Lasers for Science Facility Programme - Physics

Aspects of laser-generated acoustic shock waves in air

K Attenborough, Q Qin
Acoustics Research Centre, University of Hull, Cottingham Road, Hull, HU6 7RX, UK
Main contact email address: k.attenborough@hull.ac.uk
4

Introduction 2.5
x 10

Although the use of pulsed lasers to generate acoustic pulses in

SOUND PRESSURE Pa
both solid and liquid media is well known1), research into laser-
2

generated acoustic pulses in air has not been reported to the 1.5
same extent. Laser users usually try to avoid a breakdown in
air, since the laser energy is absorbed and heat is produced 1
when charged particles such as electrons stripped from atoms
are generated2). Nevertheless it remains a fact that strong 0.5

sparks can be produced in air when a light intensity, of the order

of 1011 W cm-2, is applied to a small volume. This requires that 0

the light beam from a laser has a peak power of the order of
10 MW or more and that this beam is focused through a lens. -0.5
0 0.05 0.1 0.15 0.2 0.25 0.3
In the focal area, the air absorbs energy from the light by means (a ) T IM E m s
of the cascade process. The energy gain causes local heating of 120
the gas, which expands outwards as a propagating shock wave

SOUND LEVEL dB re 20mPa

118
with a rarefaction or suction region behind the shock front.
Thus a powerful acoustic source is produced in air and it can be 116
located so as to avoid unwanted reflections from the associated 114
equipment. Given the similarity between the laser-induced
acoustic shock waveform and that associated with a blast- 112

wave4), acoustic pulses associated with laser-induced sparks 110

could be used to simulate blast sounds from explosions or sonic
108
booms in the laboratory and to investigate the associated
propagation effects. Measurements made near the laser sparks 106

show that the free field sound pressures obtained within a 104
source-receiver distance of less than 1.5m are at levels
102
sufficient to result in nonlinear effects and are highly
repeatable. Therefore, laser-generated acoustic shocks can be 100
4 5
used for laboratory-based research into nonlinear acoustics. 10 10

Results of laboratory measurements illustrating the effects of (b) FREQ UENCY Hz

surface roughness on nonlinear propagation are presented here.
The high-frequency content and high-amplitudes of laser-
generated acoustic shocks makes them useful also for
measurements of acoustic transmission through porous
materials. Preliminary results of measurements on three
materials are presented here.
Laser and Measurement System
The laser used to generate the sparks was a Q-switch Surelite
III-10 Nd: YAG laser with a 1064 nm wavelength and a power
of 800 mJ per pulse. If the duration of the pulse is between 4
and 6 nanoseconds2), the pulse power of the III-10 Nd: YAG
laser at 1064 nm wavelength is between 133 and 200 MW.
Without focusing, the laser beam has a beam diameter of 9 mm
and the intensity of the laser pulse is between 2.07 and
3.14 ×108 W cm-2. This intensity is much lower than the
threshold of 1011 Wcm-2 required to break down the air. In the
experiments reported here, the laser beam was focused using a
convex lens with a focal length of 10cm to a spot of diameter of
about 0.3mm so that the light intensity in the focused spot is
between 1.88 and 2.83 Wcm-2. The sensing and analysis
system that was used for measurements of laser-induced
acoustic shock waves consisted of high-pressure and high
frequency microphones, B&K Types 4138 (1/8″) and 4939
(1/4″); a high frequency amplifier, B&K Type 2636, a National
Instruments 5911 data acquisition card and LabView software.
The peak pressure, duration and stability of the laser-induced
acoustic shocks have been investigated.
Characteristics of the laser-induced acoustic shocks
A measured waveform at 3cm from the spark source, using a
1/8″ microphone, is shown in Figure 1(a). The peak pressure at
this distance is found to be 181dB re 20 µPa (22,683 Pa). Since
Figure 1. (a) Acoustic waveform (b) Spectrum obtained at
3 cm from the laser-generated spark using an 1/8″ microphone.
nonlinear convective effects, in contrast with dissipative effects
(such as viscosity and thermal conductivity), become apparent
at sound pressure levels of around 140 dB3), the measured laser-
induced spark source is useful for research into non-linear
acoustics. Even at a source-receiver distance of 150cm, the
peak pressure of the received pulse is higher than 140 dB. The
spectrum of the laser-induced acoustic shock is broadband and
high frequency (Figure 1(b)). The sound energy spectrum is
between 3 kHz and 150 kHz and peaks at 20 kHz.
The peak pressures due to the laser-generated shocks measured
with 1/8″ microphone are shown as a function of
source-receiver distance in Figure 2. The decay with distance
becomes logarithmic beyond about 10 cm from the source.
Figure 2 shows that there is increasing departure from inverse
square law with distance. This is associated with air absorption
and with nonlinear hydrodynamic loss in air. The calculated
effect of air absorption4) on the peak pressure of the laser spark
as the source-receiver distance is changed from 3 cm to 153 cm
is 1.57 dB. Estimates of hydrodynamic nonlinear effects in air
as a function of distance x may be made by approximating the
laser-generated pulses as triangular waveforms with amplitude
p and duration T and using Equations (1) and (2)5).
p0 (1)
p=
εp 0 x
1+
c03 ρ 0T0

159 Central Laser Facility Annual Report 2002/2003

Lasers for Science Facility Programme - Physics

εp0 x i.e. between 1/65 and 1/3 of the wavelength at the peak energy
T = T0 1 + (2) frequency (20 KHz).
c03 ρ 0T0
where p 0 = p ( x = 0), T0 = T ( x = 0), ρ0 is the density of standard deviation
measurement
inverse square law
air, c0 is adiabatic sound speed in air, ε =(γ+1)/2 ≈1.2 and 10
3

PEAK PESSURE Pa
is the adiabatic constant.

4
10 measurement
inverse square law
PEAK PRESSURE Pa

2
10
1 2
10 10

10
3
SOURCE-RECEIVER DISTANCE cm

Figure 3. Measured reduction in peak pressure with distance

5 20 40
DISTANCE FROM SOURCE cm
Figure 2. Measured reduction in peak pressure with
distance in the free-field compared with spherical
spreading; 1/8″ microphone receiver.
Assuming a peak pressure of 22.163 kPa, and assuming a
duration (t0) of either 12 µs (the positive duration) or 48 µs (the
total duration) which are the measured characteristics of the
waveform at 0.03m from the spark, the effects of hydrodynamic
nonlinearity are predicted to be between 3.5 and 7.8 dB. In
particular, for the given peak pressure, a reduction due to
in the free-field compared with spherical spreading; 1/4″
microphone receiver, 50 shocks. Error bars represent
standard deviations of data at each range.
The distances between the source and the receiver were set at
80 120 20.0, 22.5, 25.0, 27.5, and 30.0cm respectively. The source and
the receiver heights were kept constant at 0.75 cm,
corresponding to grazing angles of 4.29, 3.81, 3.43, 3.12, and
2.86 degrees respectively. The data in Figure 4 show a large
variation in the measured sound peak pressures at the same
source receiver distance as a function of the surface roughness.
The difference in peak pressure over the smooth rigid surface
and the 5mm cubic glass grain surface was found to be as much
as 1,400 Pa (9.4dB level difference) at 20 cm from the laser
spark source (see Figure 4).
162
160

hydrodynamic nonlinearity in air of 5.2 dB is predicted to

158
correspond to a (triangular) pulse duration of 26 µs at 3cm from
PEAK PRESSURE dB

the spark. From the data and calculations it may be concluded 156 smooth rigid
0.2mm sand paper
that, although the spark itself is asymmetric and elongated in
the direction of the incoming light beam6), the associated 154
inverse square law
1.0mm sand
acoustic pulse behaves essentially as though from a point source 152 free field
at distances beyond 10 cm but with additional nonlinear 1.0mm lattice
hydrodynamic losses and air absorption. Hydrodynamic 150

nonlinearity in air is predicted also to cause gradual elongation 148

of the pulse with distance resulting in an increased duration at a
distance of 1.5m from the spark of between 150% and 250% of 146 3.0mm sand
5.0mm cubic glass
that at 3cm from the spark. The peak pressures in 50 shocks
144
have been measured at fourteen source-receiver distances 18 20 22 24 26 28 30 32 34 36

between 20 cm and 150 cm. The results from using a ¼″

microphone are shown in Figure 3. The ¼″ receiving system
has a frequency response only up to 100 KHz. Consequently,
the use of a 1/4″ microphone results in lower peak pressures and
less apparent absorption but preserves the overall trend of the
variation with distance. The error bars present the standard
deviations of the measured peak pressures. The standard
deviations are found to vary between only 1.5% and 3.0% of the
peak pressures, which indicates that the laser-induced acoustic
pulses are very repeatable.
Nonlinear propagation over rough hard surfaces
Measurements have been carried out using a ¼″ microphone
over six different rigid rough surfaces consisting of single
layers of randomly-distributed but uniformly-sized grains fixed
to smooth glass plates. The grains were fixed to the glass base
by epoxy adhesive. The grains, the glass base plate and the
dried epoxy adhesive are acoustically rigid. The grain sizes on
the six rough surfaces varied between 0.2mm and 5.0mm
SOURCE-RECEIVER DISTANCE cm
Figure 4. Measured peak pressures (dB) as a function of
distance in free field, over a smooth acoustically rigid surface
and over 5 different rough surfaces. Inverse square law decay
is shown also.
Over the range of surface roughness used, the sound attenuation
at a given distance was found to increase with increasing
roughness size. For the data shown, the path length differences
between the direct and the scattered signals of the geometry of
the measurements are between 0.056 and 0.037 cm. This
implies time delays of between 1.6 and 1.1 µs at the receiver
points. These time differences are less than 2% of the pulse
duration, which is between 64.5 and 108.0 µs, as shown in
Table 1 and may account for the interference effects observed in
Figure 4. Without the ground surface, the peak pressures

Central Laser Facility Annual Report 2002/2003 160

 Lasers for Science Facility Programme - Physics

decreases monotonically with increasing distance, as shown by  

2

the free field data in Figures 2 and 3. Surface roughness is
found also to cause elongation of the waveforms beyond that
expected from nonlinear hydrodynamic effects. Figure 5
compared waveforms received at 30 cm from the laser-
generated sparks over smooth glass and the surface formed
from 5mm cubic glass grains. As well as reduction in
amplitude and elongation, the waveform received over the
rough surface shows evidence of a surface wave similar to that
observed at lower amplitudes7).
(a)
2500
2000
1500
PRESSURE Pa
 Sound Speed in air 
(3)
tortuosity =  
 
 Sound Speed in material 
 
This tortuosity value is very close to the average value 1.067
deduced by fitting data for the acoustic characteristic impedance
that have been obtained independently. Similar data and
deductions have been obtained with samples of gravel and
porous concrete. The results are summarised in Table 1
together with values deduced from fitting impedance tube data
and the measured flow resistivities. Not surprisingly, there is
evidence that timing the front end of shock becomes a less
accurate method for tortuosity deduction as the flow resistivity
of the porous material increases. Further work is needed to
investigate possible nonlinear and dispersive effects. However,

it appears that laser-generated acoustic pulses offer an

1000 alternative to the conventional ultrasonic cell method for
measurement of tortuosity.
500
Material Measured Tortuosity Tortuosity
0 Flow from laser- from fitting
resistivity induced impedance
-500 Pasm-2 acoustic shock tube data
data
-1000 Porous 204.6 1.07 1.067
0 50 100 150 200 aluminium
8mm gravel 846 1.5 1.46
(b)
Porous 3619 1.57 1.8
1200
concrete
1000 Table 1. Results from tortuosity measurements.
800
Conclusions
PRESSURE Pa

600
a. The characteristics of laser-generated acoustic pulses are
400 useful for laboratory research into nonlinear acoustic
200 effects.
0 b. Small-scale measurements made over a series of ground
-200
surfaces have shown that the propagation of laser-induced
acoustic shocks near to the ground is sensitive to
-400 small-scale ground roughness.
-600
c. Preliminary measurements of the speed of laser-induced
-800
0 50 100 150 200
acoustic pulses through thick samples of material suggest
the possibility for developing a novel ultrasonic method for
TIME µs determining the tortuosity of rigid-porous materials.

Figure 5. Comparison of measured waveforms at 20 cm References

(a) over a smooth glass surface (b) over a rough surface 1. R J Dewhurst, D A Hutchins, and S B Palmer, J. Appl.
(5mm cubic glass) with the spark source at 1.7 cm height
and microphone at 1.5 cm height. 2.
Use of laser-induced acoustic pulses for tortuosity
measurements
3.
The high frequency content and high amplitudes of
laser-generated acoustic pulses makes them suitable for an
ultrasonic measurement of the tortuosity in porous materials8) 4.
but on larger samples than used in typical ultrasonic
experiments. An exploratory deduction of the tortuosity of a
15 cm long cylindrical sample of porous aluminium with 5cm 5.
diameter has been made by measuring the speed of propagation
of laser-generated acoustic pulses through the sample. Two
transducers were placed 15cm apart inside and outside a metal 6.
cylinder without and with the material sample respectively. The
distance between the lens and the first transducer was about
7.
20 cm. The propagation time of the front edge of the pulse in
air without the sample was 0.447 ms. In the presence of the
porous aluminium sample it was 0.462 ms. Using Equation (3), 8.
this implies a value of tortuosity of 1.068.
Phys. 53 (6), 4064-4071, (1982).
J F Ready, Industrial applications of lasers, 2nd edition,
Academic Press, (1997).
D A Webster, and D T Blackstock, J. Acoust. Soc. Am.,
62, 518-523, (1977)
D T Blackstock, Fundamentals of Physical Acoustics,
University of Texas, Austin, Texas, JOHN WILEY &
SONS, INC, (2000).
L D Landau, and E M Lifshitz, Fluid mechanics, Pergamon
Press, Oxford, London, Paris, Frankfurt, (1963).
J F Ready, Effects of High-Power Laser Radiation, ,
Academic Press, (1971).
J P Chambers and Y H Berthelot, J.Acoust. Soc. Am., 102
(2) 707 - 714 (1997)
J F Allard, B Castagnede, M Henry, W Lauriks, Rev. Sci.
Instrum. 65, 754–5 (1994).

161 Central Laser Facility Annual Report 2002/2003