Advertisement
Not a member of Pastebin yet?
Sign Up,
it unlocks many cool features!
- 622
- Letter
- Vol. 44, No. 3 / 1 February 2019 / Optics Letters
- Photoacoustic communications: delivering audible
- signals via absorption of light by atmospheric H2O
- RYAN M. SULLENBERGER,* SUMANTH KAUSHIK,
- AND
- CHARLES M. WYNN
- Massachusetts Institute of Technology, Lincoln Laboratory, 244 Wood Street, Lexington, Massachusetts 02421, USA
- *Corresponding author: ryan.sullenberger@ll.mit.edu
- Received 25 September 2018; revised 29 November 2018; accepted 11 December 2018; posted 3 January 2019 (Doc. ID 346799);
- published 25 January 2019
- We describe a means of communication in which a user
- with no external receiver hears an audible audio message
- directed only at him/her. A laser transmits the message,
- which is encoded upon a modulated laser beam and sent
- directly to the receiver?s ear via the photoacoustic effect.
- A 1.9 ?m thulium laser matched to an atmospheric water
- vapor absorption line is chosen to maximize sound pressure
- while maintaining eye-safe power densities. We examine the
- photoacoustic transfer function describing this generation
- of audible sound and the important operational parameters,
- such as laser spot size, and their impact on a working
- system. © 2019 Optical Society of America
- https://doi.org/10.1364/OL.44.000622
- The ability to communicate with a specific subject at a prescribed location who lacks any communication equipment
- opens up many intriguing possibilities. Communication across
- noisy rooms, hail and warn applications, and localized communication directed at only the intended recipient are a few possibilities. We demonstrate a method for localized acoustic
- communication with a listener at long standoff distances using
- a modulated laser transmitted toward the receiver?s ear. The optically encoded information is converted into acoustic messages
- via the photoacoustic effect. The photoacoustic conversion of
- the optical information into an audible signal occurs via the
- absorption of light by ambient water vapor in the near area
- of the receiver?s ear followed by airborne acoustic transmission
- to the ear. The recipient requires no external communication
- equipment in order to receive audible messages. We refer to this
- means of communication as ?photoacoustic communications.?
- Alexander Graham Bell previously described a ?photophone? means of using modulated light to create sound [1].
- However, Bell?s invention never anticipated a means by which
- the sound could be sent directly to the user without the need
- for an intermediary material. Later, a photoacoustic speaker was
- patented [2] in which modulated laser light was shined into ?a
- gas absorption chamber.?
- Again, this device failed to anticipate the possibility of using
- open air as the absorbing medium. Recently, there has been
- work investigating a photoacoustic means of communication
- 0146-9592/19/030622-04 Journal © 2019 Optical Society of America
- that does not require a medium other than air. This technique,
- known as laser-induced plasma effect (LIPE), uses a laser to
- ionize the air, creating a plasma and ultimately a sound near
- the end receiver [3]. Physical Optics Corporation is currently
- developing this technique primarily for military use. The use of
- ionizing radiation for producing sound, as well as the need for
- very high-power lasers are safety concerns for the viability of
- this approach.
- Limited work has been performed examining the use of microwaves to stimulate sound directly in a user [4,5]. However,
- the communication has been limited to barely audible clicks
- (no complex messages) due to the inefficiencies in the transmission through bone and tissue. Furthermore, none of the microwave work has the ability to localize an individual in the
- manner a laser-based photoacoustic communications system
- does. Underwater photoacoustic communication has also been
- explored [6].
- Phased array acoustic systems (e.g., Audio Spotlight by
- Holosonics) and nonlinear frequency conversion (e.g., Long
- Range Acoustic Devices by LRAD Corp) have also been used
- for projecting sound [7,8]. However, the acoustic spot size produced by linear acoustic arrays is much larger than what is possible with optical conversion due to diffraction (?sound ? mrad,
- ?opt ? ?rad). Parametric acoustic sources overcome diffraction
- by transmitting higher frequency ultrasound and taking advantage of nonlinear mixing of two beams at a range. Haupt and
- Rolt used such a system in a landmine detection scheme [9],
- though in theory it could be used for communication. The
- range of such a system is limited, however, by the lossiness
- of high-frequency sound. Such systems have limits on the order
- of 10 meters, much shorter than the photoacoustic communications system described here.
- This Letter reports on two new approaches of efficiently
- producing localized continuous-wave (CW) and pulsed sound
- at >0 dB and distances > 2.5 m using photoacoustics in air.
- A schematic illustrating the two different photoacoustic communication schemes is shown in Fig. 1. In the first method
- [Fig. 1(a)], an acousto-optic modulator (AOM) provides an
- amplitude modulation of the 1.9 ?m thulium laser, which produces CW audible signals near the receiver via the absorption of
- light by ambient water vapor. In the second method [Fig. 1(b)],
- a fast-steering mirror is used to sweep the laser beam such that
- Letter
- Vol. 44, No. 3 / 1 February 2019 / Optics Letters
- 623
- propagates to the receiver (lower absorption yields more optical
- energy near the receiver), but it is also directly proportional to
- the acoustic signal near the receiver (higher absorption yields
- more local acoustic energy). For a given range, R, a balance
- between these two constraints occurs when A 1?R, where
- R is the distance from the transmitting laser to the receiver
- (end user). We choose R by selecting for a particular absorption, A. A is in turn dictated by choice of laser wavelengths
- commercially available. A highly attractive laser for a photoacoustic communications system is a 1.9 ?m thulium-based fiber laser we procured from IPG Photonics. Note that the gain
- bandwidth of thulium is sufficiently wide enough that alternate
- laser wavelengths can be obtained useful for alternate operating
- ranges.
- Of critical importance to a photoacoustic communications
- system is the efficient conversion of optical energy into acoustic
- energy using safe laser levels. Reference [13] describes a relationship between photoacoustically created sound pressure
- and optical/physical parameters:
- ?I D1?2 Av2
- ???
- Pr psafe
- ,
- 2 2f L C P r 1?2
- Fig. 1. Delivery of audible messages via photoacoustics. (a) Traditional
- photoacoustic configuration: 1907.2 nm laser light is absorbed by
- ambient water vapor. The laser beam is amplitude modulated via an
- acousto-optic modulator. (b) Dynamic photoacoustic communication
- amplifies the audible signal. (c) H2 O absorptivity near 1.9 ?m, with
- an overlay of the laser emission from our thulium fiber laser.
- the laser spot travels at the speed of sound over some arch
- (?360°) adjacent to the receiver. The resulting coherent addition of acoustic waves results in an amplification of the acoustic
- signal and produces pulsed acoustic emission without the need
- for a resonant chamber. This method is similar to dynamic
- photoacoustic spectroscopy, which has been used successfully
- for standoff detection of trace explosives [10,11].
- The laser wavelength was chosen to enable efficient long-range
- communication as well as to satisfy requirements for laser eye
- safety. Since acoustic pressure is directly proportional to optical
- absorption, [see Eqs. (1) and (2) below], a laser wavelength for
- which water is strongly absorbing is advantageous. Even in very
- dry environments, there exist appreciable amounts of water in the
- air. The upper bound for airborne water vapor is 100% relative
- humidity (RH), for which at standard temperature (25°C), there
- exist 4.4 · 104 ppm water molecules in the air. Water has several
- particularly strongly absorbing features in the near infrared.
- Because the near infrared is strongly absorbed by water, it poses
- significantly less safety risk than wavelengths that can penetrate
- through the eye to the retina. The primary safety risk at these
- wavelengths is thermal damage with an eye and skin safety
- threshold of 100 mW?cm2 [12]. Many commercial high-power
- (typically fiber) lasers exist in this regime, including 1.4 ?m,
- 1.5 ?m, and 1.9 ?m varieties. For these three reasons, we find
- the near infrared a very attractive regime for efficient operation.
- Atmospheric optical absorption, A, affects the acoustic signal via two opposing roles. It attenuates the optical energy as it
- (1)
- where P is the pressure, ? is the expansion coefficient of the gas,
- I safe is the laser intensity (assumed to be bounded by the safe
- limit at the given wavelength), A is the optical absorption, v is
- the speed of sound, C P is the specific heat of air, r is the distance from the photoacoustic absorption, f L is the laser modulation frequency, and D is the laser beam diameter. This
- equation is valid in the large-beam limit in which the laser beam
- diameter, D, is larger than the characteristic acoustic size
- vT pulse , where T pulse describes the time duration that the laser
- is on (for a 50% duty cycle waveform, this is half the period of
- the acoustic waveform). Since typical acoustic frequencies range
- between 20 Hz and 20,000 Hz, this period ranges between
- 50 ms and 50 us. When the D < vT pulse (small-beam limit),
- the following equation derived from [13] describes the relevant
- physics:
- Pr
- ?I safe D2 Av 2
- :
- 8f L C P r 1?2 vT pulse 3?2
- (2)
- Equations (1) and (2) provide the guidelines for creating a useful photoacoustic communications system. We use a
- 1.9072 ?m thulium-based fiber laser (IPG Photonics) to assess
- the relevant acoustic transfer functions describing the conversion of optical energy into acoustic energy and verify their relevance to our photoacoustic communications concept. The
- output spectrum of this laser is overlaid on a water-vapor absorption spectrum in Fig. 1(c). At 50% RH and 1.9072 ?m
- laser wavelength, we operate with an atmospheric optical absorption of A 0.04 m?1 . We use AOMs to modulate the laser (square wave, 50% duty cycle) over a range of audible and
- ultrasonic frequencies [Fig. 1(a)]. Since safe levels are defined
- by the laser energy per unit area, the laser spot size D is of particular importance. We systematically vary D (using a variety of
- lenses, and maintaining optical intensity at the target) to examine its effect on the system. An Earthworks M30 microphone
- (bandwidth 50 kHz) is placed ?1 cm away from the edge of
- the laser beam. The resultant transfer functions describing the
- conversion of eye-safe optical energy (100 mW?cm2 ) into
- acoustic energy are shown in Fig. 2(a).
- 624
- Vol. 44, No. 3 / 1 February 2019 / Optics Letters
- We carried out experiments to demonstrate and characterize
- traditional and dynamic photoacoustic communication configurations. Figures 2 and 3 show the measured sound pressure
- levels produced by traditional and dynamic operation, respectively, and Fig. 4 plots the spatial distribution of the measured
- photoacoustic spectra.
- For the traditional photoacoustic experiment, several important trends emerge from the data in Fig. 2(a). As can be seen in
- Eqs. (1) and (2) (dashed and solid lines, respectively) and our
- data, each spot size has a corresponding cutoff frequency above
- which the pressure decreases from its maximum value. The
- maximum pressure occurs at the boundary between the small
- and large spot limits, i.e., when D > vT pulse . In the large-beam
- limit, contributions from different locations in the source
- do not coherently add due to the long acoustic transit time
- across the diameter [13]. The pressure [and corresponding
- sound pressure level (SPL)] are in the audible regime
- (SPL > 0 dB) for D > 1 cm. Higher SPLs are achieved by using larger beam diameters, at the sacrifice of higher frequency
- content. Measurements of the photoacoustic signal strength
- while varying the RH [Fig. 2(b)] show the expected linear relationship. An example photoacoustic waveform (sent and received; frequency sweep, from 20 kHz to 1 kHz) is shown in
- Fig. 2(c). The agreement of the measured data over frequency
- range is good, with deviations at higher frequencies that are
- likely related to several simplifications in Eq. (1).
- We obtained similar positive results for the dynamic photoacoustic concept shown in Fig. 1(b). Figure 3(a) shows an image plot of the dynamic photoacoustic time series data with
- respect to laser beam sweep velocity. Individual waveforms
- for Mach M 1.05, 1.00, and 0.95 are shown to the right
- of the image plot. For M > 1, we see a time lag start to grow
- Fig. 2. Results from our tests utilizing the traditional photoacoustic
- configuration. (a) Transfer functions describing the conversion of
- eye-safe optical energy at 50% RH into acoustic energy for various laser
- spot sizes. Markers represent measured data, and lines represent theory
- [solid = Eq. (2), dashed = Eq. (1)]. (b) Measured photoacoustic signal
- (in mPa) versus RH. The result shows that signal strength is linear
- with RH. (c) Demonstration of a photoacoustic communications waveform, 20 kHz to 1 kHz frequency sweep, sent (T) and received (R).
- Letter
- Fig. 3. Results from our tests utilizing the dynamic photoacoustic configuration (sweep length 50 cm, range 2.5 m). (a) Photoacoustic
- signal heat map, sweep velocity (in Mach #) versus time, for a 5 mm
- laser spot at target. Waveforms at M 1.05, M 1.00, and M
- 0.95 are shown to the right of the heat map. Positive and negative
- values represent compression and rarefaction, respectively. (b) Pressure
- versus laser spot size. (c) Compression timescale (duration of the leading
- compressive wave) of dynamic photoacoustic waveform versus spot size.
- The compression timescale is indicative of the forcing function on the
- water vapor molecules from the swept laser beam.
- between the leading compression and trailing rarefaction of the
- dynamic photoacoustic signal. This is caused by the swept laser
- beam traveling faster than the speed of sound, giving additional
- width (temporal length) to the signal. Measurements of the
- photoacoustic signal strength and waveform compression timescale versus spot size (for constant laser power) are shown in
- Figs. 3(b) and 3(c), respectively. We see that both parameters
- vary linearly with spot size, with higher signal levels and shorter
- timescales for smaller laser spots. Overlaid on Fig. 3(b) is the
- signal level produced using the simple (static) photoacoustic
- configuration. Our results show that dynamic photoacoustics
- achieves an amplification proportional to L/D, where L is
- the length over which the laser beam is swept, and D is the
- spot size. We note that the signal produced via this method
- is easily audible to the naked ear.
- Another important feature of dynamic photoacoustics is its
- ability to generate spatially localized sound. The feature has
- been used recently to amplify faint photoacoustic signals from
- gases as well as aerosols [10,11]. Dynamic photoacoustics
- sweeps a laser beam at the speed of sound through an absorbing
- medium (ambient water vapor in our case) [Fig. 1(b)]. The
- acoustic waves add coherently along the sweep direction creating a local sound front similar to a shock wave that propagates
- in the direction of the laser sweep. Both the amplification
- and directionality of this process are highly advantageous to
- photoacoustic communications, in that they increase the local
- sound levels and provide a means of localizing the signal and
- directing it toward a preferred receiver.
- Letter
- Measurements of the spatial extent of the dynamic photoacoustic signal at a range of 2.5 m are made by placing our
- microphone on motorized translation stages arranged such that
- we measure the plane perpendicular to the sweep direction
- [Fig. 4(d)]. Results of these measurements are shown in
- Figs. 4(a) and 4(b) for 50 cm and 25 cm propagation distances,
- respectively. We define propagation distance as the distance between the microphone and the starting location of the laser
- sweep [Fig. 4(d)]. A horizontal position of 0 mm corresponds
- to a laser sweep speed equal to Mach 1. Horizontal positions >
- 0 mm correspond to sweep speeds > Mach 1, and horizontal
- positions < 0 mm correspond to sweep speeds < Mach 1.
- Analyzing both datasets, we see a vertical separation (?h) of
- acoustic energy for sweep speeds > Mach 1. The separation distance ?h increases linearly with Mach number as well as propagation distance. Simple computer simulations modeling the
- interference of spherically propagating wavefronts indicate that
- the ?h separation is linear with Mach number, consistent with
- our experimental results. The results of this simulation are
- shown in Fig. 4(c). The horizontal spatial extent of the photoacoustic signal becomes larger at longer standoff ranges because
- the relative Mach shifts occur at greater horizontal positions
- due to simple geometry. We confirmed this behavior at
- 10 m standoff range for which we measured a photoacoustic
- signal proportionally larger along the horizontal axis.
- There is a tradeoff between sweep length (which directly corresponds to gain) and pulse repetition frequency (PRF) of the
- Vol. 44, No. 3 / 1 February 2019 / Optics Letters
- 625
- audible signal, where PRF of a dynamic photoacoustic communications system is v?L. This means that, for a dynamic photoacoustic communication system designed with a swept path
- length of L 1 m, a single audible tone of frequency PRF
- 343 m?s?1 m 343 Hz can be produced. To increase the
- audible frequency, either the sweep length could be reduced (at
- the cost of gain), or more laser beams could be added. The laser
- spot size places an upper limit on the PRF, as the spot size dictates the lower bound on the waveform timescale. For likely operational parameters, e.g., D 3 cm, PRF 1 kHz, ANSI
- constraints (for eye and skin safe operation) on average power
- (100 mW?cm2 ) are more stressing than peak fluence
- (100 mJ?cm2 ). Since average power is proportional to PRF, this
- implies that low frequencies can be generated more loudly and
- safely than higher frequencies (everything else being equal). A
- trade study and systems engineering effort to design a dynamic
- photoacoustic communications system with the bandwidth
- necessary to encode more detailed messages (e.g., spoken words,
- music, etc.) is reserved for a later study.
- In summary, we have demonstrated the use of a 1.9 ?m thulium laser to produce photoacoustic signals from the ambient
- water vapor in air (50% RH), with sound pressure levels well
- into the audible regime (SPL > 0 dB) while using eye-safe laser
- powers. We also demonstrated the use of dynamic photoacoustics to amplify the signal beyond what is possible with traditional photoacoustic techniques. The methods described
- here provide new opportunities for development of photoacoustic communications systems capable of delivering audible
- messages to subjects who lack any communication equipment.
- Funding. Assistant Secretary of Defense for Research and
- Engineering (Air Force Contract No. FA8702-15-D-0001).
- Acknowledgment. Opinions, interpretations, conclusions, and recommendations are those of the author and are
- not necessarily endorsed by the United States Government.
- REFERENCES
- Fig. 4. Measured spatial extent of the acoustic signal (mV p?p ) produced via the dynamic photoacoustic configuration at a range of
- 2.5 m, sweep length of 25 cm, and total propagation distance from
- start of sweep to receiver of (a) 50 cm and (b) 25 cm. A horizontal
- position of 0 mm corresponds to Mach 1. Horizontal positions > 0
- correspond to sweep speeds > Mach 1, and horizontal positions <
- 0 correspond to sweep speeds < Mach 1. (c) Simulation of the ?separation distance? (?h) measured at supersonic sweep speeds growing
- linearly with propagation distance, which agrees with our measured
- data. (d) Schematic of the spatial measurement.
- 1. A. G. Bell and S. Tainter, ?Photo phone-transmitter,? U.S. patent
- 2,354,96A (December 14, 1880).
- 2. W. F. Rush, J. E. Huebler, and P. Lysenko, ?Photoacoustic speaker
- and method,? US patent 4,641,377 (February 3, 1987).
- 3. S. Gallagher, ?Non-Lethal Weapon: DOD seeks to use lasers to
- create shouting will-o-the-wisp,? 2018, https://arstechnica.com/techpolicy/2018/03/non-lethal-weapon-dod-seeks-to-use-lasers-to-createshouting-will-o-the-wisp/.
- 4. A. H. Frey, J. Appl. Physiol. 17, 689 (1962).
- 5. J. C. Lin and Z. Wang, Health Phys. 92, 621 (2007).
- 6. S. Egerev, Acoust. Phys. 49, 51 (2003).
- 7. ?Audio Spotlight by Holosonics?Focused Audio Technology,? https://
- www.holosonics.com/.
- 8. ?LRAD Mass Notification & Life Safety Systems Archives,? LRAD,
- https://www.lradx.com/product_categories/lrad_mass_notification_
- systems/.
- 9. R. W. Haupt and K. D. Rolt, Lincoln Lab. J. 15, 3 (2005).
- 10. C. M. Wynn, S. Palmacci, M. L. Clark, and R. R. Kunz, Appl. Phys.
- Lett. 101, 184103 (2012).
- 11. R. M. Sullenberger, M. L. Clark, R. R. Kunz, A. C. Samuels, D. K.
- Emge, M. W. Ellzy, and C. M. Wynn, Opt. Express 22, A1810 (2014).
- 12. Laser Institute of America, ?American National Standard for Safe Use
- of Lasers,? ANSI Z136.1?2007 (American National Standards
- Institute, 2007).
- 13. A. C. Tam, Rev. Mod. Phys. 58, 381 (1986).
Advertisement
Add Comment
Please, Sign In to add comment
Advertisement