Are current hydrophone low frequency response standards acceptable for measuring mechanical/cavitation indices?
The purpose of this paper is to determine the error introduced by ultrasonic hydrophones used to measure current or proposed Mechanical (MI) and Cavitation (CI) Indices, assuming that the hydrophones meet bandwidth specifications contained in US and IEC measurement standards. These indices are based on the peak rarefactional pressure, pr. Since the portion of the pressure waveform where pr occurs is dominated by low frequency components, attention was placed on the low frequency hydrophone response specifications. Both simulated and actual diagnostic pressure pulses (with center frequency fc) were subjected to single-pole high-pass filtering for a range of -3 dB cut-off frequencies (fa). The error in the indices introduced by this filtration was evaluated. At both fa = 0.5fc (the US requirement) and fa = 0.86fc (calculated from the IEC -6dB bandwidth specification at 0.5fc), results showed that errors exceeding -30% could be expected. Furthermore, to reduce errors to less than 5%, the low frequency hydrophone response should extend at least an order of magnitude below the center frequency of the pressure wave. For example, for a 3.5 MHz transducer, the hydrophone should have a lower cut-off frequency of less than 350 kHz, which at present constitutes a challenge because of the lack of commercial hydrophones calibrated below 1 MHz.
Harris
G R
GR
US Food and Drug Administration, Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Rockville, MD 20852, USA. grh@fdadr.cdrh.fda.gov
D000465:Algorithms; D005060:Europe; D008422:Materials Testing; D019563:Mechanics; D009991:Oscillometry; D011312:Pressure; D012815:Signal Processing, Computer-Assisted; D014159:Transducers / Q000592:standards; D014465:Ultrasonics; D014463:Ultrasonography / Q000295:instrumentation* / Q000592:standards; D014481:United States