Whither Nonlinear Acoustics?

  • M. A. Breazeale
Part of the Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation book series


If we include consideration of wave propagation in an ideal gas, we can trace the origin of theoretical nonlinear acoustics, at least as far back as Poisson’s work in 1808 [1]. The first experiments in air were done 1.27 centuries later [2]. With liquids Fox and Wallace [3] tried to explain experimental results on sound attenuation with a correct, but somewhat inadequate nonlinear theory. Keck and Beyer [4] used the equations of hydrodynamics and showed that nonlinear considerations lead to the prediction of nonlinear distortion, something that had been observed in fluids by optical techniques [5] and showed that the nonlinear equation for wave propagation in fluids has the same form as that for an ideal gas. Different thermodynamical quantities appeared in the nonlinear equations, however. It is significant that Keck and Beyer were able to perceive the inherent similarity of the two descriptions without becoming confused by the dissimilarities of certain details of equations describing ideal gases compared with those describing liquids.


Physical Acoustics Nonlinearity Parameter Nonlinear Wave Equation Crystalline Solid Order Elastic Constant 
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.
    S. D. Poisson, Journ. de l’Ecole Polytechnique 7, 14e Cah., 319 (1808).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    A. L. Thomas, R. T. Jenkins and H. T. O’Neil, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 6, 173 (1935).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. E. Fox and W. A. Wallace, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 26, 994 (1954).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    W. Keck and R. T. Beyer, Phys. Fluids 3, 346 (1960).MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    M. A. Breazeale and E. A. Hiedemann, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 30, 751 (1958).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    R. D. Peters, M. A. Breazeale and V. K. Paré, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 39, 1505 (1968).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    B.D. Blackburn and M. A. Breazeale, J. Acoust Soc. Am. 76, 1755 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. Philip and M. A. Breazeale, J. Appl. Phys. 54, 752 (1983).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    P. N. Keating, Phys. Rev. 145, 637 (1966);CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. P. N. Keating, Phys. Rev. 149, 674 (1966).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 10.
    M. A. Breazeale and J. Philip, in Physical Acoustics, edited by W. P. Mason and R. N. Thurston (Academic Press, New York, 1984), Vol. 17.Google Scholar
  12. 11.
    J. H. Cantrell, Proceedings of the IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Denver, Vol. 1, p. 425 (1987).Google Scholar
  13. 12.
    N. Dass and M. Kumari, Phys. Stat. Sol. (b) 124, 531 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 13.
    R.K. Varshney and J. Shanker, Phys. Stat. Sol. (b) 122, 65 (1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. 14.
    A. L. Ruoff, J. Appl. Phys. 49, 197 (1978).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 15.
    P. A. Lewin and L. Bjørnø in Ultrasound Tissue Characterization, edited by James Greenleaf, CRC Press, 141–162 (1986).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • M. A. Breazeale
    • 1
  1. 1.National Center for Physical AcousticsUniversity of MississipppiUniversityUSA

Personalised recommendations