Advertisement

Error in Sound Source Localization of Phased Microphone Array Caused by Installation Position Deviation of Microphone Array

Conference paper
  • 382 Downloads
Part of the Lecture Notes in Electrical Engineering book series (LNEE, volume 549)

Abstract

Microphone array measurement technology has a wide range of applications in noise location due to its good performance for far-field measurement. In practical applications of microphone arrays, there are inevitably various installation deviations, and these deviations affect the final measurement accuracy. At present, only a preliminary study has been conducted on the installation deviation of microphones in the engineering and academia, and there is still a lack of detailed and comprehensive analysis of installation errors. In this paper, the measurement error caused by the array installation position often encountered in the microphone array source positioning is studied. The study shows that the positioning error varies approximately linearly with the mounting declination and vertical offset installation deviation. The small axial offset installation deviations will not have a significant effect on positioning results; In general, the influence of installation deviation on the sound source intensity is more complicated, and compared to the stationary sound source, the array installation deviation has greater influence on the rotating sound source. This study can provide guidance for controlling the measurement error in the practical application of the microphone array, thereby improving the measurement accuracy of the microphone array.

Keywords

Microphone array Sound source localization Measurement error Stationary sound source Rota-ting sound source 

References

  1. 1.
    Michel, U. (2006). History of acoustic beamforming. In: Proceedings of the 1st Berlin Beamforming Conference, pp. 1–17.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Dougherty, R. P. (2002). Beamforming in acoustic testing[M]. Aeroacoustic Measurements: Springer.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Dougherty, R. (2014). Functional beamforming for aero-acoustic source distributions. In Proceedings of the AIAA/CEAS Aerostatics Conference 3066.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Sijtsma, P., et al. (2001). Location of rotating sources by phased array measurements. In Proceedings of the 7th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference and Exhibit.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Pannert, W., & Maier, C. (2014). Rotating beamforming motion-compensation in the frequency domain and application of high-resolution beamforming algorithms. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 333(7), 1899–1912.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Brooks, T. F., Humphreys, W. M. A. (2004). Deconvolution approach for the mapping of acoustic sources (DAMAS) determined from phased microphone arrays. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/CEAS Aerocoustics Conference, 2004–2954, 294, 856–879.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Brooks, T. F., Humphreys, W. M. (2005). Three-dimensional application of DAMAS methodology for aeroacoustic noise source definition. In: Proceedings of the AIAA/CEAS Aerocoustics Conference, 2005–2960.Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    Brooks, T. F., Humphreys, W. M. (2006). Extension of DAMAS phased array processing for spatial coherence determination (DAMAS-C). In: Proceedings of the AIAA/CEAS Aerocoustics Conference, 2006–2654.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dougherty, R. P., Stoker, R. W. (1998). Sidelobe supperss-ion for phased array aeroacoustic measureements. In: Proceedings of the 4th AIAA/CEAS Aeroacoustics Conference.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Sijtsma, P. (2007). CLEAN based on spatial source coherence. International Journal of Aeroacoustics, 6, 357–374.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Herold, G., et al. A comparison of microphone array methods for the characterization of rotating sound sources. BeBeC-2018-D22.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Sarradj, E., et al. Array methods: Which one is the best. BeBeC-2018-S01.Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Ma, W., & Liu, X. (2017). DAMAS with compression computational grid for acoustic source mapping. Journal of Sound and Vibration,410, 473–484.Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ma, W., & Liu, X. (2017). Improving the efficiency of DAMAS for sound source localization via wavelet compression computational grid. Journal of Sound and Vibration, 395, 341–353.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Ma, W., & Liu, X. (2018). Compression computational grid based on functional beamforming for acoustic source localization. Applied Acoustics-134(1), 75–87, London.Google Scholar
  16. 16.
    Tóth, B., et al. Rotating beamforming with uneven microphone placements. BeBeC-2018-D23.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Singapore Pte Ltd. 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.School of Mechanical Engineering Shanghai, Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina
  2. 2.School of Aeronautics and Astronautics, Shanghai Jiao Tong UniversityShanghaiChina
  3. 3.AECC Shenyang Engine Research InstituteShenyangChina

Personalised recommendations