Journal of Computational AcousticsVol. 08, No. 03, pp. 389-399 (2000) No AccessPROPAGATION MODEL ACCURACY FOR MFPA. TOLSTOYA. TOLSTOYATolstoy Sciences, 8610 Battailles Ct., Annandale VA 22003, USA Search for more papers by this author https://doi.org/10.1142/S0218396X00000315Cited by:3 PreviousNext AboutSectionsPDF/EPUB ToolsAdd to favoritesDownload CitationsTrack CitationsRecommend to Library ShareShare onFacebookTwitterLinked InRedditEmail AbstractThe selection of a propagation model for use in many underwater acoustic applications has been understood to be highly important for quite some time. However, it has not previously been understood how various models might actually degrade Matched Field Processing (MFP) performance even when input parameters are known exactly. That is, acoustic propagation models have not previously been benchmarked within the context of MFP where acoustic amplitudes and phases need to be highly accurate depending on the nature of the processor of interest, such as for a high resolution Capon processor. This paper discusses the SCOOTER, ORCA, and KRAKEN models, and a high angle PE model within the context of MFP. These models are compared to the SAFARI data generated for the Workshop97 geoacoustic inversion CAL case. In general it seems that all the abovementioned models show excellent accuracy for use with the Linear Processor. However, it is found that KRAKEN may experience unexpected difficulties at unpredictable frequencies where these errors can affect high resolution processing (as demonstrated by geoacoustic inversions via the RIGS method),14 that SCOOTER and PE require relatively long CPU times for high accuracy, and that how accurately parameters are interpolated, e.g., sound-speed profiles, can also be important. It should be noted that all of the models discussed in this work may be considered to be very accurate in the context of most applications, particularly those involving data. FiguresReferencesRelatedDetailsCited By 3Developing a Method for Experimental Studies of Crustal Structure in Marine Areas in Different SeasonsG. I. Dolgikh, S. S. Budrin, S. G. Dolgikh, A. A. Pivovarov and A. N. Samchenko et al.7 August 2019 | Seismic Instruments, Vol. 55, No. 4ANALYTICAL TIME DOMAIN NORMAL MODE SOLUTION OF AN ACOUSTIC WAVEGUIDE WITH PERFECTLY REFLECTING WALLSHÜSEYIN ÖZKAN SERTLEK and SERKAN AKSOY29 April 2013 | Journal of Computational Acoustics, Vol. 21, No. 02WHAT ABOUT ADIABATIC NORMAL MODES?A. TOLSTOY21 November 2011 | Journal of Computational Acoustics, Vol. 09, No. 01 Recommended Vol. 08, No. 03 Metrics History Received 22 July 1999 Revised 21 September 1999 PDF download
Read full abstract