Full text loading...
Experimental study of the Doppler shift generated by a vibrating scatterer
1.A. M. Kovalev and V. N. Krasil’nikov, “Reflection of electromagnetic waves from moving surfaces,” Sov. Phys. Tech. Phys. 7, 19 (1962).
2.D. Censor, “Scattering by time varying obstacles,” J. Sound Vib. 25, 101–110 (1972).
3.D. Censor, “Acoustical Doppler effect analysis—Is it a valid method?” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83, 1223–1230 (1988).
4.M. F. Hamilton and C. L. Morfey, “Model equations,” in Nonlinear Acoustics, edited by M. F. Hamilton and D. T. Blackstock (Academic, New York, 1998).
5.K. Naugolnykh and L. Ostrovsky, Nonlinear Wave Processes in Acoustics (Cambridge U.P., Cambridge, 1998).
6.P. H. Rogers, “Comments on ‘Scattering by time varying obstacles’,” J. Sound Vib. 28, 764–768 (1973).
7.D. Censor, “Harmonic and transient scattering from time varying obstacles,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76, 1527–1534 (1984).
8.J. C. Piquette and A. L. Van Buren, “Nonlinear scattering of acoustic waves by vibrating surfaces,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76, 880–889 (1984).
9.J. C. Piquette and A. L. Van Buren, “Comments on Harmonic and transient scattering from time varying obstacles [J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76, 1527–1534 (1984)],”
9.J. C. Piquette and A. L. Van Buren, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 79, 179–180 (1986) and author’s reply.
10.J. C. Piquette and A. L. Van Buren, “Some further remarks regarding scattering of an acoustic wave by a vibrating surface,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 80, 1533–1536 (1986).
11.J. C. Piquette, A. L. Van Buren, and P. H. Rogers, “Censor’s acoustical Doppler effect analysis—Is it a valid method?” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 83, 1681–1682 (1988).
12.N. Mujica, R. Wunenburger, and S. Fauve, “Scattering of a sound wave by a vibrating surface,” Eur. Phys. J. B 33, 209–213 (2003).
13.M. Cox and P. H. Rogers, “Automated noninvasive motion measurement of auditory organs in fish using ultrasound,” J. Vib. Sound Str. Rel. Design 109, 55–59 (1987).
14.R. M. Lerner, K. J. Parker, J. Holen, R. Gramiak, and R. C. Waag, “Sono-elasticity: medical elasticity images derived from ultrasound signals in mechanically vibrated targets,” Acoust. Imaging 16, 31–37 (1988).
15.S. Huang, R. M. Lerner, and K. J. Parker, “On estimating the amplitude of harmonic vibration from the Doppler spectrum of reflected signals,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 88, 2702–2712 (1990).
16.Y. Yamakoshi, J. Sato, and T. Sato, “Ultrasonic imaging of internal vibration of soft tissue under forced vibration,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 37, 45–53 (1990).
17.F. Figueroa and E. Barbieri, “An ultrasonic ranging system for structural vibration measurements,” IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 40, 764–769 (1991).
18.O. Bou Matar, J. P. Remenieras, C. Brunee, A. Roncin, and F. Patat, “Noncontact measurement of vibration using airborne ultrasound,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 45, 626–633 (1998).
19.L. M. Lyamshev, “Diffusion of sound by a periodically moving plate,” Sov. Phys. Dokl. 28, 274–276 (1983).
20.L. M. Lyamshev, “Distinctive features of the scattering and radiation of sound by periodically moving plates and shells,” Sov. Phys. Acoust. 30, 237–238 (1984).
21.R. T. Beyer, “The parameter B/A,” in Nonlinear Acoustics, edited by M. F. Hamilton and D. T. Blackstock (Academic, New York, 1998).
22.The Doppler effect can dominate nonlinear effects for in the case of diverging waves because of a less efficient nonlinear interaction in the bulk whereas the Doppler effect remains unchanged.12 The opposite effect is expected for converging waves.
23.For example, for experiments in water presented in Ref. 12, where the SNR is 80 dB, and using only one sideband, and for a single experimental run, we find that the relative error is lower than 15% for Smaller errors can be obtained by averaging over several experimental runs as is done the present work.
No metrics data to plot.
The attempt to load metrics for this article has failed.
The attempt to plot a graph for these metrics has failed.
Article metrics loading...