introduction

The speed of sound c in a homogenous and isotropic liquid is

1
c 
k (1)

Where  is density and k are compressibility [1]. For a suspension of solid particles in fluid at
low pressing division, eqn, (3) actually applies, yet  and k ought to be supplanted by the

 eff k , respectively. In the breaking point
effective density and the mean compressibility
where the ultrasound wave length is much larger than the molecule size, the normal density and
compressibility of the suspension can be communicated as:


   s  (1   ) l , (2)


k   k s  (1   )kl ,
Where,  is the volume division, and the subscripts “s” and ‘’l’’ represent solid and liquid
respectively. For the density-matched suspensions, implying that the particles and the fluid have


 eff
the similar density, the successful density approaches the method density [2]. = .


 eff ≠ 
Nonetheless, if the suspension is not density-matched, , an amendment must be made.
Since we need a wide scope of dissolved compressibility in the examinations, we working with
both density matched and unequal suspensions and we need to think about the density
amendment.

For modeling sound propagation there are two important length scales: the frequency of the

ultrasound  and the length size of the viscous layer  . All the models depicted here just

work in the system where  is a lot bigger than the molecule radius  . The thickness of the
viscous layer can be communicated as:

2

l
(3)

Where   2 f is the angular frequency of the ultrasound wave,  and l are the dynamic

viscosity and density of fluid in the suspension, respectively. The proportion  /  is

undifferentiated from the Reynolds number.

Urick and Ament (1949) [3] improved the mean filed approach of Urick (1947) [2], which

 eff
provides eqn (2). When considering only low order scattering, the effective density is
   (  X )
 eff     (  s  l )
(  X ) 2  Y 2 (4)

9     
2
3 3  
  (  s  l ) /  l , X   1   andY      
2 2  4      
Where

 eff
Amen (1953) [4] derived a somewhat different functional from for by considering
the overall movement of particles and fluid in non-density matched suspensions. The
effective density for this situation is
  Q
 eff    2(  s  l ) 2  (1   )
Q U 2
2

Where
9     
2
 9 
Q  2(  s  l )(1   )    3   l , U  l     
 2  2      

(5)


By plugging k and eff into equation (1) we can obtain the speed of sound c.

Reference

[1] R. S. Cobbold, Foundations of biomedical ultrasound. Oxford university press, 2006.

[2] R. Urick, "A sound velocity method for determining the compressibility of finely divided
substances," Journal of Applied Physics, vol. 18, no. 11, pp. 983-987, 1947.
[3] R. Urick and W. Ament, "The propagation of sound in composite media," The Journal of the
Acoustical Society of America, vol. 21, no. 2, pp. 115-119, 1949.
[4] W. Ament, "Sound propagation in gross mixtures," The Journal of the Acoustical Society of
America, vol. 25, no. 4, pp. 638-641, 1953.