A European comparison of medical ultrasonic field measurements: Interpreting IEC 61157

Acustica

Volumn 86, Issue 6, 2000, Pages 1000-1010

  Esward, T J ^a   Persson, H ^b   Kollman, C ^c   Segovia, F J Chinchurreta ^d   Beissner, K ^e   Ludwig, G ^e   Ward, B ^f   Whittingham, T A ^f   Eisenberg, A ^g   Pessel, M ^g   Hekkenberg, R T ^h   Duck, F A ⁱ   Knuuttila, J ^j  

^a NATIONAL PHYSICAL LABORATORY   (United Kingdom)

^b LUND INSTITUTE OF TECHNOLOGY   (Sweden)

^c UNIVERSITY OF VIENNA   (Austria)

^d Consejo Superior de Investigaciones Científicas   (Spain)

^e PHYSIKALISCH TECHNISCHE BUNDESANSTALT   (Germany)

^f NEWCASTLE GENERAL HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^g Formerly Technol Med G   (Germany)

^h TNO   (Netherlands)

ⁱ ROYAL UNITED HOSPITAL   (United Kingdom)

^j VTT TECHNICAL RESEARCH CENTRE OF FINLAND   (Finland)

more..

Author keywords

[No Author keywords available]

Indexed keywords

ACOUSTIC FIELDS; ACOUSTIC IMAGING; ACOUSTOOPTICAL EFFECTS; ULTRASONIC DEVICES;

MEDICAL ULTRASONIC FIELD MEASUREMENT;

ULTRASONIC MEASUREMENT;

EID: 0034428753     PISSN: 00017884     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: None     Document Type: Article

References (12)

1. IEC 61157: Requirements for the declaration of the acoustic output of medical diagnostic ultrasound equipment. Geneva, Switzerland, 1992.
2. 93/42/EEC: Medical devices directive.
3. T. J. Esward: An assessment of medical ultrasonic field measurement methods: final technical report for EC contract no. MAT1-CT940064. NPL Report CMAM 17, National Physical Laboratory, UK, 1998.
4. K. Beissner: Intercomparison of acoustic output measurements of a diagnostic ultrasound device. Ultrasound. Med. Biol. 25 (1999) 629-636.
5. S. P. Robinson: A comparison of the frequency response of membrane and needle-probe pvdf hydrophones. - In: Physics in medical ultrasound II. Report no.57. D. H. Evans, K. Martin (eds.). Institute of Physical Sciences in Medicine, York, United Kingdom, 1988, 79-86.
6. G. R. Harris, P. M. Gammell: Effects of diffraction on the sensitivity of needle-type ultrasonic receivers. ICA/Acoustical Society of America Conference Proceedings, Seattle, USA, 1998.
7. D. R. Bacon: Primary calibration of ultrasonic hydrophones using optical interferometry. IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control 35 (1988) 151-161.
8. G. Du, M. A. Breazeale: Harmonic distortion of a finite amplitude gaussian beam in a fluid. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 80 (1986) 212-216.
9. B. Zeqiri, A. D. Bond: The influence of waveform distortion on hydrophone spatial-averaging corrections - Theory and measurement. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 94 (1992) 1809-1821.
10. D. R. Bacon: Characteristics of a pvdf membrane hydrophone for use in the range from 1-100 MHz. IEEE Transactions on Sonics and Ultrasonics SU-19 (1982) 18-25.
11. J. Henderson, K. Jago, K. Willson, T. A. Whittingham: Towards a protocol for measurement of maximum spatial peak temporal average acoustic intensity from diagnostic b mode ultrasound scanners in the field. Phys. Med. Biol. 38 (1993) 1161-1621.
12. R. T. Hekkenberg, W. A. Oosterbaan, C. J. P. M. Teirlinck: Correction for limited bandwidth of hydrophones. DAGA symposium, Duisburg, Germany, February 1994.