Factors affecting the choice of preamplification for ultrasonic hydrophone probes.

This paper gives a systematic analysis of the effects of including an integrated (built-in) preamplifier into the ultrasonic piezoelectric probes (hydrophones) that are finding increasing use in biomedical applications. The design parameters considered include the end-of-cable sensitivity, gain, dynamic range, power supply requirements, construction intricacy, and cost. The rationale behind the inclusion of a preamplifier is given, and it is shown that the additional complexity introduced with the preamplifier into the measurement chain may not be warranted in all applications. Both the drawbacks and advantages of hydrophone preamplification are demonstrated, especially for the case of high pressure amplitude ultrasonic field measurements. Guidelines are developed for the potential user to identify the need for preamplification and the factors that influence the selection of the appropriate circuitry.

[1]  G. R. Harris,et al.  Sensitivity Considerations for PVDF Hydrophones Using the Spot-Poled Membrane Design , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Sonics and Ultrasonics.

[2]  Gerhard M. Sessler,et al.  Piezoelectricity in polyvinylidenefluoride , 1981 .

[3]  P A Lewin,et al.  A comparison of two calibration methods for ultrasonic hydrophones. , 1982, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[4]  Steven C. Roth,et al.  Measurement of a piezoelectric d constant for poly(vinylidene fluoride) transducers using pressure pulses , 1985 .

[5]  D. R. Bacon,et al.  Characteristics of a PVDF Membrane Hydrophone for Use in the Range 1-100 MHz , 1982, IEEE Transactions on Sonics and Ultrasonics.

[6]  S W Smith,et al.  Angular response of miniature ultrasonic hydrophones. , 1982, Medical physics.

[7]  D. R. Bacon.  The observation of distorted waveforms--nonlinear propagation or hydrophone overload? , 1984, Ultrasound in medicine & biology.

[8]  G.R. Harris,et al.  Use of Miniature Hydrophones to Determine Peak Intensities Typical of Medical Ultrasound Devices , 1986, IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics and Frequency Control.

[9]  P. A. Lewin,et al.  Miniature piezoelectric polymer ultrasonic hydrophone probes , 1981 .

[10]  R. C. Preston,et al.  PVDF membrane hydrophone performance properties and their relevance to the measurement of the acoustic output of medical ultrasonic equipment , 1983 .

[11]  F. Bauer,et al.  PVF2 polymers: Ferroelectric polarization and piezoelectric properties under dynamic pressure and shock wave action , 1983 .

[12]  K. Parker,et al.  Observation of Nonlinear Acoustic Effects in a B-Scan Imaging Instrument , 1985, IEEE Transactions on Sonics and Ultrasonics.

[13]  R. C. Chivers,et al.  Typical errors in using finite miniature ultrasonic probes for far field measurements , 1983 .

[14]  F. Duck,et al.  Acoustic shock generation by ultrasonic imaging equipment. , 1984, The British journal of radiology.

[15]  K. T. Chung,et al.  Piezoelectric and pyroelectric properties of poly(vinylidene fluoride) films at high hydrostatic pressure , 1981 .

[16]  P. A. Lewin,et al.  The voltage sensitivity of miniature piezoelectric plastic ultrasonic probes , 1982 .