Acoustic shock waves emitted from two interacting laser generated plasmas in air

Manikanta Elle, Nagaraju Guthikonda, S. Sai Shiva, et al.

Citation: The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 153, 1655 (2023); doi: 10.1121/10.0017535
View online: https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017535
View Table of Contents: https://asa.scitation.org/toc/jas/153/3
Published by the Acoustical Society of America

ARTICLES YOU MAY BE INTERESTED IN

Time-domain simulation of acoustic wave scattering and internal propagation from a gas bubble of various
shapes
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 153, 1468 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017386

Boundary effects on the streaming flow around a bubble located at the velocity antinode of a standing wave
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 153, 1637 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017456

Extending the Hearing-Aid Speech Perception Index (HASPI): Keywords, sentences, and context
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 153, 1662 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017546

Machine learning in acoustics: Theory and applications

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 146, 3590 (2019); https://doi.org/10.1121/1.5133944

Backscattering enhancements by partially exposed spheres due to reflected subsonic Rayleigh waves at air–
water interfaces
The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 153, 1674 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017531

Diffraction of directional sources by rigid wedges or barriers

The Journal of the Acoustical Society of America 153, 1650 (2023); https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017532
 ARTICLE
...................................

Acoustic shock waves emitted from two interacting laser

generated plasmas in air
Manikanta Elle, Nagaraju Guthikonda,a) S. Sai Shiva, and P. Prem Kiranb)
Advanced Centre of Research in High Energy Materials (ACRHEM), University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad 500046, India

ABSTRACT:
We present an acoustic detection technique to study the interaction of two shock waves emitted by two nearby,
simultaneous, laser-induced air-breakdown events that resembles the phenomenon of interaction of fluids. A micro-
phone is employed to detect the acoustic shock wave (ASW) from the interaction zone. The experiments were done
at various separation distances between the two plasma sources. The incident laser energy of the sources is varied
from 25 to 100 mJ in ratios from 1:1 to 1:4. The peak sound pressure of the ASW was compared between the single
and dual plasma sources, showing that the pressures are higher for the dual plasma source than that of the single
plasma. The evolution of peak sound pressures is observed to depend on (a) the pulse energy of the sources and (b)
the plasma separation distance, d. For the equal energy sources, the peak sound pressures increased linearly up to a
certain plasma separation distance d, beyond which the pressures saturated and decayed. For the case of unequal
energy sources, the peak sound pressures showed an interesting response of increase, saturation, decay, and further
increase with plasma separation distance d. These observations indicate the dynamics of acoustic wave interactions
across the interaction zone of the two sources depend on the input laser pulse energy as well as the plasma separation
distance d. VC 2023 Acoustical Society of America. https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017535

(Received 28 December 2022; revised 20 February 2023; accepted 20 February 2023; published online 13 March 2023)
[Editor: Julian D. Maynard] Pages: 1655–1661

I. INTRODUCTION (Manikanta, 2018). The reproducibility of laser acoustic

waves makes it a versatile diagnostic tool (Qin and
Recently, the detection of sound from the laser-induced
Attenborough, 2004; Manikanta et al., 2016) for the charac-
breakdown (LIB) of rocks in the Mars environment (Chide
terization of laser ablative plasmas and their interactions in
et al., 2019; Chide et al., 2020) attracted the scientific com-
the long range.
munity as it provided useful information along with other
High-energy laser pulses when focused into the medium
optical diagnostic tools. Acoustic detection from the laser
ionize the medium, such that a plasma is formed at the focal
material interaction is widely used by the research commu-
point (Mulser et al., 1973; Bittencourt, 2004). The plasma
nity in various fields, such as quality monitoring of laser
thus formed is a rich source of energy capable of emitting in
material processing (Shevchik et al., 2018; Pandiyan et al.,
the electromagnetic (Vinoth Kumar et al., 2014; Vinoth
2021), revealing the adhesion mechanics of single cells
Kumar et al., 2016) as well as acoustic spectral domain
(Dehoux et al., 2015; Ghanem et al., 2018), laser shock
within a very short duration of time. Focusing of a large
peening (Deaton et al., 2011), material ablation (Dogas
amount of incident laser energy at the focal volume results
et al., 2001; Ta
nski et al., 2013), remote detection of chemi-
in the generation of very high pressures and temperatures in
cals (Chen et al., 2011), acoustic testing of small spaces,
the plasma. As a result, the plasma exists in a highly com-
scale model measurements (Gomez Bola~nos et al., 2013;
pressed state. The presence of high density, pressure, and
Hosoya et al., 2013), finding buried objects (van den Heuvel
temperature within the plasma results in the sharp gradients
et al., 2003; Larson et al., 2007), tissue classification (Bende
across the plasma front and the surrounding ambient gas.
and Jean, 2004), measuring the femtosecond filament
The plasma, thus, acts like a piston that drives the surround-
lengths (Yu et al., 2003; Kaleris et al., 2019), etc., to name a
ing medium, leading to the generation of shock waves
few. The acoustic shock wave (ASW) emissions and its (SWs; mechanical waves) (Leela et al., 2013; Guthikonda
associated spectral response also indicate the plasma evolu- et al., 2021). This SW during its evolution decays rapidly in
tion of nanosecond/picosecond/femtosecond LIB of ambient pressure and temperature by transferring its energy to the
air (Manikanta et al., 2016; Manikanta et al., 2017; Nalam surrounding ambient gas and finally converts into the ASW
et al., 2019) as well as the laser ablation of materials at longer times. These ASWs help to understand the laser-
matter interaction and associated plasma properties over
a)
long-range distances and times.
Present address: Plasma Spectroscopy Analysis Center, Mokpo National
In the recent past, studies on interaction dynamics of
University, Jeonnam 58554, Republic of Korea.
b)
Also at: School of Physics, University of Hyderabad, Hyderabad 500046, two plasma sources have received much attention due to the
India. Electronic mail: prem@uohyd.ac.in enhancement in the plasma and shock properties, thereby,

J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 153 (3), March 2023 0001-4966/2023/153(3)/1655/7/$30.00 C 2023 Acoustical Society of America
V 1655
 https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017535

increasing reported lifetimes (Kameswari et al., 2021).

During the expansion of two plasma sources, the region
where the two sources or SWs interact with each other is
called the interaction zone. Here, a stagnation layer is
observed (Dardis and Costello, 2010; Harilal et al., 2011).
Within this interaction zone, the density, pressure, and tem-
perature increase, and these increases last for longer dura-
tions. Hence, interesting dynamics of the energy conservation
are observed (Fallon, 2013).
The dynamics of the colliding plasma sources have
been studied by many groups both experimentally and theo-
retically (Bosch et al., 1992; Rambo and Denavit, 1994).
They employed different approaches to generate dual
plasma sources, viz., cross-beam (Tselev et al., 2001;
Irissou et al., 2006), parallel propagating beams in which
time delay between two incident laser pulses (pre and main
laser pulse) is varied (Diwakar et al., 2013; Gupta et al.,
2013). In all these works, the spatiotemporal plasma dynam-
ics of the two sources were analyzed using different diag-
nostic techniques, such as plasma imaging, ion emission
analysis, and optical emission spectroscopy (Al-Shboul
et al., 2014; Yuan et al., 2017). These studies reported the
interaction dynamics of the plasma sources and the subse-
quent plasma evolution that are performed only for the
aforementioned configurations.
All these studies were performed over time durations of
few microseconds only. The measurement of the SW
dynamics over the long-range distances is hardly possible
with the laser probe method due to limitation of the optical FIG. 1. (Color online) (a) Experimental schematic of counter propagation
diagnostic techniques. of two SWs. L1 and L2 are two plano-convex lenses of focal length 78 mm.
Microphone position is fixed at 8 cm along the x axis. Mirrors and lenses
In view of the importance of the acoustic technique, this are indicated with M and L, respectively. The interaction zone is the plane
paper presents the acoustic emissions from the interaction of where two plasmas meet each other. (b) Confirmation of optimal position-
two expanding plasmas and SWs at ambient conditions, for ing of microphone closer to the interaction zone. The line is a guide to the
(a) varied separation distances between the plasma sources eye.
and (b) varied input laser pulse energy ratios creating equal
and unequal impedance plasma sources. The acoustic detec- varied between 25 6 0.5 mJ and 102 6 1.5 mJ. In the case of
tion technique is employed here to study the plasma–plasma, equal energy dual plasma sources, the laser energies are 25
plasma–SW, and SW–SW interaction from two nearby, and 25 mJ and 50 and 50 mJ (1:1). In the case of unequal
simultaneous, laser-induced air-breakdown events at various plasma sources, incident energy of 25 mJ was supplied to
incident energy ratios and separation distances of the plas- source S1, whereas source S2 laser energy is fixed at 41 6 1
mas. A high-pressure microphone was used as the diagnostic mJ and 101.7 6 1.5 mJ, respectively. The sources are simul-
tool to detect ASWs (Manikanta et al., 2016; Manikanta taneously active, and the source positions S1 and S2 are indi-
et al., 2017) over long distances and times. cated in Fig. 1(a). The laser pulse energy ratios used for
generating the two plasma sources are 1:1, 1:1.7, and 1:4,
II. EXPERIMENTAL DETAILS respectively. Laser energies were measured just in front of,
and prior to reaching, the focusing lenses and ensured that
Figure 1(a) illustrates the experimental schematic, the desired laser energy ratios are maintained properly
where a Nd:YAG laser beam of second harmonic wave- throughout the experiments. In this study, two plasma sour-
length of 532 nm with a pulse duration of 7 ns passes ces or dual plasma are generated by splitting the single laser
through a beam splitter (BS). By choosing BSs of different beam into two different laser beams focused at two different
reflection-to-transmission (R:T) ratio, two laser pulses of locations into the media (Guthikonda et al., 2020). Because
equal and unequal energy are generated. These pulses the plasma length and diameter vary as a function of inci-
guided in the counter propagating direction are focused to dent laser energies (Chelikani et al., 2017; Guthikonda
generate the two simultaneously expanding plasma sources et al., 2020), the interaction dynamics are different for dif-
with characteristic properties depending on the incident ferent energy ratios.
laser energy (Manikanta et al., 2016; Manikanta et al., Both the counter propagating laser beams/pulses tra-
2017). The individual laser pulse energy before the lens is verse the same optical path after the BS. These laser beams
1656 J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 153 (3), March 2023 Elle et al.
 https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017535

are focused through lenses L1 and L2 having a focal length

of 78 mm, thereby creating two air plasma sources due to
LIB S1 and S2, respectively. These plasmas were collinear
and spatially separated by a distance (d), referred to as
plasma separation distance. When d ¼ 0, both the plasma
plumes are superimposed on each other. To vary the dis-
tance (d), the focusing lenses L1 and L2 are placed on two
individual microcontrolled translational stages. The volume
where two SWs interact is named as the interaction zone.
The microphone is positioned perpendicularly at 8 cm apart
with respect to the laser propagation (z) axis such that it
faces the interaction zone of two SWs/plasmas [Fig. 1(a)].
The microphone is also equidistant from both the sources.
The output of the microphone is fed to an oscilloscope for
acoustic data acquisition, and measurements are triggered
by the incident laser pulse. A GRAS (Holte, Denmark) 40
DP, 1/8 in. externally polarized microphone is used to mea-
sure the acoustic signals. This microphone responds to posi-
tive sound pressure due to acoustic shockwave with a
negative voltage with a sensitivity of 1 mV/Pa. The micro-
phone is calibrated using a GRAS 42AB calibrator
(Manikanta et al., 2016; Manikanta et al., 2017). The peak
sound pressure of the ASW is obtained from the voltage.
The presence of the interaction zone is confirmed by scan-
ning the microphone parallel to the laser propagation axis,
where the acoustic pressure is observed to be maximum
[Fig. 1(b)]. The plasma sources are treated as fluids with
equal impedances (impedance, z ¼ qu, where q is density of
medium, and u is the sound velocity in medium).
FIG. 2. (Color online) The dependence of peak sound pressures on separa-
tion distance from equal energy dual plasma generated using a 50:50 BS.
III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION (a) For the energies of 25 mJ þ 25 mJ dual plasma; (b) for the energies of
The peak sound pressures of ASWs from dual plasma 50 mJ þ 50 mJ dual plasma. Lines are the fits indicating evolution of peak
sound pressures.
source configurations were compared with that of the single
source to bring out the interaction between the two plasma
In the case of a single plasma source, during the early
sources. The individual SWs from two separated plasma
times of <2 ls, both plasma and the shock front expand
sources expand outward, meet in the interaction zone, inter-
together (Leela et al., 2013; Shiva et al., 2017, 2019)
act with each other, and modify the acoustic shockwave
depending on the deposited laser energy. During this time,
properties. A portion of the ASW is received by the micro-
phone placed at 8 cm along the x axis perpendicular to the the shock front builds up and gains energy from the plasma
laser propagation axis. The following sections present in front. The shock front will be in the accelerating phase dur-
detail the ASW properties for equal and unequal plasma ing this time. After gaining sufficient energy, this shock
sources. front detaches from the plasma at around >2–3 ls and
expands supersonically into the undisturbed ambient atmo-
A. Interaction of equal energy sources (S1:S2 5 1:1) spheric air with its velocity much higher than the plasma
expansion. After the detachment, the shock front velocity
1. Effect of the plasma separation distance on ASW and sound pressure decay rapidly by transferring its energy
properties to the ambient air and utilizing its kinetic energy in the
The separation distance (d) between two plasma sources expansion against the ambient air (Leela et al., 2013; Shiva
affects the resultant ASW peak pressures. In Figs. 2(a) and et al., 2017, 2019). In the dual plasma expansion, interaction
2(b), the ASW peak pressures are presented at various sepa- between the two sources could happen either between plas-
ration distances for S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 25 and 50 mJ. As the plasma ma–plasma or accelerating SWs or decaying SWs depend-
separation distance (d) increases from zero, the peak sound ing on the plasma separation distance d (Guthikonda et al.,
pressure increases, reaching a maximum value at 12 mm for 2020). From Fig. 2, it is evident that the peak sound pressure
S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 25 mJ and at 19 mm for S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 50 mJ. of the ASW is showing different stages of evolution,
Beyond these distances, the peak pressure saturates for up to namely, increasing, saturation, and decaying phases, respec-
12–16 mm and d > 19 mm for 25 þ 25 mJ and 50 þ 50 mJ, tively. As observed from Figs. 2(a) and 2(b), the ASW peak
respectively. sound pressure increases linearly with increasing d, which is
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 153 (3), March 2023 Elle et al. 1657
 https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017535

due to the interaction between plasma–plasma and two

accelerating SWs contributing to the increasing phase.
Similarly, the saturation and decaying phase of the pressure
is happening due to the interaction of decaying or weak
SWs. For S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 25 mJ, the three phases of increase, sat-
uration, and decay were observed for a separation distance,
d ¼ 0–12, 12–17, and 17–24 mm, respectively. For S1 ¼ S2
¼ 50 mJ, only the increase and the saturation phases of the
peak sound pressure were observed for d ¼ 0–19 mm and
19–28 mm.
Because the laser energy absorption in ambient air
increases with increasing input laser energy, the energy of
the plasma and SW and their decay times increase (Leela
et al., 2013; Guthikonda et al., 2020). As a result, we
FIG. 3. (Color online) Time domain signals of ASWs emitted from the sin-
observed the early saturation and decaying of the ASW for gle plasma (S1 and S2) and dual plasma (S1 þ S2). The plasma separation
low input energy (25 þ 25 mJ) [Fig. 2(a)] compared to that distance (d) between two plasmas is 2 mm. Laser energies of 24 and 41 mJ
of higher energy (50 þ 50 mJ) [Fig. 2(b)]. At lower separa- were used to form plasma S1 and plasma S2, respectively. Arrival times are
indicated with vertical lines on signals.
tion distances, dual plasma or collision between the plasmas
is dominant (Rambo and Procassini, 1995). As the separa-
tion distance increases, the shock–shock interaction is domi- The ASW peak sound pressures (Pk) from the interaction
nant, and it results in increasing the density and temperature zone with respect to the plasma separation distances and
at the stagnation layer (Guthikonda et al., 2020). shadowgraphic images are presented in Fig. 4. As observed
For the case of S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 25 mJ, the peak sound pres- with increasing plasma separation distance, the correspond-
sure starts building from 4.85 kPa (at d ¼ 0), reaches a maxi- ing peak sound pressures were increasing. However, the rate
mum of 6.59 kPa between distances of 12 and 14 mm, and of increase is found to be different at different distances,
then saturates between 14 and 17 mm before decaying rap- which contrasts with that of the equal energy sources.
idly after d >17 mm and reaching 3.35 kPa at 22.5 mm. This At 2 mm separation, the Pk is 5.5 kPa, whereas at 15 mm,
ASW peak pressure of 3.35 kPa corresponds to the case of a the Pk is 8 kPa, confirming a rise in acoustic pressure. For the
single source of 25 mJ. In the case of S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 50 mJ [Fig. separation distance of 1–5 mm, the interaction is mostly due
2(b)], when d ¼ 0, the resultant pressure is measured to be to the plasma plumes as the SW remains intact with the
6.2 kPa. As the separation distance d increases, the pressure plasma source, shown in Figs. 4(b) and 4(c). Beyond 6 mm,
also increases and reaches a maximum of 9.97 kPa at the interaction between the two sources is dominated by the
d ¼ 20 mm. Beyond this point (20–28 mm), the peak sound shock–shock interaction, shown in Fig. 4(c). At these
pressure is observed to be constant, indicating the saturation
phase with its slope equal to 0.01.

B. Interaction of unequal energy sources

1. Effect of the plasma separation distance on ASW
In this section, the ASW properties due to the interac-
tion of two unequal plasma sources generated using differ-
ent input laser energies are presented. The laser pulse
energy used for the first source is fixed at 24 6 1 mJ, while
that for the second source is taken as 41 6 1 mJ and
102 6 1.5 mJ, respectively, giving rise to S1:S2 of 1:1.7 and
1:4, respectively. Hence, the two plasma sources will have
different densities and impedances.

a. Energy ratio of S1:S2¼ 1:1.7. The time domain

ASW signal from two individual sources S1, S2 and that of S1
þ S2 at a separation distance of 2 mm are shown in Fig. 4.
The arrival times (At) of sources S1, S2, and S1 þ S2 are
observed to be 234, 231, and 229 ls, respectively. The corre-
sponding peak-to-peak pressures are 3.55, 4.34, and 5.52 kPa FIG. 4. (Color online) (a) Dependence of peak sound pressure on the
plasma separation distance. The peak sound pressures are increasing with d
for sources S1, S2, and S1 þ S2, respectively. The dependence
with different rates. (b)–(d) The shadowgraphic images of interaction of
of ASW on the input laser energy and the interaction of the two SWs at d ¼ 3, 5, and 10 mm. Images presented here are taken at 30 ls
two plasma sources is evident from Fig. 3. time from the plasma initiation time.

1658 J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 153 (3), March 2023 Elle et al.
 https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017535

distances, the SWs detach from the plasma sources and will
be in the accelerating phase. At these separation distances,
the SW will have sufficient time to build up at the interaction
zone. This leads to larger peak sound pressures with increas-
ing d. Shadowgraphic images provide the explanation for the
increase in ASW pressures with plasma separation distances.

b. Energy ratio of S1: S2 ¼ 1:4. In this subsection, we

present the results of ASW when the incident laser energy is
split into two beams such that 25 6 1 mJ is focused by L1,
and 102 6 1.5 mJ is focused by L2. This results in two plasma
sources formed with different properties, i.e., the plasma
formed has different density, velocity, pressure, and tempera-
ture and, hence, expands differently into the ambient.
Plasma sources S1 and S2 are observed to generate the
peak pressures of 3.92 and 6.76 kPa, respectively, as shown
in Fig. 5. With the dual plasma sources (S1 þ S2), with a
plasma separation distance of 2 mm, the peak pressure mea-
sured is 7.9 kPa, which is higher than the peak pressure pro-
duced by either of the two individual plasma sources.
Similarly, the arrival time of the dual source is 218.5 ls,
which is less than both the individual source arrival times of
234 and 219.6 ls (from S1 and S2), respectively. The corre-
sponding ASW signals are presented in Fig. 5.
The peak sound pressures with respect to plasma sepa-
ration distance for the ratio of 1:4 are presented in Fig. 6.
From Fig. 6, the pressure starts at 7.54 kPa, increases up
to 8.47 kPa, decreases to 7.69 kPa, and again rises continu-
ously up to 9.79 kPa. The entire behavior of peak sound
pressures with respect to separation distance d is observed to
accelerate, saturate, decelerate, and then accelerate again for
0–7, 7–9, 9–13, and 13–19 mm, respectively. The pressures
are increasing rapidly from 13 to 19 mm separation distance.
The interaction of the two plasma sources can be con-
sidered as analogous to the interaction of two fluids with dif-
ferent acoustic impedances. From our earlier work on the
interaction of the two plasmas (Guthikonda et al., 2020), it
was observed that the propagation of the shock front of the
FIG. 5. (Color online) Time domain signals of ASWs emitted from the sin-
gle plasma (S1 and S2) and dual plasma S1 þ S2. The plasma separation dis-
tance between two plasmas is 2 mm. Laser energies of 25 and 102 mJ were
used to form plasma (S1) and plasma (S2), respectively. Arrival times are
indicated with color dashed lines on signals.
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 153 (3), March 2023
FIG. 6. (Color online) Dependence of peak sound pressure on plasma sepa-
ration distance for the interaction of plasma sources with 1:4 impedances.
Individual laser energies of 25 and 102 mJ form the two plasma sources S1
and S2.
high energy source through the plasma of a low energy
source is observed to predominantly lead to the formation of
a jetlet and its evolution. The evolution of a plasma jetlet in
the plasma of the lower density is studied by two-
dimensional (2D) emission images and shadowgraphic
imaging. This confirms that the plasma interaction mimics
the collision of fluids with varying impedances, where Z ¼ qu
is the impedance of the plasma sources, with q being the
plasma density and u the plasma expansion speed in the
medium—in our case, as the input laser energies are varied
in the ratios of 1:1, 1:1.7, and 1:4. This mimics the collision
of fluids with varying acoustic impedances ZS1 and ZS2,
where ZS1 < ZS2. Figure 4 shows the evolution of the jetlet at
30 ls time from the plasma initiation time, which confirms
the analogy of interaction of shockwaves with interaction of
fluids.
C. Effect of shock–shock interaction on the ASW
In this section, we present the results of ASW during
the shock–shock interaction regime occurring at d > 10 mm.
For the plasma separation distance of d > 10 mm, all the
effects of plasma–plasma and plasma–shock interactions
will be diminished. Hence, in this regime, the microphone
will be receiving the net effect of the interacting shock-
waves from both the sources occurring at the interaction
zone. An enhancement of ASW from the interaction zone is
observed in all the cases studied.
For easier understanding, the ASW signals obtained at a
plasma separation distance of 14 mm for the case of equal
energy sources at 25 and 50 mJ per source are compared
with that of the dual source of S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 25 mJ, resulting in
S1 þ S2 ¼ 50 mJ [Fig. 7(a)]. It is observed that the single
source with laser pulse energies of 25 and 50 mJ generated
the peak sound pressures of 3.4 and 4.7 kPa, respectively,
which are lower than the peak pressure 6.59 kPa due to dual
plasma source (S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 25 mJ, resulting in S1 þ S2 ¼ 50
mJ). The interaction of acoustic sources resulted in an
Elle et al. 1659

FIG. 7. (Color online) Time domain signals of ASWs from a 7 ns LIB of
ambient air medium. (a) Single source of 50 mJ and dual source of 25
mJ þ 25 mJ at 14 mm separation distance; (b) single source of 100 mJ and
dual source of 50 mJ þ 50 mJ at 14 mm separation distance.
enhancement of 1.4 times compared to a single acoustic
source of 50 mJ laser pulse energy. Similarly, at higher laser
energy [Fig. 7(b)], the peak sound pressures generated from a
single source of 50 and 100 mJ are 4.75 and 6.8 kPa, respec-
tively, while from a dual plasma source (S1 ¼ S2 ¼ 50 mJ),
the peak sound pressure is 9 kPa, which is 1.3 times higher
than the corresponding peak sound pressure due to a single
source of 100 mJ laser energy. The peak pressure comparison
clearly shows that when the incident laser energy is split into
counter propagating parts, an enhancement in the peak ASW
pressures is observed. This happens due to the interaction of
two plasmas/SWs at the interaction zone.
The arrival times of the ASW from the dual plasma
sources in Figs. 7(a) and 7(b) are observed to be higher than
those of their corresponding single source energies (50 and
100 mJ). From the dual source configuration, with both 25
and 50 mJ, the peak pressures are higher compared to single
sources due to 25/50 mJ and 50/100mJ. This indicates that
the laser energy deposited will be sustained and leads to
enhanced resultant pressures.
IV. CONCLUSION
The time domain analysis of ASW from individual as
well as interacting SWs generated from the 7 ns LIB of air
were presented. In all, three cases of interacting plasma
sources with energy ratios of 1:1, 1:1.7, and 1:4 led to
1660 J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 153 (3), March 2023
https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017535
ASWs of higher peak sound pressures than those of the
individual plasmas. Comparison of the peak sound pressures
between the single and dual plasma sources shows that the
pressures are higher in the case of interacting plasma
sources. For the equal energy sources, the peak sound pres-
sures increased linearly up to a certain separation distance
d > 12 mm for 25 mJ þ 25 mJ and d > 18 mm for 50 mJ
þ 50 mJ before getting saturated and decaying, while for
the case of unequal energy sources, the peak sound pres-
sures showed increase, saturation, decay, and increase with
increasing plasma separation distance d. For the case of
energy ratio of 1:1.7, the peak pressure increased almost lin-
early for the separation distance d  14 mm, while for the
case of energy sources of 1:4 ratio, the increase was
observed until d  6 mm, and then the pressures saturated
until 10 mm before decaying until d  14 mm. From 14 mm,
the peak pressure increased linearly until the end of our
observations (d ¼ 20 mm). The results confirmed that the
dynamics of interaction of plasma/SWs across the interac-
tion zone vary with the plasma separation distance and the
incident laser energy ratios. The shadowgraphic images of
the interaction of two interacting plasmas show that the
plasma–plasma interaction is dominant at lower separation
distances, while with increasing plasma separation distance,
shock–plasma and shock–shock interaction are dominant,
wherein the shock of S2 is leading to jetlet in the S1 plasma.
The evolution of acoustic emissions confirmed that the
shockwaves generated at a few microseconds (imaged via
shadowgraphy) continue to affect the surroundings up to
260 ls. This confirms that acoustic detection can be a diag-
nostic tool to understand the evolution of atmospheric plas-
mas and their interactions, including the dynamics across
the interaction zone.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors thank the Defence Research and
Development Organization (DRDO), Government of India,
for the financial support through the Grant-in-Aid for
ACRHEM, Phase-III vide ERIP/ER/1501138/M/01/319/
D(R&D). M.E. and N.G. contributed equally to the work
presented and can be considered as joint first authors.
Al-Shboul, K. F., Harilal, S. S., Hassan, S. M., Hassanein, A., Costello, J.
T., Yabuuchi, T., Tanaka, K. A., and Hirooka, Y. (2014).
“Interpenetration and stagnation in colliding laser plasmas,” Phys.
Plasmas 21, 013502.
Bende, T., and Jean, B. J. (2004). “Non-contact photoacoustic spectroscopy
for photoablation control,” U.S. patent 6694173B1.
Bittencourt, J. A. (2004). Fundamentals of Plasma Physics (Springer, New
York).
Bosch, R. A., Berger, R. L., Failor, B. H., Delamater, N. D., Charatis, G.,
and Kauffman, R. L. (1992). “Collision and interpenetration of plasmas
created by laser-illuminated disks,” Phys. Fluids B Plasma Phys. 4,
979–988.
Chelikani, L., Pinnoju, V., Verma, P., Singh, R. V., and Kiran, P. P. (2017).
“Dynamic response of laser ablative shock waves from coated and
uncoated amorphous boron nanoparticles,” AIP Conf. Proc. 1793,
120024.
Elle et al.
 https://doi.org/10.1121/10.0017535
Chen, X., Cheng, L., Guo, D., Kostov, Y., and Choa, F.-S. (2011).
“Quantum cascade laser based standoff photoacoustic chemical
detection,” Opt. Express 19, 20251–20257.
Chide, B., Maurice, S., Cousin, A., Bousquet, B., Mimoun, D., Beyssac, O.,
Meslin, P.-Y., and Wiens, R. C. (2020). “Recording laser-induced sparks
on Mars with the SuperCam microphone,” Spectrochim. Acta Part B At.
Spectrosc. 174, 106000.
Chide, B., Maurice, S., Murdoch, N., Lasue, J., Bousquet, B., Jacob, X.,
Cousin, A., Forni, O., Gasnault, O., Meslin, P.-Y., Fronton, J.-F., Bassas-
Portus, M., Cadu, A., Sournac, A., Mimoun, D., and Wiens, R. C. (2019).
“Listening to laser sparks: A link between laser-induced breakdown spec-
troscopy, acoustic measurements and crater morphology,” Spectrochim.
Acta Part B At. Spectrosc. 153, 50–60.
Dardis, J., and Costello, J. T. (2010). “Stagnation layers at the collision front
between two laser-induced plasmas: A study using time-resolved imaging
and spectroscopy,” Spectrochim. Acta Part B At. Spectrosc. 65, 627–635.
Deaton, J. B., Azad, F. H., Azer, M. N., and Rockstroh, T. J. (2011). “Laser
shock peening system with time-of-flight monitoring,” U.S. patent
US20070119824A1.
Dehoux, T., Ghanem, M. A., Zouani, O. F., Rampnoux, J. M., Guillet, Y.,
Dilhaire, S., Durrieu, M. C., and Audoin, B. (2015). “All-optical broad-
band ultrasonography of single cells,” Sci. Rep. 5, 8650.
Diwakar, P. K., Harilal, S. S., Freeman, J. R., and Hassanein, A. (2013).
“Role of laser pre-pulse wavelength and inter-pulse delay on signal
enhancement in collinear double-pulse laser-induced breakdown
spectroscopy,” Spectrochim. Acta Part B At. Spectrosc. 87, 65–73.
Dogas, D., Efthimiopoulos, T., Andreouli, C., and Campbell, M. (2001).
“Acoustic wave monitoring of the excimer laser ablation of YBCO high-
Tc superconductor,” Appl. Phys. A 73, 287–294.
Fallon, C. (2013). “Optical diagnostics of colliding laser produced plasmas:
Towards next generation plasma light sources,” Ph.D. thesis, Dublin City
University, Dublin, Ireland.
Ghanem, M. A., Dehoux, T., Liu, L., Saux, G. L., Plawinski, L., Durrieu,
M.-C., and Audoin, B. (2018). “Opto-acoustic microscopy reveals adhe-
sion mechanics of single cells,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 89, 014901.
Gomez Bola~nos, J., Pulkki, V., Karppinen, P., and Haeggstr€ om, E. (2013).
“An optoacoustic point source for acoustic scale model measurements,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 133, EL221–EL227.
Gupta, S. L., Pandey, P. K., and Thareja, R. K. (2013). “Dynamics of laser
ablated colliding plumes,” Phys. Plasmas 20, 013511.
Guthikonda, N., Manikanta, E., Chelikani, L., Shiva, S. S., Harsha, S. S.,
Ikkurthi, V. R., and Kiran, P. P. (2020). “Interaction of two counterpropagating
laser induced plasmas and shock waves in air,” Phys. Plasmas 27, 023107.
Guthikonda, N., Shiva, S. S., Manikanta, E., Kameswari, D. P. S. L.,
Ikkurthi, V. R., Sijoy, C. D., and Kiran, P. P. (2021). “Effect of focusing
plane on laser blow-off shock waves from confined aluminum and copper
foils,” J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 55, 115202.
Harilal, S. S., Polek, M. P., and Hassanein, A. (2011). “Jetlike emission
from colliding laser-produced plasmas,” IEEE Trans. Plasma Sci. 39,
2780–2781.
Hosoya, N., Nagata, M., and Kajiwara, I. (2013). “Acoustic testing in a
very small space based on a point sound source generated by laser-
induced breakdown: Stabilization of plasma formation,” J. Sound Vib.
332, 4572–4583.
Irissou, E., Vidal, F., Johnston, T., Chaker, M., Guay, D., and Ryabinin, A.
N. (2006). “Influence of an inert background gas on bimetallic cross-
beam pulsed laser deposition,” J. Appl. Phys. 99, 034904.
Kaleris, K., Orfanos, Y., Bakarezos, M., Papadogiannis, N., and
Mourjopoulos, J. (2019). “Experimental and analytical evaluation of the
acoustic radiation of femtosecond laser plasma filament sound sources in
air,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 146, EL212–EL218.
Kameswari, D. P. S. L., Guthikonda, N., Shiva, S. S., Manikanta, E.,
Harsha, S. S., Ikkurthi, V. R., and Kiran, P. P. (2021). “Investigation of
stagnation layer dynamics of counterpropagating laser induced air plas-
mas: Numerical simulations vis-a-vis experimental observations,” Phys.
Plasmas 28, 043104.
Larson, G. D., Martin, J. S., and Scott, W. R., Jr. (2007). “Investigation of
microphones as near-ground sensors for seismic detection of buried land-
mines,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 122, 253–258.
J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 153 (3), March 2023
Leela, C., Bagchi, S., Kumar, V. R., Tewari, S. P., and Kiran, P. P. (2013).
“Dynamics of laser induced micro-shock waves and hot core plasma in
quiescent air,” Laser Part. Beams 31, 263–272.
Manikanta, E. (2018). “Acoustic shock wave emissions from laser induced
breakdown of materials,” Ph.D. thesis, University of Hyderabad,
Hyderabad, India.
Manikanta, E., Vinoth Kumar, L., Leela, C., and Prem Kiran, P. (2017).
“Effect of laser intensity on temporal and spectral features of laser gener-
ated acoustic shock waves: ns versus ps laser pulses,” Appl. Opt. 56,
6902–6910.
Manikanta, E., Vinoth Kumar, L., Venkateshwarlu, P., Leela, C., and Kiran,
P. P. (2016). “Effect of pulse duration on the acoustic frequency emis-
sions during the laser-induced breakdown of atmospheric air,” Appl. Opt.
55, 548–555.
Mulser, P., Sigel, R., and Witkowski, S. (1973). “Plasma production by
laser,” Phys. Rep. 6, 187–239.
Nalam, S. A., Manikanta, E., Srikanthaiah, S. H., and Kiran, P. P. (2019).
“Acoustic measurements on femtosecond laser induced filaments,” in
Proceedings of the International Conference on Optics and Electro-
Optics (ICOL-2019), October 19–22, Dehradun, India.
Pandiyan, V., Drissi-Daoudi, R., Shevchik, S., Masinelli, G., Le-Quang, T.,
Loge, R., and Wasmer, K. (2021). “Semi-supervised monitoring of laser
powder bed fusion process based on acoustic emissions,” Virtual Phys.
Prototyp. 16, 481–497.
Qin, Q., and Attenborough, K. (2004). “Characteristics and application of
laser-generated acoustic shock waves in air,” Appl. Acoust. 65, 325–340.
Rambo, P. W., and Denavit, J. (1994). “Interpenetration and ion separation
in colliding plasmas,” Phys. Plasmas 1, 4050–4060.
Rambo, P. W., and Procassini, R. J. (1995). “A comparison of kinetic and
multifluid simulations of laser-produced colliding plasmas,” Phys.
Plasmas 2, 3130–3145.
Shevchik, S. A., Kenel, C., Leinenbach, C., and Wasmer, K. (2018).
“Acoustic emission for in situ quality monitoring in additive manufactur-
ing using spectral convolutional neural networks,” Addit. Manuf. 21,
598–604.
Shiva, S. S., Leela, C., Kiran, P. P., Sijoy, C. D., Ikkurthi, V. R., and
Chaturvedi, S. (2017). “Numerical investigation of nanosecond laser
induced plasma and shock wave dynamics from air using 2D hydrody-
namic code,” Phys. Plasmas 24, 083110.
Shiva, S. S., Leela, C., Kiran, P. P., Sijoy, C. D., Ikkurthi, V. R., and
Chaturvedi, S. (2019). “Role of laser absorption and equation-of-state
models on ns laser induced ablative plasma and shockwave dynamics in
ambient air: Numerical and experimental investigations,” Phys. Plasmas
26, 072108.
Tanski, M., Barbucha, R., Kocik, M., Garasz, K., and Mizeraczyk, J.
(2013). “Investigation of the laser generated ablation plasma plume
dynamics and plasma plume sound wave dynamics,” Proc. SPIE Int. Soc.
Opt. Eng. 8703, 870300.
Tselev, A., Gorbunov, A., and Pompe, W. (2001). “Cross-beam pulsed laser
deposition: General characteristic,” Rev. Sci. Instrum. 72, 2665–2672.
van den Heuvel, J., Klein, V., Lutzmann, P., van Putten, F., Hebel, M., and
Schleijpen, H. (2003). “Sound wave and laser excitation for acousto-
optical landmine detection,” Proc. SPIE Int. Soc. Opt. Eng. 5089,
569–578.
Vinoth Kumar, L., Manikanta, E., Leela, C., and Kiran, P. P. (2014).
“Spectral selective radio frequency emissions from laser induced break-
down of target materials,” Appl. Phys. Lett. 105, 064102.
Vinoth Kumar, L., Manikanta, E., Leela, C., and Kiran, P. P. (2016).
“Effect of laser intensity on radio frequency emissions from laser induced
breakdown of atmospheric air,” J. Appl. Phys. 119, 214904.
Yu, J., Mondelain, D., Kasparian, J., Salmon, E., Geffroy, S., Favre, C.,
Boutou, V., and Wolf, J.-P. (2003). “Sonographic probing of laser fila-
ments in air,” Appl. Opt. 42, 7117–7120.
Yuan, D., Li, Y., Liu, M., Zhong, J., Zhu, B., Li, Y., Wei, H., Han, B., Pei,
X., Zhao, J., Li, F., Zhang, Z., Liang, G., Wang, F., Weng, S., Li, Y.,
Jiang, S., Du, K., Ding, Y., Zhu, B., Zhu, J., Zhao, G., and Zhang, J.
(2017). “Formation and evolution of a pair of collisionless shocks in
counter-streaming flows,” Sci. Rep. 7, 42915.
Elle et al. 1661