<?xml version='1.0' encoding='utf-8'?>
<oai_dc:dc xmlns:dc="http://purl.org/dc/elements/1.1/" xmlns:oai_dc="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/" xmlns:xsi="http://www.w3.org/2001/XMLSchema-instance" xsi:schemaLocation="http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc/ http://www.openarchives.org/OAI/2.0/oai_dc.xsd">
  <dc:contributor>R.L. Argyle</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>R.T. Nester</dc:contributor>
  <dc:contributor>J.J. Dawson</dc:contributor>
  <dc:creator>Guy W. Fleischer</dc:creator>
  <dc:date>2002</dc:date>
  <dc:description>&lt;p&gt;The use of rubber-compound windows for fisheries acoustics must consider operating frequency and ambient water temperatures. Signal attenuation by the rubber becomes pronounced with increased frequency and decreased temperature. Based on our results, a 420 k Hz system could be expected to lose up to 3-4 dB in colder water through a 5.1-cm thick rubber diaphragm. At 120 k Hz, signal loss was negligible and would undoubtedly also be inconsequential for even lower frequencies used in fisheries applications (e.g., 70, 38 k Hz).&lt;/p&gt;</dc:description>
  <dc:format>application/pdf</dc:format>
  <dc:identifier>10.1006/jsvi.2002.5139</dc:identifier>
  <dc:language>en</dc:language>
  <dc:publisher>Elsevier</dc:publisher>
  <dc:title>Evaluation of a rubber-compound diaphragm for acoustic fisheries surveys: Effects on dual-beam signal intensity and beam patterns</dc:title>
  <dc:type>article</dc:type>
</oai_dc:dc>