Fig. 1. Comparison of two scattering phase functions and scattering intensities. (a) Particle radius: 0.1 μm; (b) Particle radius: 0.4 μm; (c) Particle radius: 0.8 μm; (d) Particle radius: 2 μm; (e) particle radius: 6 μm; (f) Particle radius: 10 μm
Fig. 2. Comparison of two sample methods of scattering phase functions
Fig. 3. Emission and receive model in dust environment
Fig. 4. Semianalytic sensing geometric model
Fig. 5. Dust environment experiment. (a) Laboratory layout; (b) Experimental scene
Fig. 6. Scattering phase functions with different relative humidity conditions
Fig. 7. Normalized simulation echo powers with different relative humidity conditions
Fig. 8. Normalized simulation echo powers changing with dust concentrations in different relative humidity conditions
Fig. 9. Normalized simulation echo powers changing with dust concentrations. (a) T-matrix; (b) H-G scattering phase function
Fig. 10. Comparison of results of two simulation methods and experiment
Parameters | Value | Parameters | Value | ${\varphi _e}$/mrad
| 87 | d0/mm
| 58 | ${\varphi _r}$/mrad
| 124 | N0 | 2 000 | ${r_e}$/mm
| 5 | $\tau $/ns
| 100 | ${r_r}$/mm
| 7.5 | ${\omega _e}$ | 10−6 |
|
Table 1. Parameters of system and simulation
C/mg·m−3 | Signal amplitude/V | C/mg·m−3 | Signal amplitude/V | 101.5 | 3.32 | 299 | 4.16 | 138.6 | 3.44 | 315.7 | 4.24 | 150 | 3.6 | 342.3 | 4.4 | 186.4 | 3.72 | 508 | 5.12 | 219 | 3.88 | − | − |
|
Table 2. Experimental results
C/mg·m−3 | N/m−3 | C/mg·m−3 | N/m−3 | 101.5 | 0.19×1011 | 299 | 0.66×1011 | 138.6 | 0.26×1011 | 315.7 | 0.71×1011 | 150 | 0.28×1011 | 342.3 | 0.8×1011 | 186.4 | 0.37×1011 | 508 | 1.55×1011 | 219 | 0.44×1011 | − | − |
|
Table 3. Number concentration
C/mg·m−3 | Relative errors | C/mg·m−3 | Relative errors | T-matrix
| H-G | T-matrix
| H-G | 101.5 | 12% | 5% | 299 | 4% | 13% | 138.6 | 20% | 2% | 315.7 | 8% | 20% | 150 | 1% | 10% | 342.3 | 3% | 21% | 186.4 | 6% | 10% | 508 | 1% | 35% | 219 | 2% | 4% | − | − | − |
|
Table 4. Relative errors between simulation and experiment