Comparison of Synthetic and Experimental Bottom Interactive Waveforms

  • F. R. DiNapoli
  • D. Potter
  • P. Herstein
Part of the NATO Conference Series book series (NATOCS, volume 5)


Our interest in subbottom acoustics is motivated by proposed continuous wave (CW) passive systems designed to utilize more than just the energy content of signals arriving at the receiver via predominantly bottom bounce paths. To reach a point where the merits of such systems could be delineated with confidence or contributions to their conception could be made, it was first necessary to have a believable theoretical model capable of predicting the received waveform versus time produced by a transient source. The apparent contradiction that while the system concepts pertain to CW signals, the model is required to accommodate transient signals can be explained from the belief that the highest quality bottom bounce data is obtained from transient sources such as air guns or explosives thus achieving credibility for the model implies assessment against transient data.


Seismic Data Sound Speed Grazing Angle Environmental Input Sound Speed Profile 
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. R. Santaniello, F. R. DiNapoli, R. K. Dullea and P. D. Herstein, “Studies on the Interaction of Low Frequency Acoustic Signals with the Ocean Bottom”, Geophysics, Vol. 44, No. 12, December (1979).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    F. R. DiNapoli, “Fast Field Program for Multilayered Media”, NUSC Report No. 4103, 26 August (1971).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    F. R. DiNapoli and R. L. Deavenport, “Theoretical and Numerical Green’s Function Field Solution in a Plane Multilayered Medium”, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 67, January (1980).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    F. R. DiNapoli, unpublished work in conjunction with data supplied by P. Stoffa of Lamont Doherty Geological Observatory.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    E. L. Hamilton, “Acoustic Properties of the Sea Floor: A Review”, Oceanic Acoustic Modeling Conference, Part 4 Sea Bottom, Saclantcen Conference Proceedings No. 17, 15 October (1975).Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    P. D. Herstein, R. K. Dullea and S. R. Santaniello, “Hatteras Abyssal Plain Low Frequency Bottom Loss Measurements”, NUSC Report No. 5781, 14 April (1979).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    D. R. Horn, M. Ewing, B. M. Horn and M. N. Delach, “A Prediction of Sonic Properties of Deep-Sea Cores, Hatteras Abyssal Plain and Environs”, TR No. 1, CU-1–69 NAVSHIPS N00024–69-C-1184, November (1969).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    J. S. Cohen and L. T. Einstein, “Continuous Gradient Ray Tracing System (CONGRATS) II: Eigenray Processing Programs”, NUSC Report 1069.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    G.H.F. Gardner, L. W. Gardner and A. R. Gregory, “Formation Velocity and Density — The Diagnostic Basics for Stratigraphic Traps”, Geophysics, Vol. 39, No. 6, December (1974).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1980

Authors and Affiliations

  • F. R. DiNapoli
    • 1
  • D. Potter
    • 1
  • P. Herstein
    • 1
  1. 1.Naval Underwater Systems Center (NUSC)New LondonUSA

Personalised recommendations