Your browser doesn't support javascript.
loading
Comparisons among ten models of acoustic backscattering used in aquatic ecosystem research.
Jech, J Michael; Horne, John K; Chu, Dezhang; Demer, David A; Francis, David T I; Gorska, Natalia; Jones, Benjamin; Lavery, Andone C; Stanton, Timothy K; Macaulay, Gavin J; Reeder, D Benjamin; Sawada, Kouichi.
Affiliation
  • Jech JM; Northeast Fisheries Science Center, 166 Water Street, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543, USA.
  • Horne JK; School of Aquatic and Fishery Sciences, University of Washington, Box 355020, Seattle, Washington 98195, USA.
  • Chu D; Northwest Fisheries Science Center, 2725 Montlake Boulevard East, Seattle, Washington 98112, USA.
  • Demer DA; Southwest Fisheries Science Center, 8604 La Jolla Shores Drive, La Jolla, California 92037, USA.
  • Francis DT; School of Electronic, Electrical and Systems Engineering, University of Birmingham, Edgbaston, Birmingham B15 2TT, United Kingdom.
  • Gorska N; Institute of Oceanography, University of Gdansk, Aleja Marszlka Pilsudskiego 46, 81-378 Gdynia, Poland.
  • Jones B; Oceanography Department, Graduate School of Engineering and Applied Sciences, Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California 93943, USA.
  • Lavery AC; Department of Applied Ocean Physics and Engineering, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543, USA.
  • Stanton TK; Department of Applied Ocean Physics and Engineering, Woods Hole Oceanographic Institute, Woods Hole, Massachusetts 02543, USA.
  • Macaulay GJ; National Institute of Water and Atmospheric Research, Private Bag 14901, Kilbirnie, Wellington 6021, New Zealand.
  • Reeder DB; Naval Postgraduate School, Monterey, California 93943, USA.
  • Sawada K; National Research Institute of Fisheries Engineering, Fisheries Research Agency, 7620-7, Hasaki, Kamisu, Ibaraki 314-0408, Japan.
J Acoust Soc Am ; 138(6): 3742-64, 2015 Dec.
Article in En | MEDLINE | ID: mdl-26723330
ABSTRACT
Analytical and numerical scattering models with accompanying digital representations are used increasingly to predict acoustic backscatter by fish and zooplankton in research and ecosystem monitoring applications. Ten such models were applied to targets with simple geometric shapes and parameterized (e.g., size and material properties) to represent biological organisms such as zooplankton and fish, and their predictions of acoustic backscatter were compared to those from exact or approximate analytical models, i.e., benchmarks. These comparisons were made for a sphere, spherical shell, prolate spheroid, and finite cylinder, each with homogeneous composition. For each shape, four target boundary conditions were considered rigid-fixed, pressure-release, gas-filled, and weakly scattering. Target strength (dB re 1 m(2)) was calculated as a function of insonifying frequency (f = 12 to 400 kHz) and angle of incidence (θ = 0° to 90°). In general, the numerical models (i.e., boundary- and finite-element) matched the benchmarks over the full range of simulation parameters. While inherent errors associated with the approximate analytical models were illustrated, so were the advantages as they are computationally efficient and in certain cases, outperformed the numerical models under conditions where the numerical models did not converge.
Subject(s)

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Sound / Acoustics / Water / Ecosystem / Models, Theoretical Type of study: Prognostic_studies Limits: Animals Language: En Journal: J Acoust Soc Am Year: 2015 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos

Full text: 1 Collection: 01-internacional Database: MEDLINE Main subject: Sound / Acoustics / Water / Ecosystem / Models, Theoretical Type of study: Prognostic_studies Limits: Animals Language: En Journal: J Acoust Soc Am Year: 2015 Document type: Article Affiliation country: Estados Unidos
...