Single-bubble sonoluminescence from noble gas mixtures

Physical Review E - Statistical Physics, Plasmas, Fluids, and Related Interdisciplinary Topics

Volumn 66, Issue 6, 2002, Pages 4-

  da Graca J ^a   Kojima, H ^a  

^a RUTGERS UNIVERSITY   (United States)

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

LIGHT EMISSION INTENSITY; MASS FLUXES; NOBLE GAS MIXTURES; PRESSURE GRADIENTS;

COMPUTER SIMULATION; LIGHT EMISSION; MIXTURES; NATURAL FREQUENCIES; PHOTODIODES; SEGREGATION (METALLOGRAPHY); SONOLUMINESCENCE; TEMPERATURE MEASUREMENT;

INERT GASES;

ARTICLE;

EID: 41349099641     PISSN: 1063651X     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1103/PhysRevE.66.066301     Document Type: Article

References (25)

1. B.P. Barber, R.A. Hiller, R. Lofstedt, S.J. Putterman, and K.R. Weninder, Phys. Rep. 281, 65 (1997).
2. S.J. Putterman, P.G. Evans, G. Vazquez, and K. Weninger, Nature (London) 409, 782 (2001).
3. R. Hiller, K. Weninger, S.J. Putterman, and B.P. Barber, Science 265, 248 (1994).
4. B.D. Storey and A.J. Szeri, J. Fluid Mech. 396, 203 (1999).
5. J. O. Hirschfelder, C. F. Curtiss, and R. B. Bird, Molecular Theory of Gases and Liquids (Wiley, New York, 1954).
6. S. Chapman and T.G. Cowling, The Mathematical Theory of Non-Uniform Gases (Cambridge University Press, London 1970).
7. K. Yasui, Phys. Rev. E 63, 035301(R) (2001).
8. B.D. Storey and A.J. Szeri, Phys. Rev. Lett. 88, 074301 (2002);
9. B.D. Storey and A.J. Szeri, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 456, 1685 (2000).
10. UDT Sensors, Inc., Hawthorn, CA.
11. Variations in room temperature during mixing leads to at most (Formula presented) Torr uncertainty in the total dissolved noble-gas pressure. This uncertainty does not affect the qualitative variation of light intensity as a function of mixture ratio shown in Fig. 33.
12. D.F. Gaitan, Ph. D. thesis, University of Mississippi, 1990 (unpublished).
13. M. Honevac, software package LightLab: Far Field Mie Scattering (Valley Scientific, Valley City, OH, 1998).
14. W.J. Lentz, A.A. Atchley, and D.F. Gaitan, Appl. Opt. 34, 2648 (1995).
15. S. Hilgenfeldt, M.P. Brenner, S. Grossman, and D. Lohse, J. Fluid Mech. 365, 171 (1998).
16. J.A. Ketterling and R.E. Apfel, Phys. Rev. E 61, 3832 (2000).
17. D.F. Gaitan and R.G. Holt, Phys. Rev. E 59, 5495 (1999).
18. A dynamic diffusive equilibrium is independently established between each constituent noble gas in the bubble and that dissolved in water. The segregation is likely to take place over a short time compared to the acoustic period and it does not affect this diffusive equilibrium 4. It is then reasonable that the mixture fraction as applied during the mixing procedure is the mixture fraction in the bubble itself. In evaluating x, the differences in the diffusivity and solubility of different noble-gas species do not enter. Since the total noble-gas content is kept constant at 1% of the total dissolved gas, the (Formula presented) relation is the same for all mixtures in agreement with our observation.
19. The entire acoustic apparatus was reassembled between the two sets of measurements (a) and (b) in Fig. 33. The reassembly is the likely cause for the systematic difference in the data of “pure” He in the two datasets.
20. G. Vazques, C. Camara, S. Putterman, and K. Weninger, Opt. Lett. 26, 575 (2001). They find (Formula presented) (Formula presented) and (Formula presented)
21. G.E. Vazquez and S.J. Putterman, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 3037 (2000).
22. R. Toegel, B. Gompf, R. Pecha, and D. Lohse, Phys. Rev. Lett. 85, 3165 (2000).
23. G. Mark, Ultrason. Sonochem. 5, 41 (1998).
24. B.D. Storey and A.J. Szeri, Proc. R. Soc. London, Ser. A 457, 1685 (2001).
25. V.Q. Vuong, A.J. Szeri and D.A. Young, Phys. Fluids 11, 10 (1999).