0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Investigation of Curved Polymeric Piezoelectric Active Diaphragms

[+] Author and Article Information
Kelly C. Bailo, Diann E. Brei, Karl Grosh

Department of Mechanical Engineering and Applied Mechanics, The University of Michigan, Ann Arbor, MI 48109-2125

J. Vib. Acoust 125(2), 145-154 (Apr 01, 2003) (10 pages) doi:10.1115/1.1547461 History: Received October 01, 2000; Revised September 01, 2002; Online April 01, 2003
Copyright © 2003 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Marcos, Anthony C., 1995, “Latest Developments in Voice Coil Actuators,” Power Transmission Design, 37 (10).
Tappert, Peter M., Mercadal, Mathieu and Flotow, Andreas H., 1997, “Evaluation of Actuation Schemes Used for Acoustic Attenuation of Vibrating Surfaces,” SPIE Proceedings, Smart Structures and Materials 1996, Industrial and Commercial Applications of Smart Structures Technology, San Diego, CA, Vol. 3044, pp. 79–86.
Clark,  Robert L., Fuller,  Chris R., and Wicks,  Al, 1991, “Characterization of Multiple Piezoelectric Actuators for Structural Excitation,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 90(1), pp. 346–357.
Fuller, C. R., Guigou, C., and Gentry, C. A., 1996, “Foam-PVdF Smart Skin for Active Control of Sound,” SPIE Proceedings, Smart Structures and Materials 1996, Industrial and Commercial Applications of Smart Structures Technology, San Diego, CA, Vol. 2721, pp. 26–37.
Shields, F. Douglas, 1993, “Piezoelectric Panel Speaker,” USA Patent #5196755, March 23.
Liang, C., and Rogers, C. A., 1992, “A Fully-coupled Acoustic Analysis of Curved PVdF Acoustic Actuators for Active Sound Attenuation,” Recent Advances in Adaptive and Sensory Materials and Their Applications, C. A. Rogers and R. C. Rogers, eds., Blacksburg, VA, Apr. 27–29.
Wang,  Bor-Tsuen, 1994, “Active Control of Far-field Sound Radiation by a Beam with Piezoelectric Control Transducers: Physical System Analysis,” Smart Mater. Struct., 3(4), pp. 476–484.
Larson, Philip H., and Vinson, Jack R., 1993, “The Use of Piezoelectric Materials in Curved Beams and Rings,” ASME Adaptive Structures and Material Systems, AD-Vol. 35, pp. 277–285.
Moskalik,  A. J., and Brei,  D., 1999, “Analytical Dynamic Performance Modeling for Individual C-block Actuators,” ASME J. Vibr. Acoust., 121, pp. 221–230.
Bailo, Kelly C., Brei, Diann E., and Grosh, K., 1998, “Investigation of Polymeric Piezoelectric Acoustic Semi-circular Transducers,” Proc. SPIE Smart Structures and Materials: Smart Structures and Integrated Systems, Vol. 3329, pp. 150–160.
Snyder,  S. D., Tanaka,  N., and Kikushima,  Y., 1996, “The Use of Optimally Shaped Piezoelectric Film Sensors in the Active Control of Free Field Structural Radiation, Part 2: Feedback Control,” ASME J. Vibr. Acoust., 118(1), pp. 112–121.
Johnson, M. E., and Elliot, S. J., 1995, “Experiments on the Active Volume Control of Sound Radiation Using a Volume Velocity Sensor,” SPIE Proceedings, Smart Structures and Materials 1995, Smart Structures and Integrated Systems, San Diego, CA, Vol. 2443, pp. 658–669.
Athanas, Lewis S., 1994, “Ferroelectric Composite Film Acoustic Transducer,” USA Patent #5283835, February 1.
Park, Kyung T., and Radice, Peter F., 1992, “Electroacoustic Novelties,” USA Patent #5115472, May 19.
Park, Kyung T., and Radice, Peter F., 1994, “Electroacoustic Novelties,” USA Patent #5309519, May 13.
Radice, Peter F., 1987, “Piezoelectric Polymeric Film Balloon Speaker,” USA Patent #468207, Jan. 20.
Athanas, Lewis S., 1994, “Ferroelectric Composite Film Acoustic Transducer,” USA Patent #5283835, Feb. 1.
Ravinet, P., Claudepierre, C., Guillou, D., and Micheron, F., 1986, “Electroacoustic Transducer with a Piezoelectric Diaphragm,” USA Patent #4607145, Aug. 19.
Measurement Specialites, Inc., 1998, “Piezoelectric Polymer Speakers,” Application Note 1242138, P.O. Box 799, Valley Forge, PA 19482, Aug.
Love, A. E. H., 1944, A Treatise on the Mathematical Theory of Elasticity, Fourth Edition, Dover Publications, New York.
Graff, Karl F., Wave Motion in Elastic Solids, Ohio State University Press.
Morse, Philip M., and Ingard, K. Uno, 1968, Theoretical Acoustics, Princeton University Press.
Kinsler, L. E., Frey, A. R., Coppens, A. B., and Sanders, J. V., 1982, Fundamentals of Acoustics, John Wiley & Sons.
Junger, M., and Feit, D., 1986, Sound Structures and Their Interaction, AIP Press.

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Numerical model meshes (typical): Example numerical model meshes for (a) ABAQUS dynamic model. Defined by radius (R) and thickness (t) with element aspect ratios kept near 1:1 in high stress regions which occur near the fixed end constraints. (b) COMET acoustic model. Defined by radius (R), width (b), and subtended angle (θs), consisting of approximately 100 two-dimensional elements along the arc length and six through the width.
Grahic Jump Location
Typical dynamic displacement correlation: Experimental versus numerical results for a prototype configured with four layers of 28 micron PVdF, radius=25 mm,width=20 mm, subtended angle=90 deg,thickness=394 μm and 75 Volts applied.
Grahic Jump Location
Typical acoustic frequency correlation: Experimental versus numerical results for a prototype configured with four layers of 28 micron PVdF with a vibrating surface area of 68 mm wide by 96 mm long and a subtended angle of 25 deg tested at 100 volts, resulting in a peak output of 103 dB at 1730 Hz. The results correlation shows acoustic sound pressure variations ranged from 1 to 7 dB with an average backbone variation of less than 3 dB.
Grahic Jump Location
Analytic prediction: 2D analytic prediction for single-layer prototype with thickness=1 mm,radius=45 mm,width=20 mm, subtended angle=90 deg and applied electric field=30 V/μm. Total solution is compared to particular solution.
Grahic Jump Location
Prototypes set up for experimentation: Constant curvature prototypes placed in aluminum clamps ready for dynamic and acoustic experimental testing.
Grahic Jump Location
Thickness study: Results for varying thickness single-layer prototypes with radius=45 mm,width=20 mm, subtended angle=90 deg and applied electric field=30 V/μm. (a) Numeric simulation results. Mode number is indicated above each resonance peak. (b) Analytic simulation results. 2D prediction of total acoustic response.
Grahic Jump Location
Numerical radius study: Results for a single-layer prototype with thickness=1 mm,width=20 mm, subtended angle=90 deg and applied electric field=30 V/μm. Mode number is indicated above each resonance peak.
Grahic Jump Location
Numerical subtended angle study: Results for a single-layer (28 μm PVdF) prototype with an arc length=100 mm,width=20 mm and applied electric field=30 V/μm. (a) Acoustic frequency response. Prototype configured with subtended angles, θs=5deg, 15 deg, 90 deg illustrating that the acoustic response for the transducer configured at 15 deg is higher than that of the other configurations in the frequency range above 750 Hz. (b) Optimal subtended angle at 1250 Hz. Results illustrate that there exists an optimal subtended angle occurring near 15 deg.
Grahic Jump Location
Analytic subtended angle study: Results for a single-layer (28 μm PVdF) prototype with an arc length=100 mm,width=20 mm and applied electric field=30 V/μm, configured with subtended angles, θs=5 deg and 15 deg.
Grahic Jump Location
Experimental subtended angle study: Results measured in the far-field at 1.2 meters for a four-layer (28 μm PVdF) prototype with an arc length=68 mm,width=96 mm and 200 volts applied. (a) Acoustic frequency response. Prototype configured with subtended angles, θs=10 deg, 30 deg, 45 deg. (b) Optimal subtended angle at 1100 Hz and 1920 Hz. Results illustrate that there exists an optimal subtended angle occurring between 15 deg and 20 deg in this frequency range.
Grahic Jump Location
Experimental subtended angle study at 1100 Hz: Results measured in the far-field at 1.2 meters for two four-layer (28 μm PVdF) prototypes with 200 volts applied. Configuration 1 consists of an arc length=68 mm and width=96 mm while configuration 2 consists of an arc length=96 mm and width=68 mm.
Grahic Jump Location
Voltage variation with respect to 4 volt baseline linear response in near field at 10 cm: Four-layer (28 μm PVdF) prototype with an arc length=96 mm,width=67 mm and 200 volts applied. Straight lines indicate a theoretical extrapolation of the expected linear increase in sound levels with increased power w.r.t. the 4 volt baseline, while the jagged line shows the measured response. At low voltages the device behaves relatively linearly, while at higher frequencies the response drops off at voltages as low as 50 volts, indicating nonlinear behavior in the device.
Grahic Jump Location
Acoustic PVdF transducer configuration: Defined by radius (R), width (b), subtended angle (θs), and thickness (t), which is broken down into electrode layer thickness (te-nominal 6.5 μm), piezoelectric layer thickness (tp-nominal 28 or 52 μm) and bonding layer thickness (tb-nominal 40 to 60 μm). (a) Bending lay-up: Layers strain in opposing directions above and below the neutral axis. (b) Extension lay-up: All layers are configured such that as a voltage is applied, they all strain in one circumferential direction.
Grahic Jump Location
Acoustic experimental set-up: (a) Schematic. General acoustic experimental equipment set up, showing the transducer powered by an HP 35670A dynamic signal analyzer through a Piezosystems Model ESA-203 voltage amplifier with data acquisition by a Realistic brand sound level meter (microphone). (b) Photo. Near field acoustic experimental set-up showing a microphone set up at a distance of 10 cm from the vibrating surface of the transducer.

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In