Recently researchers often normalize the radiation force on spheres in standing waves in inviscid fluids using an acoustic contrast factor (typically denoted by Φ) that is independent of kR where k is the wave number and R is the sphere radius. An alternative normalization uses a function Ys that depends on kR. Here, standard results for Φ are extended as a power series in kR using prior Ys results. Also, new terms are found for fluid spheres and applied to the kR dependence of Φ for strongly responsive and weakly responsive examples. Partial-wave phase shifts are used in the derivation.
1. Introduction
Figure 1 illustrates the utility of Eq. (6) and serves to motivate some of the sections which follow. The properties of the liquid drop considered, chlorobenzene acoustically trapped in water, were taken from Ref. 6: λ = ρi/ρ = 1.101 and γ = βi/β = 1/(λσ2), where σ = ci/c = 0.848. The kR independent curve with long dashes is Φ0 from Eq. (3); the solid curve is from the exact PWS result for Ys using Eq. (5). The curve with the shorter of the long dashes is based on expressions for Φ0 and Φ2 that follow from results in Ref. 5 reviewed in Sec. 3. The curve with the shortest dashes is from including the result for Φ4 given in Sec. 4 and in the supplementary material. Section 5 illustrates another application of this approach. To appreciate the sphere sizes for kR = 0.5, where the deviation from Φ0 is appreciable in Fig. 1, notice that with ω/2π = 50 kHz, R = 2.4 mm but for 1 and 10 MHz, R = 0.12 mm and 12 μm. Readers primarily interested in the results of this method may proceed to Sec. 3.
2. The relevant expansion of partial wave phase shifts
3. The leading order terms in Eq. (6) and applications
4. The new term in Eq. (6) applied to the example in Fig. 1
It was numerically confirmed that the next term of the series in Eq. (6) scales as (kR)6. This was done for the example in Fig. 1 by computing the scaled difference SD6 = [(Φ0 + x2Φ2 + x4Φ4) – ΦE]/x6, where ΦE is the exact result from the numerical series, Eqs. (10) and (5), and x = kR. It is found that SD6 approaches a constant as x decreases down to approximately 0.08. (Below x of 0.08, round off error becomes significant when evaluating SD6. Including the contribution a32 associated with the n = 3 partial wave is essential.) Similar numerically scaled difference evaluations were previously used to verify formulas for the anj coefficients in Eq. (8) applied to radiation force and scattering problems.11
5. Application to weakly responsive spheres algebraically evaluated
6. Conclusions and discussion
For the case of ideal inviscid fluids considered, the kR dependence of the generalized acoustic contrast factor Φ is given by Eq. (6) when kR is small but finite with Φ0, Φ2, and Φ4 given by Eqs. (3), (12), and (15). For sufficiently large immiscible drops in water, the tapping conditions from Eqs. (3)–(6) will depend on drop size in normal gravity. (Such a dependence has been reported.26 The trapping of immiscible drops in water with kR > 0.5 has been demonstrated but is not widely studied.27,28) It is assumed here that kR is sufficiently small as to be less than the region where resonances first appear in the associated scattering amplitude, Eq. (7). Physical processes which dissipate energy such as viscosity and thermal conductivity are completely neglected in the analysis as are forces on the sphere from acoustic streaming.29,30 Some effects of viscosity, significant for very small spheres, are reviewed in Refs. 17, 29, and 30. Radiation force modifications resulting from reflections of waves scattered by the sphere off of the boundaries of the acoustic chamber have also been neglected.
Though the standing waves here have been taken to be plane waves, an extension based on Eq. (8) allows for the modification of Φ0 in Eq. (3) for the case of cylindrically symmetric standing waves. See Secs. IV–VII of Ref. 12. The incident wave has also been assumed here to be temporarily unmodulated. For approaches to modulated cases see, for example, Refs. 17, 28, and 31. Responses to temporally modulated ultrasound can be complicated and include neuromodulation and other biological applications.30–33
Supplementary Material
See the supplementary material for formula used in the evaluation of Eqs. (11), (12), and (15).
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by the U.S. Office of Naval Research Award No. N000142212599. Equation (5) and applications thereof were discussed by the present author at the virtual Acoustofluidics 2020 meeting.
Author Declarations
Conflict of Interest
The author has no conflicts to disclose.
Data Availability
The data that support the findings of this study are available within the article.