques for modal analysis of violins

期刊

APPLIED ACOUSTICS
卷 177, 期 -, 页码 -

出版社

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.apacoust.2021.107942

关键词

Modal analysis; Violin; NDT; Acoustic excitation

资金

  1. Research Foundation Flanders FWO [1180217 N, 1148018 N, 12T5418N]

向作者/读者索取更多资源

This study provides a critical comparison of various experimental modal analysis approaches with the violin as a case study, considering both contact and non-contact excitation and different acquisition approaches. The influence of different boundary conditions on the vibrational response of the violin is investigated, and relevant modal parameters are extracted within the frequency range of 0-1000 Hz. Two optimal approaches for performing modal analysis on violins are proposed, one for use in the violinmaker's practice and one for use with fragile instruments.
For decades, modal analysis has been a tool to gain insights in the vibrational and acoustical behavior of music instruments. This study provides a critical comparison of various experimental modal analysis approaches with the violin as a case study. Both contact and non-contact excitation and different acquisition approaches are considered. The influence of different boundary conditions (clamped, supported, free/free) on the vibrational response of the violin is investigated. The response is analyzed to extract relevant modal parameters (frequency, damping and mode shape) within the frequency range of 0-1000 Hz. The performance of the different approaches is evaluated in terms of (i) signature vibration modes, (ii) experimental reproducibility, (iii) contact requirement and (iv) cost of required equipment. Two optimal approaches are proposed for performing modal analysis on violins: a contact method for use in the violinmaker's practice, and a non-contact method for use with fragile instruments. (C) 2021 Published by Elsevier Ltd.

作者

我是这篇论文的作者
点击您的名字以认领此论文并将其添加到您的个人资料中。

评论

主要评分

4.7
评分不足

次要评分

新颖性
-
重要性
-
科学严谨性
-
评价这篇论文

推荐

暂无数据
暂无数据