Suppr超能文献

聚焦超声换能器空间峰值强度估计:方法比较。

Focused ultrasound transducer spatial peak intensity estimation: a comparison of methods.

机构信息

Division of Radiotherapy and Imaging, The Institute of Cancer Research, Sutton, United Kingdom.

出版信息

Phys Med Biol. 2018 Mar 7;63(5):055015. doi: 10.1088/1361-6560/aaaf01.

Abstract

Characterisation of the spatial peak intensity at the focus of high intensity focused ultrasound transducers is difficult because of the risk of damage to hydrophone sensors at the high focal pressures generated. Hill et al (1994 Ultrasound Med. Biol. 20 259-69) provided a simple equation for estimating spatial-peak intensity for solid spherical bowl transducers using measured acoustic power and focal beamwidth. This paper demonstrates theoretically and experimentally that this expression is only strictly valid for spherical bowl transducers without a central (imaging) aperture. A hole in the centre of the transducer results in over-estimation of the peak intensity. Improved strategies for determining focal peak intensity from a measurement of total acoustic power are proposed. Four methods are compared: (i) a solid spherical bowl approximation (after Hill et al 1994 Ultrasound Med. Biol. 20 259-69), (ii) a numerical method derived from theory, (iii) a method using measured sidelobe to focal peak pressure ratio, and (iv) a method for measuring the focal power fraction (FPF) experimentally. Spatial-peak intensities were estimated for 8 transducers at three drive powers levels: low (approximately 1 W), moderate (~10 W) and high (20-70 W). The calculated intensities were compared with those derived from focal peak pressure measurements made using a calibrated hydrophone. The FPF measurement method was found to provide focal peak intensity estimates that agreed most closely (within 15%) with the hydrophone measurements, followed by the pressure ratio method (within 20%). The numerical method was found to consistently over-estimate focal peak intensity (+40% on average), however, for transducers with a central hole it was more accurate than using the solid bowl assumption (+70% over-estimation). In conclusion, the ability to make use of an automated beam plotting system, and a hydrophone with good spatial resolution, greatly facilitates characterisation of the FPF, and consequently gives improved confidence in estimating spatial peak intensity from measurement of acoustic power.

摘要

由于在产生的高焦点压力下,水声传感器有损坏的风险,因此很难对高强度聚焦超声换能器的焦点处的空间峰值强度进行特性描述。Hill 等人(1994 年《超声医学与生物学》第 20 卷第 259-269 页)提供了一个简单的方程,用于使用测量的声功率和焦点波束宽度来估算实心球形碗换能器的空间峰值强度。本文从理论和实验上证明,对于没有中心(成像)孔径的球形碗换能器,该表达式才是严格有效的。换能器中心的一个孔会导致峰值强度的高估。提出了从测量总声功率确定焦点峰值强度的改进策略。比较了四种方法:(i)实心球形碗近似值(根据 Hill 等人 1994 年《超声医学与生物学》第 20 卷第 259-269 页),(ii)从理论推导出的数值方法,(iii)使用测量的旁瓣与焦点峰值压力比的方法,以及(iv)实验测量焦点功率分数(FPF)的方法。在三个驱动功率水平(低(约 1 W)、中(约 10 W)和高(20-70 W))下,对 8 个换能器的空间峰值强度进行了估算。计算出的强度与使用校准的水听器进行的焦点峰值压力测量得出的强度进行了比较。结果发现,FPF 测量方法提供的焦点峰值强度估算值与水听器测量值最为接近(相差在 15%以内),其次是压力比方法(相差在 20%以内)。数值方法被发现始终高估焦点峰值强度(平均高出 40%),然而,对于带有中心孔的换能器,它比使用实心碗假设(高估 70%)更准确。总之,能够使用自动化的波束绘图系统和具有良好空间分辨率的水听器,极大地促进了 FPF 的特性描述,从而使通过测量声功率来估计空间峰值强度更有信心。

相似文献

引用本文的文献

本文引用的文献

文献AI研究员

20分钟写一篇综述,助力文献阅读效率提升50倍。

立即体验

用中文搜PubMed

大模型驱动的PubMed中文搜索引擎

马上搜索

文档翻译

学术文献翻译模型,支持多种主流文档格式。

立即体验