www.elsevier.com/locate/ultsonch
Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 12 (2005) 79–84
Experimental and theoretical investigation of the meanacoustic pressure in the cavitation field
Cleofe Campos-Pozuelo a,*, Christian Granger b, Christian Vanhille c,Alexei Moussatov b,d, Bertrand Dubus b
a Instituto de Acustica, C.S.I.C., Serrano, 144, 28006 Madrid, Spainb IEMN, UMR CNRS 8520, Departement ISEN, 41 Boulevard Vauban, 59046 Lille Cedex, France
c E.S.C.E.T. Universidad Rey Juan Carlos. Tulipan, s/n. 28933 Mostoles, Madrid, Spaind Institut Meurice, 1 Avenue E. Gryzon, 1070 Bruxelles, Belgium
Received 23 February 2004; revised 22 June 2004; accepted 22 June 2004
Available online 13 August 2004
Abstract
The cavitation field radiated by a 20 kHz sonotrode-type transducer is experimentally and theoretically analyzed. Special interest
is paid to the origin of the strong fluid streaming appearing in low frequency sonoreactors. A new experimental procedure is pro-
posed to evaluate the mean acoustic pressure inside the fluid. This parameter has been quantified for different points and amplitudes.
The velocity of the radiating surface is controlled by a laser interferometer and is always sinusoidal. Train wave excitation is used.
The pressure wave and amplitude are measured in the tank with a calibrated hydrophone. The acoustic mean pressure is estimated
from the total pressure value at the end of the pulse after an adequate filtering. An analytical nonlinear second order model based on
the coupling of the equations of the fluid mechanics with the Rayleigh–Plesset equation is developed in order to relate the measured
acoustic parameters to the cavitation state of the fluid. The distributions of the fundamental amplitude and mean pressure are cal-
culated as a function of bubble density and bubble size. A qualitative theoretical description of the experimental data is presented.
Quantitative differences and model limitations are commented.
� 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
Keywords: Cavitation field characterization; Nonlinear acoustics; Ultrasonic reactors
1. Introduction
Although bubbly liquids are known to be highly non-
linear acoustic media [1], physical phenomena related to
the cavitation field, such as streaming, are usually stud-
ied considering linear acoustic waves [2,3]. According to
Mitome [7], two different types of acoustic streaming can
be considered. In the ‘‘genuine acoustic streaming’’, the
fluid motion is produced by the attenuation of theacoustic wave during its propagation. In the ‘‘quasi-
1350-4177/$ - see front matter � 2004 Elsevier B.V. All rights reserved.
doi:10.1016/j.ultsonch.2004.06.009
* Corresponding author.
E-mail address: [email protected] (C. Campos-Pozuelo).
acoustic streaming’’, fluid motion results from the gradi-ent of the mean acoustic pressure, as a consequence of
nonlinear phenomena in the ultrasonic wave propaga-
tion. The analysis of nonlinear waves in the cavitation
field is complicated by the stochastic nature of the bub-
ble and acoustic fields and by the complex interaction
between these fields. On the other hand, it is well known
that for a nonlinear wave propagating in a fluid the
mean acoustic pressure is not zero and its value stronglydepends on the nonlinearity parameter of the medium.
Thus, experimentally, the problem of analyzing the non-
linear acoustic behaviour of the cavitating fluid can be
handled by measuring the mean acoustic pressure which
is directly related to nonlinear acoustic parameters and
80 C. Campos-Pozuelo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 12 (2005) 79–84
which naturally averages in time the physical quantities.
Measurements of mean acoustic pressure in the cavita-
tion field generated by a 20 kHz sonotrode are reported
in Section 2. A theoretical second order nonlinear model
is proposed to analyze these experimental results in
Section 3.
Fig. 2. Analyzed conelike bubble structure (CBS).
2. Measurement of mean acoustic pressure
The experimental set-up is schematized in Fig. 1. The
20 kHz source is made of a sandwich piezoelectric trans-
ducer, a mechanical amplifier and a 70 mm diameter
sonotrode. The source is driven by a pulsed sinusoidalexcitation with a typical pulse length of 6000 periods
at 20 kHz with 1 Hz repetition rate. Note that steady-
state in the tank is reached after a few hundred periods.
The sonotrode surface velocity is monitored indirectly
by measuring the radial velocity at half-height of the
sonotrode and using a preliminary measurement of the
longitudinal (surface)/radial (half height) velocity ratio.
A picture of the conical bubble structure (CBS) gener-ated below the sonotrode under these conditions is dis-
played in Fig. 2 [4]. The pressure is measured in the
tank using a Bruel & Kjaer (B&K) 8103 hydrophone.
In the following, the acoustic pressure p is
pðtÞ ¼ ptðtÞ � p0 ð1Þwhere pt is the total pressure, p0 the ambient pressureand t the time. The mean acoustic pressure is Æp(t)æwhere Æ æ denotes the time average. The acoustic pres-
Fig. 1. Experimental set-up.
sure is recorded at different points in the cavitation field.
In Fig. 3, an example of acoustic pressure on the axis of
the transducer is shown. A strong nonlinear distortion isto be noted. In order to establish the origin of this
strongly nonlinear behaviour and to verify the hypothe-
ses of linear excitation, simultaneous acquisition of
transducer vibration and pressure signals was continu-
ously done. In Fig. 4a comparison of the normalized
waveforms and spectral decomposition is presented. A
sinusoidal wave is obtained for the excitation while an
0.00E+0 2.00E-4 4.00E-4 6.00E-4 8.00E-4 1.00E-3
Time (s)
-2.00E+5
0.00E+0
2.00E+5
4.00E+5
6.00E+5
Pres
sure
(Pa)
Fig. 3. Measured waveshape at the axis (x = 4 cm from the source).
0 2 4 6
x 10-4
x 10-4
-2
-1.5
-1
-0.5
0
0.5
1
Time (s)
Nor
mal
ized
uni
ties
(a)
(b)0 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10
0
0.1
0.2
0.3
0.4
0.5
0.6
0.7
0.8
0.9
1
Frequency (Hz)
Nor
mal
ized
uni
ties
Velocity at the transducerPressure
Velocity at the transducerPressure
Fig. 4. Comparison of the vibration velocity at the transducer and the pressure field: (a) waveshape and (b) spectral decomposition.
C. Campos-Pozuelo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 12 (2005) 79–84 81
important harmonic distortion is observed for the pres-
sure wave. The pressure amplitude at the fundamental
frequency is chosen as reference pressure, in order,
firstly, to have a stable amplitude parameter, and sec-
ondly, to compare with the second order model devel-
oped in the following section. The mean acousticpressure is extracted using an adequate low-pass filtering
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00
Time (s)
-80000.00
-60000.00
-40000.00
-20000.00
0.00
20000.00
Pres
sure
(Pa)
<p>
Fig. 5. Filtered signal corresponding to the mean pressure.
of the hydrophone signal. An example of filtered signal
is given in Fig. 5. The mean pressure is identified to the
signal value after the end of the excitation. In Fig. 6, the
amplitude of the fundamental and the mean acoustic
pressures before and after reaching the cavitation
threshold, are compared. In the absence of cavitation,
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16 0.20Spatial coordinate (m)
0.00E+0
5.00E+4
1.00E+5
1.50E+5
2.00E+5
2.50E+5
Pres
sure
(Pa)
v=0.0525m/s. Fundamental amplitude
v=1.3133m/s. Fundamental amplitude
v=0.0525m/s.Averagedpressure
v=1.3133m/s. Averaged pressure
Fig. 6. Comparison of the fundamental and mean acoustic pressure
amplitudes before and after reaching the cavitation threshold.
0.00 0.40 0.80 1.20 1.60 2.00Excitation (m/s)
190.00
200.00
210.00
220.00
230.00
240.00
Pres
sure
(dB)
Fig. 7. Pressure amplitude evolution with the excitation.
82 C. Campos-Pozuelo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 12 (2005) 79–84
a number of reflections appear in the reactor. The valuesof the mean pressure remain small, of the order of 1% of
the fundamental pressure. When the cavitation regime is
established the conelike bubble structure (CBS) appears
and the pressure field distribution and values are com-
pletely changed. An important mean pressure (42% of
the fundamental at the origin) is observed. In Fig. 7
the evolution of the pressure amplitude with excitation
is plotted. The strong attenuation and pressure satura-tion in the cavitation regime are clear.
In Fig. 8 the mean acoustic pressure distribution in
the cavitating fluid is shown for two transversal sections.
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12Transversal spatial coordinate (m)
0.00
10000.00
20000.00
30000.00
40000.00
Pres
sure
(Pa)
v=1.4 m/sx=0.006 mx=0.044 m
Fig. 8. Mean acoustic pressure distribution for two transversal
sections.
The large mean acoustic pressure values, obtained only
in fluid areas where a large bubble concentration occurs,
indicate that this nonlinear phenomenon is associated to
the nonlinear vibration of bubbles. In fact, it is well
known that a bubbly liquid presents a strong nonlinear
acoustic behaviour and that a nonlinear acoustic waveproduces a mean pressure different to zero [1,5].
3. Theoretical interpretation
A simple model for linear and nonlinear wave propa-
gation is developed, on the basis of the Rayleigh–Plesset
expression for the nonlinear vibration of the bubble andthe conservation equations for the fluid. Linear behav-
iour of the fluid in the absence of bubbles is assumed,
i.e., the nonlinearity is only due to the nonlinear vibra-
tions of bubbles. Plane wave propagation is considered.
Then, the following equations describe the bubbly liquid
[5]:
o2pox2
� 1
c20
o2pot2
¼ �q0No2vot2
ð2Þ
€vþ dx0 _vþ x20vþ gp ¼ av2 þ bð2v€vþ _v2Þ ð3Þ
where p is acoustic pressure, c0 and q0 are, respectively,the sound speed and density of the liquid, N is the num-
ber of bubbles per unit volume, v the bubble volume, d isthe viscous damping coefficient, x2
0 ¼3cP0q0R
20
, R0 is the bub-
ble radius at the equilibrium, g ¼ 4pR0q0, a ¼ ðcþ1Þx2
0
2V 0and
b ¼ 16V 0, V 0 ¼ 4
3pR30. Eq. (2) results from the combination
of the moment and mass conservation laws. Eq. (3) de-
scribes the bubble dynamic in the Rayleigh–Plesset
approximation. Only second order terms are considered
in the bubble volume variations as well as in the pres-
sure. A perturbative technique is used to find the mean
acoustic pressure from Eqs. (2) and (3). Thus thesolution is assumed to be the linear solution pl (vl) plus
a second order perturbation p2 (v2):
p ¼ pl þ p2v ¼ vl þ v2
ð4Þ
Assuming also harmonic excitation the complex wavenumber k is easily obtained from Eqs. (2) and (3):
k ¼ k0
ffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffiffi1� q0Ngc20
ðx2 � x20 � jdxx0 � q0Ngc20Þ
s,ð5Þ
Assuming linear excitation, we obtain
hpi ¼ hp2i ¼Nða� bx2Þjv0j2e�2ax2ðx2
0 þ q0c20NgÞ 1þ x2
0
ðx20 þ 2q0c20NgÞ
� �
v0 ¼jgqc20ku0
ðx2 � x20 � jdxx0 � gNq0c
20Þ
ð6Þ
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12Spatial coordinate (m)
0.00E+0
4.00E+4
8.00E+4
1.20E+5
1.60E+5
Pres
sure
(Pa)
Fundamental amplitude. Experimental
Mean pressure. Experimental
Theory
Fig. 9. Comparison between theoretical and experimental results.
Void fraction, NV0 = 0.175.
0.00 0.04 0.08 0.12 0.16Spatial coordinate (m)
0.00E+0
4.00E+5
8.00E+5
1.20E+6
1.60E+6
2.00E+6
Volu
met
ric F
orce
(N/m
3 ) Quasi-acoustic streaming
Genuine acoustic streaming
Fig. 10. Amplitude of the forces corresponding to genuine acoustic
streaming and quasi-acoustic streaming.
C. Campos-Pozuelo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 12 (2005) 79–84 83
a being the imaginary part of the wave number in Eq.(5). Physically a corresponds to the acoustic attenuationof the cavitating medium.
In Fig. 9, theoretical and experimental values of fun-
damental (i.e. at driving frequency) and mean acoustic
pressures are compared, showing a good qualitative cor-
respondance. Nevertheless, this agreement is obtained
for bubble density NV0 of 0.175, this value being clearly
overestimated by this simple model. The strong nonlin-ear distortion observed in Fig. 3 is not explained by a
perturbation model. Moreover this perturbation model
does not take into account nonlinear attenuation, which
is clearly important in the cavitation field. If stronger
nonlinear attenuation is considered, the experimental
pressure amplitude gradient and mean acoustic pressure
values (Fig. 9) could be fitted with smaller values of bub-
ble density. The high values of Æpæ (of the order of a halfof the fundamental) can be obtained for a value of
NV0 = 2 · 10�5, but in this case the attenuation ob-tained by the model is really small, and does not justify
the decrease of the fundamental and the mean pressure.
For this strong nonlinearity, a really important nonlin-
ear attenuation is expected, giving easily a pressure de-
crease as experimentally observed for small values of a(see Fig. 7). Other limiting hypotheses in the modelare plane wave approximation (the geometrical diver-
gence can also contribute to this amplitude decrease)
and homogeneous bubble distribution in the cone. More
sophisticated numerical models, based in the same phys-
ical approach, are then needed to have a realistic charac-
terization of the bubble density in the fluid. Nevertheless
the qualitative behaviour experimentally observed is
correctly described and the physical interpretation cor-rect. We use this idea to give a new interpretation of
the origin of the acoustic streaming in a cavitating fluid.
The second order model described above has also been
used to calculate the magnitude of the forces generatingthe streaming. In the ‘‘genuine acoustic streaming’’, the
fluid motion is produced by the attenuation of the
acoustic wave during its propagation. The well-known
solution proposed by Nyborg [6] is used to calculate
the volume force generated in a fluid when a plane
acoustic wave propagates. In this approximation, the
linear propagation of the wave in the bubbly liquid is
considered to calculate the effective attenuation of thewave and the magnitude of the force. In the ‘‘quasi
acoustic streaming’’, fluid motion results directly from
the gradient of the mean acoustic pressure [7]. In Fig.
10 the magnitude of the volume forces generating each
type of streaming (genuine acoustic streaming and qua-
si-acoustic streaming) are compared for the values in
Fig. 9. It appears clearly that the force associated to
the fluid nonlinearity (due to the nonlinear vibrationof bubbles and origin of the quasi-acoustic streaming)
is much larger than the force associated to attenuation
increase (origin of the genuine acoustic streaming) when
cavitation turns on. The strong fluid streaming observed
in the cavitation field mainly originates in acoustic wave
nonlinearity.
4. Conclusion
The cavitation field of a low frequency sonotrode is
analyzed from the nonlinear acoustic point of view. Be-
cause of the strong nonlinear distortion of the acoustic
field, it is not easy to have direct evaluation of the acous-
tic parameters. In this paper, it is proposed to take as
the reference the pressure amplitude at fundamentalfrequency for the linear part, and the mean acoustic
84 C. Campos-Pozuelo et al. / Ultrasonics Sonochemistry 12 (2005) 79–84
pressure for the nonlinear distortion. A new experimen-
tal procedure is presented to evaluate the mean acoustic
pressure inside the fluid. A simple perturbation model
based on the Rayleigh–Plesset equation for the bubbles
vibration and linear fluid mechanics is also developed.
The qualitative comparison between theoretical andexperimental data indicates that the proposed physical
approach is correct. Limitations of the model and need
for more sophisticated numerical models are discussed.
Acoustic streaming in a cavitating fluid is shown to re-
sult from bubbly fluid acoustic nonlinearity rather than
attenuation.
Acknowledgment
This work was supported by CNRS and CSIC
(French-Spanish cooperation project 2002FR0004),
URJC (Rey Juan Carlos University) No. PPR-2003-46
and the European Union (Feder 2).
References
[1] K. Naugolnykh, L. Ostrovsky, Nonlinear Wave Processes in
Acoustics, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, 1998.
[2] N. Gondrexon, V. Renaudin, C. Petrier, M. Clement, P. Boldo, Y.
Gonthier, A. Bernis, Ultrason. Sonochem. 5 (1998) 1–6.
[3] O. Dahlem, J. Reisse, V. Halloin, Chem. Eng. Sci. 54 (1999) 2829–
2838.
[4] A. Moussatov, C. Granger, B. Dubus, Ultrason. Sonochem. 10
(2003) 191–195.
[5] M.F. Hamilton, D.T. Blackstock (Eds.), Nonlinear Acoustics,
Academic Press, 1998.
[6] W.L. Nyborg, Acoustic streaming, in: W.P. Mason (Ed.), Physical
Acoustics, vol. 2B, Academic Press, 1965.
[7] H. Mitome, Acoustic streaming and nonlinear acoustics––research
activities in Japan, in: H. Hobaek (Ed.), Advances in Nonlinear
Acoustics, World Scientific, 1993.