Acoustic power calibration of high-intensity focused ultrasound transducers using a radiation force technique

Subha Maruvada, Gerald R. Harris, and Bruce A. Herman

Center for Devices and Radiological Health, Food and Drug Administration Rockville, Maryland 20850

Randy L. King
King Acoustic Technologies, LLC, Washington, DC 20007

Received 19 July 2006; revised 5 December 2006; accepted 6 December 2006 To address the challenges associated with measuring the ultrasonic power from high-intensity focused ultrasound transducers via radiation force, a technique based on pulsed measurements was developed and analyzed. Two focused ultrasound transducers were characterized in terms of an effective duty factor, which was then used to calculate the power during the pulse at high applied power levels. Two absorbing target designs were used, and both gave comparable results and displayed no damage and minimal temperature rise if placed near the transducer and away from the focus. The method yielded reproducible results up to the maximum pulse power generated of approximately 230 W, thus allowing the radiated power to be calibrated in terms of the peak-to-peak voltage applied to the transducer. 2007 Acoustical Society of America. DOI: 10.1121/1.2431332 PACS number s : 43.35.Yb TDM Pages: 14341439

I. INTRODUCTION

Knowledge of the ultrasonic power radiated by therapeutic ultrasound transducers such as used in high-intensity focused ultrasound HIFU surgery is important from both an effectiveness and safety standpoint.13 The power produced by transducers used in biomedical ultrasound applications typically is found by radiation force means, in which the axial force i.e., the force in the direction of propagation on a target attached to a balance is measured.218 Two types of targets are used in a radiation force balance system: reecting and absorbing7 see Sec. II B . The relationship between the measured force F and the temporal-average acoustic power PTA for the case of plane waves and a perfectly absorbing target is PTA = cF, 1

problems, pulsed-mode instead of continuous-wave cw measurements can be made to lower the PTA, from which the power during the pulse can be computed. The objective of this work was to analyze this approach for calibrating the transducer output power in terms of the applied peak-to-peak voltage.
II. MATERIALS AND METHODS A. Transducers

where c is the speed of sound in the propagation medium, usually water.7,19 For focused fields with beam convergence angle = sin1 dS / 2L , PTA = 2cF/ 1 + cos , 2

where dS and L are the diameter and geometrical focal length radius of curvature of the source transducer, respectively.7,19 Equations 1 and 2 have been used successfully in many measurement situations, but for high-power focused beams these measurements can be challenging.2 For example, transducer damage can occur if the measurement time is longer than would be encountered in clinical use. Also, for absorbing targets, excessive heating can result in measurement error or target damage. Furthermore, bubble formation between the transducer and target at high powers can introduce measurement errors. Acoustic streaming is another potential source of measurement error that increases as both PTA and ultrasonic frequency increase. To overcome these
1434 J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 121 3 , March 2007

Ultrasonic frequencies between 1 and 2 MHz commonly are employed in HIFU.20 In this study two focused transducers operating in this range were used 1.50 MHz, 10-cm diameter, 15-cm focal length, ONDA Corp, Sunnyvale, CA; 1.11 MHz, 8-cm diameter, 10-cm focal length, King Acoustic Technologies, LLC, Washington, DC . The values of cos in Eq. 2 for these two transducers were 0.866 and 0.917, respectively. A third transducer 3.33 MHz, 6-cm diameter, 5-cm focal length, cos = 0.800 was used to assess the effect of acoustic streaming at a higher frequency. All transducers were matched to an electrical impedance of 50 ohms.
B. Targets

For all reecting targets, plane and conical, the force varies with the angle between the beam axis and the normal to the reecting surface. Most reecting targets are convex cones, for which precise positioning is necessary to achieve accurate measurements. Also, a disadvantage of conical reectors in focused elds is that the radiation force is very sensitive to the beam convergence angle.18 Furthermore, with these targets more care is needed in tank design to avoid reections. For absorbing targets these factors are much less critical. However, for high-power transducers, target heating can cause measurement instability, and for highly focused
2007 Acoustical Society of America

0001-4966/2007/121 3 /1434/6/$23.00

Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210.119.18.219. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms

FIG. 1. Twelve-cm brush target.

beams, target damage can occur. In this work, three absorbing targets were employed and efforts were made to overcome the disadvantages. Two brush targets8 were constructed having 10-cm made in-house and 12-cm King Acoustic Technologies, LLC, Washington, DC diameters with bristles of 4 and 6.5 cm length, respectively. Figure 1 shows a picture of the 12-cm brush target. Nylon bristles from common cleaning brushes were pulled and packed densely together and then potted in a base of rubber. The approximate diameters of the nylon brush bristles were 0.17 and 0.25 mm, respectively, for the 10- and 12-cm brush targets. The 10-cm brush was potted in a silicone elastomer Sylgard 170, Dow Corning, Midland, MI and the 12-cm brush was potted in a proprietary twopart rubber material designed to absorb ultrasound King Acoustic Technologies, Washington, DC . The third target, a commercially available absorbing design14,21 model Ham A, Precision Acoustics Ltd., Dorchester, UK , is based on polyurethane rubber material. It is composed of two layers: a top layer whose acoustic impedance is matched to that of water and a backing layer that is partially air-loaded to increase transmission loss. The target has at front and back faces and a thickness of 14 mm. The material was cut into a disk of 12 cm diameter. According to Ref. 7, for unfocused transducers the target diameter should be at least 1.5 times the transducer diameter to intercept all signicant parts of the eld. For focused transducers, an equivalent specication based on simple ray acoustics can be expressed as dT 1.5dS L z /L, 3

FIG. 2. Experimental setup of radiation force balance.

ducer was positioned so that it radiated downward onto the target. The driving electronics consisted of a function generator Wavetek 81, Fluke Corp., Everett, WA and power amplier ENI 2100L or ENI A-300, Rochester, NY . A 50-dB dual-directional coupler Amplier Research, model DC2000, Souderton, PA , two power sensors model 8482A, Agilent Tech., Palo Alto, CA , and a power meter model E4419B, Agilent Tech., Palo Alto, CA were placed between the amplier and transducer to monitor the forward and reversed electrical power to the transducer. Operation of the radiation force balance system was accomplished through MATLAB The Mathworks Inc., Natick, MA . MATLAB was used to control the hardware function generator, balance, and power meter as well as to acquire and analyze the data. The peak-to-peak transducer voltage was measured during the steady-state portion of the pulse with a digital oscilloscope model 54622A, Agilent Tech., Palo Alto, CA . The peak-to-peak rather than rms pulse voltage was measured for convenience, although either would provide a robust calibration of the transducer and drive electronics combination until amplier saturation at high drive levels becomes signicant.
D. Effective duty factor EDF

where dT is the target diameter and z is the transducer-totarget distance. The transducer-to-target distances stated herein refer to the distance between the plane dened by the transducer rim and either the tips of the brush bristles or the front face of the at target. For the 1.11- and 1.50-MHz transducers, most measurements were made at a transducer-to-target distance of 5 cm to satisfy Eq. 3 , but positions closer to the focus were used for comparison.
C. Radiation force balance system

Two pulse repetition frequencies, 500 and 1000 Hz, were used in this approach for circumventing the problems associated with measuring high temporal-average powers. For both, the pulse duration was chosen to give a duty factor DF equal to the product of the pulse repetition frequency and the pulse duration, of approximately 10%. The power during the pulse PPA can be calculated from the measured temporal-average power as in Eq. 4 , PPA = PTA/DF. 4

The setup of the experiment is shown in Fig. 2. The absorbing target was suspended from the bottom of an electronic balance AND HM-202, Bradford, MA , and the transJ. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 3, March 2007

Equation 4 is exact for a power pulse waveform having a true rectangular modulating envelope. However, turn-on and turn-off transients can lead to inaccuracies in Eq. 4 that will increase as the pulses duration decreases. Therefore, first an effective duty factor EDF , defined as the ratio of pulsed to cw power, PPUL / PCW, was established by measuring
Maruvada et al.: High-power calibration 1435

Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210.119.18.219. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms

TABLE I. cw and pulsed-mode power values to establish an effective duty factor EDF for the 1.11-MHz transducer. Upp V 72 88 102 112 123 Pcw W 9.94 15.11 20.23 24.56 29.65 PPUL 500 W 0.88 1.34 1.79 2.17 2.62 PPUL 1000 W 0.84 1.29 1.73 2.09 2.53 EDF 500 0.089 0.089 0.088 0.088 0.088 EDF 1000 0.085 0.085 0.086 0.085 0.085

both PPUL and PCW with the transducer driven at the same peak-to-peak transducer voltage for five cw PTAs approximately evenly spaced over the range from 10 to 30 W. The EDF was the average valued obtained over this range. Then, in pulsed mode the transducer drive level was increased and the power during the pulse was calculated from PPA = PTA/EDF. 5

III. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. Effective duty factor

E. Other measurement considerations

Each measurement comprised ve on-off cycles under computer control per the procedure in Ref. 16. The on time was 9 s, a time sufcient to attain and process a stable balance reading, while the off time was 20 s to allow the target temperature to return to near baseline see Sec. III E . Four independent measurements were made at each drive level to assess the type A random uncertainty.22 The water was degassed to 2 ppm and measurements were made at room temperature 22 C 25 C . The speed of sound c in Eq. 2 was adjusted for its variation with temperature.23 To determine where in the brush targets heating due to ultrasound absorption might arise, 250- m-diameter wire, copper-constantan thermocouples were placed centrally at three locations within the 10- and 12-cm brush targets: near the base of the bristles, in the center of the bristles, and 1 mm below the top of the bristles. Temperature measurements also were made in the at target using the same type of thermocouple placed in the center and approximately 1 mm below the front surface. To assess the effect of acoustic streaming, a 6.4- m-thick low-density polyethylene membrane 12.5 cm in diameter was inserted between the transducer and target in one set of measurements.7 For transducers with planar radiating surfaces, it is recommended that the antistreaming membrane be tilted with respect to the beam axis to eliminate the possibility of standing waves. To see if such angulation is critical for focused beams, the membrane angle was varied from approximately 0 to 5, 0 corresponding to the plane normal to the beam axis. For the 3.3-MHz transducer used in the acoustic streaming measurements, the target was placed 2.5 cm from the transducer and also at an 8-cm distance to exacerbate the effects of streaming.
1436 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 3, March 2007

Continuous wave and pulsed measurements to establish an EDF were performed on the 1.50- and 1.11-MHz transducers. The results for the 1.11-MHz transducer are given in Table I. PPUL 500 and PPUL 1000 are the pulsed mode PTAs at pulse repetition frequencies of 500 and 1000 Hz, respectively. The means and coefcients of variation for the ve EDF values were 0.088 and 0.15% at 500 Hz and 0.085 and 0.47% at 1000 Hz. For the 1.50-MHz transducer, the means and coefcients of variation for the ve EDF values were 0.094 and 0.7% at 500 Hz and 0.091 and 1.9% at 1000 Hz. The corresponding DFs Eq. 4 were 0.090 and 0.093 for the 1.11- and 1.50-MHz transducers, respectively, indicating a small but measurable effect of the turn-on and turn-off transients. See also Sec. III G, below.
B. High-output pulsed mode powers

Figure 3 a shows the pulsed-mode power PPA from Eq. 5 for the 1.11-MHz transducer using the 10-cm brush target vs transducer voltage for the two pulse repetition frequencies. The corresponding temporal-average powers ranged from 4 to 22 W. Peak acoustic powers during the pulse were calculated from Eq. 4 to be approximately 40 to 230 W, the upper value being the highest possible with the available ampliers before noticeable distortion of the sinusoidal drive voltage was observed. Power-law ts to these data lead to calibration equations for the acoustic power of 2.037 coefcient of determination R2 PTA = 0.001 66 UPP 2.038 = 0.999 and PTA = 0.001 68 UPP R2 = 0.999 from the 500and 1000-Hz repetition rate results, respectively, where the power, PTA, has units of watts and the peak-to-peak voltage, UPP, has units of volts.

FIG. 3. Comparison of measured pulsed-mode power using the two different pulse repetition frequencies for the a 1.11-MHz transducer and b 1.50-MHz transducer. Maruvada et al.: High-power calibration

Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210.119.18.219. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms

FIG. 4. Comparison of three absorbing targets.

FIG. 6. Average temperature rise vs measured temporal-average acoustic power at three locations in 12-cm brush target at transducer-target distances of a 5 cm and b 10 cm using the 1.50-MHz transducer.

Similar results were obtained with the 1.50-MHz transducer, for which pulsed-mode temporal-average acoustic powers from 4 to 16 W were measured using the 10-cm brush target Fig. 3 b . Peak acoustic powers during the pulse were calculated to be approximately 40 to 180 W. The 2.092 500 Hz, R2 power law ts were PTA = 0.001 09 UPP 2.058 2 = 0.999 and PTA = 0.001 32 UPP 1000 Hz, R = 0.999 . Although the power-law ts appear to be different, the coefcients and exponents are such that the difference in PTA values calculated for the two repetition rates are small and within the experimental error seen in Fig. 3 b .
C. Comparison of three targets

water over this range had no effect on these results. It should be noted, however, that the variation with distance may be greater at higher powers or frequencies where there will be more nonlinearity in the water and increased absorption and shock loss. The same experiment was attempted with the 1.11-MHz transducer and 12-cm at target while the transducer was driven at approximately 10-W temporal-average acoustic power. However, visible damage to the target occurred at a distance of 9 cm and the experiment was aborted.

Pulsed-mode measurements for the 1.50-MHz transducer with all three targets are shown in Fig. 4. The distance between transducer and each target was 5 cm. Little variation less than 2% was found among the targets, the slight difference at the highest power being due to difculty in recording the peak-to-peak voltage because of instability in the power amplier at its maximum output. Similar results were seen with the 1.11-MHz transducer.
D. Effect of transducer-to-target distance

E. Target temperature measurements

The distance between the transducer and target was varied using the 1.50-MHz transducer and the two brush targets. The distance was increased from 5 to 11 cm while the transducer was driven in cw mode to provide approximately 10and 30-W temporal-average acoustic powers. As shown in Fig. 5, the measured acoustic power stayed nearly constant vs distance. In only one case, at 30 W with the 12-cm brush, was there a small but statistically signicant drop in acoustic power of 2% at 11 cm versus 5 cm. The small attenuation in

FIG. 5. Measured temporal-average power vs distance between transducer and 10- and 12-cm brush target using the 1.50-MHz transducer at 10 and 30 W. J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 3, March 2007

Using the 1.50-MHz transducer and 12-cm brush target, the temperature rise measured by the three thermocouples during each of the ve on-off cycles was recorded and the results were averaged. The cycle off time did not allow the temperature to return to baseline, so the nal temperature at the end of each cycle on time was greater than that of the previous cycle. However, the ve temperature rises were approximately the same. The average temperature rise over the ve on cycles was found for PTA from 10 to 30 W for cw excitation. The temperature rise was recorded at two transducer-to-target distances of 5 and 10 cm. The results are plotted in Fig. 6. The temperature rise was much larger for the 10-cm distance as the target was closer to the transducer focus. The temperature rise was greatest near the top of the brush and decreased towards the base of the brush. The maximum temperatures at the end of the fth cycle on time of the 30-W sonications were 30 C, 27 C, and 24 C for the three thermocouple positions when the target was 5 cm from the transducer, and 43 C, 28 C, and 23 C when the target was 10 cm from the transducer. At this maximum cw power, the maximum temperature rises were about 4 C and 18 C for transducer-to-target distances of 5 and 10 cm, respectively see Fig. 6 . Similar results were obtained with the 10-cm brush target. Regarding the at target, as mentioned above, thermal damage occurred at a distance of 9 cm. At 5 and 7 cm the power measured was 10.5 and 10.7 W while the average temperature rise was 6 C and 13 C, respectively. The maximum temperatures were 36 C at 5 cm and 45 C at 7 cm.
Maruvada et al.: High-power calibration 1437

Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210.119.18.219. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms

Finally, with the target 8 cm from the 3.3-MHz transducer, tilting the membrane from 0 5 had no discernible effect on the measurements at membrane positions both near the transducer and near the target.
G. Application of calibration method

FIG. 7. Streaming measurements for 3.33-MHz transducer and 10-cm brush target. The transducer-to-target distance was 2.5 cm and the antistreaming membrane was placed 1 cm from the target.

F. Acoustic streaming

The attenuation through the antistreaming membrane, determined via hydrophone measurements, was found to be less than 0.15% 0.01 dB at 3.3 MHz. For the 3.3-MHz transducer, measurements were made with and without the membrane using cw excitation from 10 to 30 W at distances of 2.5 and 8 cm between the transducer and 10-cm brush target. Figure 7 shows the results for the 2.5-cm target distance both without the membrane and with the membrane placed 1 cm from the target. At 30 W the membrane caused a reduction in the measured power of 1.1%. This same measurement for the 1.5-MHz transducer and a target distance of 5 cm resulted in a decrease of 0.2% at 30 W. Figure 8 shows the streaming effects on the measurements for the 3.33-MHz transducer when the brush target was placed 8 cm from the transducer. Two membrane distances were used: 1 cm from the transducer face and 1 cm from the target. The reduction in the measured power was 0.6% for the membrane near the transducer and 18% for the membrane near the target at 30 W. This latter result demonstrates that the power lost due to attenuation in the water is recaptured via streaming. In this regard, it is noted that an antistreaming membrane should be used only if the power at the target location is desired. To achieve a more accurate measurement of the total power radiated by the transducer, no membrane should be used. Also, because streaming is enhanced by nonlinear propagation, its effects will be reduced by making measurements at reduced temporal-average powers as in the present pulsed technique.

Successful application of the strategy expressed in Eq. 5 relies on the constancy of the EDF as drive level is increased. That is, the shape of the pulsed transducer voltage waveform must remain unchanged with drive level. To validate this premise, the rms transducer voltage, normalized by the peak-to-peak voltage, was measured over the full range of drive levels used for the 1.11- and 1.50-MHz transducers. For both transducers, the coefcient of variation was found to be 1% for 13 measurements between 10 and 180 W. For the 1.11-MHz transducer, which was capable of higher output, the coefcient of variation was 2% for 16 measurements between 10 and 230 W. Further, in using calibration data obtained under pulsed conditions, it should be recognized that when a HIFU transducer is driven at full i.e., cw output, self-heating due to 100% efciency of operation can affect the acoustic output. However, other means can be used to evaluate possible transducer instability during continuous operation, such as monitoring the forward and reverse electrical power, a change in which would be indicative of a change in transducer impedance and output due to, for example, thermal drift in the matching network components. Also, one could observe the output over time of a hydrophone placed in a low-intensity region of the eld where neither hydrophone damage nor saturation effects due to nonlinear propagation are expected.
IV. CONCLUSION

FIG. 8. Streaming measurements for 3.33-MHz transducer and 10-cm brush target. The transducer-to-target distance was 8 cm. 1438 J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 3, March 2007

Temporal-average acoustic powers of approximately 4 to 22 W were measured from focused ultrasound therapy transducers in a pulsed mode. By determining the effective duty factor of the pulses at relatively low temporal-average power, it was possible to relate peak-to-peak transducer voltages to acoustic powers up to 230 W. Three absorbing targets of two designs were used, and powers agreed for all targets to within the Type A random measurement uncertainty at all drive levels maximum coefcient of variation: 2% at 95% condence level , indicating that all three are suitable as absorbing targets. No evidence of cavitation e.g., balance instability was observed at the 500- and 1000-Hz pulse repetition frequencies used and a duty factor of about 10%. Brush target temperature rises were less than about 4 C at a target distance of 5 cm. The temperature rises in the at target were greater, with thermal damage occurring if it was placed near the focus. For the brush targets, no signicant variation in measured power was seen for the transducer-to-target distances used. For these measurements a distance of 5 cm was found to be a reasonable compromise in that it was small enough to avoid signicant focal heating, yet large enough to permit a practical target size according to Eq. 3 .
Maruvada et al.: High-power calibration

Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210.119.18.219. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms

Streaming effects were not observed at 1.50 MHz but were seen with the 3.33-MHz transducer. A membrane may be needed to eliminate streaming effects on power measurements if the power at the plane of the target is desired. However, at higher frequencies the membrane can introduce greater variation in the measured acoustic power, most likely due to reection from the membrane. A membrane may be counterproductive, however, if the total power output is the quantity of interest, since unobstructed streaming allows some recapture, by the target, of the momentum in the ultrasound eld lost to absorption in the transmitting medium. These results suggest that a pulsed-mode approach using 5001000-Hz pulse repetition frequencies, approximately 10% duty factor, absorbing target not near focus, and welldegassed water should be a suitable method for accurate voltage-power characterization that avoids transducer or target damage and bubble- or thermal-related measurement anomalies. This technique is appropriate for preclinical research, development, and testing of HIFU transducers and systems where monitoring and control of the transducer drive electronics is available. For further assessment of transducer performance under cw drive conditions, the forward and reverse electrical power can be measured, or the output vs time of a hydrophone placed in a low-intensity region of the eld can be observed. Note: The mention of commercial products, their sources, or their use in connection with material reported herein is not to be construed as either an actual or implied endorsement of such products by the U.S. Department of Health and Human Services.
1

G. Fleury, R. Berriet, J. Y. Chapelon, G. ter Haar, C. Lafon, O. Le Baron, L. Chupin, F. Pichonnat, and J. Lenormand, Safety issues for HIFU transducer design, in 4th International Symposium on Therapeutic Ultrasound Proceedings, edited by G. R. ter Haar and I. Rivens American Institute of Physics, Melville, NY, 2005 , pp. 233241. 2 A. Shaw and G. ter Haar, Requirements for Measurement Standards in High Intensity Focused Ultrasound HIFU Fields, National Physical Laboratory Report DQL AC 015 National Physical Laboratory, Teddington, UK, February 2006 . 3 V. A. Khokhlova, M. R. Bailey, J. A. Reed, B. W. Cunitz, P. J. Kaczkowski, and L. A. Crum, Effects of nonlinear propagation, cavitation, and boiling in lesion formation by high intensity focused ultrasound in a gel

phantom, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 119, 18341848 2006 . G. Kossoff, Balance technique for the measurement of very low ultrasonic power outputs, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 38, 880881 1965 . 5 K. Beissner, Minimum target size in radiation force measurements, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 76, 15051510 1984 . 6 R. A. Robinson, Performance evaluation of a digital readout hyperthermia range ultrasonic wattmeter, IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason. 31, 467 472 1984 . 7 Ultrasonic Power Measurement in Liquids in the Frequency Range 0.5 MHz to 25 MHz, Publ. IEC 61161 International Electrotechnical Commission, Geneva, 1992 . 8 K. Hynynen, Acoustic power calibrations of cylindrical intracavitary ultrasound hyperthermia applicators, Med. Phys. 20, 129134 1993 . 9 K. Beissner, W. A. Oosterbaan, R. T. Hekkenberg, and A. Shaw, European intercomparison of ultrasonic power measurements, Acust. Acta Acust. 82, 450458 1996 . 10 S. E. Fick, Ultrasound power measurement by pulsed radiation pressure, Metrologia 36, 351356 1999 . 11 R. T. Hekkenberg, K. Beissner, B. Zeqiri, R. A. Bezemer, and M. Hodnett, Validated ultrasonic power measurements up to 20 W, Ultrasound Med. Biol. 27, 427438 2001 . 12 G. S. K. Wong and L. Wu, High power ultrasound standard, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 111, 17911799 2002 . 13 K. Beissner, IEC measurement standards for ultrasonic hydrophones and radiation force balances, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 112, 2342 2002 . 14 Y. Sutton, A. Shaw, and B. Zeqiri, Measurement of ultrasonic power using an acoustically absorbing well, Ultrasound Med. Biol. 29, 1507 1513 2003 . 15 P. A. Lewin, N. Barrie-Smith, M. Ide, K. Hynynen, and M. Macdonald, Interlaboratory acoustic power measurement, J. Ultrasound Med. 22, 207213 2003 . 16 Acoustic Output Measurement Standard for Diagnostic Ultrasound Equipment, Rev. 3, NEMA Standards Publication UD-2-2004 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine, Laurel, MD, and National Electrical Manufacturers Association, Rosslyn, VA, 2004 . 17 G. R. Harris, Progress in medical ultrasound exposimetry, IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 52, 717736 2005 . 18 A. Shaw, How to measure HIFU output power properly, in 5th International Symposium on Therapeutic Ultrasound Proceedings, edited by G. T. Clement, N. J. MacDonnald, and K. Hynynen American Institute of Physics, Melville, NY, 2006 , pp. 628632. 19 K. Beissner, Radiation force calculations, Acustica 62, 255263 1987 . 20 G. Clement, Perspectives in clinical uses of high-intensity focused ultrasound, Ultrasonics 42, 10871093 2004 . 21 B. Zeqiri and C. J. Bickley, A new anechoic material for medical ultrasonic applications, Ultrasound Med. Biol. 26, 481485 2000 . 22 M. C. Ziskin, Specication of acoustic output level and measurement uncertainty in ultrasonic exposimetry, IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 50, 10231034 2003 . 23 N. Bilaniuk and G. S. K. Wong, Speed of sound in water as a function of temperature, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 93, 16091612 1993 .
4

J. Acoust. Soc. Am., Vol. 121, No. 3, March 2007

Maruvada et al.: High-power calibration

1439

Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210.119.18.219. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms