{"title":"不同脉宽激励下高加速度计标定的实验与机理研究","authors":"Zhenhai Zhang;Fei Teng","doi":"10.1109/TIM.2025.3557827","DOIUrl":null,"url":null,"abstract":"High-precision accelerometers are crucial in high-speed impact testing and precise detonation control of penetration fuzes. Calibration results of high-g accelerometers under narrow and wide pulsewidth impact conditions, however, show certain discrepancies, directly affecting the accelerometers’ measurement accuracy and application scenarios. This article focuses on studying the differences in the calibration of high-g accelerometer sensitivity using the narrow pulsewidth excitation method of the Hopkinson bar and the wide pulsewidth excitation method of the air cannon. The mechanisms behind these differences are quantitatively revealed, and the intrinsic relationship between the two calibration methods is established. First, calibration experiments were conducted on the same batch of accelerometers using both impact methods. Next, the linearity indices of the calibration results from both methods were calculated. Then, the differences in the calibration results of the two methods were analyzed and compared, followed by a detailed quantitative investigation of the underlying mechanisms behind these differences. Finally, an empirical formula was established through linear regression analysis to correlate the calibration results of the two excitation methods. The results indicate that there is indeed a difference in sensitivity between the two calibration methods. This difference is unrelated to the peak value of the excitation acceleration. It is, however, mainly influenced by the pulsewidth of the excitation acceleration and the amplitude-frequency characteristics of the accelerometer.","PeriodicalId":13341,"journal":{"name":"IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement","volume":"74 ","pages":"1-11"},"PeriodicalIF":5.6000,"publicationDate":"2025-04-04","publicationTypes":"Journal Article","fieldsOfStudy":null,"isOpenAccess":false,"openAccessPdf":"","citationCount":"0","resultStr":"{\"title\":\"Experimental and Mechanistic Study on the Calibration of High-g Accelerometers With Different Pulsewidth Excitations\",\"authors\":\"Zhenhai Zhang;Fei Teng\",\"doi\":\"10.1109/TIM.2025.3557827\",\"DOIUrl\":null,\"url\":null,\"abstract\":\"High-precision accelerometers are crucial in high-speed impact testing and precise detonation control of penetration fuzes. Calibration results of high-g accelerometers under narrow and wide pulsewidth impact conditions, however, show certain discrepancies, directly affecting the accelerometers’ measurement accuracy and application scenarios. This article focuses on studying the differences in the calibration of high-g accelerometer sensitivity using the narrow pulsewidth excitation method of the Hopkinson bar and the wide pulsewidth excitation method of the air cannon. The mechanisms behind these differences are quantitatively revealed, and the intrinsic relationship between the two calibration methods is established. First, calibration experiments were conducted on the same batch of accelerometers using both impact methods. Next, the linearity indices of the calibration results from both methods were calculated. Then, the differences in the calibration results of the two methods were analyzed and compared, followed by a detailed quantitative investigation of the underlying mechanisms behind these differences. Finally, an empirical formula was established through linear regression analysis to correlate the calibration results of the two excitation methods. The results indicate that there is indeed a difference in sensitivity between the two calibration methods. This difference is unrelated to the peak value of the excitation acceleration. It is, however, mainly influenced by the pulsewidth of the excitation acceleration and the amplitude-frequency characteristics of the accelerometer.\",\"PeriodicalId\":13341,\"journal\":{\"name\":\"IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement\",\"volume\":\"74 \",\"pages\":\"1-11\"},\"PeriodicalIF\":5.6000,\"publicationDate\":\"2025-04-04\",\"publicationTypes\":\"Journal Article\",\"fieldsOfStudy\":null,\"isOpenAccess\":false,\"openAccessPdf\":\"\",\"citationCount\":\"0\",\"resultStr\":null,\"platform\":\"Semanticscholar\",\"paperid\":null,\"PeriodicalName\":\"IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement\",\"FirstCategoryId\":\"5\",\"ListUrlMain\":\"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10949136/\",\"RegionNum\":2,\"RegionCategory\":\"工程技术\",\"ArticlePicture\":[],\"TitleCN\":null,\"AbstractTextCN\":null,\"PMCID\":null,\"EPubDate\":\"\",\"PubModel\":\"\",\"JCR\":\"Q1\",\"JCRName\":\"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC\",\"Score\":null,\"Total\":0}","platform":"Semanticscholar","paperid":null,"PeriodicalName":"IEEE Transactions on Instrumentation and Measurement","FirstCategoryId":"5","ListUrlMain":"https://ieeexplore.ieee.org/document/10949136/","RegionNum":2,"RegionCategory":"工程技术","ArticlePicture":[],"TitleCN":null,"AbstractTextCN":null,"PMCID":null,"EPubDate":"","PubModel":"","JCR":"Q1","JCRName":"ENGINEERING, ELECTRICAL & ELECTRONIC","Score":null,"Total":0}
Experimental and Mechanistic Study on the Calibration of High-g Accelerometers With Different Pulsewidth Excitations
High-precision accelerometers are crucial in high-speed impact testing and precise detonation control of penetration fuzes. Calibration results of high-g accelerometers under narrow and wide pulsewidth impact conditions, however, show certain discrepancies, directly affecting the accelerometers’ measurement accuracy and application scenarios. This article focuses on studying the differences in the calibration of high-g accelerometer sensitivity using the narrow pulsewidth excitation method of the Hopkinson bar and the wide pulsewidth excitation method of the air cannon. The mechanisms behind these differences are quantitatively revealed, and the intrinsic relationship between the two calibration methods is established. First, calibration experiments were conducted on the same batch of accelerometers using both impact methods. Next, the linearity indices of the calibration results from both methods were calculated. Then, the differences in the calibration results of the two methods were analyzed and compared, followed by a detailed quantitative investigation of the underlying mechanisms behind these differences. Finally, an empirical formula was established through linear regression analysis to correlate the calibration results of the two excitation methods. The results indicate that there is indeed a difference in sensitivity between the two calibration methods. This difference is unrelated to the peak value of the excitation acceleration. It is, however, mainly influenced by the pulsewidth of the excitation acceleration and the amplitude-frequency characteristics of the accelerometer.
期刊介绍:
Papers are sought that address innovative solutions to the development and use of electrical and electronic instruments and equipment to measure, monitor and/or record physical phenomena for the purpose of advancing measurement science, methods, functionality and applications. The scope of these papers may encompass: (1) theory, methodology, and practice of measurement; (2) design, development and evaluation of instrumentation and measurement systems and components used in generating, acquiring, conditioning and processing signals; (3) analysis, representation, display, and preservation of the information obtained from a set of measurements; and (4) scientific and technical support to establishment and maintenance of technical standards in the field of Instrumentation and Measurement.