Antti Huhtala

2papers

2 Papers

NAAug 29, 2014
Quantifying Uncertainty in Material Damage from Vibrational Data

Troy Butler, Antti Huhtala, Mika Juntunen

The response of a vibrating beam to a force depends on many physical parameters including those determined by material properties. Damage caused by fatigue or cracks result in local reductions in stiffness parameters and may drastically alter the response of the beam. Data obtained from the vibrating beam are often subject to uncertainties and/or errors typically modeled using probability densities. The goal of this paper is to estimate and quantify the uncertainty in damage modeled as a local reduction in stiffness using uncertain data. We present various frameworks and methods for solving this parameter determination problem. We also describe a mathematical analysis to determine and compute useful output data for each method. We apply the various methods in a specified sequence that allows us to interface the various inputs and outputs of these methods in order to enhance the inferences drawn from the numerical results obtained from each method. Numerical results are presented using both simulated and experimentally obtained data from physically damaged beams.

DSAug 29, 2012
How far are vowel formants from computed vocal tract resonances?

Daniel Aalto, Antti Huhtala, Atle Kivelä et al.

We compare numerically computed resonances of the human vocal tract with formants that have been extracted from speech during vowel pronunciation. The geometry of the vocal tract has been obtained by MRI from a male subject, and the corresponding speech has been recorded simultaneously. The resonances are computed by solving the Helmholtz partial differential equation with the Finite Element Method (FEM). Despite a rudimentary exterior space acoustics model, i.e., the Dirichlet boundary condition at the mouth opening, the computed resonance structure differs from the measured formant structure by $\approx$ 0.7 semitones for [i] and [u] having small mouth opening area, and by $\approx$ 3 semitones for vowels [a] and [ae] that have a larger mouth opening. The contribution of the possibly open velar port has not been taken into considaration at all which adds the discrepancy for [a] in the present data set. We conclude that by improving the exterior space model and properly treating the velar port opening, it is possible to computationally attain four lowest vowel formants with an error less than a semitone. The corresponding wave equation model on MRI-produced vocal tract geometries is expected to have a comparable accuracy.