Milestone-Proposal talk:Sonar, 100th birthday of Paul Langevin Invention 1917-2017

Original citation from proposer -- Administrator1 (talk) 19:10, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

Invention of Sonar, 1915-1918

At this location, from 1915 to 1918, Paul Langevin designed a submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers, following the idea by Constantin Chilowsky of using ultrasounds.. This improved method for submarine ultrasonic echo detection (later known as sonar) obtained 4000-meter echo soundings from the cable ship Charente in the Bay of Biscay, and was later successfully used during World War II. Echo sounding led to other applications such as medical echography.

Suggested Rewrite of Citation -- Bberg (talk) 21:03, 24 September 2022 (UTC)

The 72 words of the proposed citation is 2 words too long. Also, the word "following" in the first sentence is ambiguous as it could be read to mean "following in time" instead of the correct meaning of "based on" or "based upon." A non-ambiguous and easier-to-read rewrite which comes in at the necessary 70 words is as follows:

At this location, from 1915 to 1918, Paul Langevin designed a submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers. Based on Constantin Chilowsky's proposed use of ultrasounds, this improved method for submarine ultrasonic echo detection (later called sonar) obtained 4000-meter echo soundings from the cable ship Charente in the Bay of Biscay. It was later used successfully during World War II, and echo sounding led to other applications including medical echography.

Re: Suggested citations from History Committee members -- Administrator1 (talk) 19:11, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

70 Words: A submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers to detect ultrasound signals was designed at this location from 1915 to 1918 based on theoretical and engineering concepts from many contributors. This device used ultrasonic echo detection (later known as sonar) to obtain 4000-meter echo soundings from a ship in the Bay of Biscay. Echo sounding was later used during World War II and led to medical echography and other applications.

61 Words: A submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers to detect ultrasound signals was designed at this location from 1915 to 1918. This device used ultrasonic echo detection (later known as sonar) to obtain 4000-meter echo soundings from a ship in the Bay of Biscay. Echo sounding was later used during World War II and led to medical echography and other applications.

Expert reviews uploaded on behalf of proposer by Administrator4 -- Administrator4 (talk) 19:11, 18 March 2022 (UTC)

The following comments and suggestions were submitted by two experts in the field in response to a request from LDF. William D. O’Brien, Jr. Donald Biggar Willett Professor Emeritus University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign

You (LDF) asked our opinion on the following questions:

The proposed “The Invention of Sonar” is most appropriate provide that Langevin’s name is explicitly recognized and included in this plaque title. You are correct that there were others suggesting pulse-echo detection schemes (mainly in patent applications); most notably were the inventor of FM and superheterodyne circuit Edward Howard Armstrong, an AIEE Edison Medal recipient; and the inventor of the Fessenden oscillator or Fathometer Reginald Aubrey Fessenden that operated in the audio frequency range (~500 Hz) but was never promoted seriously for its echo-ranging capabilities. And there is Ernest Rutherford who is mentioned in the application. All four, Langevin included, clearly had the concept of sonar (echo ranging) in mind, Armstrong and Fessenden for mainly iceberg detection, and Rutherford and Langevin for submarine detection. Of these four uniquely clever engineers, Langevin was the most targeted and successful at developing a workable sonar capability. Rutherford had the right idea except for his lack of understanding orientated crystalline structure did not allow him to generate a functioning sonar system. The credit has to be given to Langevin who had an exceptional understood and developed the echo-ranging capability successfully with his in-depth physical knowledge (a great leap!) of the piezoelectric effect, knowledge that Rutherford lacked.

Alfred C. H. Yu, PhD, FAIUM Professor, NSERC Steacie Fellow Editor in Chief, IEEE Transactions on UFFC Laboratory on Innovative Technology in Medical Ultrasound (LITMUS) University of Waterloo OVERALL COMMENTS This narrative is generally a strong laudation of Professor Paul Langevin and his seminal contributions to sonar technology. There was a reasonable justification for why Langevin's work should be considered as very significant because of practical wartime needs during WWI. The technical obstacles were also qualitatively elaborated in some detail. Nevertheless, there is quite a bit of room for improvement to enhance the narrative. In particular, authors should contrast Langevin's achievements more explicitly in a few different contexts. Specific suggestions for improvement are given below to each of the three main sections of the narrative.

SUGGESTIONS FOR IMPROVEMENT

A) Historical Significance Section 1. Authors should explicitly highlight the fact that the period beginning around 1916 is well considered as the start of modern ultrasonics development. Langevin is a core contributor and trailblazer. The current passage seems to have focused too much on the social and geopolitical motivations behind Langevin's work (e.g. sinking of Titanic, WWI, submarine warfare, etc).

2. Throughout this section, there is no mentioning of the word "sonar". It is not obvious to lay readers whether Langevin's "ultrasound detection device" is indeed a sonar device or not. Please fix.

3. The scientific significance of Langevin's research work needs to be explicitly acknowledged with respect to the history of ultrasonics. Since his seminal contributions mark the start of the modern ultrasonics era, it would be helpful to explain how Langevin's work has transformed the previous scientific era that focused on the fundamental physics of piezoelectricity (discoveries by the Curie brothers) and acoustic wave propagation (Rayleigh and his two-volume treatise entitled "The Theory of Sound").

B) Obstacles Section 1. It wasn't clear whether there are political and geographic obstacles that needed to be overcome. Indeed there are, given that Langevin's work was done during WWI. See the following article that discussed in detail the political struggle between Langevin and the Royal Commission on Awards to Inventors regarding the sonar patent dispute:

D. Zimmerman, "'A more credible way': the discovery of active sonar, the Langevin-Chilowsky patent dispute and the Royal Commission on Awards to Inventors", War in History, vol. 25, no. 1, pp. 48-68, 2018.

2. It is unfair for the authors to downplay the significance of Chilowsky's contributions to sonar. He and Langevin were obviously the co-inventors on both patents (with equal contributions). It is true that Chilowsky moved on to pursue other interests shortly after 1916, but without Chilowsky's initial proposal and his subsequent short collaboration with Langevin, the latter would not have demonstrated echo detection in 1917,

3. In the Technical Obstacle subsection, there is an obvious error in the date. September 2016 should be September 1916 instead in the sentence "In September 2016 he considered using piezoelectricity for detection of sound waves..."

4. There is a lack of tangible mentioning on the performance achievements gained from Langevin's customized cutting of quartz crystals and their use to develop a sandwich transducer (the Langevin triplet). It was well demonstrated back then that a system of piezoelectric quartz plates mounted to the two sides of a steel disc was able to project a beam of ultrasound waves that had a wave frequency of 150 kHz and a power output of 1 kW. The authors can even add remarks to substantiate what is the practical impact of this achieved power output. For instance, when this ultrasound beam was insonated into a water tank, all the small fishes that tried to swim across the beam were immediately killed. Also, an instant painful burning sensation was felt when a person’s hand was held in the vicinity of the ultrasound beam.

C) Unique Features Section 1. Again, throughout this section, there is no mentioning of the word "sonar". Also, it is not clear how Langevin's work is unique and distinguished from similar achievements.

2. For contrast, authors should explain how Langevin's sonar device development is very different from other contemporary ways that were explored back then, such as the training of sea lions for submarine detection.

---

Re: Expert reviews uploaded on behalf of proposer by Administrator4 -- Bberg (talk) 17:18, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

I think that the above has been responded to within the proposal. If this was indeed the case, the proposer should have provided a reply noting this fact.

Comments on Details Provided and Citation -- Bberg (talk) 22:41, 22 April 2022 (UTC)

First, the details provided in the (1) historical significance, (2) what obstacles, and (3) what features sections are rich in content. However, please break these into more paragraphs to make them more easily read and appreciated. It may also be helpful to add one or two boldfaced subsection labels within these sections as well.

The "1915-1918" dates do not match the citation, which only cites through 1917. Either change 1918 to 1917 in the title, or incorporate 1918 into the citation.

While the citation reads very nicely, I suggest these minor changes:
1. change "Here" to "At this location" at the very start since this reads more smoothly (and you have the room to make this change)
2. remove the commas that precede and follow "(later known as sonar)"
3. add a comma after Biscay
4. change "world war" to "World War"
5. remove "also" from the last sentence as it really is not necessary

Re: Comments on Details Provided and Citation -- Bberg (talk) 17:20, 19 May 2022 (UTC)

It's unfortunate that my comments made 4 weeks ago have received no reply.

Also, the proposal lacks the necessary "Justification for Inclusion of Name(s) in the Citation" section as required by History Committee rules. Importantly, as Dr. Yu (the second Expert Reviewer) noted "It is unfair for the authors to downplay the significance of Chilowsky's contributions to sonar," this raises the unanswered issue of whether it is appropriate to include Langevin's name without also including Chilowsky's name in the citation.

Re: Re: Comments on Details Provided and Citation -- Bleridon (talk) 07:04, 1 June 2022 (UTC)

Dear Bbreg,

Sorry for having missed your comments five weeks ago. I now followed your suggestions and made the appropriate modifications. Please let me know if you want to bring additional changes. Regarding the contribution from Chilowsky: While it is certain that Chilowsky was at the origin of the idea of using ultrasound, the practical realization that led to a working device and a successful invention was due to the use of piezoelectricity for which Langevin is entirely creditable. This is why we are in favor of keeping the citation as it is. But of course Chilowsky's contribution is largely acknowledged in the text (as well as Marcel Tournier's and Fernand Holweck's). I included an appropriate justification in this sense. Please feel free to comment on it. With best regards

Brigitte

Correspondence with experts uploaded by Advocate -- Feisel (talk) 14:24, 9 June 2022 (UTC)

Correspondence with experts. June 2 – 8, 2022

Lyle Feisel to Alfred C. H. Yu and William O’Brien.

The proposer has proposed a new citation:

At this location, from 1915 to 1918, Paul Langevin designed a submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers, following the idea by Constantin Chilowsky’s of using ultrasounds. This improved method for submarine ultrasonic echo detection (later known as sonar) obtained 4000-meter echo soundings from the cable ship Charente in the Bay of Biscay, and was later successfully used during World War II. Echo sounding led to other applications such as medical echography.

It might need a little tidying up, but it does address the role of Chilowski. What do think? Would you endorse this version? I look forward to hearing from you. Thanks again for your help.

Response from Alfred Yu

I think the new citation is generally OK and it does address the role of Chilowski. I endorse this version. Though the title of the proposed milestone will need to be refined as well. "Paul Langevin's Invention of Sonar, 1915-1918" does not seem appropriate given Chilowski's indispensable role in this invention.

Response from William O’Brien

I’m not in compete agreement that Chilowski’s name should be recognized. Others like Reginald Fessenden in 1914 actually demonstrated iceberg echo ranging so the idea of acoustic detection was already out there well before the demonstrated proof by Langevin (not sure the word “ultrasound” was used in the technical literature then). FYI, my lack of complete agreement, however, is weak and not worth even a scientific argument if the French want to include Chilowski’s name in the citation.

Lyle Feisel response to Yu and O’Brien

Thanks very much for your comments. I will combine them into comments for the proposal page.

Alfred, I’m sure that will not be the title of the milestone. That is a working title. My guess is that it will be something like “The Invention of Sonar”.

Re: Correspondence with experts uploaded by Advocate -- Amy Bix (talk) 20:22, 27 July 2022 (UTC)

The current version of the citation seems rather lengthy, given IEEE stipulations? I would recommend thinking about ways to make it more concise, as follows:

At this location, from 1915 to 1918, Paul Langevin designed a submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers, following Constantin Chilowsky's idea of using ultrasounds. This improved method for submarine ultrasonic echo detection (later known as sonar) obtained 4000-meter echo soundings from a ship in the Bay of Biscay. Echo sounding was later used during World War II and led to medical echography and other applications.

Re: Re: Correspondence with experts uploaded by Advocate -- Bberg (talk) 23:36, 7 August 2022 (UTC)

Thanks to Amy for this suggested new citation which reduces the word count from 72 to 66. I suggest the following changes to Amy's version: (1) in the first sentence, change "idea of" to "proposal for" as "proposal" is a more formal word which is explicitly used in the text of the proposal itself, and (2) add a comma after "World War II" in the last sentence.

I note that the section title "Justification for inclusion of Prof. Paul Langevin’s name" does not explicitly call out inclusion of Chilowsky’s name, although it does discuss it. I know that the Milestones Subcommittee considered the use of names in this proposal's citation, but it should have been more clear that Chilowsky’s name was considered as well.

Re: Re: Re: Correspondence with experts uploaded by Advocate -- Jbart64 (talk) 16:22, 8 August 2022 (UTC)

I support the Milestone but I offer the following suggestion on wording. The debate over who contributed and who's name should appear on an achievement is a long-standing debate in Milestone applications. That debate is an issue here. Including anyone's name begs a complete debate over the history of the achievement, with no clear and easily explained resolution for the general public who are the intended audience of these plaques. Therefore, I suggest the following in light of the many contributors to this achievement. Two versions are offered, with and without the phrase "based on theoretical and engineering concepts from many contributors". Including this phrase leaves 70 words, excluding this phrase leaves 61 words.

70 Words: A submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers to detect ultrasound signals was designed at this location from 1915 to 1918 based on theoretical and engineering concepts from many contributors. This device used ultrasonic echo detection (later known as sonar) to obtain 4000-meter echo soundings from a ship in the Bay of Biscay. Echo sounding was later used during World War II and led to medical echography and other applications.

61 Words: A submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers to detect ultrasound signals was designed at this location from 1915 to 1918. This device used ultrasonic echo detection (later known as sonar) to obtain 4000-meter echo soundings from a ship in the Bay of Biscay. Echo sounding was later used during World War II and led to medical echography and other applications.

Dave Bart

Expert reviewer's comments uploaded on behalf of the advocate by -- Administrator4 (talk) 17:43, 11 April 2023 (UTC)

On April 5, Lyle Feisel wrote to Willian O’Brien and Alfred Yu, Experts in re the milestone proposal 2014-04, as follows”

===================================

Dear Bill and Alfred,

Once again, I need to request your assistance in evaluating the proposal to create an IEEE milestone recognizing the invention of sonar and two principal contributors, Paul Langevin and Constantin Chilowski. I’m not sure if you know what has transpired in the consideration of this proposal, but the pertinent facts are that after the proposal had gone through the complete process including approval by the IEEE Board of Directors, the proposers identified what was at least a misapprehension and at worst an error in the citation and the proposal text. I recommended that the changes be treated as editorial corrections, but the History Committee chose instead to send it back through the approval process, which, I must admit, was probably the right decision. In any event, below my signature you will find a description of the proposed changes in the citation and in the proposal text.

My request to you is to consider these changes and express either your approval or your concerns about the changes. It is unfortunate that these changes were proposed after the board’s approval but in the interest of accuracy, it was the responsible thing for the proposers to do. I look forward to hearing your reaction.

Once again, I thank you for your effort in evaluating this proposal. I hope this is the final iteration.

Best regards,

Lyle Feisel

Changes in the Citation 

Here is the approved citation:

Invention of Sonar, 1915-1918 At this location, from 1915 to 1918, Paul Langevin designed a submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers. Based on Constantin Chilowsky's proposed use of ultrasounds, this improved method for submarine ultrasonic echo detection (later called sonar) obtained 4000-meter echo soundings from the cable ship Charente in the Bay of Biscay. It was later used successfully during World War II, and echo sounding led to other applications including medical echography. Here is the proposed modified citation:

Invention of Sonar, 1915-1918

At this location, from 1915 to 1918, Paul Langevin designed a submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers. Based on Constantin Chilowsky's proposed use of ultrasounds, this innovative method for submarine ultrasonic echo detection (later called sonar) obtained 1300-meter echo soundings on a submarine on July 10th 1918. It was used successfully during World War II, and led to other applications including depth sounding and medical echography. 2) Justification and documents:

I think « innovative" is more appropriate than « improved » but I leave it to the judgment of the committee. What is important for me is to remove the allusion to the cable ship charente and the bay of Biscay that does not seem enough substantiated by existing references. This refers to depths sounding as opposed to submarine detection and on the contrary it seems that it is only in 1924 that Langevin improved his process so that it was able to work between 200 and several thousand meters of depth. See the partial translation of the article by Benoit Lelong that I am attaching.

By contrast the essays on submarine detection in the bay of Toulon in July 1918 were referenced in the Proceedings of the interallied conference in October 1918, that may be found here: https://bibnum.explore.psl.eu/s/psl/ark:/18469/2hj19#?c=0&m=0&s=0&cv=0&xywh=-143%2C-446%2C2858%2C4160 See page 13 that I am also attaching to this email, and the text extracted from this same page in French and in English. These essays were already documented in the text of the proposal.

3) Regarding the text itself:

In the section: What is the historical significance of the work (its technological, scientific, or social importance)?

I suggest to modify the paragraph entitled: "Impact of the invention", by simply adding the sentence in red.

Previously approved text:

Impact of the invention: While these efforts had little effect during the first world war since they were mature only by the end of the conflict, they had a considerable impact during the Second World War. These developments also paved the way for civil applications such as, for instance the use of medical ultrasound to visualize the interior of a non-transparent environment in echography. Developments in this field are still very active, and still noticeably rely on the use of piezoelectric materials. This work is also pioneering in its use of applied and basic science (and not just empirical approach) to solve military problems. It helped proving that scientific advance can result in military advantage.

Suggested modified text:

Impact of the invention: While these efforts had little effect during the first world war since they were mature only by the end of the conflict, they had a considerable impact during the Second World War. These developments also paved the way for civil applications such as, for instance the use of medical ultrasound to visualize the interior of a non-transparent environment in echography. Developments in this field are still very active, and still noticeably rely on the use of piezoelectric materials. The same technology also contributed to the early development of depth sounding, that was particularly important for the laying of underwater cables by telegraph companies and the establishment of marine charts by military hydrographic services, with an improved patented sounder developed by Langevin and Florisson from 1919 to 1924. This work is also pioneering in its use of applied and basic science (and not just empirical approach) to solve military problems. It helped proving that scienti.fic advance can result in military advantage.

The following responses were received: From William O’Brien Thank you Lyle for reaching out to me again. It seems from what I read below, this might be some type of agenda that has nothing to do with history of engineering. Therefore, I will leave any decisions in your capable hand.

All the best, Bill

From Alfred Yu: I'm OK with the amendment on the change in citation text. I do not agree with the proposed change to the historical significance paragraph. The suggested amendment of

"The same technology also contributed to the early development of depth sounding, that was particularly important for the laying of underwater cables by telegraph companies and the establishment of marine charts by military hydrographic services, with an improved patented sounder developed by Langevin and Florisson from 1919 to 1924."

is just one niche example of how the sonar invention has influenced technological development in other fields. The previous sentence in that paragraph, i.e., "These developments also paved the way for civil applications, such as for instance the use of medical ultrasound to visualize the interior of a non-transparent environment in echography." has already captured the essence of how the sonar invention has influenced technological development in other fields. There is no need for the proposed new sentence (the one in red).

Advocate's Recommendation After considering the comments of the experts, I recommend that all proposed changes be approved. O’Brien takes the position that if it’s alright with me, it’s alright with him. I infer from his comment that he doesn’t consider the changes to be a major issue, so let’s get on with it. Yu immediately approves the citation change and says that the proposal change is redundant. I agree that it is redundant but feel that it does not detract from the proposal and may be useful to some readers. On the other hand, I think Yu makes a good point and if the committee decides to strike the change in the proposal, I would concur. Again, I recommend the approval of all changes proposed. I especially endorse the citation change and hope that we can move forward expeditiously.

Re: Expert reviewer's comments uploaded on behalf of the advocate by -- Dmichelson (talk) 09:44, 19 April 2023 (UTC)

At this location, from 1915 to 1918, Paul Langevin designed a submarine detector using piezoelectric quartz crystal transceivers. Based on Constantin Chilowsky's proposed use of ultrasounds, this innovative method for submarine ultrasonic echo detection (later called sonar) obtained 1300-meter echo soundings from a submarine on July 10th 1918. It was used successfully during World War II, and led to other applications including depth sounding and medical echography.

According to Zimmerman, Langevin's work began in Paris shortly after Chilowsky submitted his proposal to the French government in February 1915. "He asked Chilowsky to join him and a small team of scientists working at his laboratory at the School of Physics and Chemistry in Paris. By April 1916 results were so promising that the French Navy transferred their work to Toulon so that experiments could be undertaken at sea."

The breakthrough work occurred in February 1917, when Langevin realized that the quartz crystal could function as both a transmitter and receiver. "This was the spark of genius that would separate Langevin’s work from other First World War ASW researchers. The piezoelectric effect had been known for 35 years, but it had been considered a scientific curiosity with no practical application. After developing the receiver, Langevin realized that the dual nature of the piezoelectric effect would allow quartz to be used as a transmitter as well, since when the crystal was fed an electrical oscillation, supersonic elastic sound waves would be produced."

There's no doubt that the work was conducted between 1915 and 1918, but Zimmerman's text suggests that Toulon was more than a test site. Certainly the successful detection of the submarine was not conducted in Paris. Are the words, "At this location" justified?

Otherwise, I propose the following modified citation for clarity:

From 1915 to 1918, Paul Langevin demonstrated the feasibility of using piezoelectric quartz crystals to both transmit and receive pulses of ultrasound and thereby detect submerged submarines at ranges up to 1300 metres. The system, later called sonar, validated Constantin Chilowsky's proposal to use ultrasound for this purpose. The technology was used successfully during World War II, and led to other applications including depth sounding and medical echography.

IMHO, the modified citation immediately focuses on Langevin's key contribution while acknowledging what came before and after, while remaining acceptably brief (68 words).