Simulations of pressure pulse–bubble interaction using boundary element method

Klaseboer, Evert; Turangan, Cary; Fong, Siew Wan; Liu, Tie Gang; Hung, K. C.; Khoo, Boo Cheong

doi:10.1016/j.cma.2005.08.014

Cited by 36 publications

(33 citation statements)

References 38 publications

Supporting

Mentioning

Contrasting

Order By: Relevance

“…A typical simulation is shown in figure 7, where the shock wave is modelled as a travelling step pressure. In [41], the code was validated by comparing with the simulation results from previous papers [36,38]. It was found that the BEM code successfully captured the bubble deformation and collapse.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…The pressure pulse that was applied in figure 7 was 0.528 GPa. This is a very high pressure and the corresponding shock speed is larger than the speed of sound at 1950 m s 21 [41]. The shock front has travelled a distance of 1950 Â 1.75 Â 10 26 ¼ 3.4 mm during that time.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is understood that the phenomena, up to the jet impact, are primarily inertially governed [41,42]. The same might not be so for a bubble or bubble cloud in an ultrasound or HIFU field.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…Klaseboer et al [41,42] attempted to simulate the bubbleshock wave interaction using the boundary element method (BEM), where only the surface of the bubble is meshed as an alternative to the above-mentioned numerical methods. A typical simulation is shown in figure 7, where the shock wave is modelled as a travelling step pressure.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 3 more Smart Citations

Bubbles with shock waves and ultrasound: a review

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

The study of the interaction of bubbles with shock waves and ultrasound is sometimes termed ‘acoustic cavitation'. It is of importance in many biomedical applications where sound waves are applied. The use of shock waves and ultrasound in medical treatments is appealing because of their non-invasiveness. In this review, we present a variety of acoustics–bubble interactions, with a focus on shock wave–bubble interaction and bubble cloud phenomena. The dynamics of a single spherically oscillating bubble is rather well understood. However, when there is a nearby surface, the bubble often collapses non-spherically with a high-speed jet. The direction of the jet depends on the ‘resistance' of the boundary: the bubble jets towards a rigid boundary, splits up near an elastic boundary, and jets away from a free surface. The presence of a shock wave complicates the bubble dynamics further. We shall discuss both experimental studies using high-speed photography and numerical simulations involving shock wave–bubble interaction. In biomedical applications, instead of a single bubble, often clouds of bubbles appear (consisting of many individual bubbles). The dynamics of such a bubble cloud is even more complex. We shall show some of the phenomena observed in a high-intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU) field. The nonlinear nature of the sound field and the complex inter-bubble interaction in a cloud present challenges to a comprehensive understanding of the physics of the bubble cloud in HIFU. We conclude the article with some comments on the challenges ahead.

show abstract

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

“…It is understood that the phenomena, up to the jet impact, are primarily inertially governed [41,42]. The same might not be so for a bubble or bubble cloud in an ultrasound or HIFU field.…”

mentioning

confidence: 99%

mentioning

confidence: 99%

See 2 more Smart Citations

Bubbles with shock waves and ultrasound: a review

2015

Self Cite

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

show abstract

“…BEM has been an extremely popular method in bubble dynamics simulations (Blake et al 1986(Blake et al , 1997Tong et al 1999;Fong et al 2006;Klaseboer et al 2006;Turangan et al 2006). Although the model assumes that the liquid phase is incompressible and the scalar properties of the gas are spatially uniform, Klaseboer et al (2006Klaseboer et al ( , 2007 have shown that with some assumptions, BEM is still applicable to limited applications of shock-bubble interaction. FLM, on the other hand, has advantages over other simulation methods mentioned above that include its suitability for highly deforming flow, ability to sharply resolve material interfaces and to capture flow discontinuities, e.g.…”

Section: Introductionmentioning

confidence: 99%

The collapse of single bubbles and approximation of the far-field acoustic emissions for cavitation induced by shock wave lithotripsy

et al. 2011

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Recent clinical trials have shown the efficacy of a passive acoustic device used during shock wave lithotripsy (SWL) treatment. The device uses the far-field acoustic emissions resulting from the interaction of the therapeutic shock waves with the tissue and kidney stone to diagnose the effectiveness of each shock in contributing to stone fragmentation. This paper details simulations that supported the development of that device by extending computational fluid dynamics (CFD) simulations of the flow and near-field pressures associated with shock-induced bubble collapse to allow estimation of those far-field acoustic emissions. This is a required stage in the development of the device, because current computational resources are not sufficient to simulate the far-field emissions to ranges of O(10 cm) using CFD. Similarly, they are insufficient to cover the duration of the entire cavitation event, and here simulate only the first part of the interaction of the bubble with the lithotripter shock wave in order to demonstrate the methods by which the far-field acoustic emissions resulting from the interaction can be estimated. A free-Lagrange method (FLM) is used to simulate the collapse of initially stable air bubbles in water as a result of their interaction with a planar lithotripter shock. To estimate the far-field acoustic emissions from the interaction, this paper developed two numerical codes using the Kirchhoff and Ffowcs William-Hawkings (FW-H) formulations. When coupled to the FLM code, they can be used to estimate the far-field acoustic emissions of cavitation events. The limitation of the technique is that it assumes that no significant nonlinear acoustic propagation occurs outside the control surface. Methods are outlined for ameliorating this problem if, as here, computational resources cannot compute the flow field to sufficient distance, although for the clinical situation discussed, this limitation is tempered by the effect of tissue absorption, which here is incorporated through the standard derating procedure. This approach allowed identification of the sources of, and explanation of trends seen in, the characteristics of the far-field emissions observed in clinic, to an extent that was sufficient for the development of this clinical device.

show abstract

Shock Wave Interaction with Single Bubbles and Bubble Clouds

Ohl

2013

Bubble Dynamics and Shock Waves

View full text Add to dashboard Cite

Simulations of pressure pulse–bubble interaction using boundary element method

Cited by 36 publications

References 38 publications

Bubbles with shock waves and ultrasound: a review

Bubbles with shock waves and ultrasound: a review

The collapse of single bubbles and approximation of the far-field acoustic emissions for cavitation induced by shock wave lithotripsy

Shock Wave Interaction with Single Bubbles and Bubble Clouds

Contact Info

Product

Resources

About