Numerical evaluation of three-dimensional sound intensity measurement accuracies and a proposal for an error correction method

Iino, Takeshi; Tatekawa, Hirokazu; Mizukawa, Hisanobu; Suzuki, Hideo

doi:10.1250/ast.34.34

Cited by 5 publications

(4 citation statements)

References 9 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…It furthers the work of Pascal and Li 21 and Iino et al 22 by examining new probe implementations, exploring the effect of having the microphones mounted on a rigid sphere, and using a spatial average bias metric in addition to examining the maximum biases. The results from a companion paper that investigated orthogonal probes 23 are here compared to results from regular tetrahedral and sixmicrophone probes.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Comparison of multimicrophone probe design and processing methods in measuring acoustic intensity

Wiederhold

Gee

Blotter

et al. 2014

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Three multimicrophone probe arrangements used to measure acoustic intensity are the four-microphone regular tetrahedral, the four-microphone orthogonal, and the six-microphone designs. Finite-sum and finite-difference processing methods can be used with such probes to estimate pressure and particle velocity, respectively. A numerical analysis is performed to investigate the bias inherent in each combination of probe design and processing method. Probes consisting of matched point sensor microphones both embedded and not embedded on the surface of a rigid sphere are considered. Results are given for plane wave fields in terms of root-mean-square average bias and maximum bias as a function of angle of incidence. An experimental verification of the analysis model is described. Of the combinations considered and under the stated conditions, the orthogonal probe using the origin microphone for the pressure estimate is shown to have the lowest amount of intensity magnitude bias. Lowest intensity direction bias comes from the six-microphone probe using an average of the 15 intensity components calculated using all microphone pairs. Also discussed are how multimicrophone probes can advantageously use correction factors calculated from a numerical analysis and how the results of such an analysis depend on the chosen definition of the dimensionless frequency.

show abstract

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 93%

Comparison of multimicrophone probe design and processing methods in measuring acoustic intensity

Wiederhold

Gee

Blotter

et al. 2014

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…The maximum bias errors were found by assuming A S ðf p Þ ) A n ðf p Þ. Equations (17) and (18) are only valid, therefore, if the SNR a is larger than about 10 dB. For SNR a !…”

Section: Bias Errorsmentioning

confidence: 99%

“…These and other errors have been discussed at length, [8][9][10][11][12][13][14] and many have tried to overcome the errors using varying experimental sensor placement or processing. [15][16][17][18] To overcome some of the problems of the traditional method, especially for high-amplitude jet and rocket noise, the phase and amplitude gradient estimator (PAGE) method was developed. [19][20][21] Instead of using formulations which split the complex pressure into real and imaginary parts, as is done in the traditional method, the formulations for the PAGE method represent the complex pressure with a magnitude and phase, based on expressions from Mann et al 22 and Mann and Tichy.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

Bandwidth extension of narrowband-signal intensity calculation using additive, low-level broadband noise

Cook

Succo

Gee

et al. 2019

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Calculation of acoustic intensity using the phase and amplitude gradient estimator (PAGE) method has been shown to increase the effective upper frequency limit beyond the traditional p-p method when the source of interest is broadband in frequency [Torrie, Whiting, Gee, Neilsen, and Sommerfeldt, Proc. Mtgs. Acoust. 23, 030005 (2015)]. PAGE processing calculates intensity for narrowband sources without bias error up to the spatial Nyquist frequency [Succo, Sommerfeldt, Gee, and Neilsen, Proc. Mtgs. Acoust. 30, 030015 (2018)]. The present work demonstrates that for narrowband sources with frequency content above the spatial Nyquist frequency, additive low-level broadband noise can improve intensity calculations. To be effective, the angular separation between the source and additive noise source should be less than 30 , while using phase unwrapping with a smaller angular separation will increase the usable bandwidth. The upper frequency limit for the bandwidth extension depends on angular separation, sound speed, and probe microphone spacing. Assuming the signal-to-additive-noise ratio (SNR a) is larger than 10 dB, the maximum level and angular bias errors incurred by the additive broadband noise beneath the frequency limit-or up until probe scattering effects must be taken into account-are less than 0.5 dB and 2:5 , respectively. Smaller angular separation yields smaller bias errors. V

show abstract

“…a) Ono-Sokki Tetra-Phone: This array is composed of four pressure microphones positioned at the vertices of a tetrahedron [16], [34], [38]. The pressure at the center is approximated as the average of the pressure signals recorded by these microphones such that: (32) where and is the th vertex of the tetrahedron.…”

Section: ) Comparison With Conventional Arraysmentioning

confidence: 99%

Theoretical Analysis of Open Spherical Microphone Arrays for Acoustic Intensity Measurements

Hacıhabiboğlu

2014

IEEE/ACM Trans. Audio Speech Lang. Process.

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Acoustic intensity is a vectorial measure of acoustic energy flow through a given region of interest. Three-dimensional measurement of acoustic intensity requires special microphone array configurations. This paper provides a theoretical analysis of open spherical microphone arrays for the 3-D measurement of acoustic intensity. The calculations of the pressure and the particle velocity components of the sound field inside a closed volume are expressed using the Kirchhoff-Helmholtz integral equation. The conditions which simplify the calculation are identified. This calculation is then constrained to a finite set of microphones positioned at prescribed points on an open sphere. Several open spherical array topologies are proposed. Their magnitude and directional errors and measurement bandwidths are investigated via numerical simulations. A comparison with conventional open-sphere 3-D intensity probes is presented.

show abstract

Numerical evaluation of three-dimensional sound intensity measurement accuracies and a proposal for an error correction method

Cited by 5 publications

References 9 publications

Comparison of multimicrophone probe design and processing methods in measuring acoustic intensity

Comparison of multimicrophone probe design and processing methods in measuring acoustic intensity

Bandwidth extension of narrowband-signal intensity calculation using additive, low-level broadband noise

Theoretical Analysis of Open Spherical Microphone Arrays for Acoustic Intensity Measurements

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About