A very-wide-angle acoustic model for underwater sound propagation

RobertA. Dalrymple
Ocean Engineering Group, Department of CivilEngineering, Unioersity ofDelaware,NewarlL
Delaware 19716

Levsiri C. Munasinghe
Ocean Engineering Group, Department of CivilEngineering, University ofDelaware, Newark,
Delaware 19716

David H. Wood

Department ofMathematicai Science& Department ofComputer andInformation Sciences, University of

Delaware, Newark. Delaware 19716

James T. Kirby
Department of CivilEngineering, University ofDelaware, Neumrk, De/aware 19716

(Received 5 January1990; accepted for publication 31 May 1990)

A parabolic model, valid forwide angles (out to90* from the assumed propagation direction
for a homogeneous environment),is presented. Numericalcomputations for the modelare donealmostentirelyin the Fourierdomain,and the modelcanbeshownto betheoretically exactfor a homogeneous ocean.In addition,the modelcan implicifiy handlerange-dependent

sound-speed profiles. An erroranalysis indicates that themodelis moreaccurate thanthe standard parabolic equation (SPE) andthemodified-wide-angle parabolic equation (MWAPE) for constant perturbations of the indexof refraction. The accuracy of the modelis examined by comparison of computed solutions with exactsolutions for rangeindependent cases. Several idealized range-dependent cases are alsoexamined.
PACS numbers: 43.30,Bp

INTRODUCTION

-where

The parabolicequationmethod, first introducedin

ar

+ koZQ2p = 0,

(3)

acoustics byTappert andHardin,has been used tocompute

the acoustic pressure field due to a sourcefor long-range wavepropagation in a sound channel 2 (seeRef. 2 for a recent overviewof parabolicmodels).A disadvantage of the methodis that there is a restrictionon the propagation anglesof the acoustic waves, althoughthis is not necessarily a severedrawback,due to the small grazinganglesof the wavestrappedin a waveguide. A numberof recentworkshavefocused on extending theparabolic modelto widerangles. Thebasis for these modelsis the Helmholtzequation, whichgoverns the modified acoustic pressure p, and whichwill be illustrated hereas

Q: isan operator = n: + -- -k
environment results in

(4)

Factoringthe Helmholtz equationin a range-independent

(r+ikoQ)(r-ikoQ=O. (5)
If we are concerned with waves propagating in the positive directionand neglect the influence of the waves ih the oppositedirection(the backscattered waves),thenour governing equationis, in parabolicform,

a2' a2' +ko%2,o=O, &2,

where

(1)
It is the representation of Q that determines how well the parabolic model functions at largepropagation angles.

ko is a characteristic wavenumber; n(r,z) = Co/C(r,z) = k(r,z)/ko = indexof refraction; Co is thesound speed associated with ko; C(r) is the soundspeed; (2) k(r,z) = to/C(r,z) is the wavenumber;
to is the angular frequency; is the rangedirection;

Following Tappert 3 and Thomson andChapman, wecan

represent Q as

Q = x/1+ p + E,
where

(7)

z is the depth; p(r,z) is the acoustic pressure.

= kaz
e = n2 -- 1.
0001-4966/90/101863-14500.80 1990Acoustical Society of America

(8)
(9)
1863

The Helmholtzequation canbe rewrittenas

1863 J. Acoust. Soc.Am.88 (4), October 1990

The standard parabolic model 3 arises by approximating Q

by the lineartermsin a series expansion: QI + 6/2 -I- It/2. (10)

0p=0 onz=h.

(16)

Thecorresponding parabolic equation is

iko i c9 P =ikop+ (n - 1)p+ ---2p Or -2ko c9z
If we rewrite Q exactly as

The equation governing thepressure fieldisgiven by the Helmholtz equation,

(11)
(12)

o2p 1 0 ---+k2p=0' ar 2 r

(17)

Q= 41 +it + e = x/1

+ e/(1 +it),

where k(r,z) is the wave number governing the acoustical wavemotion.A representative wavenumber, ko(r), isintroducedvia the indexof refractionn and a parameter,v(r,z),
which is a measure of the deviation of the index of refraction

then we can approximate Q in a variety of ways. From a binomialexpansion, neglecting termsof order, andhigher, andneglecting termsinvolving products of and/, we have,
correct to order 6,

from unity:

=kon =k(l--).
Now, our equationis

(18)

Q.-x/l+ It + e/2.

(13)

Tappert suggests that thismodel is not an improvementover the standard parabolic equation. Alternatively,reversing the rolesof 6 andIt in (12), we can approximateQ as

O:'p +r 3r

3r

+ (k--kgd)p = 0. (9)

Finally,the reduc fore 0f the Helmholtzuation is obtainedby removingthe radial spreadingby assuming that

Q/I

+ e +it/(2/1 + e),

(14)

p(r,z) =p(r)/.
Substituting Eq. (20) into .

(20)
(19) andneglecting thete

asin Tappert andTappert andLee. s with 1/(4), i.e.,a far-field approximation, weobtain Thomson andChapman, 4 utilizing the methodology developed by FeitandFleck 6 in optics, introduced thefollowingrepresentation:

Or

Qx/l -It + (41 + e- l).

much smaller thanthetwopresented previously.

(15)

We now introduce the Fourier sine transform, which is

definedsymbolicallyas

They notedthat the error of this approximation to Q is

Another classof wide-anglemodelshasbeendeveloped usingPad6 approximants of the Q operator.In underwater

P(r,v,, ) = (P).
Explicitly, the Fourier transfore paim are

(22)

acoustics, Greene 7 for example, hasused a ( l, 1) Pad6approximant, whileKnightlyet alfi extend themethod to a
(2,2) approximant, with the numericaldisadvantage of introducing mixed fifth-order derivativesin the governing equation.

(r,z) sin yzdz,

(23)

(r,z) = p(r,y,, ) sin Vz,

where

(24)
(25)
Heimholtz

y=(m+)(,/h),
I. THE WIDE-ANGLE MODEL

m = 0,1,2 .....m.

A Fourier sine transform of the ruced

equation,. (21), transforms the equationto one solely dependent on the r erdinate;

In thispaper,the problem is Fouriertransformed in the cross-range directionprior to obtaining the parabolic equation form. This will permitan exactrepresentation of Q for isovelocity oceans, andveryaccurate results using step-wise integrationsfor each of the Fourier modes,which are then inverse transformed to find the sound-pressure profile.This
ly model surface water wave propagation over a uniform

dP + (kg - ffm)P(kgdP) =0. dr

(26)

To obtaina parabolic mel from thissecond-order equation, we split the uation, assuming in Fouder space that the pressure, )(r,y ) can be split into a forward-propagattechnique was used byDairymple andKirby to successful- ing wave and a backscattered wave, p(r,y)
= p + (r, y,, ) + p- (r,y), which satisfythe followingpair of equations:

slope andbyDalrymple etal.l tomodel water wave propagation over irregular bathymetry. A cylindrical coordinate systemwill be usedto describe

the domain,with r in the rangedirection,z pointingdownward and 0 asthe azimuthalangle.We will assume that the

dP+ = ikg --+ + G(r,r ), dr

(27)

azimuthal variation isveryslight andthatthedependence of pressurep on theazimuthalangle0 canbeneglected. At the surface, we will assume a pressure release boundary condition, p(t:,0) = 0, and, at the constantdepth bottom, a noflow boundarycondition,
1864 J. Acoust. Soc.Am.,VoL88, No.4, October 1990

dp_ i4k g- P- - G(r,r ), dr

(28)

whereG(r,y ) isunknown apriori. [If thelasttermin s. (27) and (28) werezero, i.e., for a homogeneous environment,thenthe parabolic splittingwouldbe exact. ] SubstiDalrymple otaL:Wide-angie acoustic model 1864

that tuting these equations into (26) and assuming [P+1>> IP- ] results in anexpression for G(r,y, ):

a(r,r,.) = a(, ko2 - r,.)/ar

2xo - Ym

The factthat thearguments of theexponentials in Eqs. (36) and ( 38) arenotthesame leads to phase errors, such as are oftenobserved in modeling wavepropagation by using Eq. (27), whichhasonly first derivatives with respect to
range.

2o2-- /2rn
(29)

For range-independent wavenumbers, only the right-hand term of G(r,7., ) exists:

6(r,rm) = is( - t,vP)/2x/kg - r.

(30)

An estimate of the phase error inherentin our method can be determined and compared to similarerrorsin two othertypesof parabolic waveequations, the standard parabolicequation(SPE), and themodifiedwide-angle parabolic equation (MWAPE). The phaseerror in our method is
due to the use of

Equation(27) with either (29) or (30) serves asa parabolicmodel.If p(r,y,.) is defined suchthat

k ='(ko2 - 72r) + koe/(2x[ko - m)

asan approximation for

(39)
(40)

p+ (r,v, . ) - p(r,y,.) exp(i]k 0 - y.r),

thenEq. (27) canberewritten as

(31)

kexact =4(ko 2q-ek&-'2m).

equation asgiven byMcDaniel andRobertson n is
(32)

OeXp(ix0 --T,,, r)
___ _ t9( o2--,.)/Or
24ko _ 7m
Equation (32) is better suitedfor numericalsolutions

The approximation to k, t of the standard parabolic

k, = ko+ ko/2- ,/(2ko).

Mary etal? andRobertson u is

(41)

Similarly, the corresponding approximationused in the modified-wide-angle parabolic equation as given by St.

than Eq. (27) because the representation of + as in Eq.

(31) removes themain oscillatory term, ik - y,, +

fromnumerical computations sothat fewerrange samples
are needed.

/,oe 2

r 2ko

r4 er4 8k03 4ko

asfollows:

8
(42)

It is possible to rewritekt
II. ERROR ESTIMATES

...., =4(-r)+
--

It is possible to estimate the accuracy of Eq. (32) asan approximate solution to Eq. (21), the Helmholtzequation, fora range-independent sound-speed profile. A perturbation s(z) fromn2(z) -- 1 of ordere canbedefined asfollows:

2x/(o _ rm)
+ h.o.t. (43)

8(,o - )4( g- )
andthefollowing errorestimates for a constt perturbation
mn then be made:

2 = __[n2(z) _ 1] = -- es(z).

(33)

To analyze the effect of perturbing the indexof refraction by a term of order e, consider the casewheres(z) = 1
and e is a smallconstant. Then, an exactsolutionto Eq. (32) can be formally statedas follows:

)+o(),() k .... ,--kw=ko + 1 +h''t'

.... ,-&= ok8

b = bo exp (ikoer/2o - r)'

The solutionto Eq. (27) is then

(34)

+h.o.t. )

)+ =bo exp [ix[o -- mr+ (ikoer/2]k -- y,.) ].

(35)

The inverseFourier transformof Eq. (35) yieldsthe

result

+6k o(+h.o.t.) +o(), (45) k .... ,-k,=koff3ff ++h.o.t.)+o,)

[16k 32ko
(46)

P* = o sin(y,z)

Xexp[ iko - 72,, + (ikoer/2Gk - , ) ],

(36)

Curves of 6 vssin- (v/k o) for s. {)-(46) are givenin Fig. 1 as a functionof the aolute vues of

(k...., -- k, )/k o, (k,, -- k, )/k o, and -- k )/ko, restively. Since /k o isthesine of the where p + is theacoustic pressure of the forward-propagatangleassociat with the mth mode,notethat, for angles
ing wave. (37)
associat with small valuesof m, the MWAPE can handle a

Equation (36) is an approximation to the solution of Eq. (21), which,in thiscase, is

larger range of 6 for the same value of the errors

l(k,,,--k)/ko[

and [(k.... ,-k)/kol

thanthe

p+ = bo sin(y.z) exp(ix/k -- r + koer) (38) error](k.... -- kmp , )/kol of theMWAPE islger than
1865 J. Acoust.Soc. Am., Vol. 88, No. 4, October 1990 Dairytopicota/.: Wide-angieacousticmodel 1865

VWA model. However, as the angle (or m) incre,es, the

", o
\

Fourier sine comPonents simultaneously. Inorder toillus'

trate the implementation of the fourth-order Runge-Kutta

",.'"<Z.

.-/-. %- '

--/

.'/ ;1', I'.

\o.

scheme,the equationsfor a simple second-order RungeKutta scheme with regardto bare shownin the Appendix. The modelwastested by computation of sound~pressure transmission lossasa functionof rangein an idealizedocean environment. For comparison, reference solutions were re-

produced fromFishman andMcCoy, 5 consisting of solu'

' :.... : :,--:::-: '" .... _ ,1:

same value of e.

,, -.,..... 1 ''-- / 0.00-

.'

1-:", K..'I',

I '4" ...... , -..

-"\ .....

.....
0.007.

tionsby a fast-field programalgorithm(FFP) and a highfrequency approximation based on an exactfactorization of the Helmholtz equation for range-independent environments.

FIG. L Crvesofe vssin- ' (7,./ko) i detees asa function ofte absolmc

values of (k..., -- lq. )lk., (k. , -- k. )tk., and( k..... -- k.,..r )lko
for the WA, $PE, and WAPE models, respectively:--,WA - - -, $PE,

The testoceanenvironment, as givenin Table I, representsthree differentbilinear sound-speed profiles,casesA, B, and C, respectively. These idealizedoceanmodelswere

taken fromtheNORDA Parabolic Equation Workshop. 6

These are for a constantdensity ocean and have been used

theerror [(ke., -- kv, )/ko[ for the VWA model for the
It is clearlyevidentfrom Eqs. (44)-(46) andFig. I that
the error of our method is much smaller than that for the

standard parabolic equation, whichhasan error evenwhen = 0 and is alsosmallerby an o() than the error incurred by the modified-wide-angle parabolicequation.However,in the latter case,the relative error magnitudes, as shownin Fig. 1, will depend on the sineof the propagating angleas well asthe magnitude of 6. Hence,our methodcanbecharacterized as accurate for all modes exceptpossibly one at zerothorderandcorrectto firstorderin (constant)perturbations of the index of refraction.

for testing thebeamwidth capabilities of solution algorithms for the Helmholtzequation. Cases A-C requirehalf-beamwidthcapabilities of 18 ,30,and40,respectively. The model depthandrangeincrements were10and20 m, respectively. A "false bottom" from 1500 m down to 2560 m with an exponential attenuationprofilewasusedto minimizereflections returned to the water column above from the bottom of

the computational grid. The attenuation wasaccomplished

by including a small imaginary term to the index of refraction:

k /k o = n = no + ifi,
equal to 1.

(50)

whereno is the reference indexof refraction and is usually The phase of a planewavein the direction of propagation is then as follows:

If any modeis at cutoff,i.e., whenko = y,, our method andtheabove error analysis is invalid.To avoidthispossibility duringactualcomputations, it isnecessary to compare ko and y,, beforehand and shiftthe valueof ko suchthat it lies
betweenmodes.However, if the highest-ordermode is very

exp(ik onr) ---exp(ik onor) exp( -- kofir ),

( 51)

where r is the distanceof propagation. The relationship

betweensoundattenuationin the oceanbottom and fi is as
follows:

near cutoff (i.e., when y k o), large phaseerrorscan re-

sult forthat mode, as isevident from Eq.(39),inaddition to

theconstant phase errorofo( ) foranymode fornonzero 6. It isa standard result in perturbation theory TM thatthemodal wavenumbers k,, are of the followingform:

cC o ---[40 000r(loglo e) ]fi,

where

(52)

c= soundtransmissionlossin dB/m/kHz,

k 2 =ko2 _ 7z,.+ ca,. .,. + h.o.t.,

where

(47)

fi = imaginarypart of the indexof refraction,

(53)

Co = the reference soundspeed in m/s.

a.,.,,, --

koZk(r,z)dz,

(48)
(49)

Three initial startingfields,a normal-mode solutionfor

a homogeneous ocean, a fieldby Thomson andChapman 4 , = eigenfunctions ofEq. (19) for v = -- .

Hence,for the highest modecorresponding to y,, = k0, k,,is nearlyzeroand it couldbe statedthat the difference in the exact and approximate modal wave numberssquared can be bounded by an error of o().
IlL TEST RESULTS

TABLE I. Idealized ocean environment andpropagation parameters. The soundspeed is a linear functionof depth between givenpoints;frequency = 25 Hz; source depth= 500m; receiver depth= 500m;andmaximum
attenuation = 2 dB/m/kHz.

Depth (m)
0 1000 1500 2560

CaseA
1500

Soundspeed(m/s) CaseB
1500

CaseC
1500

Test computations haveshownthat both the fourth-order Runge-Kutta as well as the fourth-order Adams-Bash-

forth-Moulton predictor-corrector algorithm (with a fourth-order Runge-Kutta startoff) can be successfully usedto numericallysolvethe resultingEqs. (32) for the
1866 J. Acoust. Soc.Am.,VoL88, No.4, October 1990

! 520 1563 1563

1520 1744 1744

1520 197 i 1971

Dalrymple et aL:Wide-angle acoustic rhodel

1866

using Kaiser-window techniques, anda high-angle PE forasound speed of 1600 m/s,shown inFig.4(b). Similar to source function by Greene 7 wereconsidered. All threeini- case B, thehigher sound speed contributed to a slight imtial fields gave model results for thetestcases thatdiffered provement indetail inthe10to20-km region. A benchmark very littlefrom each other onthegraphical scale oftheresul- for computational speed can be provided with the knowledge tant transmission losses. thateach of theabove cases was computed byone thousand Thereference sound speed for theinitialfieldwastaken 20-mrange sections using thefourth-order Runge-Kutta tobe1510 m/s,while themodel reference wave number ko scheme, which took100s of scalar processing onan IBM andhence the model reference sound speed wasobtained 3090.Since eachstepof the fourth-order Runge-Kutta
from

scheme requires oneinverse Fouriersinetransform andone

k =--L k2 az, 1500 ao

Fourier sine transform (see theAppendix) for thefourth(54) order scheme, eighttransforms are required. In addition,

oneinverse Fourier sine transform isrequired at theendof where theintegral was designed tominimize themagnitude theentirestep giving a totalof nineFouriersine transforms

ofkov inG(r,y,, ). This gave model reference sound speeds for eachrangesection or a total of 9000 Fouriersinetransof 1520, 1547, and1574 m/sforcases A, B, andC, respec- forms for 20 km.In comparison, theSPEimplemented by tively. It should benoted thattheintegral does nottakeinto thesplit-step Fourier transform algorithm took just25sfor accountthe highersoundspeedin the falsebottomand, thesame computations using anidentical range step. hence, the actual model reference sound speeds couldbe The model wasalsoused to compute sound-pressure higher. transmission losses in an idealized range-dependent ocean UsingThomson andChapman's initialfield,the com- environment, asshown inFig.5.Therange dependency was putational results ofthe transmission loss (dB)versus range provided by reducing the sound speed froman otherwise (km)are shown inFigs. 24. The overall agreement isgood. homogeneous 1500 m/sby0.2m/spermeter concentrically An interesting feature of themodel isshown in Fig.2 (case along theradiiof a circle of diameter 50.5kin,extending A), where theresultant detail generally agrees wellwiththe from a range of 5-15kmandreaching a maximum depth of FFP result inthe 10-to20-kinregion thanwithFishman and 500m at a range of 10km.Thisgave a sound speed of 1400
MeCoy'shigh-frequency modelresult. The modelwassome-

what sensitive tothechoice Ofko, asshown inFig.3(a) and

m/s at theocean surface at a rangeof 10km, anda vertical section through thisringof reduced sound speed isshown in

(b) formodel reference sound speeds of 1547 and 1600 m/s, Fig. 5. Similar to casesA-C, a false bottom from 1500 m respectively forcase B. Thehigher sound speed resulted in a downto 2560m withanexponential attenuation profile was small improvement of detail of thehightransmission losses used to minimize reflections fromthebottom of thegrid.A at 11, 15.5, and 17 km. Results for caseC were obtained for normal-mode solutionfor a homogeneous oceanwith a thesound speed of 1574 m/s,asshown inFig.4(a) aswellas source at a depth of 500m wasutilized to generate thestart-

z
I-

FIG. 2. Computational resultsfor

case A with a model reference sound

speed of 1520 m/s: ---, VWA modelresult;- - -, FFP resultfrom

7C

Fishman andMcCoy; s---,Fishman andMcCoy'shigh-frequency model

result.

8O

9C

lOC

RANGE (kin)

1867

d.Acoust. Soc. Am., VoL 88,No.4, October 1990

Dairytopic oral.:Wide-angle acoustic model

1867

7o

9c

10C

FIG. 3. (a) Computational results

RANGE (km)

for case B with a model reference

soundspeedof 1547 m/s; ---, VWA model result;- - -, FFP re-

sultfromFishman andMcCoy; s__, Fishmanand McCoy'shigh-frequency model result.(b) Computational resultsfor caseB with a model

reference sound speed of 1600m/s.

7O

80

go

1'6 1'7 1'8 1'9

RANGE (kin)

awide-angle split-step Fourier transform algorithm, as out20 m, respectively. The results are shown as acontour map of lined byThomson and Chapman 4 byassuming negligible the transmission loss (dB) over the entire grid inFig. 6. range dependency, and the results are shown inFig. 7.The Asa comparison, thetransmission loss fortherange- similarity between Figs. 6 and7 is remarkable. Closer independent test environment was also computed bymeans of spection ofFig.7 reveals that thecontours donotquite

ing field. Themodel range and depth increments were 10and

1868 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 88, No. 4, October 1990

Dalrymple eta/.: Wide-angle acoustic model 1868

(i-

7O

9O

RANGE (kin)

FIG. 4. (a) Computational results

for case C with a model reference

sound speedof 1574 m/s:

VWA model result;- - -, FFP re-

sultfromFishman andMcCoy Is;--,

Fishman and McCoy's high-frequency modelsult. (b) Computational results for case C with a model

reference sound speed of 1600m/s.

!oc

RANGE (km)

matchthose of Fig. 6 after a rangeof 10km andare spatially shifted, suggestive of accumulated phase errors,whichare to be expected from the application. of the split-stepFourier transformalgorithm to a range-dependent environment. As a control,Fig. 8 gives a comparison of transmission
1869 J. Acoust. Soc.Am.,Vol.88, No.4, October1990

loss (dB) contours of a homogeneousocean with a sound

speedof 1500 m/s and with an exponentially attenuating falsebottom for a normal-modeinitial field. It is interesting to note that evena weakly range-dependent oceanenvironment suchas the ring shownin Fig. 5 considerably affects
Dalryrnple et al.: Wide-angle acoustic model 1869

RANGE ( kl ,

0.2

10

15

20

//

FIG. 5. Idealizedoceanfor a rangedependent sound-speed environment. Sound-speed contourinterval

is 10 m/s.

o o

underwatersoundpropagation. A more severetestwas providedby applyingthe model to the range-dependent oceanenvironment, asshownin Fig. 9. The contoursare similar to thosein Fig. 5 exceptthat the soundspeed variesfrom 1500m/s by 0.6 m/s/m concentri-

eally along the radii from 5 to 15 km and givinga sound speed of 1200m/s at the oceansurfaceat a rangeof 10 kin. A falsebottom,similarto that of the earlierexample,wasused
to minimize reflections from the bottom. A normal-mode

solutionfor a homogeneous oceanwith a source of frequency

RANSE (k)
0.02

lO

15

20

o o

FIG. 6. Computationalresultsfor the very-wide-angle model applied to the idealized range-dependent environment with contours of the

transmission loss (dB). Contour interval is 5 dB.

o o

1870

J. Acoust. Soc.Am.,VoL88, No. 4, October1990

Dalrymple ot al.: Wide-angle acoustic model

1870

RANGE
10 15

(km)
2O

0.02

FIG. 7. Computational resultsfor the split-step Fouriertransform algorithm applied to the idealized range-dependent environment with
contours of the transmission loss

(dB). Contour interval is 5 dB.

25 Hz at a depth of 500m was used to generate a starting field. Themodel range and depth increments were10and20 m,respectively. Figure 10shows the result foramodel reference sound speed obtained fromEq. (54), whileFig. 11
shows theresultfor a modelreference sound speed obtained
from

1 f7k2dz ' :5-Jo

(55)

The results areshown ascontour maps of thetransmis-

sion loss (dB).Thesensitivity ofthemodel totheselection of

koisillustrated bythe difference indetail inthe range of10RANGE (kin)

20

0.02

10

15

o o

FIG. 8. Computational results for the very-wide-angle model andthe

split-step Fouriertransform algorithm applied to a homogeneous

oceanwith a soundspeedof 1500
m/s. Contours are of the transmission loss (dB), and the contourinterval is 5 dB.

1871

J.Acoust. Sec. Am., Vol. 88, No. 4,October 1990

Dalrymple etaL: Wide-angle acoustic model

1871

0.2

lo

15

20

FIG. 9. Idealizedocean for a strongly range-dependent sound-speed en-

vironment. Sound-speed contour interval is 50 m/s.

20 km between Figs. 10and 11.However,asexpected, there wasa strongsimilarityin the overallstructure. If a receiver wasplaced at a range of 20 km andat a depthof less than 500 m, it wouldbe importantto evaluate the modelreference soundspeed from an integralwith limits similar to thosein Eq. (55) and not from Eq. (54). However, if the receiver

wasplaced at a muchgreater depth,Eq. (54) should thenbe

considered.

For comparison purposes, the sametest casewas also modeled by the wide-angle split-step Fourier transformalgorithmwith a reference sound speed of 1500m/s. The contours of transmission loss (riB) are shownin Fig. 12. A1-

0.02

lO

15

2O

FIG. 10. Computational resultsfor the very-wide-angle model applied to the idealizedstronglyrange-dependent environment using a model reference sound speed computed througha depthof 1500m with contours of the transmissionloss (dB).
Contour interval is 5 dB.

1872

J. Acoust. Soc.Am.,VoL88, No.4, October1990

Dalrymple ot al.: Wide-angle acoustic model

1872

0.02
o

10

15

20

FIG. 11. Computational results for the very-wide-angle model applied to the idealizedstronglyrange-dependent environment using a model reference sound speed computed through a depth
of 700 m with contours of the transmis-

sion loss (dB). Contour interval is 5 dB.

o
o

thoughthereare similarities between Fig. 12 and Figs. I0 and 11,in the 10-20-km region, theyarenotasreadilyvisible asfor theprevious testcase wherea sound-speed variation of only 100m/s wasused. This is to beexpected fromthe splitstepalgorithmwith largedeviations ofk(r,z) from the referenceko(r), in additionto its inability to handlestrongly range-dependent environments. The phenomenon of wavefocusing for cases of waves

propagating through a refractive focus iswell known.Accurate reproduction of experimental results for this casehas

been widely achieved forwater waves bymany authors. 17-19

Oneof the majordifferences between the modeling of water wavepropagation andunderwater sound propagation is the initial field used to start off the computations.For water waves,in order to be realistic,the initial conditionis usually a monochromatic waveof constant amplitude. However,for

0.02

10

15

20

FIG. 12. Computational results for the split-step Fourier transform algorithm appliedto the idealized stronglyrangedependentenvironmentwith contours
of the transmission loss (dB). Contour
interval is 5 riB.

1873

J. Acoust.Sec. Am., Vol. 88, No. 4, October1990

Dalrympleeta/.: Wide-angleacousticmodel

1873

RANG;
5 250

(m)
500

FIG. 13. Idealizedoceanfor a rangedependentsound-speed environment to illustrate effects of focusing. Soundspeed contourintervalis 50 m/s.

We considered an idealizedrange-dependent oceanenunderwater sound propagation, a quitedifferent initialconsimilarto theonediscussed before except that the ditionis usedcorresponding to the form of a depth-depen- vironment dent delta function. We were interested to find an idealized rangedependency waslimitedto a semi-ellipse extending to oceantestcasecombinedwith an initial sound-pressure cona depthof 250m andsituated at a range of 100to 350m. The boundary of the semi-ellipse wasdefined according to dition that exhibitedstrongfocusing characteristics.

RAE

(m)

20
lO

500

1000

1500

2000

500

FIG. 14.Computational results for the very-wide-angle modelapplied to the idealized range-dependent environment usinga model refer-

ence sound speed of 1500m/s to illustrate effectsof focusing.Contour interval is :5 dB.

lOOO

15oo

1874

J. Acoust.Sec. Am., Vol. 88, No. 4, October 1990

Dalrympleet aL: Wide-angleacousticmodel

1874

R 2+ Z 2= 1,
where

(56)
(57)

R = [ (rangein meters)- 225]/125

Z = depthin meters/250

ronment. The algorithm hasbeen successfully applied to idealized ocean environments and is computationallywell suited for arrayprocessing, particularly whenthe AdamsBashforth-Mouitonpredictor-corrector schemeis implemented,alongwith vectorized computation of the discrete
fast Fourier transforms.

andthe sound speed in the semi-ellipse wasdefined according to

In the future, the algorithmwill be appliedto rangedependentoceanenvironments and will be extendedto ineludethe effects of strongdepth-dependent perturbations of

sound speed m/s= 1500 -- 300[1-- x/(R2+ Z ) ].

(58)

This idealized range-dependent oceanenvironment is shown in Fig. 13.The sound speed outside theellipse wasa homogeneous 1500m/s, whiletheinitialcondition of a continuoussourceof noisewas represented by an idealized square waveof magnitude unity and frequency 25 Hz extending from 100to 1400m in depth.This initial condition approximately represents the effectof a great numberof superimposed depth-dependent delta functions and hasan
exactanalyticFourier sinetransform.The contours of sound transmission loss(dB) for thiscaseis shownin Fig. 14 and

the indexof refractionand the effects of depth-dependent density profiles.

APPENDIX

We rewriteEq. (32) for therange-independent case for

the sakeof brevity:

3= - {f
ar
where

2i4/o: -- Ym exp(i,q/o -- m r)

'[exp(ik02 - ya,,r) ]} (AI)

(A2)
(A3)

clearlyshows the effect of focusing afterthe ellipse.

l. SUMMARY

= k0.
For the second-order Runge-Kutta, (r+ At) = b(r) + 0.5(k, + k2 ),
where

We havedescribed a very-wide-angle numerical method forsolving theHelmholtzequation for sound-pressure propagation for a constant density, range-dependent ocean envi-

k2
or

-- Ar-,( if-/- '[ b exp(/x/k 02 -- yz,,, r) ] } 2ik02exp(ix/k 02 _ -- Ar-s(Vl,f 1{(I//--[ kI )exp 02 - /2rn (r+ Ar)]}) 2io2-- ,. exp [ ix/k o -- y,(r+ Ar)]

(A4)

(AS)

[ff-,-' ( k =--Ar,, +exp(i4k -Ar)-Ar-'[+(r)lexp(ix/k--,A 2i4k

(A6)

Now,

)(r + Ar)=(r+ Ar)exp[i4k - (r + Ar)].

Hence,froms. (A3), (A4), (A6), and (A7),

(A7)

p+(r+ Ar)=p+ (r)exp(i -- mAr)

- ar, [ + (r) ] exp(ik g- g-/m

(AS)

F. D. TapDeft and R. H. Hardin,"Computer simulations of long-range ocean acoustic propagation using theparabolic equation method," m Proceedings of the8th International Congrexs on.4coustics (Goldcrest, London, 1974), Vol. 2, p. 452.

F.D. Tappert, "Theparabolic approximation method," in Waoe Propagation and UnderwaterAcoustics, Lecture Notesin Physics, edited by J. B. Keller andJ. S. Papadakis (Springer,New York, 1977), Vol. 10,pp. 224287.

W. F. AmesandDing Lee,"Currentdevelopments in thenumerical treatment of oceanacoustic propagation," Appl. Num. Math. , 2547
{ 1987).

D. J. Thomson andN. R. Chapman, "A wide-angle split-step algorithm

for the parabolicequation,"J. Acoust.Soc.Am. 74, 1848-1854 (1983).

F. D. Tappertand D. Lee, "A rangerefraction parabolic equation," I.

1875

d. Acoust. Soc.Am.,Vol.B8,No.4, October 1990

Dalrymple et aL:Wide-angle acoustic model

1875

Acoust. Soe. Am. 76, 1797-1803 (1984).

6M. D. Felt and J. A. Fleck, Jr., "Light propagation in graded-index fibers,"Appl. Opt. 17, 3990-3998 (1978). ?R. R. Greene, "Therational approximation to theacoustic wave equation
with bottom interaction," J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76, 1764-1773 (1984).

sG. H. Knightly, D. Lee,andD. F. St.Mary, "A higher-order parabolic

waveequation," J. Acoust. Soc.Am. 82, 580-587 (1987).

waveequation," J. Comput.Phys.71, 304-315 (1987). E. C. Titchmarsh, Eigenfunction Expansions/lssociated withSecond-Order DifferentialEquations (Oxford [J.P., Oxford, England,1958), Part II, pp. 217-221. L. Fishman andJ. J. McCoy,"A newclass of propagation models based on a factorization of the Helmholtzequation," Geophys. J. R. Astron.
So:. 80, 439-461 (1985).

gR.A. Dalrymple andJ. T. Kirby,"Verywide angle water wave models

and wave diffraction," J. Fluid Mech. 192, 33-50 (1988).

aJ.A. Davis,D. White,andR. C. Cavanagh, "NORDA Parabolic Equation Workshop, 31 March-3 April 1981,"NORDA Tech. Note 143
(1982); NTIS No. AD-121 932.

OR. A. Dalrymple, K. D. Sub,]. T. Kirby,andJ. W. Chae,"Models for verywideangle waterwaves andwave diffraction. Part2. Irregular bathymetry,"J. Fluid Mech. 201, 299-322 (1989).

J.T. Kirby and R.A.Dairytopic, "Verification ofa parabolic equation for

propagation of weakly-nonlinear waves," Coast.Eng.8, 219-232 (1984).

S.T. McDaniel, "Propagation ofnormal modes in theparabolic approximation," J. Acoust. Soc.Am. 57, 307-311 (1975).

2j. S. Robertson, "An exactsolution to a modified wide-angle parabolic equation," J. Acoust. Soc.Am. 84, 1791-1793(1988).

A. C. Radder, "Ontheparabolic equation method forwater-wave propagation,"I. Fluid Mech.95( 1), 159-176(1979). P. L-F. Liu.andT-K. Tsay, "Refraction-diffraction modelfor weaklynonlinear water-waves," J. Fluid Mech. 141, 265--274 (1984).

D. F. St.Mary,D. Lee, andG. B9tseas, "A modified wide-angle parabolic

1876

J. Acoust.Sec. Am., Vol.88, No. 4, October1990

Dalrymple ela/.: Wide-angle acoustic model

1876