Tweet
Please tell me where this idea goes wrong.
I would prefer it being killed now than finding out after tests.
Normal sidescan uses a very narrow soundbeam.
Typical .1° horizontal and 40° vertical.
As our friend Greg pointed out that is difficult to do hence the price for these transducers.
For several days now I have been pondering over something.
It might not be the best solution, but perhaps just good enough for us.
The idea is as follows:
Instead of sending a very narrow beam and receive that again I send a not so narrow beam but with a lot of power.
It need to be as much power as possible because of the wider beam, the energy emitted will be scattered over much more seawater (hence the smaller range given in my requirement post)
The receiver, and that is the difference, receives only on a very narrow beam.
The whole tranducer array will be packed in sound absorbent material so as little sound as possible will come through.
Might even experiment with vacuum in sensor array as vacuum does not conduct sound.
A thin strip of copper placed vertical through the insulating outer shell will transport the soundwaves directly to its own piezo element.
Sound travels through solid material quite good depending on material.
The strips are glued on the piezo to make firm contact. (accoording Channel Industries the piezo can be glued with superglue)
Sound coming from the sides will be reflected off the coper strips so only sound hitting them head on will be transported to the element.
The form and dimension of the strips will decide the receiver "beam".
Actually I think the "front" end of the strip will decide the horizontal and vertical plane that can be received.
My guess is that a .1° in horizontal plane might be possible as is the 40° in vertical plane.
The output of the receiver is minimal but I am convinced that modern OPAMP's will be able to amplify it more than enough without to much destortion.
This principle cannot be used for large range sonars as the power loss of the wider beam transmitter will be to large.
Can anyone tell me why this will not work, taking in consideration that the range is not large and the resolution need not to be extremely high.
Regards, Jan
I would prefer it being killed now than finding out after tests.
Normal sidescan uses a very narrow soundbeam.
Typical .1° horizontal and 40° vertical.
As our friend Greg pointed out that is difficult to do hence the price for these transducers.
For several days now I have been pondering over something.
It might not be the best solution, but perhaps just good enough for us.
The idea is as follows:
Instead of sending a very narrow beam and receive that again I send a not so narrow beam but with a lot of power.
It need to be as much power as possible because of the wider beam, the energy emitted will be scattered over much more seawater (hence the smaller range given in my requirement post)
The receiver, and that is the difference, receives only on a very narrow beam.
The whole tranducer array will be packed in sound absorbent material so as little sound as possible will come through.
Might even experiment with vacuum in sensor array as vacuum does not conduct sound.
A thin strip of copper placed vertical through the insulating outer shell will transport the soundwaves directly to its own piezo element.
Sound travels through solid material quite good depending on material.
The strips are glued on the piezo to make firm contact. (accoording Channel Industries the piezo can be glued with superglue)
Sound coming from the sides will be reflected off the coper strips so only sound hitting them head on will be transported to the element.
The form and dimension of the strips will decide the receiver "beam".
Actually I think the "front" end of the strip will decide the horizontal and vertical plane that can be received.
My guess is that a .1° in horizontal plane might be possible as is the 40° in vertical plane.
The output of the receiver is minimal but I am convinced that modern OPAMP's will be able to amplify it more than enough without to much destortion.
This principle cannot be used for large range sonars as the power loss of the wider beam transmitter will be to large.
Can anyone tell me why this will not work, taking in consideration that the range is not large and the resolution need not to be extremely high.
Regards, Jan
Comment