4.5 Article

Pseudo-equivalent deterministic excitation method application for experimental reproduction of a structural response to a turbulent boundary layer excitation

期刊

JOURNAL OF THE ACOUSTICAL SOCIETY OF AMERICA
卷 152, 期 3, 页码 1498-1514

出版社

ACOUSTICAL SOC AMER AMER INST PHYSICS
DOI: 10.1121/10.0013424

关键词

-

资金

  1. FEDER/FSE Rhpne-Alpes

向作者/读者索取更多资源

In the field of transportation engineering, wind tunnels remain the best option for analyzing structural vibration and emitted noise. However, due to limitations and discrepancies among wind tunnel facilities, researchers have developed a numerical method called PEDEM to simulate the experimental conditions and study the structural response of panels subjected to turbulent boundary layer excitation.
In the transportation engineering field, the turbulent boundary layer over a structure is one of the most relevant sources of structural vibration and emitted noise. Wind tunnels are still one of the best options for vibroacoustic experimental analyses for this specific problem. However, it is also true that this experimental method is not always affordable, due to several limitations-settings hard to control, time and money consumption, discrepancies among laboratories-that wind tunnel facilities present. It has already developed different methodologies to address this necessity, most of them based on the use of loudspeakers or shakers. In this work, an existing numerical method, called the pseudo-equivalent deterministic excitation method (PEDEM), is further developed for the experimental purpose of reproducing the experimental structural response of a panel subjected to a turbulent boundary layer (TBL) excitation, by using an equivalent rain-on-the-roof excitation instead; different formulations are used for the application of this approximated TBL excitation. The experimental application of PEDEM, here called X-PEDEM, is validated by comparison with experimental results of two different panels analysed in two different wind tunnel facilities.

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

4.5
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