Near field acoustic holography is usually based on measurement of the pressure. This paper describes an investigation of an alternative technique that involves measuring the normal component of the acoustic particle velocity. A simulation study shows that there is no appreciable difference between the quality of predictions of the pressure based on knowledge of the pressure in the measurement plane and predictions of the particle velocity based on knowledge of the particle velocity in the measurement plane. However, when the particle velocity is predicted close to the source on the basis of the pressure measured in a plane further away, high spatial frequency components corresponding to evanescent modes are not only amplified by the distance but also by the wave number ratio (kzk). By contrast, when the pressure is predicted close to the source on the basis of the particle velocity measured in a plane further away, high spatial frequency components are reduced by the reciprocal wave number ratio (kkz). For the same reason holography based on the particle velocity is less sensitive to transducer mismatch than the conventional technique based on the pressure. These findings are confirmed by an experimental investigation made with a p-u sound intensity probe produced by Microflown.

1.
J. D.
Maynard
,
E. G.
Williams
, and
Y.
Lee
, “
Nearfield acoustic holography. I. Theory of generalized holography and the development of NAH
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
78
,
1395
1413
(
1985
).
2.
W. A.
Veronesi
and
J. D.
Maynard
, “
Nearfield acoustic holography (NAH). II. Holographic reconstruction algorithms and computer implementation
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
81
,
1307
1322
(
1987
).
3.
E. G.
Williams
,
Fourier Acoustics—Sound Radiation and Nearfield Acoustical Holography
(
Academic Press
, San Diego,
1999
).
4.
R.
Raangs
,
W. F.
Druyvesteyn
, and
H.-E.
de Bree
, “
A low-cost intensity probe
,”
J. Audio Eng. Soc.
51
,
344
357
(
2003
).
5.
H.-E.
de Bree
, “
The Microflown: An acoustic particle velocity sensor
,”
Acoust. Aust.
31
,
91
94
(
2003
).
6.
E. G.
Williams
and
J. D.
Maynard
, “
Numerical evaluation of the Rayleigh integral for planar radiators using the FFT
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
72
,
2020
2030
(
1982
).
7.
K. B.
Ginn
and
J.
Hald
, “
STSF—Practical instrumentation and applications
,”
Brüel & Kjær Technical Review
2
,
1
27
(
1989
).
8.
J.
Hald
, “
Non-stationary STSF
,”
Brüel & Kjær Technical Review
1
,
1
36
(
2000
).
9.
K.-U.
Nam
and
Y.-H.
Kim
, “
Errors due to sensor and position mismatch in planar acoustic holography
,”
J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
106
,
1655
1665
(
1999
).
10.
F.
Jacobsen
and
H.-E.
de Bree
, “
Measurement of sound intensity: p-u probes versus p-p probes
,”
Proceedings of Noise and Vibration Emerging Methods 2005
,
Saint Raphaël
, France.
You do not currently have access to this content.