Experimental Mechanics

, Volume 59, Issue 1, pp 41–49 | Cite as

A Simple Dual-Beam Time-Multiplexed Photon Doppler Velocimeter for Pressure-Shear Plate Impact Experiments

  • D.D. Mallick
  • M. Zhao
  • B.T. Bosworth
  • B.E. Schuster
  • M.A. Foster
  • K.T. RameshEmail author


Pressure-shear plate impact experiments generate normal and transverse particle velocities during high strain rate deformations. Traditionally, freespace lenscoupled tabletop laser interferometry techniques are used together with diffraction gratings to interrogate the evolving velocity vector at the back face of the target plate. Recently, fiberoptic velocimetry (photon Doppler velocimetry or PDV) has become commonplace for measuring normal particle velocities above 200m/sec. In this work, we demonstrate transverse velocity detection using a modified PDV system where we subtract the measured normal velocity history from a concurrent velocity history measured at a canted angle to the target surface to obtain the transverse velocity component. This modified system is time-multiplexed to reduce the number of components, and uses an erbium doped fiber amplifier (EDFA) to boost the angled signal intensity while maintaining low noise. The system operates as a heterodyne interferometer, but features a frequency upshifted reference leg to improve data analysis at the particle velocities expected in the experiment. We demonstrate by direct comparison that this inexpensive and simple approach is as effective as traditional grating methods.


PDV Photon doppler velocimetry Interferometry Velocimetry Pressure-shear plate impact 



We thank the Borg group at Marquette University for their input into this work. We also thank Christian Kettenbeil at California Institute of Technology for his input. Finally, we thank the Hopkins Extreme Materials Institute for their support, specifically Steve Lavenstein, David Eastman and Dr. Ravi Shivaraman. This research was sponsored by the Army Research Laboratory and was accomplished under Cooperative Agreement Number W911NF-12-2-0022. The views and conclusions contained in this document are those of the authors and should not be interpreted as representing the official policies, either expressed or implied, of the Army Research Laboratory or the U.S. Government. The U.S. Government is authorized to reproduce and distribute reprints for Government purposes notwithstanding any copyright notation herein.


  1. 1.
    Klopp R, Clifton R, Shawki T (1985) Pressure-shear impact and the dynamic viscoplastic response of metals. Mech Mater 4(3):375CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Clifton R (1970) Analysis of the laser velocity interferometer. J Appl Phys 41(13):5335. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Kim K, Clifton R, Kumar P (1977) A combined normal and transverse-displacement interferometer with an application to impact of y-cut quartz. J Appl Phys 48(4132):4132. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Espinosa H, Mello M, Xu Y (1996) A desensitized displacement interferometer applied to impact recovery experiments. Appl Phys Lett 69(21):3161. CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Vogler T, Alexander S, Thornhill T, Reinhart W (2011) Sandia Technical Report SAND2011–6700, pp 1–52Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Chhabildas L, Sutherland H, Asay J (1979) A velocity interferometer technique to determine shear-wave particle velocity in shock-loaded solids. J Appl Phys 50(8):5196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Meyers M (2007) Dynamic behavior of materials. WileyGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Strand O, Goosman D, Martinez C, Whitworth T, Kuhlow W (2006) Compact system for high-speed velocimetry using heterodyne techniques. Rev Sci Instr 77(08318):1Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Dolan D (2010) Accuracy and precision in photonic doppler velocimetry. Rev Sci Instr 81 (053905):053905–1–053905-7Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Holtkamp DB (2006) Survey of optical velocimetry experiments - applications of PDV, a heterodyne velocimeter. In: 2006 IEEE international conference on megagauss magnetic field generation and related topics. Herlany, pp 119–128.
  11. 11.
    Ao T, Dolan D (2010) Sandia Technical Report SAND2010–3628, pp 1–64Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    Zuanetti B, Wang T, Prakash V (2017) A compact fiber optics-based heterodyne combined normal and transverse displacement interferometer. Rev Sci Instrum 88(033108):1. Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Kettenbeil C, Mello M, Bischann M, Ravichandran G (2018) Heterodyne transverse velocimetry for pressure-shear plate impact experiments. J Appl Phys 123(125902):125902–1–125902-14Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Young J, Preston J, Driel H, Sipe J (1983) Laser induced periodic surface structure. Phys Rev B 27 (2):1141–1154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Luo J, Bai J, He P, Ying K (2004) IEEE Trans Ultrason Ferroelectr Frequency Control 51 (9):1119–11127CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Cabral A, Rebordao J (2007) Accuracy of frequency-sweeping interferometry for absolute distance metrology. Opt Eng 46(7):073602CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Mahafza BR (2013) Radar systems analysis and design using MATLAB. Chapman & HallGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Casem D, Grunschel S, Schuster B (2012) Normal and transverse displacement interferometers applied to small diameter Kolsky bars. Exp Mech 52(2):173CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Society for Experimental Mechanics 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  • D.D. Mallick
    • 1
    • 2
    • 3
  • M. Zhao
    • 1
    • 2
  • B.T. Bosworth
    • 1
    • 4
  • B.E. Schuster
    • 1
    • 3
  • M.A. Foster
    • 1
    • 4
  • K.T. Ramesh
    • 1
    • 2
    Email author
  1. 1.Hopkins Extreme Materials InstituteJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical EngineeringJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA
  3. 3.US Army Research LaboratoryAdelphiUSA
  4. 4.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringJohns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations