A comparison between power injection and impulse response decay methods for estimating frequency averaged loss factors for SEA
Damping measurements on vehicle subsystems are rarely straightforward due to the complexity of the dynamic interaction of system joints, trim, and geometry. Various experimental techniques can be used for damping estimation, such as frequency domain modal analysis curve-fitting methods, time domain decay-rate methods, and other methods based on energy and wave propagation. Each method has its own set of advantages and drawbacks. This paper describes an analytical and an experimental comparison between two, widely used loss factor estimation techniques frequently used in Statistical Energy Analysis (SEA). The single subsystem Power Injection Method (PIM) and the Impulse Response Decay Method (IRDM) were compared using analytical models of a variety of simulated simple spring-mass-damper systems. Frequency averaged loss factor values were estimated from both methods for comparison. The parameters of the analytical models were varied to study the effects of the total number of modes, amount of damping, location of modes within frequency bands, and the width of the frequency bands on loss factor estimation. The analytical study showed that both methods give accurate loss factor values as long as one modal resonance is present in each frequency band and as long as the damping values remain realistic for linear systems. These analytical results were confirmed experimentally by measuring the loss factors of simple steel plates, with and without damping treatments applied. Copyright © 2003 SAE International.
SAE Technical Papers
A comparison between power injection and impulse response decay methods for estimating frequency averaged loss factors for SEA.
SAE Technical Papers.
Retrieved from: https://digitalcommons.mtu.edu/michigantech-p/2844