Engineering Papers⌕ Search

Engineering topics

Kolaini, Ali R.

Publications and source records attributed to Kolaini, Ali R..

At least 37 records · Page 2
All sourcesNASA NTRSDOE OSTI
NASA NTRS2013

Updates on Force Limiting Improvements

The following conventional force limiting methods currently practiced in deriving force limiting specifications assume one-dimensional translation source and load apparent masses: Simple TDOF model; Semi-empirical force limits; Apparent mass, etc.; Impedance method. Uncorrelated motion of the mounting points for components mounted on panels and correlated, but out-of-phase, motions of the support structures are important and should be considered in deriving force limiting specifications. In this presentation "rock-n-roll" motions of the components supported by panels, which leads to a more realistic force limiting specifications are discussed.

acoustic↗
NASA NTRS2013

Acoustic Suppression Systems and Related Methods

An acoustic suppression system for absorbing and/or scattering acoustic energy comprising a plurality of acoustic targets in a containment is described, the acoustic targets configured to have resonance frequencies allowing the targets to be excited by incoming acoustic waves, the resonance frequencies being adjustable to suppress acoustic energy in a set frequency range. Methods for fabricating and implementing the acoustic suppression system are also provided.

Kolaini, Ali R.↗
NASA NTRS2012

Non-intrusive Shock Measurements Using Laser Doppler Vibrometers

Stud mount accelerometers are widely used by the aerospace industry to measure shock environments during hardware qualification. The commonly used contact-based sensors, however, interfere with the shock waves and distort the acquired signature, which is a concern not actively discussed in the community. To alleviate these interference issues, engineers at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory are investigating the use of non-intrusive sensors, specifically Laser Doppler Vibrometers, as alternatives to the stud mounted accelerometers. This paper will describe shock simulation tests completed at the Jet Propulsion Laboratory, compare the measurements from stud mounted accelerometers and Laser Doppler Vibrometers, and discuss the advantages and disadvantages of introducing Laser Doppler Vibrometers as alternative sensors for measuring shock environments.

shock testing↗
NASA NTRS2012

Impact of Acoustic Standing Waves on Structural Responses: Reverberant Acoustic Testing (RAT) vs. Direct Field Acoustic Testing (DFAT)

Loudspeakers have been used for acoustic qualification of spacecraft, reflectors, solar panels, and other acoustically responsive structures for more than a decade. Limited measurements from some of the recent speaker tests used to qualify flight hardware have indicated significant spatial variation of the acoustic field within the test volume. Also structural responses have been reported to differ when similar tests were performed using reverberant chambers. To address the impact of non-uniform acoustic field on structural responses, a series of acoustic tests were performed using a flat panel and a 3-ft cylinder exposed to the field controlled by speakers and repeated in a reverberant chamber. The speaker testing was performed using multi-input-single-output (MISO) and multi-input-multi-output (MIMO) control schemes with and without the test articles. In this paper the spatial variation of the acoustic field due to acoustic standing waves and their impacts on the structural responses in RAT and DFAT (both using MISO and MIMO controls for DFAT) are discussed in some detail.

speakers↗
NASA NTRS2012

A New Approach in Force-Limited Vibration Testing of Flight Hardware

The force-limited vibration test approaches discussed in NASA-7004C were developed to reduce overtesting associated with base shake vibration tests of aerospace hardware where the interface responses are excited coherently. This handbook outlines several different methods of specifying the force limits. The rationale for force limiting is based on the disparity between the impedances of typical aerospace mounting structures and the large impedances of vibration test shakers when the interfaces in general are coherently excited. Among these approaches, the semi-empirical method is presently the most widely used method to derive the force limits. The inclusion of the incoherent excitation of the aerospace structures at mounting interfaces has not been accounted for in the past and provides the basis for more realistic force limits for qualifying the hardware using shaker testing. In this paper current methods for defining the force limiting specifications discussed in the NASA handbook are reviewed using data from a series of acoustic and vibration tests. A new approach based on considering the incoherent excitation of the structural mounting interfaces using acoustic test data is also discussed. It is believed that the new approach provides much more realistic force limits that may further remove conservatism inherent in shaker vibration testing not accounted for by methods discussed in the NASA handbook. A discussion on using FEM/BEM analysis to obtain realistic force limits for flight hardware is provided.

force limiting responses↗
NASA NTRS2012

Reverberant Acoustic Testing and Direct Field Acoustic Testing Acoustic Standing Waves and their Impact on Structural Responses

The aerospace industry has been using two methods of acoustic testing to qualify flight hardware: (1) Reverberant Acoustic Test (RAT), (2) Direct Field Acoustic Test (DFAT). The acoustic field obtained by RAT is generally understood and assumed to be diffuse, expect below Schroeder cut-of frequencies. DFAT method of testing has some distinct advantages over RAT, however the acoustic field characteristics can be strongly affected by test setup such as the speaker layouts, number and location of control microphones and control schemes. In this paper the following are discussed based on DEMO tests performed at APL and JPL: (1) Acoustic wave interference patterns and acoustic standing waves, (2) The structural responses in RAT and DFAT.

vibro-acoustics↗
NASA NTRS2012

New Approaches in Force-Limited Vibration Testing of Flight Hardware

To qualify flight hardware for random vibration environments the following methods are used to limit the loads in the aerospace industry: (1) Response limiting and notching (2) Simple TDOF model (3) Semi-empirical force limits (4) Apparent mass, etc. and (5) Impedance method. In all these methods attempts are made to remove conservatism due to the mismatch in impedances between the test and the flight configurations of the hardware that are being qualified. Assumption is the hardware interfaces have correlated responses. A new method that takes into account the un-correlated hardware interface responses are described in this presentation.

Random Vibration↗
NASA NTRS2011

Issues Related to Large Flight Hardware Acoustic Qualification Testing

The characteristics of acoustical testing volumes generated by reverberant chambers or a circle of loudspeakers with and without large flight hardware within the testing volume are significantly different. The parameters attributing to these differences are normally not accounted for through analysis or acoustic tests prior to the qualification testing without the test hardware present. In most cases the control microphones are kept at least 2-ft away from hardware surfaces, chamber walls, and speaker surfaces to minimize the impact of the hardware in controlling the sound field. However, the acoustic absorption and radiation of sound by hardware surfaces may significantly alter the sound pressure field controlled within the chamber/speaker volume to a given specification. These parameters often result in an acoustic field that may provide under/over testing scenarios for flight hardware. In this paper the acoustic absorption by hardware surfaces will be discussed in some detail. A simple model is provided to account for some of the observations made from Mars Science Laboratory spacecraft that recently underwent acoustic qualification tests in a reverberant chamber.

direct acoustics↗
NASA NTRS2011

Acoustic Testing of Flight Hardware Using Loudspeakers: How Much do We Know About This Method of Testing?

Loudspeakers have been used for acoustic qualification of spacecrafts, reflectors, solar panels, and other acoustically responsive structures for more than a decade. Even though a lot of hardware has been acoustic tested using this method, the nature of the acoustic field generated by controlling an ensemble of speakers with and without the hardware in the test volume has not been thoroughly investigated. Limited measurements from some of the recent speaker tests used to qualify flight hardware have indicated significant spatial variation of the acoustic field within the test volume. Also structural responses have been reported to differ when similar tests were performed using reverberant chambers. Unlike the reverberant chamber acoustic test, for which the acoustic field in most chambers is known to be diffuse except below several tens of Hz where acoustic standing waves and large spatial variations exist, the characteristics of the acoustic field within the speaker test volume has not been quantified. It has only been recently that a detailed acoustic field characterization of speaker testing has been made at Jet Propulsion Laboratory (JPL) with involvement of various organizations. To address the impact of non-uniform acoustic field on structures, a series of acoustic tests were performed using a flat panel and a 3-ft cylinder exposed to the field controlled by speakers and repeated in a reverberant chamber. The analysis of the data from this exercise reveals that there are significant differences both in the acoustic field and in the structural responses. In this paper the differences between the two methods are reviewed in some detail and the over- or under-testing of articles that could pose un-anticipated structural and flight qualification issues are discussed. A framework for discussing the validity of the speaker acoustic testing method with the current control system and a path forward for improving it will be provided.

Acoustics↗