Advertisement

Experimental Techniques

, Volume 42, Issue 4, pp 429–438 | Cite as

Impact Series Shaker Excitation Approach for Structural Modal Testing in Thermal Environments

Article
  • 33 Downloads

Abstract

Thermal modal testing plays an important role in the aerospace engineering. However, excitation approaches applied in tests at room temperature do not work well in thermal environments. This paper, to solve this problem, introduces the impact series excitation approach to excite the structures by the modal shaker. Two excitation configurations are presented for the tests under different temperature conditions. Compared with the conventional shaker excitation, this approach shows apparent advantages thanks to the avoidance of mechanical connection between the shaker and the test article. As both excitation configurations can yield high-quality test results in different temperature environments, the proposed approach is validated to be effective and convenient to modal testing.

Keywords

Excitation technique Thermal modal testing High-temperature environment Composite structure Impact series 

Notes

Acknowledgements

This work is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 11372084). This support is gratefully acknowledged.

References

  1. 1.
    Brown AM (2002) Temperature-dependent modal test/analysis correlation of X-34 FASTRAC composite rocket nozzle. J Propuls Power 18(2):284–288.  https://doi.org/10.2514/2.5968 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Vosteen LF, Mcwithey RR, Thomson RG (1957) Effect of transient heating on vibration frequencies of some simple wing structures. NACA-TN-4054. https://ntrs.nasa.gov/search.jsp?R=19930084882
  3. 3.
    Glass DE (2008) Ceramic Matrix Composite (CMC) Thermal Protection Systems (TPS) and Hot Structures for Hypersonic Vehicles. Paper presented at the 15th AIAA International Space Planes and Hypersonic Systems and Technologies Conference, Dayton, Ohio.  https://doi.org/10.2514/6.2008-2682
  4. 4.
    Geng Q, Li H, Li Y (2014) Dynamic and acoustic response of a clamped rectangular plate in thermal environments: experiment and numerical simulation. J Acoust Soc Am 135(5):2674–2682.  https://doi.org/10.1121/1.4870483 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Du M, Geng Q, Li Y (2016) Vibrational and acoustic responses of a laminated plate with temperature gradient along the thickness. Compos Struct 157:483–493.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.01.063 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Zhao R, Yu K, Cui N (2018) Vibration response analysis of a composite sandwich plate under a time-varying thermal environment. J Vib Eng 31(2):329–335.  https://doi.org/10.16385/j.cnki.issn.1004-4523.2018.02.017 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Zhao R, Yu K, Hulbert GM, Wu Y, Li X (2017) Piecewise shear deformation theory and finite element formulation for vibration analysis of laminated composite and sandwich plates in thermal environments. Compos Struct 160:1060–1083.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2016.10.103 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Zhao R, Yu K, Hulbert GM (2018) Time discontinuous finite element method for transient response analysis of linear time-varying structures. Meccanica 53(4–5):703–726.  https://doi.org/10.1007/s11012-017-0764-4 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Zhao R, Yu K (2015) An efficient transient analysis method for linear time-varying structures based on multi-level substructuring method. Comput Struct 146:76–90.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruc.2014.08.004 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Zhao R, Yu K (2014) Hamilton's law of variable mass system and time finite element formulations for time-varying structures based on the law. Int J Numer Methods Eng 99(10):711–736.  https://doi.org/10.1002/nme.4692 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Li X, Yu K (2015) Vibration and acoustic responses of composite and sandwich panels under thermal environment. Compos Struct 131:1040–1049.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.06.037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zhang X, Yu K, Bai Y, Zhao R (2015) Thermal vibration characteristics of fiber-reinforced mullite sandwich structure with ceramic foams core. Compos Struct 131:99–106.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.compstruct.2015.04.049 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Bai Y, Yu K, Zhao R, Zhao J, Zhou H, Yang Y, Ma Y (2018) Experimental investigation on the effects of the high temperature and debonding on the modal characteristics of a composite honeycomb structure. Acta Mat Compos Sin 35(4):40–50.  https://doi.org/10.13801/j.cnki.fhclxb.20170628.002 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Yu K, Bai Y, Zhao R, Zhou H (2018) Advance of experimental technologies for structural modal test in high temperature environments. Mech Eng 40(1):1–12.  https://doi.org/10.6052/1000-0879-17-288 (in Chinese)Google Scholar
  15. 15.
    Bediz B, Korkmaz E, Ozdoganlar OB (2014) An impact excitation system for repeatable, high-bandwidth modal testing of miniature structures. J Sound Vib 333(13):2743–2761.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.jsv.2014.02.022 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cheng H, Li H, Zhang W, Liu B, Wu Z, Kong F (2015) Effects of radiation heating on modal characteristics of panel structures. J Spacecr Rocket 52(4):1228–1235.  https://doi.org/10.2514/1.A33214 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Wu D, Wang Y, Shang L, Wang H, Pu Y (2016) Experimental and computational investigations of thermal modal parameters for a plate-structure under 1200°C high temperature environment. Measurement 94:80–91.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2016.07.078 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Spivey ND (2010) High-temperature modal survey of a hot-structure control surface. Paper presented at the 27th Congress of International Council of the Aeronautical Sciences, Nice, FranceGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Mayes RL, Gomez AJ (2006) Lessons learned in modal testing-part 4: what's shakin', dude? Effective use of modal shakers. Exp Tech 30(4):51–61.  https://doi.org/10.1111/j.1747-1567.2006.00063.x CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    McConnell KG, Cappa P (2000) Transducer inertia and stinger stiffness effects on FRF measurements. Mech Syst Signal Pr 14(4):625–636.  https://doi.org/10.1006/mssp.1999.1283 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Cloutier D, Avitabile P, Bono R, Peres M (2009) Shaker/stinger effects on measured frequency response functions. Paper presented at the Proceedings of the IMAC-XXVII, OrlandoGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Warren C, Avitabile P (2011) Effects of Shaker Test Set Up on Measured Natural Frequencies and Mode Shapes the 28th International Modal Analysis Conference, IMAC-XXVIII. Springer New York, Jacksonville, pp: 1245–1250.Google Scholar
  23. 23.
    Mohammadali M, Ahmadian H (2016) Improvement in modal testing measurements by modeling and identification of shaker–stinger–structure interactions. Exp Tech 40(1):49–57.  https://doi.org/10.1111/ext.12037 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Sharma A, Brown DL, Allemang RJ, Phillips AW (2016) An alternative MIMO FRF estimation method using pneumatic exciters. In: Mains M (ed) Topics in modal analysis & testing, vol 10. Springer, Heidelberg, pp 361–379Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Wong S, Chan J (1998) Identification of vibration of cooler tubes with tube-to-baffle impacts. J Vib Acoust 120(2):419–425.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2893846 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. 26.
    Wong SC, Barhorst AA (2007) Stochastic analysis of Poisson impact series using discrete form, spectrum analysis and time correlation. Mech Syst Signal Pr 21(1):151–164.  https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ymssp.2005.10.009 CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Zhu WD, Zheng NA, Wong CN (2007) A stochastic model for the random impact series method in modal testing. J Vib Acoust 129(3):265–275.  https://doi.org/10.1115/1.2730529 CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Society for Experimental Mechanics, Inc 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Astronautic Science and MechanicsHarbin Institute of TechnologyHarbinPeople’s Republic of China

Personalised recommendations