Modeling and Experimental Analysis of Piezoelectric Shakers for High-Frequency Calibration of Accelerometers

Author(s):  
Gregory W. Vogl ◽  
Kari K. Harper ◽  
Bev Payne ◽  
E. P. Tomasini
2004 ◽  
Vol 28 (11) ◽  
pp. 2277-2295 ◽  
Author(s):  
David Aadland ◽  
Kevin X.D. Huang

2015 ◽  
Author(s):  
S. Ollivier ◽  
C. Desjouy ◽  
P. Y. Yuldashev ◽  
A. Koumela ◽  
E. Salze ◽  
...  

2013 ◽  
Vol 308 ◽  
pp. 45-49 ◽  
Author(s):  
Imrich Vojtko ◽  
Marek Kočiško ◽  
Anna Šmeringaiová ◽  
Pavel Adamčík

The article describes the experimental analysis method of worm gear boxes for specific products. The measuring station for the dynamic load worm reducers testing can simulate various extreme transition modes of operation. There are assessed low and high frequency vibration.


2020 ◽  
Vol 641 ◽  
pp. A3 ◽  
Author(s):  
◽  
N. Aghanim ◽  
Y. Akrami ◽  
M. Ashdown ◽  
J. Aumont ◽  
...  

This paper presents the High Frequency Instrument (HFI) data processing procedures for thePlanck2018 release. Major improvements in mapmaking have been achieved since the previousPlanck2015 release, many of which were used and described already in an intermediate paper dedicated to thePlanckpolarized data at low multipoles. These improvements enabled the first significant measurement of the reionization optical depth parameter usingPlanck-HFI data. This paper presents an extensive analysis of systematic effects, including the use of end-to-end simulations to facilitate their removal and characterize the residuals. The polarized data, which presented a number of known problems in the 2015Planckrelease, are very significantly improved, especially the leakage from intensity to polarization. Calibration, based on the cosmic microwave background (CMB) dipole, is now extremely accurate and in the frequency range 100–353 GHz reduces intensity-to-polarization leakage caused by calibration mismatch. The Solar dipole direction has been determined in the three lowest HFI frequency channels to within one arc minute, and its amplitude has an absolute uncertainty smaller than 0.35μK, an accuracy of order 10−4. This is a major legacy from thePlanckHFI for future CMB experiments. The removal of bandpass leakage has been improved for the main high-frequency foregrounds by extracting the bandpass-mismatch coefficients for each detector as part of the mapmaking process; these values in turn improve the intensity maps. This is a major change in the philosophy of “frequency maps”, which are now computed from single detector data, all adjusted to the same average bandpass response for the main foregrounds. End-to-end simulations have been shown to reproduce very well the relative gain calibration of detectors, as well as drifts within a frequency induced by the residuals of the main systematic effect (analogue-to-digital convertor non-linearity residuals). Using these simulations, we have been able to measure and correct the small frequency calibration bias induced by this systematic effect at the 10−4level. There is no detectable sign of a residual calibration bias between the first and second acoustic peaks in the CMB channels, at the 10−3level.


Author(s):  
Duy Hai Nguyen ◽  
Jonathan Stindl ◽  
Teresa Slanina ◽  
Jochen Moll ◽  
Viktor Krozer ◽  
...  

2018 ◽  
Author(s):  
Ivan Chistyakov ◽  
Olga Soboleva

Questionnaires are common tools in psychological studies, and they include questions about frequencies (e.g., State-Trait Anxiety Inventory asks how often do you feel nervous with response options ‘never’, ‘sometimes’, ‘often’ and ‘very often’), but the meaning of responses is not clear. B. F. Skinner proposed an experimental analysis as a way to find the meaning of verbal behavior. The term ‘often’ was defined functionally as behavior with positive sensitivity to the relative frequency of an event and sensitivity to the question and social consequences. The matching law was used to describe context-behavior relations quantitatively. We conducted four experiments on ten Russian native speakers to determine the meaning of the term ‘often’. During each experiment inducers (alternating events ‘1’ and ‘0’ with a predetermined probability of occurrence, the question about the relative frequency of one of the events ‘Do you often see ‘1’s?’) and response options (‘Yes’ and ‘No’) were constantly presented. We documented free operant responses over the sequences of events with different lengths (from 4 to 12 events) and prior odds of ‘1’s to ‘0’s (from 1:5 to 5:1). Collected data suggests that ‘often’ means ‘at least three times in a row’.


Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document