Sign in to use this feature.

Years

Between: -

Subjects

remove_circle_outline
remove_circle_outline

Journals

Article Types

Countries / Regions

Search Results (3)

Search Parameters:
Authors = Dhwanil Shukla ORCID = 0000-0002-4567-1292

Order results
Result details
Results per page
Select all
Export citation of selected articles as:
22 pages, 1012 KiB  
Review
An Overview of Acoustic Impedance Measurement Techniques and Future Prospects
by Nandeesh Hiremath, Vaibhav Kumar, Nicholas Motahari and Dhwanil Shukla
Metrology 2021, 1(1), 17-38; https://doi.org/10.3390/metrology1010002 - 11 May 2021
Cited by 40 | Viewed by 19881
Abstract
In order to progress in the area of aeroacoustics, experimental measurements are necessary. Not only are they required for engineering applications in acoustics and noise engineering, but also they are necessary for developing models of acoustic phenomenon around us. One measurement of particular [...] Read more.
In order to progress in the area of aeroacoustics, experimental measurements are necessary. Not only are they required for engineering applications in acoustics and noise engineering, but also they are necessary for developing models of acoustic phenomenon around us. One measurement of particular importance is acoustic impedance. Acoustic Impedance is the measure of opposition of acoustical flow due to the acoustic pressure. It indicates how much sound pressure is generated by the vibration of molecules of a particular acoustic medium at a given frequency and can be a characteristic of the medium.The aim of the present paper is to give a synthetic overview of the literature on impedance measurements and to discuss the advantage and disadvantage of each measurement technique. In this work, we investigate the three main categories of impedance measurement techniques, namely reverberation chamber techniques, impedance tube techniques, and far-field techniques. Theoretical principles for each technique are provided along with a discussion on historical development and recent advancements for each technique. Full article
Show Figures

Figure 1

13 pages, 9283 KiB  
Article
Multirotor Drone Aerodynamic Interaction Investigation
by Dhwanil Shukla and Narayanan Komerath
Drones 2018, 2(4), 43; https://doi.org/10.3390/drones2040043 - 3 Dec 2018
Cited by 143 | Viewed by 24403
Abstract
Aerodynamic interactions between rotors are important factors affecting the performance of in-plane multirotor Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) or drones, which are the majority of small size UAVs (or mini-drones). Optimal design requires knowledge of the flow features. The low Reynolds number of many [...] Read more.
Aerodynamic interactions between rotors are important factors affecting the performance of in-plane multirotor Unmanned Air Vehicles (UAVs) or drones, which are the majority of small size UAVs (or mini-drones). Optimal design requires knowledge of the flow features. The low Reynolds number of many UAV rotors raises the question of how these features differ from those expected by traditional analytical methods for rotorcraft. Aerodynamics of a set of side-by-side rotors in hover over a range of rotor separation and Reynolds number is studied using high-speed Stereo Particle Image Velocimetry (SPIV) and performance measurements. The instantaneous and time-averaged SPIV data presented here indicate an increase in inter-rotor wake interactions with decrease in rotor spacing and Reynolds number. A dip in rotor efficiency at small rotor spacing at low Reynolds number is observed through thrust and torque measurements. The basic components of in-plane multirotor wake and velocity profiles are identified and discussed to help generalize the findings to a wide range of drones. However, the data provide confidence in traditional analysis tools, with small modifications. Full article
Show Figures

Graphical abstract

20 pages, 11670 KiB  
Review
Testing-Based Approach to Determining the Divergence Speed of Slung Loads
by Narayanan Komerath, Nandeesh Hiremath and Dhwanil Shukla
Aerospace 2018, 5(1), 24; https://doi.org/10.3390/aerospace5010024 - 28 Feb 2018
Cited by 3 | Viewed by 6411
Abstract
When a rotorcraft carries an external slung load, flight speed is often limited by the fear of divergent oscillations, rather than vehicle performance. Since slung objects can be of any shape, incorporating the aerodynamics with sufficient accuracy to predict safe speed has been [...] Read more.
When a rotorcraft carries an external slung load, flight speed is often limited by the fear of divergent oscillations, rather than vehicle performance. Since slung objects can be of any shape, incorporating the aerodynamics with sufficient accuracy to predict safe speed has been a problem. The uncertainty forces certifying authorities to set conservative limits on speed to avoid divergence. Obtaining the aerodynamic coefficients of bluff bodies was excessively time-consuming in experiments, and impractical in computations. This review traces the evolution of progress in the area. Prior thinking was to use computations for prediction, with the computational codes validated using a few samples of experiments. This approach has not led to valid general predictions. Data were sparse and a-priori predictions were rarer. A continuous rotation approach has enabled swift measurements of 6-degrees-of-freedom aerodynamic load maps with high resolution about several axes of rotation. The resulting knowledge base in turn permits a swift determination of dynamics up to divergence, with wind tunnel tests where necessary to fill interpolation gaps in the knowledge base. The essence of efficient and swift dynamics simulation with a few well-tested assumptions is described. Under many relevant conditions, the vehicle flight dynamics can be safely decoupled from those of the slung load. While rotor wake swirl causes the payload to rotate at liftoff and landing, this effect can be incorporated into the simulation. Recent success in explaining two well-documented flight test cases provides strong evidence that predictions can be made for most missions swiftly. Full article
(This article belongs to the Special Issue Aircraft Dynamics & Control)
Show Figures

Figure 1

Back to TopTop