4.7 Article

A metacontinuum model for phase gradient metasurfaces

期刊

SCIENTIFIC REPORTS
卷 13, 期 1, 页码 -

出版社

NATURE PORTFOLIO
DOI: 10.1038/s41598-023-39956-z

关键词

-

向作者/读者索取更多资源

The objective of this study is to derive and validate a metacontinuum model for phase gradient-based metasurfaces. This model defines the metasurface in terms of anisotropic inertia and bulk modulus, and takes into account thermal and viscous dissipation effects by introducing a complex-valued speed of sound. Experimental results show that the metacontinuum model provides reliable predictions for the acoustic properties of metasurface samples, with accuracy comparable to the equivalent impedance model and even outperforming it in some cases.
Acoustic metamaterials and metasurfaces often present complex geometries and microstructures. The development of models of reduced complexity is fundamental to alleviate the computational cost of their analysis and derivation of optimal designs. The main objective of this paper is the derivation and validation of a metacontinuum model for phase gradient-based metasurfaces. The method is based on the transformation acoustics framework and defines the metasurface in terms of anisotropic inertia and bulk modulus. Thermal and viscous dissipation effects in the metacontinuum are accounted for by introducing a complex-valued speed of sound. The model is implemented in a commercial FEM code, and its predictions are compared with numerical simulations on the original geometry and also using an equivalent boundary impedance approach. The results are examined for an exterior acoustics benchmark and for an in-duct installation in terms of transmission coefficient with the four-pole matrix method. The metacontinuum model gives solid results for the prediction of the acoustic properties of the examined metasurface samples for all the analyzed configurations, as accurate as the equivalent impedance model on which it is based and outperforming it in some circumstances.

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