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: 1434–1439
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.1–3 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.2–18 Two types of targets are used in a radiation force balance system: reﬂecting 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 = sin−1 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.
For all reﬂecting targets, plane and conical, the force varies with the angle between the beam axis and the normal to the reﬂecting surface. Most reﬂecting targets are convex cones, for which precise positioning is necessary to achieve accurate measurements. Also, a disadvantage of conical reﬂectors in focused ﬁelds 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 reﬂections. 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 184.108.40.206. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright; see http://asadl.org/terms
Vol. The power during the pulse PPA can be calculated from the measured temporal-average power as in Eq. the pulse duration was chosen to give a duty factor DF equal to the product of the pulse repetition frequency and the pulse duration. Agilent Tech. MA . 3.. 4 . 500 and 1000 Hz. Dow Corning. Palo Alto. for unfocused transducers the target diameter should be at least 1. The transducer-to-target distances stated herein refer to the distance between the plane deﬁned by the transducer rim and either the tips of the brush bristles or the front face of the ﬂat target. Palo Alto. PA .219.25 mm. WA and power ampliﬁer ENI 2100L or ENI A-300. A 50-dB dual-directional coupler Ampliﬁer Research. and a power meter model E4419B.
D. an equivalent speciﬁcation based on simple ray acoustics can be expressed as dT 1. Souderton. Acoust. MI and the 12-cm brush was potted in a proprietary twopart rubber material designed to absorb ultrasound King Acoustic Technologies. Midland.50-MHz transducers.5dS L − z /L. 4
The setup of the experiment is shown in Fig. although either would provide a robust calibration of the transducer and drive electronics combination until ampliﬁer saturation at high drive levels becomes signiﬁcant.11. MATLAB was used to control the hardware function generator. Operation of the radiation force balance system was accomplished through MATLAB The Mathworks Inc. 4 that will increase as the pulses duration decreases. LLC.FIG. 7. 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. PPA = PTA/DF. 2. of approximately 10%. Washington. The peak-to-peak rather than rms pulse voltage was measured for convenience. The absorbing target was suspended from the bottom of an electronic balance AND HM-202.
beams. Agilent Tech..and 12-cm brush targets. 2. Figure 1 shows a picture of the 12-cm brush target.org/terms
. first an “effective duty factor” EDF . Everett. two power sensors model 8482A.17 and 0...21 model Ham A. but positions closer to the focus were used for comparison. is based on polyurethane rubber material. see http://asadl. NY .: High-power calibration 1435
Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210. respectively. Soc. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. Washington. and power meter as well as to acquire and analyze the data. In this work. The 10-cm brush was potted in a silicone elastomer Sylgard 170. Natick. For focused transducers. For both. Bradford. Precision Acoustics Ltd. CA were placed between the ampliﬁer and transducer to monitor the forward and reversed electrical power to the transducer. respectively.5 cm length. 3
FIG. Rochester. a commercially available absorbing design14. Effective duty factor „EDF…
where dT is the target diameter and z is the transducer-totarget distance. Twelve-cm brush target. The peak-to-peak transducer voltage was measured during the steady-state portion of the pulse with a digital oscilloscope model 54622A. UK .. target damage can occur.. Fluke Corp. Am. was established by measuring
Maruvada et al. The third target. model DC2000. Two “brush” targets8 were constructed having 10-cm made in-house and 12-cm King Acoustic Technologies. 3 . three absorbing targets were employed and efforts were made to overcome the disadvantages. No. The material was cut into a disk of 12 cm diameter. DC . March 2007
Equation 4 is exact for a power pulse waveform having a true rectangular modulating envelope.18. defined as the ratio of pulsed to cw power. Dorchester. The approximate diameters of the nylon brush bristles were 0. MA . balance. However. PPUL / PCW.119. were used in this approach for circumventing the problems associated with measuring high temporal-average powers. The driving electronics consisted of a function generator Wavetek 81.
C.5 times the transducer diameter to intercept all signiﬁcant parts of the ﬁeld. CA . CA . turn-on and turn-off transients can lead to inaccuracies in Eq.
ducer was positioned so that it radiated downward onto the target. 1. for the 10. most measurements were made at a transducer-to-target distance of 5 cm to satisfy Eq. and the transJ. The target has ﬂat front and back faces and a thickness of 14 mm. Therefore.. 121. Experimental setup of radiation force balance. Radiation force balance system
Two pulse repetition frequencies. For the 1. According to Ref. DC diameters with bristles of 4 and 6.and 1. Nylon bristles from common cleaning brushes were pulled and packed densely together and then potted in a base of rubber. Agilent Tech. Palo Alto.
FIG.62 PPUL 1000 W 0.11-MHz transducer. PTA.
B. The corresponding temporal-average powers ranged from 4 to 22 W.: High-power calibration
Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210.090 and 0. in pulsed mode the transducer drive level was increased and the power during the pulse was calculated from PPA = PTA/EDF. Power-law ﬁts to these data lead to calibration equations for the acoustic power of 2. see http://asadl.23 24.088 and 0.5 cm in diameter was inserted between the transducer and target in one set of measurements.and 1.09 2. PPUL 500 and PPUL 1000 are the pulsed mode PTA’s at pulse repetition frequencies of 500 and 1000 Hz.4. UPP. Peak acoustic powers during the pulse were calculated from Eq.088 0.5 cm from the transducer and also at an 8-cm distance to exacerbate the effects of streaming. the upper value being the highest possible with the available ampliﬁers before noticeable distortion of the sinusoidal drive voltage was observed. 4 to be approximately 40 to 230 W. and 1 mm below the top of the bristles. the means and coefﬁcients of variation for the ﬁve EDF values were 0. See also Sec. Am. The speed of sound c in Eq. 250.11-MHz transducer and b 1. High-output pulsed mode powers
Figure 3 a shows the pulsed-mode power PPA from Eq. where the power.085 0.73 2.999 and PTA = 0. III G.50. respectively. respectively.m-thick low-density polyethylene membrane 12. copper-constantan thermocouples were placed centrally at three locations within the 10. The on time was 9 s. March 2007
Continuous wave and pulsed measurements to establish an EDF were performed on the 1.34 1.001 66 UPP 2.84 1. has units of volts. To assess the effect of acoustic streaming.50-MHz transducers.11 20.086 0.038 = 0. RESULTS AND DISCUSSION A. The results for the 1.22 The water was degassed to 2 ppm and measurements were made at room temperature 22 ° C – 25 ° C . in the center of the bristles. 121.org/terms
. The EDF was the average valued obtained over this range.999 from the 500and 1000-Hz repetition rate results.53 EDF 500 0. Maruvada et al.119. cw and pulsed-mode power values to establish an effective duty factor EDF for the 1.088 EDF 1000 0.085
both PPUL and PCW with the transducer driven at the same peak-to-peak transducer voltage for five cw PTA’s approximately evenly spaced over the range from 10 to 30 W..47% at 1000 Hz. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. Other measurement considerations
Each measurement comprised ﬁve on-off cycles under computer control per the procedure in Ref. III E . 3.m-diameter wire.15% at 500 Hz and 0. No. 2 was adjusted for its variation with temperature.23 To determine where in the brush targets heating due to ultrasound absorption might arise.17 2. has units of watts and the peak-to-peak voltage.085 0. To see if such angulation is critical for focused beams. 5 for the 1.65 PPUL 500 W 0.79 2.and 12-cm brush targets: near the base of the bristles. it is recommended that the antistreaming membrane be tilted with respect to the beam axis to eliminate the possibility of standing waves.11-MHz transducer using the 10-cm brush target vs transducer voltage for the two pulse repetition frequencies.085 0. Acoust. Then. 16.and 1. a time sufﬁcient to attain and process a stable balance reading. The corresponding DFs Eq. Comparison of measured pulsed-mode power using the two different pulse repetition frequencies for the a 1. Upp V 72 88 102 112 123 Pcw W 9.50-MHz transducer. Soc.11-MHz transducers. Temperature measurements also were made in the ﬂat target using the same type of thermocouple placed in the center and approximately 1 mm below the front surface.TABLE I.
1436 J.093 for the 1. Effective duty factor
E.089 0.001 68 UPP R2 = 0. 0° corresponding to the plane normal to the beam axis. Vol.9% at 1000 Hz.094 and 0.089 0.3-MHz transducer used in the acoustic streaming measurements. indicating a small but measurable effect of the turn-on and turn-off transients.088 0. 3.7 For transducers with planar radiating surfaces.94 15. 4 were 0. while the off time was 20 s to allow the target temperature to return to near baseline see Sec.29 1. the membrane angle was varied from approximately 0° to 5°.11.18. the target was placed 2. For the 1.091 and 1.50-MHz transducer. a 6. Four independent measurements were made at each drive level to assess the type A random uncertainty.56 29.7% at 500 Hz and 0.11-MHz transducer are given in Table I.085 and 0.037 coefﬁcient of determination R2 PTA = 0. below. 5
III. The means and coefﬁcients of variation for the ﬁve EDF values were 0.88 1. For the 3.
the slight difference at the highest power being due to difﬁculty in recording the peak-to-peak voltage because of instability in the power ampliﬁer at its maximum output. The maximum temperatures at the end of the ﬁfth cycle on time of the 30-W sonications were 30 ° C. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. The cycle off time did not allow the temperature to return to baseline. The small attenuation in
.001 09 UPP 2.999 and PTA = 0. and 43 ° C. Similar results were seen with the 1. The maximum temperatures were 36 ° C at 5 cm and 45 ° C at 7 cm. see http://asadl. However. the maximum temperature rises were about 4 ° C and 18 ° C for transducer-to-target distances of 5 and 10 cm.
Maruvada et al. J.5 and 10. Little variation less than 2% was found among the targets. In only one case. No. However.50-MHz transducer at 10 and 30 W.11-MHz transducer and 12-cm ﬂat target while the transducer was driven at approximately 10-W temporal-average acoustic power. The temperature rise was much larger for the 10-cm distance as the target was closer to the transducer focus.50-MHz transducer.50-MHz transducer and the two brush targets.. 28 ° C. Soc.and 12-cm brush target using the 1.092 500 Hz.50-MHz transducer. 6. 6 . Regarding the ﬂat target. at 30 W with the 12-cm brush.18. The same experiment was attempted with the 1.50-MHz transducer with all three targets are shown in Fig. The temperature rise was greatest near the top of the brush and decreased towards the base of the brush.11-MHz transducer. 6.119. The temperature rise was recorded at two transducer-to-target distances of 5 and 10 cm. As shown in Fig. 5.
C. Peak acoustic powers during the pulse were calculated to be approximately 40 to 180 W. March 2007
Using the 1. the coefﬁcients 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. Vol.058 2 = 0. The distance between transducer and each target was 5 cm. R2 power law ﬁts were PTA = 0.001 32 UPP 1000 Hz. for which pulsed-mode temporal-average acoustic powers from 4 to 16 W were measured using the 10-cm brush target Fig.
Pulsed-mode measurements for the 1. 3 b . 121. respectively see Fig. Comparison of three absorbing targets.: High-power calibration 1437
Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210. visible damage to the target occurred at a distance of 9 cm and the experiment was aborted. 3. 4. The average temperature rise over the ﬁve on cycles was found for PTA from 10 to 30 W for cw excitation. The results are plotted in Fig. as mentioned above. so the ﬁnal temperature at the end of each cycle on time was greater than that of the previous cycle. however. thermal damage occurred at a distance of 9 cm. Am. 5. 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. R = 0. Measured temporal-average power vs distance between transducer and 10. Acoust. the temperature rise measured by the three thermocouples during each of the ﬁve on-off cycles was recorded and the results were averaged.50-MHz transducer and 12-cm brush target.
FIG.999 . the measured acoustic power stayed nearly constant vs distance. 4. At this maximum cw power. Effect of transducer-to-target distance
E.219. the ﬁve temperature rises were approximately the same. Although the power-law ﬁts appear to be different.
Similar results were obtained with the 1. Comparison of three targets
water over this range had no effect on these results. 3 b . and 24 ° C for the three thermocouple positions when the target was 5 cm from the transducer.FIG. At 5 and 7 cm the power measured was 10. was there a small but statistically signiﬁcant drop in acoustic power of 2% at 11 cm versus 5 cm. respectively. It should be noted. 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. 27 ° C. Target temperature measurements
The distance between the transducer and target was varied using the 1. 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. The 2. Similar results were obtained with the 10-cm brush target. and 23 ° C when the target was 10 cm from the transducer.7 W while the average temperature rise was 6 ° C and 13 ° C.
This latter result demonstrates that the power lost due to attenuation in the water is recaptured via streaming.2% at 30 W. For the brush targets.. a change in which would be indicative of a change in transducer impedance and output due to. Also. 7.Finally.15% 0. 3.11-MHz transducer.
Maruvada et al. Figure 8 shows the streaming effects on the measurements for the 3.01 dB at 3.3 MHz.
IV. no signiﬁcant variation in measured power was seen for the transducer-to-target distances used. Brush target temperature rises were less than about 4 ° C at a target distance of 5 cm. The temperature rises in the ﬂat target were greater. However. No evidence of cavitation e. the coefﬁcient of variation was found to be 1% for 13 measurements between 10 and 180 W. For the 1. The transducer-to-target distance was 8 cm. it was possible to relate peak-to-peak transducer voltages to acoustic powers up to 230 W. 8. in using calibration data obtained under pulsed conditions. self-heating due to 100% efﬁciency of operation can affect the acoustic output.
Successful application of the strategy expressed in Eq. yet large enough to permit a practical target size according to Eq.
FIG. For both transducers. 1438 J. Vol. normalized by the peak-to-peak voltage.119.g.3-MHz transducer.33-MHz transducer when the brush target was placed 8 cm from the transducer. At 30 W the membrane caused a reduction in the measured power of 1. the shape of the pulsed transducer voltage waveform must remain unchanged with drive level. Three absorbing targets of two designs were used.. 3 .: High-power calibration
Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210.33-MHz transducer and 10-cm brush target. because streaming is enhanced by nonlinear propagation. For these measurements a distance of 5 cm was found to be a reasonable compromise in that it was small enough to avoid signiﬁcant focal heating. That is.. To achieve a more accurate measurement of the total power radiated by the transducer. Streaming measurements for 3. such as monitoring the forward and reverse electrical power. its effects will be reduced by making measurements at reduced temporal-average powers as in the present pulsed technique. no membrane should be used. 121. The transducer-to-target distance was 2. indicating that all three are suitable as absorbing targets. it is noted that an antistreaming membrane should be used only if the power at the target location is desired.5-MHz transducer and a target distance of 5 cm resulted in a decrease of 0. cw output.5 and 8 cm between the transducer and 10-cm brush target.
F. it should be recognized that when a HIFU transducer is driven at full i. other means can be used to evaluate possible transducer instability during continuous operation.33-MHz transducer and 10-cm brush target. which was capable of higher output.11. Soc. balance instability was observed at the 500. the coefﬁcient of variation was 2% for 16 measurements between 10 and 230 W.6% for the membrane near the transducer and 18% for the membrane near the target at 30 W.e. In this regard. 5 relies on the constancy of the EDF as drive level is increased.1%. determined via hydrophone measurements. the rms transducer voltage.219. Further. The reduction in the measured power was 0. This same measurement for the 1. thermal drift in the matching network components. To validate this premise. with thermal damage occurring if it was placed near the focus. measurements were made with and without the membrane using cw excitation from 10 to 30 W at distances of 2. March 2007
Temporal-average acoustic powers of approximately 4 to 22 W were measured from focused ultrasound therapy transducers in a pulsed mode. tilting the membrane from 0 ° – 5° had no discernible effect on the measurements at membrane positions both near the transducer and near the target. Also. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. was measured over the full range of drive levels used for the 1. Am. Application of calibration method
FIG.50-MHz transducers. Streaming measurements for 3.org/terms
. By determining the effective duty factor of the pulses at relatively low temporal-average power. Figure 7 shows the results for the 2. see http://asadl.5-cm target distance both without the membrane and with the membrane placed 1 cm from the target. Acoust.5 cm and the antistreaming membrane was placed 1 cm from the target. one could observe the output over time of a hydrophone placed in a low-intensity region of the ﬁeld where neither hydrophone damage nor saturation effects due to nonlinear propagation are expected.3-MHz transducer. For the 3. with the target 8 cm from the 3. for example. Two membrane distances were used: 1 cm from the transducer face and 1 cm from the target. was found to be less than 0.and 1. No.18.and 1000-Hz pulse repetition frequencies used and a duty factor of about 10%. Acoustic streaming
The attenuation through the antistreaming membrane. and powers agreed for all targets to within the Type A random measurement uncertainty at all drive levels maximum coefﬁcient of variation: 2% at 95% conﬁdence level .
Biol. Zeqiri. Sonics Ultrason. 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. 481–485 2000 . “Speed of sound in water as a function of temperature. Am.” Ultrasound Med. however. ter Haar and I. N. development. G. 467– 472 1984 . K. Am.” IEEE Trans. Shaw. 17 G. Clement.” in 5th International Symposium on Therapeutic Ultrasound Proceedings. Note: The mention of commercial products. Acoust. “Requirements for Measurement Standards in High Intensity Focused Ultrasound HIFU Fields. 233–241.: High-power calibration
Downloaded 05 Feb 2013 to 210. 20 G. Am. Ultrason.or thermal-related measurement anomalies. Ferroelectr. 11 R. Ultrason.
G. Am. at higher frequencies the membrane can introduce greater variation in the measured acoustic power. Berriet. 12 G.5 MHz to 25 MHz. and B. S. 16 “Acoustic Output Measurement Standard for Diagnostic Ultrasound Equipment. 22 M. 8 K. February 2006 . NY. For further assessment of transducer performance under cw drive conditions. R. C. Acoust. J.
J. A membrane may be counterproductive. and J. Bailey. absorbing target not near focus. March 2007
Maruvada et al. Fleury. approximately 10% duty factor. pp. J. pp. R. MD. “Validated ultrasonic power measurements up to 20 W. Zeqiri.Streaming effects were not observed at 1. 38.” Acustica 62. W. and welldegassed water should be a suitable method for accurate voltage-power characterization that avoids transducer or target damage and bubble. Hynynen. M. Ultrasound Med. T. Melville. Y. A. K. UK. “How to measure HIFU output power properly. Oosterbaan. Am. Soc. ter Haar. IEC 61161 International Electrotechnical Commission. 111. 121. and A. 6 R. and National Electrical Manufacturers Association. Beissner.” in 4th International Symposium on Therapeutic Ultrasound Proceedings. Reed. A. Acta Acust. Lenormand. 27. “Minimum target size in radiation force measurements. Hynynen American Institute of Physics. 2004 . Lewin. 93. Wu. and K. 9 K. Rivens American Institute of Physics. Crum. G. if the total power output is the quantity of interest. 29. 2005 . 13 K. However. 3 V. 3. edited by G. K.” Ultrasound Med. W. most likely due to reﬂection from the membrane. 2 A. R. and M.. Beissner. M. 20. “High power ultrasound standard.” J. Ziskin. B.” J. Acoust.119. Acoust. A membrane may be needed to eliminate streaming effects on power measurements if the power at the plane of the target is desired. 3. Barrie-Smith. 880–881 1965 . 26.S. Kossoff. Department of Health and Human Services. 15 P. Redistribution subject to ASA license or copyright. 1609–1612 1993 . 76. “A new anechoic material for medical ultrasonic applications. Acoust. Vol. Beissner. Khokhlova. 255–263 1987 . Control 52. Beissner. the forward and reverse electrical power can be measured. “Acoustic power calibrations of cylindrical intracavitary ultrasound hyperthermia applicators. Ferroelectr. of the momentum in the ultrasound ﬁeld lost to absorption in the transmitting medium. Teddington.” J. Geneva. Chapelon. 23 N. 22. Cunitz. Phys. This technique is appropriate for preclinical research. 21 B. edited by G. A. “Ultrasound power measurement by pulsed radiation pressure. Rev. and M. 18 A. J. and boiling in lesion formation by high intensity focused ultrasound in a gel
phantom. Soc. R. Control 50. L.” J. Soc. 2342 2002 . “Balance technique for the measurement of very low ultrasonic power outputs. 82. 450–458 1996 . Freq.org/terms
. These results suggest that a pulsed-mode approach using 500–1000-Hz pulse repetition frequencies. “Radiation force calculations. Beissner.” Metrologia 36. see http://asadl.18. Shaw. 129–134 1993 . S. 112. 1791–1799 2002 . Hynynen. N. 628–632. Le Baron. Wong. 1834–1848 2006 . R. Bilaniuk and G. Sutton.33-MHz transducer. Chupin.” Publ. Kaczkowski. “Measurement of ultrasonic power using an acoustically absorbing well. Melville.” Acust. J. E. “Perspectives in clinical uses of high-intensity focused ultrasound. “Performance evaluation of a digital readout hyperthermia range ultrasonic wattmeter. 1023–1034 2003 . A.” National Physical Laboratory Report DQL AC 015 National Physical Laboratory.219. K. Biol. or the output vs time of a hydrophone placed in a low-intensity region of the ﬁeld can be observed. J.” J.” J. T. “European intercomparison of ultrasonic power measurements. 5 K. Harris. cavitation. NY. Fick. 10 S. Soc. 351–356 1999 . A. 1507– 1513 2003 . Soc. C. “Speciﬁcation of acoustic output level and measurement uncertainty in ultrasonic exposimetry. Bezemer. Soc. P. Biol. 19 K. Freq. MacDonnald. Acoust. No. Acoust. 1505–1510 1984 . “Interlaboratory acoustic power measurement. Shaw. 31.” Ultrasonics 42. by the target.50 MHz but were seen with the 3. A. F. Robinson. Ide.” Med.” Ultrasound Med. 427–438 2001 . Am. Wong and L.” NEMA Standards Publication UD-2-2004 American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine. Hekkenberg. “IEC measurement standards for ultrasonic hydrophones and radiation force balances. 207–213 2003 . Am. Soc. B. Rosslyn. A. Pichonnat. 7 “Ultrasonic Power Measurement in Liquids in the Frequency Range 0. Macdonald. Bickley.” IEEE Trans. Hodnett. R. 1087–1093 2004 . since unobstructed streaming allows some recapture. Hekkenberg. Shaw and G. 1992 . and testing of HIFU transducers and systems where monitoring and control of the transducer drive electronics is available. VA. A. and L. “Effects of nonlinear propagation. Laurel. 2006 . Clement. T. ter Haar. “Progress in medical ultrasound exposimetry. 14 Y. 119. Lafon.” IEEE Trans. O. Zeqiri and C. “Safety issues for HIFU transducer design.” J. 717–736 2005 .