|
|
|
Simulation of Sonar Beampattern
|
|
This
page gives a
short introduction of how the simulations were done and a comparison of
simulated and measured beampattern for a given transducer. |
|
The Simulation Principle
The
calculations shown here base on the same
principle as the calculations of the diffraction pattern of optical
instruments that can be found here
(under construction).
We have an array that is the source of a plane wave,
in the case of the
sonar
array we have the sides of the transducers that face the water. On the
physical basis of interference and diffraction of acoustical waves the
geometrical arrangement of the sound projecting plane determines the
pattern of sound that is sent away from the transducer. The basis of
the simulation is always this geometrical arrangement, the result of
the simulation, the soundfield or beampattern of the transducer, is
shown as a two-dimensional grayscale
image or as a polar plot.
The simulations are valid for the farfield only,
corresponding to
Fraunhofer Diffraction. This means for instance, that for a transducer
500mm long working at 50kHz the simulated beampattern is valid at all
distances larger than 5 meter from the transducer away. Any curvature
of the sound projecting plane of the transducer can not be considered
up to now.
The sound projecting plane can have any geometry. It
is represented by
a bitmap that is shown for each simulation, white color represents
areas where sound is emitted. Areas of different intense sound emission
can be represented by a grayscale. The program also gives the
percentage of energy concentrated in the central lobe.
The Program
The diffraction simulation program was written by me
in Visual C++
because I
could not find any product to fit my requirements and for to learn
programming with C++. Originally it was a program to simulate
diffraction pattern of optical instruments, but, inspired by the need
to work with ultrasound generation in my daily job I added the
functionality to simulate sonar and other wavefields as well.
Dynamic
All
soundfields are calculated down to -25dB. Professional measured polar
plots in many cases go down to -50dB, but the plots calculated for
-50dB turned out to be relatively confused because of
many small sidelobes. Since the sidelobes smaller than -25dB can be
neglected in practice I decided
to display the beampattern down to -25dB, the only exception are the
simulations shown on this page for the reason to be comparable with the
measurements.
Frequency
I have chosen 50kHz instead of 200kHz for most of
the
simulations,
since this is the frequency where you would preferentially like to run
the fishfinder transducer arrays, since they will give a
vertical beamwith of 45° at -3dB for 50kHz that is good to work
with,
but a narrow 11° at 200kHz, that would be very problematic
to find the correct combination of downtild angle and hight above
ground for a reasonable range.
|
Can
we trust the results?
This may be one of the first questions that arises,
so I simulated some
existing transducers and compared the simulated beampattern with
measured ones I found in publications.
In the following I will present the results for the
transducer model
B256 from Airmar Technology Corporation, a commercial fishing 50/200
kHz transducer with an element configuration of four circular
elements with 44 mm diameter, arranged in a diamond shaped pattern
(Fig. 1). This transducer is of special interest, since it consists of
the same or very similar elements most of the 50/200 kHz fishfinder
transducers are
made of.
|
|
Figure
1: Element configuration of the Airmar B256 transducer
|
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 2:
polar plot for the simulated beampattern of the B256 transducer at
50kHz (black) and measured beampattern from the company´s
technical data sheet (green).
|
|
|
|
|
Figure 3:
polar plot for the simulated beampattern of the B256 transducer at
200kHz (black) and measured beampattern from the technical data
sheet (green).
|
|
|
The
simulated
beampattern (black) in Figures 2 and 3 show a good correspondence with
the measured ones
(green) from the technical datasheet, especially concerning position,
but also the relative intensity of the sidelobes. Below -30dB the
correspondance gets worse, this may be a result of internal
reflections and absorbtions in the real transducer that are not
included in the
simulation. This is one more reason for my decision to display the
other simulations only down to -25dB. The small sidelobes at +/-
20° that are present in the 50kHz measured pattern are
completely absent in the simulation. This may also be a result of
internal
reflections - or, as can be suspected when viewing the two-dimensional
maps of the 50kHz beampattern (Fig.4a), are a result of a small tilt
of the transducer during the measurement. If the polar plot in Figure 2
does not
represent a section along the green line in Fig.4a, but along one of
the red
lines small sidelobes at +/- 20° will appear. They will also
appear, when the listening hydrophone for the measurement covers an
angle of more than 6 degrees.
|
a)
|
b)
|
|
Figure 4:
two-dimensional simulated beampattern of the B256 at 50kHz (a) and
200kHz (b).
The maps are 120° x120° wide and represent a dynamic of 50dB
from
white to black.
|
|
|
At
angles larger
than +/- 75° the simulations often show strong deviations from
the measured beampattern, this may be a result of the fact that the
simulated transducer have no sound absorbing enclosure from the back
and the sides as real ones and no housing to alter the pattern. For
this reason I run the simulations only to angles of +/-
80° in most cases.
|
|