You are on page 1of 11

Direct Measurement of Particle Velocity New Paradigms in Quantifying Acoustic Fields

S.Sadasivan, Scientist G (Retired) , ADE , Bangalore subramaniamsadasivan@hotmail.com

Abstract
Technology and performance of a true acoustic particle velocity sensor in real world application context are presented. Algorithmic approaches in real time passive surveillance - localization of low flying aircraft and gunshot-like transients using 3-D acoustic intensity and velocity correlations are brought out as enabled by this sensor, the Microflown. Introduction There is more to acoustics than meets the ear ! Passive surveillance with mechanical waves emanating from airborne vehicles - is increasingly emphasized in battlefield operations. Measurement and Signature Intelligence (MASINT) systems significantly rely on acoustics modality in providing situational awareness passively no pings ! - , non line of sight and beyond line of sight. Given the real time computing capability presently available for signals in the audio-frequency range , the research focus is on acoustic vector sensors (AVSs) that measure particle velocity and pressure simultaneously at a single point in space - and associated algorithms[1,2].

In this presentation, the experiences of the author in microflown sensor measurements in real world - are shared. The focus is on aero-acoustic propagation situations. Any sound field is completely described by both its scalar value sound pressure and the vector value acoustic particle velocity. The microflown sensor is a MEMS technology based acoustic vector sensor that truly measures the particle velocity. It can be deployed in 3 D configuration in 3 orthogonal Cartesian coordinate directions . Together with a microphone, this configuration enables direct measurement of the quadratic quantity the acoustic intensity vector - and thus provides source bearing information with simple computations given that the particle motion is along the propagation direction, parallel or anti-parallel. As acoustic particle velocity was not a measurable quantity in the past, the standard approach being time integration of pressure gradient, employing the Euler equation. The pressure gradient is approximated by pressure difference at two closely spaced points using two phase- matched microphones. A two channel FFT analyzer is utilized to perform the computations [3]. Apart from the required computational effort, pressure gradients are not broadband. With the microflown sensor, acoustic particle velocity has now become a directly measurable quantity. The microflown invention thus fills an embarrassing gap in acoustic measurement technology obviating need only for

circumstantial evaluation of particle velocity - and thus intensity- albeit with theoretical justification.

Central to intensity estimation are joint measurement of pressure and particle velocity signals. The computations can be performed in time domain or frequency domain. For transient ballistic acoustic events, direct numerical integration of the product of pressure and particle velocity signals is a convenient approach for obtaining intensity estimates. For continuous, short term stationary signals, cross spectral approach under stochastic setting is a preferred option. Note as opposed to two microphone pressure gradient method prone to errors where imaginary part of cross spectrum between two pressure signals figures in computations, direct measurement of velocity by microflown enables straight forward use of intensity definition as real part of the cross spectrum - cospectrum - between pressure and velocity signals. In addition, the particle velocity covariance matrix alone ( no pressure measurement needed) can be employed for source bearing estimation albeit with sign ambiguity.

The Microflown Sensor

Fig.1 AVS - Gradient Microphone Configuration

Fig.2 AVS - Microflown Configuration

Although, the term AVS is used for gradient microphone configuration as shown in Fig.1 [4 ] also, we will abide by Nehorai and Paldi [5 ] admonition that only direct particle velocity sensor based configuration is truly a broadband AVS [6], see Fig.2.

Fig.3 The Particle Velocity Sensor Configuration

Fig.4 Temperature Difference Basic to Particle Velocity Measurement

The microflown sensor is an extremely sensitive thermal mass flow sensor based upon MEMS technology. Its working principle is based upon the measurement of a temperature difference between two extremely small platinum wires that are heated up to 200 degrees above the ambient temperature. When an airflow is applied around these wires, a small difference in temperature between two micro-machined cantilevers will occur., Fig.3, the temperature difference being proportional to particle velocity, Fig.4. The sensor has a linear behaviour over its entire frequency width. Note the sensor is sensitive to direction of propagation [2,7] . Measurement and Analysis Small propeller aircraft, helicopters and unmanned air vehicles constituted target platforms for measurements. Both land and sea environments are considered. The microflown sensor was located on top of a tripod with the tripod placed either on top of a 4 wheeler or on ground for land based experiments. Suitable deck location was chosen for measurements in the air-sea interface. The 4-channel microflown signal recordings were made using the Sony dat recorder, National Instruments PXI system, Prosig data acquisiton system or a sound card. See Fig.5. Typical sampling rate employed is 12 kHz for Sony , 20 kHz for NI and Prosig and 96 kHz for sound card. Experiments

were carried out with or without wind cap, some in India some in Netherlands. Post processing of the signals are performed on Matlab.

Fig.5 Acoustic Propagation Experiments Scenarios and Instrumentation

Results and Discussions

A measure of performance of the microflown is obtained from field data in addition to intense laboratory studies. For instance, a comparison of the derived autospectra from particle velocity signals with direct microphone measured pressure spectra is shown in

Fig.6, using aircraft fly-by signals [8]. The derived pressure spectra from the sum of three orthogonal particle velocity spectra (denoting kinetic energy density distribution) and the directly measured microphone signal spectra (denoting potential energy density distribution) are closely matched as can be expected at distances of many wavelengths from source. The agreement as studied in the bandwidth of interest for the aircraft localization problem is testament to excellent measurement quality of the particle velocity sensors.

Fig.6 Derived (red) and Directly Measured Pressure (blue) Spectra Left panel - aircraft at 46 deg azimuth wrt sensor coordinate system Right panel - aircraft at 139 deg azimuth wrt sensor coordinate system Doppler analysis of particle velocity measurement singly and jointly with pressure is a powerful approach for passive localization of aircraft. The horizontal particle velocity spectrogram, the three Cartesian intensities and variation of intensity peaks at harmonic frequencies are shown in Fig.7. The intensities correspond to aircraft approach location in the first quadrant with the X-Y horizontal axis origin at the sensor location in a manned aircraft fly-by scenario [8]. Using the techniques presented in Ref. [9] , one can obtain the aircraft speed and closest point of approach from spectrogram frequencies.
500
4 pu intensity 2 0 0 x 10
-11

10
x 10
-11

-10

400

100

200

300

400

500 frequency, Hz

600

700

800

900

1000

10 3-D intensity 10

-11

frequenc y , Hz

300

pv intensity

2 0 0 100
-11

200

300

400

500 frequency, Hz

600

700

800

900

1000

200
pw intensity

4 2 0

x 10

-12

100

100

200

300

400

500 frequency, Hz

600

700

800

900

1000

10

-13

100

200

300

400 500 600 frequency, Hz

700

800

900

1000

10

20

30 time,s

40

50

60

Fig.7 Horizontal Particle Velocity Spectrogram, 3-D Intensities and Intensity Variation with Frequency

The results ~ 29 m/s for aircraft speed and 135 m for cpa distance are in agreement with physical scenario. The azimuth estimates range between 29 deg and 35 deg and the elevation between 1deg to 11 deg using the intensities at harmonics in the frequency between 100Hz and 1000Hz and slant range at this instant 238 m is obtained using straight and level flight assumptions. It will be instructive to compare the least squares model for intensity with frequency with other aircraft noise signatures.
teuge measurement 5 probe 1 fs = 96000 Hz Welch spectra

a z im u th , d e g

The complete azimuth time history obtained from segments of vector particle velocity and pressure is shown in Fig.8 for another propeller aircraft fly by situation. Note velocity correlation based method requiring no pressure measurements [5,10]also provides good estimates.

400

300 red - velocity covariance based and blue intensity based

200

100

In another field measurement, signals were 0 recorded as a pusher propeller aircraft flew directly over the sensor station . The sensor -100 was positioned atop a vehicle about 3.3 m -200 from ground and the aircraft flew 0 5 10 15 20 25 30 35 40 45 time, s directly overhead the sensor at about Fig.8 Azimuth Time History of Aircraft Flight75m height at 0.23M speed. No wind Intensity v/s Particle Velocity Correlation cap was used for the sensor. Intensity Methods analysis clearly brings out that the aircraft flew above sensor as there is abrupt change in azimuth from negative-negative quadrant to positive-positive quadrant. The elevation, based on free space model, indicates close to 90 deg as the value at time of sign change in horizontal intensities, Fig.9.

Fig. 9 Aircraft Directly above Sensor - Intensity Analysis Results

The helicopter hover measurement is considered next. The particle velocity and pressure signals were collected as on helicopter was hovering and the other (same type) in forward flight ahead of sensor station. The helicopters strong tonal content at around 6100 Hz clearly stands out in the intensity spectrogram computed using parametric spectra [8].

Fig.10 Two Helicopters Spectral (left) and Azimuthal (right) Resolution

See Fig.10, where the positive and negative components of one horizontal intensity are shown separately. The merging of the dominant components at about 30s as the second helicopter takes hover position is clearly brought out in the figure. The azimuth obtained from horizontal intensities in the band 6100Hz 6200Hz for the first hovering helicopter and 6200Hz - 6300Hz for the second enables assessment of helicopter motion and two target localization with a single AVS, seen in conjunction with the spectrogram. A mathematical perspective to identification of number of sources with a single AVS is provided in Ref .[11 ]. In the vicinity of a hill, when the propeller aircraft flew close to sensor station , clear Lloyd Mirror interference is seen in pressure spectrogram at closest point of approach whereas a sort of hole is seen in a horizontal particle velocity timefrequency pattern at cpa time, Fig.11. As the sensor was used without wind cap, broadband noise is seen to dominate a horizontal particle velocity component in the early approaching part of flight. More work is needed to assess performance of acoustic vector sensors in the presence of terrain discontinuity between sensor and source. Fig.11. Pressure (top left panel) and 3-D Particle Velocity (other three panels) Joint Time-Frequency Representation

The time-frequency representation of the pressure and vertical particle velocity signals for an UAV flight in ocean environment is shown in Fig.12 . The sensors were mounted on board a ship and the UAV flew-by. The cross spectrum magnitude between pressure and velocity are shown. In one case the sensors were co-located and in the other a few metres away . The cross spectra of separated sensor signals more clearly bring out harmonic features in the acoustic signature. For instance, the change possibly in the rpm at about 145s and absence of stationary interference just above 600 Hz brought out in the latter are useful informations.

Fig.12. Pressure - Vertical Particle Velocity Cross Spectra Sensors co-located, (left) and Sensors Spatially Separate (right) Transient event source localization as needed ,say towards determining gunshot ballistics in audio forensics [12] - can be performed using the AVS signal time histories, Fig. 13.
pressure 0.6 0.4 0.1 amplitude,v 0 -0.2 -0.4 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 time,s velocity - vertical 0.06 0.04 amplitude,v amplitude,v 0.02 0 -0.02 -0.04 -0.06 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 time,s 0.8 1 0.15 0.1 0.05 0 -0.05 -0.1 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 time,s 0.8 1 0.8 1 -0.2 0 0.2 0.4 0.6 time,s velocity - horizontal 0.8 1 amplitude,v 0.2 0 -0.1 0.2 velocity - horizontal

Fig.13 Transient Acoustic Event Pressure and 3 orthogonal Particle Velocity Signals at a Single Spatial Location

The Intensity based values are accurate to about 2 deg for this case, whereas the correlation matrix eigen analysis based estimates can be sign ambiguous, Fig. 14. The impulsive acoustic source was fired several metres away from the sensors [13]. The angle of incidence, with respect to horizontal, computed using time delays estimated from peaks in absolute of Hilbert transform of cross correlation between pressure / particle velocity at one location to like quantities in another varied between 31.5 deg and 39 deg whereas true values with simple geometry and planar assumptions are 31 deg for sensor 1 and 45 deg for sensor 2. The horizontal particle velocity sensors gave almost identical values 36.7 deg and 36.8 deg. With sign correction incorporated, correlation estimates closely matched intensity based values.

90 120

1 60 120

90

1 60

150

0.5

30

150

0.5

30

180

180

210

330

210

330

240 270

300

240 270

300

Fig.14 Azimuth Direction of an Impulsive Event - from Two Spatial Locations Separated by 10 m. Red Arrows Intensity based Blue Arrow - Velocity Correlation based

Conclusions Performance of a true particle velocity sensor the microflown - as assessed from field deployment is brought out . Use of this true vector sensor in acoustic modality exploitation based applications in passive surveillance and source localization are touched upon. Continuous and transient vector signals are considered for possible applications in localization of low flying aircraft and gunshots. The trend currently is to explore advanced signal processing algorithms using spatio-temporal spectrum estimation tools in analyzing the vector signals.

Acknowledgement Director , ADE, is thanked for supporting the related technology development efforts while the author was at ADE. Colleagues Mr.S.Ravisekar,Mr.Devendra and Mrs. Chhaya Rajput provided excellent support in all phases of the project. Mr.Alex Koers and Prof. Elias deBree and Dr.Tom Basten the movers and shakers at Microflown Technologies, NL and all engineers and students at their facility in HAN University campus,NL are thanked for their significant help in parts of measurements reported herein. Ms. Anu Moorthy, Graduate Student, University of Tennessee, provided immense help in literature search. Her ready support is gratefully acknowledged. References 1.Hawkes, M., and Nehorai, A., Wideband Source Localization Using a Distributed Acoustic Vector-Sensor Arry, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, Vol.51, No.6, June 2003, pp. 1479-1491. 2. de Bree, H.E., A Perspective on Acoustic Vector Sensors in Passive Surveillance Real World Measurements,Algorithms and Applications, Invited Presentation, Aero India 2009 International Seminar, Journal of Aerospace Sciences and Technologies, Aeronautical Society of India, Feb.2009, Vol. 61, no.1, pp. 271-282. 3. Tichy, J., Acoustic Intensity Measurements A Review, AIAA, 1984. 4. Lockwood, M.E., and Jones, D.L., Beamformer Performance with Acoustic Vector Sensors in Air, J.Acoust.Soc.Am. 119 (1) Jan 2006, pp. 608- 619. 5. Nehorai, A., and Paldi, E., Acoustic Vector-Sensor Array Processing, Transactions on Signal Processing , Vol.42, Sept. 1994, pp. 2481-2491. IEEE

6. Wind, J.W., Tijs, E., and deBree, H.E., Source Localization Using Acoustic Vector Sensors: A MUSIC Approach, NOVEM 2009, pp. 100-1 to 100-8. 7. Verbeek, J., The Microflown Makes Acoustic Particle Velocity Measurable Quantity, Electronics Automation 2009, 27-29 A Direct

8. Sadasivan, S., Basten T., and deBree, H.E., Acoustic Vector Sensor Based Intensity Measurements for Passive Localization of Small Aircraft, Proceedings NSA 2008, accepted for publication in J.Acoust. Soc. India, 2009. 9. J. Schilller, Motion Parameter Estimation of a Sound Source Using the Multipath Interference of the Radiated Noise, E3.6, Signal Processing II, Theories and Applications, Science Publishers BV, (North-Holland), 1983, pp. 661-664.

10. Esmersoy,C., Polarization Analysis, Rotation and Velocity Estimation in ThreeComponent VSP, in Vertical Seismic Profiling. Part B, Advanced Concepts, Geophysical Press, 1983, pp. 236-255 11. B.Hochwald and A.Nehorai , Identifiability in Array Processing Models with Vector-Sensor Applications, IEEE Transactions on Signal Processing, Vol.44,No.1, Jan 1996,pp.83-95. 12. Maher,R.C., Audio Forensic Examination - Authenticity, Enhancement and Interpretation, IEEE Signal Processing Magazine, Vol.26,No.2,March 2009, pp. 84-94. 13. Tom Basten, Hans-Elias de Bree, S. Sadasivan., Acoustic eyes, a novel sound source localization and monitoring technique with 3D sound probes, Proceedings, ISMA 2008 International Conference on Noise and Vibration Engineering, September 15-17, 2008 , Leuven, Belgium