Light diffraction by large amplitude ultrasonic waves in liquids

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "Light diffraction by large amplitude ultrasonic waves in liquids"

Meryl Charles
6 years ago
Views:

$PROCEEDINGS of the 22 nd International Congress on Acoustics Ultrasound: Paper ICA2016-29 Light diffraction by large amplitude ultrasonic waves in liquids Laszlo Adler (a), John H.$

1 PROCEEDINGS of the 22 nd International Congress on Acoustics Ultrasound: Paper ICA Light diffraction by large amplitude ultrasonic waves in liquids Laszlo Adler (a), John H. Cantrell (b), William T. Yost (c) (a) Ohio State University, USA, (b) NASA Langley Research Center, USA, (c) NASA Langley Research Center, USA, Abstract Light diffraction from ultrasound, which can be used to investigate nonlinear acoustic phenomena in liquids, is reported for wave amplitudes larger than that typically reported in the literature. Large amplitude waves result in waveform distortion due to the nonlinearity of the medium that generates harmonics and produces asymmetries in the light diffraction pattern. For standing waves with amplitudes above a threshold value, subharmonics are generated in addition to the harmonics and produce additional diffraction orders of the incident light. With increasing drive amplitude above the threshold a cascade of period-doubling subharmonics are generated, terminating in a region characterized by a random, incoherent (chaotic) diffraction pattern. To explain the experimental results a toy model is introduced, which is derived from traveling wave solutions of the nonlinear wave equation corresponding to the fundamental and second harmonic standing waves. The toy model reduces the nonlinear partial differential equation to a mathematically more tractable nonlinear ordinary differential equation. The model predicts the experimentally observed cascade of period-doubling subharmonics terminating in chaos that occurs with increasing drive amplitudes above the threshold value. The calculated threshold amplitude is consistent with the value estimated from the experimental data. Keywords: nonlinear acoustics, acousto-optics, chaos

2 1 Introduction In 1932, Debye and Sears [1] in the USA and Lucas and Biquard [2] in France independently observed that when a monochromatic light beam propagates perpendicularly through an ultrasonic beam, the light will diffract into several orders. A theoretical model, developed by Raman and Nath [3] (the Raman-Nath theory), shows that the ultrasonic wave behaves like a diffraction grating for the light. Starting with the electromagnetic wave equation and introducing a variable refractive index µ for the light due to ultrasonic pressure variations, they predicted the intensity of each order as well as the positions of the orders. The intensity I n of the diffracted light in the nth order is given as In=Jn 2 ( ) (1) where J n is the nth order Bessel function and v is the Raman-Nath parameter given as =2πµa/ λ (2) where a is the width of the sound field and λ is the wavelength of the light. The angle Θ of the diffracted light is obtained as [3] sin(θ)= nλ/λ* (3) where λ * is the wavelength of the sound. The Raman-Nath theory is in good agreement with the experimental results for infinitesimal amplitude ultrasonic waves [1,2], since the intensity of the orders for such case is proportional to the square of Bessel functions. Zankel and Hiedemann [4] observed that finite (large) amplitude ultrasonic waves produce an asymmetry in the diffraction pattern resulting from the nonlinearity of the propagation medium, which progressively distorts the ultrasonic sinusoid with an increase in the ultrasonic pressure amplitude. The asymmetry in the first order (the difference between the negative and positive first diffraction order) of the measured light intensity with increasing fundamental wave pressure amplitude is shown in Figure 1. The asymmetry in the diffraction pattern also increases with an increase in the wave propagation distance as illustrated in Figure 2, as observed by Breazeale [5]. The asymmetry in the light diffraction orders due to the generated acoustic second harmonics allowed a determination of the nonlinearity parameter B/A for water and m-xylene by Adler and Hiedemann [6]. It was later observed that above a threshold acoustic drive amplitude subharmonics are generated, leading to diffraction orders in addition to the orders from the integer harmonics [7,8]. The additional diffraction orders generated above the acoustic threshold amplitude are shown in the bottom diffraction pattern of Figure 3. 2

In the present paper a toy model is introduced to quantify the threshold acoustic drive amplitude necessary to generate in a liquid-filled resonant cavity a cascade of period-doubling subharmonics

3 In the present paper a toy model is introduced to quantify the threshold acoustic drive amplitude necessary to generate in a liquid-filled resonant cavity a cascade of period-doubling subharmonics that, with increasing drive amplitude, terminates in chaos. Theoretical predictions from the model are compared to experiment. (a) (b) (Reproduced with permission from K. L. Zankel and E. A. Hiedemann, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 31, 1366 (1959). Copyright, Acoustical Society of America) Figure 1: Intensity of light measured in the first diffraction order for a 4 MHz ultrasonic wave in water as function of pressure amplitude at a distance from the source: (a) at 10 cm and (b) at 50 cm. (Reproduced with permission from M.A. Breazeale, Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 33, 857 (1961). Copyright, Acoustical Society of America) Figure 2: Light diffraction by 1.76 MHz ultrasonic waves in water as a function of sound intensity (increasing downward) at propagation distances 3 cm (left), 20 cm (middle), and 36 cm (right). 3

4 Figure 3: Schematic diagram of the diffraction pattern below the threshold (top pattern) and above threshold (bottom pattern). 2 Acoustic harmonic generation under resonant conditions Consider acoustic wave propagation in a dissipative medium having quadratic nonlinearity. The equation governing longitudinal wave propagation along the spatial direction x can be approximated in Lagrangian coordinates as [9] 2 u = t 2 c2 2 u + λ x 2 a 3 u t x 2 βc2 u x 2 u x 2 (4) where u is the particle displacement, t is time, c is the acoustic phase velocity, a is the damping coefficient, and = (B/A) + 2 is the nonlinearity parameter for liquids, where A and B are the Fox- Wallace-Beyer coefficients. The solution of Eq.(4) to second harmonic terms, assuming a driving source u(0,t) = 0 cos( t), is given as (neglecting the static term) [9] u = η 0 e α 1x cos(ωt kx) (5) 4

5 1 8 βk2 η 2 0 [ exp( 2α 1x) exp ( α 2 x) ] sin 2(ωt kx) + α 2 2α 1 where k = /c, 1 2 a/2c 3 is the fundamental wave attenuation coefficient, and 2 is the second harmonic attenuation coefficient related to 1 as R r = 2 1. Now consider a fluid-filled cavity formed between parallel surfaces of a flat transducer and a flat reflector. The propagating wave model [10] is used to assess the effects of continuous waves reflecting normally between parallel surfaces of a resonant cavity [11]. For continuous waves bounded by reflecting surfaces at x = 0 and x = L/2 the amplitude at a point x [0, L/2] consists of the sum of all contributions resulting from waves which have been generated or reflected at the point x = 0 and have propagated to the point x. The fundamental wave resonant amplitude ( 1) res is obtained as [11] (η 1 ) res = Re[A 1(x, t)] η 0 α 1 L. (6) The second harmonic resonant amplitude ( 2) res is obtained as [11] (η 2 ) res = 1 16 βk 2 η 0 2 R r α 1 2 L. (7) 3 Toy model for assessing subharmonic generation and chaos The linear wave equation 2 u t 2 c 2 2 u x 2 = 0 is a partial differential equation (PDE) that, for unforced resonant conditions at a point x [0, L/2], can be reduced to the linear ordinary differential equation (ODE) d 2 η dt 2 + ω 2 0 η = 0, where 0 = 2 c/l, by substituting u(x, t) = 5

6 η(t) cos kx in the wave equation. The solution to the ODE governs the resonant amplitude for any x [0, L/2]. The differential equation obtained by eliminating the dependence on at least one independent variable in the PDE is an example of a toy model. The fundamental and harmonic resonant solutions to Eq.(4) have the form B n(l)cos(n t + n), where n = 1, 2 and B n(l) and n are constants. The form of the solutions suggests that the problem can be simplified by developing a toy model that preserves the fundamental and second harmonic resonant amplitudes given by Eqs.(6) and (7) but eliminates the spatial dependence of the nonlinear PDE. It is assumed that the resonant solutions of Eq.(4) must correspond to the steady state solutions of some ODE with quadratic nonlinearity. It is also assumed that an extended solution space of the nonlinear ODE overlaps that of the extended solution space of the nonlinear PDE but this must be verified experimentally. Consider the equation d 2 η dt dη + γ + ω 2 dt 0 2 η 3 β ω4 L 8 R r c 2 η2 = ω2 η 2π 0 cos ωt (8) where = c 1. It is assumed that Eq.(8) will adequately serve as a toy model for possible subharmonic solutions of Eq.(4), providing that Eq.(8) correctly predicts the fundamental and second harmonic resonant amplitudes given by Eqs.(6) and (7), respectively. A perturbation solution to Eq.(8) has been shown to yield the appropriate amplitudes [11]. In nonlinear systems with oscillatory drive forces the generation of higher harmonics of order n = 2, 3, serves to stimulate and sustain the generation of subharmonics of fractional order 1/n [12]. Not all subharmonics are stable and thus not experimentally observed in the steady state. For an acoustic resonant system subharmonic generation occurs when the amplitude of excitation attains a threshold value, which is dependent on the acoustic drive frequency and attenuation in the medium. The driving term ( 2 0/2 )cos( t) in Eq.(8) allows the possibility of stable subharmonic generation leading to chaos. An assessment of this possibility can be obtained by testing for homoclinic bifurcation (subharmonic generation) using the Melnikov method [12]. 6

7 The Melnikov method establishes conditions under which subharmonic generation leading to chaos is assured. Central to the method is the Melnikov function M(t 0) [12], which for Eq.(8) is given as [11] M(t 0 ) = ξ hp (t t 0 )h[η hp (t t 0 ), ξ hp (t t 0 ), t] dt (9) where and h[η hp (t t 0 ), ξ hp (t t 0 ), t] = ( ω2 2π η 0 cos ωt γξ hp (t t 0 )) ξ hp (t t 0 ) = 2R rc 2 ω 0 3 βlω 4 sinh [ω 0 (t t 0 )/2] cosh 3 [ω 0 (t t 0 )/2]. Evaluation of the integrals in Eq.(9) yields [11] M(t 0 ) = 8R rc 2 cos ωt 0 η βl sinh(ωπ/ω 0 ) R 2 r c 5 ω5 0 α 15 β 2 L 2 ω 8 1. (10) The vanishing of the Melnikov function M(t 0) marks the beginning of an unstable region in phase space that includes both subharmonic generation and chaos. For given values of the attenuation coefficient 1 and drive frequency the drive amplitude threshold ( 0) th necessary for M(t 0) = 0 is obtained for a value of t 0 such that cos( t 0) = 1 in Eq.(10). Thus, from Eq.(10) the threshold drive amplitude necessary to initiate a cascade of period-doubling subharmonics that, with increasing drive amplitude, terminates in chaos is 7

(η 0 ) th = 16 R r c 3 15 5 βl (ω 0 ω 8) α 1 sinh ( ωπ ω 0 ). (11) 4 Experiments and conclusion The predictions of Eq.

8 (η 0 ) th = 16 R r c βl (ω 0 ω 8) α 1 sinh ( ωπ ω 0 ). (11) 4 Experiments and conclusion The predictions of Eq.(11) are compared to measurements obtained for a water-filled resonant cavity [13]. For water c 1.54 x 10 3 m s -1, 6.8, and R r 4. In the present experiments = 0 = 31.4 MHz, m -1, and L = 0.06 m. The threshold displacement drive amplitude ( 0) th necessary for subharmonic generation is calculated by substituting these values in Eq.(11) to obtain ( 0) th m. This drive amplitude results in the fundamental resonant amplitude ( 1) res 0.2 nm as calculated from Eq.(6). The resonant amplitude corresponding to subharmonic generation is estimated in the present experiments to be roughly 0.3 nm. The calculated value ( 1) res 0.2 nm is consistent with the experimental value. As the acoustic drive amplitude is further increased, the subharmonic pattern transitions via a cascade of period-doublings to random, chaotic oscillations, as predicted by the Melnikov method. Figure 4a shows the predicted chaotic diffraction pattern. Figure 4b, however, shows a diffraction pattern for drive amplitudes beyond chaos corresponding to the occurrence of a stable subharmonic not quantitatively predicted by the present model. (Reprinted from L. Adler, W. T. Yost, and J. H. Cantrell, AIP Conf. Proc. 1433, 527 (2012)) 8

9 Figure 4. Acousto-optic diffraction patterns for larger transducer drive amplitudes: (a) chaotic region; (b) stable subharmonic beyond chaos. The occurrence of a stable subharmonic beyond chaos could possibly be explained by the addition of a cubic term in Eq.(8), which would be necessary for sufficiently large acoustic drive amplitudes. The potential function corresponding to Eq.(8) is a linear combination of quadratic and cubic terms that defines a single-well potential. The potential allows escape (displacement without bounds leading to unbounded orbits) beyond some critical drive amplitude. In such case no recovery (i.e., stable subharmonics) beyond chaos is possible. The addition of a quartic potential, which would correspond to a cubic term in Eq.(8), would serve to block escape and allow the possibility of stable oscillations beyond chaos. This is the subject of further investigation. Acknowledgments This work was supported by the Advanced Composites Project, NASA Langley Resech Center, Hampton, Virginia, USA, and an Emeritus Academy Grant, Ohio State University, Columbus, Ohio, USA. References [1] Debye, P.; Sears, F. W. Proceedings of the National Academy of Scences, Vol 18,1932, pp 409. [2] Lucas, R.; Biquard, P. J. Physique Radium, Vol 194, 1932, pp [3] Raman, C. V.; Nath, N. S. Proceedings of the Indian Academy of Sciences, Vol 2, 1935, pp 406. [4] Zankel, K. L.; Hiedemann, E. A. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol 31, 1959, pp [5] Breazeale, M. A. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol 33, 1961, pp 857. [6] Adler, L.; Hiedemann, E. A. Journal of the Acoustical Society of America, Vol 34, 1962 pp 410. [7] Korpel, A; Adler, R. Applied Physics Letters, Vol 7, 1965, pp

10 [8] Adler, L.; Breazeale, M. A. Die Naturwissenschaften, Vol 8, 1968, pp 385. [9] Cantrell, J. H. Fundamentals and applications of nonlinear ultrasonic nondestructive evaluation, in Ultrasonic and Electromagnetic NDE for Structure and Material Characterization, edited by T. Kundu (Taylor and Francis, London, 2012) pp [10] Bolef, D. I.; Miller, J. G. High-frequency continuous wave ultrasonics, in Physical Acoustics, Vol. VIII, edited by W. P. Mason and R. N. Thurston (Academic, New York, 1971) pp. 95. [11] Cantrell, J. H.; Adler, L.; Yost, W. T. Chaos: An Interdisciplinary Journal of Nonlinear Science, Vol 25, 2015, [12] Jordon, D. W.; Smith, P. Nonlinear Ordinary Differential Equations (Oxford University Press, New York, 2007). [13] Adler, L.; Yost, W. T.; Cantrell, J. H. Subharmonics, chaos and beyond, in AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol 1433, 2012, pp

Lecture 6 Fiber Optical Communication Lecture 6, Slide 1

Lecture 6 Fiber Optical Communication Lecture 6, Slide 1 Lecture 6 Optical transmitters Photon processes in light matter interaction Lasers Lasing conditions The rate equations CW operation Modulation response Noise Light emitting diodes (LED) Power Modulation