Abstract

Remote detection and characterization of laser beams propagating in maritime atmospheres is discussed. A model for off-axis scattered laser light based on Mie scattering from maritime aerosols is presented and compared with angle and time-resolved measurements from a pulsed laser source. We demonstrate that the direction of the source can be determined from the angle-resolved intensity and that the beam direction can be determined from arrival times of the scattered signals if the position of the laser source is known.

© 2011 Optical Society of America

Full Article  |  PDF Article

References

  • View by:
  • |
  • |
  • |

  1. J. P. Cariou, “Off-axis detection of pulsed laser beams: simulation and measurements in the lower atmosphere,” Proc. SPIE 5086, 129–138 (2003).
    [CrossRef]
  2. N. Roy and F. Reid, “Off-axis laser detection model in coastal areas,” Opt. Eng. 47, 086002 (2008).
    [CrossRef]
  3. J. K. Michulec and R. Schleijpen, “Influence of aerosols on off-axis laser detection capabilities,” Proc. SPIE 7463, 1–12(2009).
    [CrossRef]
  4. The SBLAS receiver was manufactured by the Goodrich Corp., Danbury, Conn.
  5. S. G. Gathman, “Optical properties of the marine aerosol as predicted by the Navy aerosol model,” Opt. Eng. 22, 57–62(1983).
  6. J. Piazzola and G. Kaloshin, “Performance evaluation of the coastal aerosol extinction code MEDEX with data from the Black Sea,” J. Aerosol Sci. 36, 341–359 (2005).
    [CrossRef]
  7. S. Hammel, A. van Eijk, D. Tsintikidis, “ANAM vs. NAM: is the difference significant?” Proc. SPIE 5891, 1–12 (2005).
    [CrossRef]
  8. C. F. Bohren and D. R. Huffman, Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles (Wiley-Interscience, 1983).
  9. F. Hanson and S. Radic, “High bandwidth underwater optical communication,” Appl. Opt. 47, 277–283 (2008).
    [CrossRef] [PubMed]

2009 (1)

J. K. Michulec and R. Schleijpen, “Influence of aerosols on off-axis laser detection capabilities,” Proc. SPIE 7463, 1–12(2009).
[CrossRef]

2008 (2)

N. Roy and F. Reid, “Off-axis laser detection model in coastal areas,” Opt. Eng. 47, 086002 (2008).
[CrossRef]

F. Hanson and S. Radic, “High bandwidth underwater optical communication,” Appl. Opt. 47, 277–283 (2008).
[CrossRef] [PubMed]

2005 (2)

J. Piazzola and G. Kaloshin, “Performance evaluation of the coastal aerosol extinction code MEDEX with data from the Black Sea,” J. Aerosol Sci. 36, 341–359 (2005).
[CrossRef]

S. Hammel, A. van Eijk, D. Tsintikidis, “ANAM vs. NAM: is the difference significant?” Proc. SPIE 5891, 1–12 (2005).
[CrossRef]

2003 (1)

J. P. Cariou, “Off-axis detection of pulsed laser beams: simulation and measurements in the lower atmosphere,” Proc. SPIE 5086, 129–138 (2003).
[CrossRef]

1983 (1)

S. G. Gathman, “Optical properties of the marine aerosol as predicted by the Navy aerosol model,” Opt. Eng. 22, 57–62(1983).

Bohren, C. F.

C. F. Bohren and D. R. Huffman, Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles (Wiley-Interscience, 1983).

Cariou, J. P.

J. P. Cariou, “Off-axis detection of pulsed laser beams: simulation and measurements in the lower atmosphere,” Proc. SPIE 5086, 129–138 (2003).
[CrossRef]

Gathman, S. G.

S. G. Gathman, “Optical properties of the marine aerosol as predicted by the Navy aerosol model,” Opt. Eng. 22, 57–62(1983).

Hammel, S.

S. Hammel, A. van Eijk, D. Tsintikidis, “ANAM vs. NAM: is the difference significant?” Proc. SPIE 5891, 1–12 (2005).
[CrossRef]

Hanson, F.

Huffman, D. R.

C. F. Bohren and D. R. Huffman, Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles (Wiley-Interscience, 1983).

Kaloshin, G.

J. Piazzola and G. Kaloshin, “Performance evaluation of the coastal aerosol extinction code MEDEX with data from the Black Sea,” J. Aerosol Sci. 36, 341–359 (2005).
[CrossRef]

Michulec, J. K.

J. K. Michulec and R. Schleijpen, “Influence of aerosols on off-axis laser detection capabilities,” Proc. SPIE 7463, 1–12(2009).
[CrossRef]

Piazzola, J.

J. Piazzola and G. Kaloshin, “Performance evaluation of the coastal aerosol extinction code MEDEX with data from the Black Sea,” J. Aerosol Sci. 36, 341–359 (2005).
[CrossRef]

Radic, S.

Reid, F.

N. Roy and F. Reid, “Off-axis laser detection model in coastal areas,” Opt. Eng. 47, 086002 (2008).
[CrossRef]

Roy, N.

N. Roy and F. Reid, “Off-axis laser detection model in coastal areas,” Opt. Eng. 47, 086002 (2008).
[CrossRef]

Schleijpen, R.

J. K. Michulec and R. Schleijpen, “Influence of aerosols on off-axis laser detection capabilities,” Proc. SPIE 7463, 1–12(2009).
[CrossRef]

Tsintikidis, D.

S. Hammel, A. van Eijk, D. Tsintikidis, “ANAM vs. NAM: is the difference significant?” Proc. SPIE 5891, 1–12 (2005).
[CrossRef]

van Eijk, A.

S. Hammel, A. van Eijk, D. Tsintikidis, “ANAM vs. NAM: is the difference significant?” Proc. SPIE 5891, 1–12 (2005).
[CrossRef]

Appl. Opt. (1)

J. Aerosol Sci. (1)

J. Piazzola and G. Kaloshin, “Performance evaluation of the coastal aerosol extinction code MEDEX with data from the Black Sea,” J. Aerosol Sci. 36, 341–359 (2005).
[CrossRef]

Opt. Eng. (2)

N. Roy and F. Reid, “Off-axis laser detection model in coastal areas,” Opt. Eng. 47, 086002 (2008).
[CrossRef]

S. G. Gathman, “Optical properties of the marine aerosol as predicted by the Navy aerosol model,” Opt. Eng. 22, 57–62(1983).

Proc. SPIE (3)

J. P. Cariou, “Off-axis detection of pulsed laser beams: simulation and measurements in the lower atmosphere,” Proc. SPIE 5086, 129–138 (2003).
[CrossRef]

J. K. Michulec and R. Schleijpen, “Influence of aerosols on off-axis laser detection capabilities,” Proc. SPIE 7463, 1–12(2009).
[CrossRef]

S. Hammel, A. van Eijk, D. Tsintikidis, “ANAM vs. NAM: is the difference significant?” Proc. SPIE 5891, 1–12 (2005).
[CrossRef]

Other (2)

C. F. Bohren and D. R. Huffman, Absorption and Scattering of Light by Small Particles (Wiley-Interscience, 1983).

The SBLAS receiver was manufactured by the Goodrich Corp., Danbury, Conn.

Cited By

OSA participates in CrossRef's Cited-By Linking service. Citing articles from OSA journals and other participating publishers are listed here.

Alert me when this article is cited.


Figures (9)

Fig. 1
Fig. 1

In this off-axis scattering geometry the laser and receiver are separated by R along the baseline between them. The laser beam is at an angle ψ to the baseline. Scattered light is detected by the receiver at an angle θ corresponding to a distance z along the beam line from the source and travels a distance r to the receiver. θ S is the angle to a reference direction on the receiver.

Fig. 2
Fig. 2

The laser source is located just on shore at Cowley Beach, Queensland, Australia, and the path of the receiver was nearly parallel to shore and perpendicular to the beam (red). The horizontal receiver FOV, shown schematically at one point on the path, was centered directly to starboard.

Fig. 3
Fig. 3

Volume scattering functions calculated from the ANAM cases in Table 1. The scattering angle relative to the beam direction is θ + ψ .

Fig. 4
Fig. 4

An estimate of the (negative) source angle θ S E obtained from the SBLAS sensor (blue circles) is compared with the (negative) source angle θ S (black) and beam angle ψ (dashed) derived from the GPS tracking data.

Fig. 5
Fig. 5

Normalized scattered intensity at the receiver for three selected points along the ship path prior to crossing the beam line. The model predictions are calculated on a 0.5 ° grid with Δ θ = 3.0 ° , for the four aerosol cases of Table 1. The receiver orientations relative to the source θ S and the beam angles ψ were taken from GPS tracking data.

Fig. 6
Fig. 6

Normalized scattered intensity at the receiver for three selected points along the ship path after crossing the beam line. The model predictions are calculated as in Fig. 5.

Fig. 7
Fig. 7

Comparison of the single-scatter model (black curve) and Monte Carlo calculations ( 10 8 photons) for the experimental geometry and beam angles ψ = 0.6 ° (○), 2.4 ° (□), and 9.5 ° (△) and the aerosol scattering function from Case 4. The MC results show slightly greater scattering than the model prediction due to multiple scattering and also scattering from behind the beam line.

Fig. 8
Fig. 8

The relative propagation time from the laser to the receiver determined by the crossing time of the highest threshold level for single measurements at beam angles ψ = 6.0 ° (○), 1.5 ° (□), 1.5 ° (⋄), and 6.0 ° (△). Timing curves calculated from ( z + r ) / c using the known geometry and offset to give the best fit are shown as dashed lines.

Fig. 9
Fig. 9

Difference of beam angle ψ c (blue) calculated from Eq. (3) using the estimated source angle θ S E and timing data d t H / d θ from SBLAS and the beam angle obtained from GPS data.

Tables (2)

Tables Icon

Table 1 ANAM Environmental Parameters Used to Generate the Four Aerosol Distributions and the Total Scattering Coefficient b and Absorption Coefficient a Calculated from the MIE Code

Tables Icon

Table 2 ANAM Parameters for Each of the Five Particle Types

Equations (9)

Equations on this page are rendered with MathJax. Learn more.

d I ( θ , t ) d θ = P 0 [ t S R ( θ ) t ] exp [ α ( z + r ) ] β ( θ + ψ ) r 2 d z d θ .
I ( θ , t ) = θ Δ θ / 2 θ + Δ θ / 2 P 0 [ t S R ( θ ) t ] exp [ α ( z + r ) ] β ( θ + ψ ) R sin ( ψ ) d θ .
d t S R d θ = R 2 c sin ( ψ ) / cos [ ( θ + ψ ) / 2 ] 2 .
d N d r = i = 0 4 N i 2 π σ i exp ( σ i 2 / 2 ) ρ s i exp { [ ln ( r / ρ s i ) ] 2 2 σ i 2 } ,
{ N 0 = 0 N 1 = 136.55 amp 2 } amp 5 ,
{ N 0 = 0.3 × 136.55 amp 2 N 1 = 0.7 × 136.55 amp 2 } amp > 5 ,
N 2 = 0.5462 Max [ 5.866 ( W 2.2 ) , 0.5 ] ,
N 3 = 0.007214 × 10 0.06 w ,
N 4 = 0.01 × 10 0.07 w 0.04 h .

Metrics