Considerations for Choosing Sensitive Element Size for Needle and Fiber-Optic Hydrophones-Part II Experimental Validation of Spatial Averaging Model

Considerations for Choosing Sensitive Element Size for Needle and Fiber-Optic Hydrophones-Part II : Experimental Validation of Spatial Averaging Model

Acoustic pressure can be measured with a hydrophone. Hydrophone measurements can underestimate incident acoustic pressure due to spatial averaging effects across the hydrophone sensitive element. The spatial averaging filter for a nonlinear focused beam is a low-pass filter that decreases monotonica...

Ausführliche Beschreibung

Bibliographische Detailangaben
Veröffentlicht in:IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control. - 1986. - 66(2019), 2 vom: 07. Feb., Seite 340-347
1. Verfasser: Wear, Keith A (VerfasserIn)
Weitere Verfasser: Liu, Yunbo
Format: Online-Aufsatz
Sprache:English
Veröffentlicht: 2019
Zugriff auf das übergeordnete Werk:IEEE transactions on ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and frequency control
Schlagworte:Journal Article Research Support, U.S. Gov't, P.H.S.
Beschreibung
Zusammenfassung:Acoustic pressure can be measured with a hydrophone. Hydrophone measurements can underestimate incident acoustic pressure due to spatial averaging effects across the hydrophone sensitive element. The spatial averaging filter for a nonlinear focused beam is a low-pass filter that decreases monotonically from 1 to 0 as frequency increases from 0 to infinity. Experiments were performed to test an analytic model for the spatial averaging filter. Nonlinear pressure tone bursts were generated by three source transducers with driving frequencies ranging from 2.5 to 6 MHz, diameters ranging from 19 to 64 mm, and focal lengths ranging from 38 to 89 mm. The nonlinear pressure fields were measured using four needle hydrophones with nominal geometrical sensitive element diameters of 200, 400, 600, and [Formula: see text]. The average root-mean-square difference between theoretical and experimental spatial averaging filters was 5.8% ± 2.6%
Beschreibung:Date Completed 03.02.2020
Date Revised 09.01.2021
published: Print-Electronic
Citation Status MEDLINE
ISSN:1525-8955
DOI:10.1109/TUFFC.2018.2886071