Imaging with Dynamic-Ripple Diffraction

  • Lawrence W. Kessler


Most methods of point-by-point scanning of acoustic fields employ relatively slow mechanical methods to measure amplitude and phase in the receptor plane. Optical methods of sound field detection have been discussed in a very general way in Chapter 3, and it was pointed out that point-by-point optical scanning has several advantages over direct optical conversion methods. In particular, since the sound field parameters are ultimately translated into electrical signals, electronic filtering may be employed to reject unwanted background. Furthermore, the choice between conventional imaging and holographic imaging is made by changing from linear detection to phase detection, respectively. The commercial availability of lasers and laser beam scanning devices permit the construction of acoustic imaging systems to be relatively straightforward, and with the appropriate devices and TV compatible circuitry, real time imaging is possible.


Sound Field Acoustic Image Knife Edge Acoustic Frequency Acoustic Microscope 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1).
    R. Adler, A. Korpel, and P. Desmares. “An Instrument for making Surface Waves Visible”. IEEE Trans. SU Vol. SU-15, 157, (1968)Google Scholar
  2. 2).
    A. Korpel and P. Desmares “Rapid Sampling of Acoustic Holograms by Laser Scanning Techniques”, J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 45, 881 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3).
    R.S. Mezrich, K.F. Etzold and D.H. Vilkomerson “Ultrasonovision” Proc. 1974 Ultrasonics Symposium. Milwaukee, Wisc. IEEE Cat#74 CHO 896-SU pp 1–4Google Scholar
  4. 4).
    A. Korpel, L.W. Kessler and P.R. Palermo, “An Acoustic Microscope Operating at 100 MHz”, Nature, 232, 110–111 (1971).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5).
    L.W. Kessler, P.R. Palermo and A. Korpel, “Practical High Resolution Acoustic Microscopy”, Acoustical Holography Vol. 4, Plenum Press, New York (1972), ed. by G. Wade, pp. 51–71.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6).
    L.W. Kessler, P.R. Palermo and A. Korpel “Recent Developments with the Scanning Laser Acoustic Microscope” in Acoustic Holography Vol.5, ed. by P. Green, Plenum Press, New York (1974).Google Scholar
  7. 7).
    R.L.Whitman, M. Ahmed and A. Korpel “A Progress Report on the Laser Scanning Camera” Acoustical Holography Vol. 4, Plenum Press, NY (1972) ed. by Wade pp. 11–32Google Scholar
  8. 8).
    R.L. Whitman, A. Korpel and M. Ahmed “Novel Techniques for Real Time Depth-Gated Acoustic Image Holography” Appl. Phys. Lett 20, 370 (1972).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9).
    R. L. Whitman and A. Korpel “Probing of Acoustic Surface Pertubations by Coherent Light”, Applied Optics, 8, 1567 (1969).ADSCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10).
    A. Korpel and L.W. Kessler, “Comparison of Methods of Acoustic Microscopy”, Acoustic Holography, Vol. 3, A. F. Metherell (ed.), Plenum Press, NY (1971) Ch. 3, pp. 23–43CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11).
    M. Ahmed, R. L. Whitman and A. Korpel, “Response of an Isotropic Acoustic Imaging Faceplate” IEEE Trans. SU SU-20 323 (1973).Google Scholar
  12. 12).
    SONOMICROSCOPE 100 manufactured by Sonscan, Inc. Bensenville, Illinois 60106 (312) 766–8795Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • Lawrence W. Kessler
    • 1
  1. 1.Sonoscan, Inc.BensenvilleUSA

Personalised recommendations