Experimental evaluation of indicators of nonlinearity for use in ultrasound transducer characterizations

Ultrasound in Medicine and Biology

Volumn 28, Issue 11-12, 2002, Pages 1509-1520

  Bigelow, Timothy A ^a   O'Brien Jr , William D ^a  

^a University of Illinois at Urbana Champaign   (United States)

Author keywords

Acoustic nonlinearity; Transducer calibration; Transducer characterization

Indexed keywords

ABSORPTION; DIAGNOSIS; ELECTRIC DISTORTION; PRESSURE EFFECTS; TRANSDUCERS;

ACOUSTIC PRESSURE;

ULTRASONICS;

WATER;

ACCURACY; ACOUSTICS; ARTICLE; ELECTRIC POTENTIAL; EQUIPMENT DESIGN; EVALUATION; FREQUENCY ANALYZER; MATHEMATICAL ANALYSIS; MEDICAL INSTRUMENTATION; NONLINEAR SYSTEM; PRESSURE MEASUREMENT; PRIORITY JOURNAL; PULSE GENERATOR; SOUND PRESSURE; ULTRASOUND TRANSDUCER;

ACOUSTICS; CALIBRATION; ELECTRONICS, MEDICAL; HUMANS; NONLINEAR DYNAMICS; PRESSURE; SIGNAL PROCESSING, COMPUTER-ASSISTED; TRANSDUCERS; ULTRASONOGRAPHY;

EID: 0036866891     PISSN: 03015629     EISSN: None     Source Type: Journal    
DOI: 10.1016/S0301-5629(02)00610-5     Document Type: Article

References (16)

1. Acoustic output measurement standard for diagnostic ultrasound equipment Am Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine and Rosslyn, VA . 1998;National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Laurel, MD.
2. Bacon D.R. Finite amplitude distortion of the pulsed fields used in diagnostic ultrasound. Ultrasound Med Biol. 10:(2):1984;189-195.
3. Bechmann R., Fair I.E. Standard definitions, and methods of measurement for piezoelectric vibrators. 177:1966;Institute of Electrical and Electronics Engineers, Inc, New York.
4. Bigelow TA, Experimental Evaluation of Nonlinear Indices for Ultrasound Transducer Characterizations. M.S. thesis. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2001.
5. Christopher T., Carstensen E.L. Finite amplitude distortion and its relationship to linear derating formulae for diagnostic ultrasound systems. Ultrasound Med Biol. 22:(8):1996;1103-1116.
6. Duck F.A. Estimating in situ exposure in the presence of acoustic nonlinearity. J Ultrasound Med. 18:1999;43-53.
7. Information for manufacturers seeking marketing clearance of diagnostic ultrasound systems, and transducer. 1997;Center for Devices, and Radiological Health, US Food, and Drug Administration, Rockville, MD.
8. Hamilton M.F., Blackstock D.T. Nonlinear acoustics. 1998;Academic Press, San Diego, CA.
9. Lucas B.G., Muir T.G. Field of a finite-amplitude focusing source. J Acoust Soc Am. 74:(5):1983;1522-1528.
10. Naugolnykh K., Ostrovsky L. Nonlinear wave processes in acoustics. 1998;Cambridge University Press, New York.
11. Ostrovskii L.A., Sutin A.M. Focusing of finite-amplitude acoustic waves. Sov Phys Dokl. 20:(4):1975;275-277.
12. Pierce A.D. Acoustics. An introduction to its physical principles and applications. 1991;Acoustical Society of America, Woodbury, NY.
13. Sempsrott JM, O'Brien WD. Experimental verification of acoustic saturation. Proceedings of the 1999 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, 1999:287-1290.
14. Sempsrott JM Experimental Evaluation of Acoustic Saturation. M.S. thesis. University of Illinois at Urbana-Champaign, 2000.
15. Sutin A.M. Influence of nonlinear effects on the properties of acoustic focusing systems. Sov Phys Acoust. 24:(4):1978;334-339.
16. Szabo T.L., Clougherty F.C., Grossman C.G. Effects of nonlinearity on the estimation of in situ values of acoustic output parameters. J Ultrasound Med. 18:1999;33-41.