Research Papers

Influence of Microstructure on the High-Frequency Ultrasound Measurement of Peak Density

[+] Author and Article Information
Jeremy Stromer

Department of Mechanical Engineering,
University of Connecticut Storrs,
191 Auditorium Road, Unit 3139,
Storrs, CT 06269
e-mail: jeremy.stromer@uconn.edu

Leila Ladani

Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering,
Institute for Predictive Performance
University of Texas at
Arlington Research Institute,
7300 Jack Newell Boulevard South,
Fort Worth, TX 76118
e-mail: Leila.Ladani@uta.edu

1Corresponding author.

Manuscript received October 27, 2017; final manuscript received July 30, 2018; published online August 31, 2018. Assoc. Editor: Yuris Dzenis.

ASME J Nondestructive Evaluation 1(4), 041008 (Aug 31, 2018) (10 pages) Paper No: NDE-17-1102; doi: 10.1115/1.4041067 History: Received October 27, 2017; Revised July 30, 2018

Peak density is an ultrasound measurement, which has been found to vary according to microstructure, and is defined as the number of local extrema within the resulting power spectrum of an ultrasound measurement. However, the physical factors which influence peak density are not fully understood. This work studies the microstructural characteristics which affect peak density through experimental, computationa,l and analytical means for high-frequency ultrasound of 22–41 MHz. Experiments are conducted using gelatin-based phantoms with glass microsphere scatterers with diameters of 5, 9, 34, and 69 μm and number densities of 1, 25, 50, 75, and 100 mm−3. The experiments show the peak density to vary according to the configuration. For example, for phantoms with a number density of 50 mm−3, the peak density has values of 3, 5, 9, and 12 for each sphere diameter. Finite element simulations are developed and analytical methods are discussed to investigate the underlying physics. Simulated results showed similar trends in the response to microstructure as the experiment. When comparing scattering cross section, peak density was found to vary similarly, implying a correlation between the total scattering and the peak density. Peak density and total scattering increased predominately with increased particle size but increased with scatterer number as well. Simulations comparing glass and polystyrene scatterers showed dependence on the material properties. Twenty-four of the 56 test cases showed peak density to be statistically different between the materials. These values behaved analogously to the scattering cross section.

Copyright © 2018 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Lizzi, F. L. , Greenebaum, E. J. , and Elbaum, M. , 1983, “ Theoretical Framework for Spectrum Analysis in Ultrasonic Tissue Characterization,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 73(4), pp. 1366–1373. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lizzi, F. L. , Ostromogilsky, M. , Feleppa, E. J. , Rorke, M. C. , and Yaremko, M. M. , 1987, “ Relationship of Ultrasonic Spectral Parameters to Features of Tissue Microstructure,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control, 34(3), pp. 319–329. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Feleppa, E. J. , Lizzi, F. L. , and Coleman, D. J. , 1986, “ Diagnostic Spectrum Analysis in Ophthalmology: A Physical Perspective,” Ultrason, Med. Biol., 12(8), pp. 623–631. [CrossRef]
Tadayyon, H. , Sadeghi-Naini, A. , Wirtzfeld, L. , Wright, F. , and Czarnota, G. , 2014, “ Quantitative Ultrasound Characterization of Locally Advanced Breast Cancer by Estimation of Its Scatterer Properties,” Med. Phys., 41(1), p. 012903. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Coleman, D. J. , Lizzi, F. L. , Silverman, R. H. , Helson, L. , Torpey, J. H. , and Rondeau, M. J. , 1985, “ A Model for Acoustic Characterization of Intraocular Tumors,” Invest. Ophthalmol. Visual Sci., 26(4), pp. 545–550 https://iovs.arvojournals.org/article.aspx?articleid=2177088.
Feleppa, E. J. , Kalisz, A. , Sokil-Melgar, J. B. , Lizzi, F. L. , Rosado, A. L. , Shao, M. C. , Fair, W. R. , Cookson, M. S. , Reuter, V. E. , and Heston, D. W. , 1996, “ Typing of Prostate Tissue by Ultrasonic Spectrum Analysis,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr., 43, pp. 609–619. [CrossRef]
Yang, M. , Krueger, T. M. , Miller, J. G. , and Holland, M. R. , 2007, “ Characterization of Anisotropic Myocardial Backscatter Using Spectral Slope, Intercept and Midband Fit Parameters,” Ultrason. Imaging, 29(2), pp. 122–134. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Mamou, J. , Coron, A. , Hata, M. , Machi, J. , Yanagihara, E. , Laugier, P. , and Feleppa, E. J. , 2010, “ Three-Dimensional High-Frequency Characterization of Cancerous Lymph Nodes,” Ultrason. Med. Biol., 36(3), pp. 361–375. [CrossRef]
Sigelmann, R. A. , and Reid, J. M. , 1973, “ Analysis and Measurement of Ultrasound Backscattering From an Ensemble of Scatterers Excited by Sine-Wavebursts,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am, 53(5), pp. 1351–1355. [CrossRef]
Bamber, J. C. , Hill, C. R. , King, J. A. , and Dunn, F. , 1979, “ Ultrasonic Propagation Through Fixed and Unfixed Tissues,” Ultrason. Med. Biol., 5(2), pp. 159–165. [CrossRef]
Nicholas, D. , 1982, “ Evaluation of Backscattering Coefficients for Excised Human Tissues, Results, Interpretation, and Associated Measurements,” Ultrason. Med. Biol., 8(1), pp. 17–28. [CrossRef]
D'Astous, F. T. , and Foster, F. S. , 1986, “ Frequency Dependence of Ultrasound Attenuation and Backscatter in Breast Tissue,” Ultrason. Med. Biol., 12(10), pp. 795–808. [CrossRef]
Ueda, M. , and Ozawa, Y. , 1985, “ Spectral Analysis of Echoes for Backscattering Coefficient Measurements,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 77(1), pp. 38–47. [CrossRef]
Insana, M. F. , Wagner, R. F. , Brown, D. G. , and Hall, T. J. , 1990, “ Describing Small-Scale Structure in Random Media Using Pulse-Echo Ultrasound,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 87(1), pp. 179–192. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Yao, L. X. , Zagzebski, J. A. , and Madsen, E. L. , 1990, “ Backscatter Coefficient Measurements Using a Reference Phantom to Extract Depth-Dependent Instrumentation Factors,” Ultrason. Imaging, 12(1), pp. 58–70. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Chen, X. , Phillips, D. , Schwarz, K. Q. , Mottley, J. G. , and Parker, K. J. , 1997, “ The Measurement of Backscatter Coefficient From a Broadband Pulse-Echo System: A New Formation,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control, 44(2), pp. 515–525. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
O'Donnell, M. , and Miller, J. G. , 1981, “ Quantitative Broadband Ultrasonic Backscatter: An Approach to Nondestructive Evaluation in Acoustically Inhomogeneous Materials,” J. Appl. Phys., 52(2), pp. 1056–1065. [CrossRef]
Oelze, M. L. , and O'Brien, W. D. , 2002, “ Frequency-Dependent Attenuation-Compensation Functions for Ultrasonic Signals Backscattered From Random Media,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 111(5), pp. 2308–2319. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Lavarello, R. J. , Ghoushal, G. , and Oelze, M. L. , 2011, “ On the Estimation of Backscatter Coefficients Using Single-Element Focused Transducers,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 129(5), pp. 2903–2911. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Krautkrämer, J. , and Krautkrämer, H. , 1990, Ultrasonic Testing of Materials, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Kossoff, G. , Fry, E. , and Jellins, J. , 1973, “ Average Velocity of Ultrasound in the Human Female Breast,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 53 (6), pp. 1730–1736. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Li, C. , Huang, L. , Duric, N. , Zhang, H. , and Rowe, C. , 2009, “ An Improved Automatic Time-of-Flight Picker for Medical Ultrasound Tomography,” Ultrasonics, 49(1), pp. 61–72. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Wiskin, J. , Borup, D. , Johnson, S. , and Berggren, M. , 2012, “ Non-Linear Inverse Scattering: High Resolution Quantitative Breast Tissue Tomography,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 131(5), pp. 3802–3813. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Jago, J. R. , and Whittingham, T. A. , 1991, “ Experimental Studies in Transmission Ultrasound Computed Tomography,” Phys. Med. Biol., 36(11), pp. 1515–1527. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Greenleaf, J. F. , and Bahn, R. C. , 1981, “ Clinical Imaging With Transmissive Ultrasonic Computerized Tomography,” Biomed. Eng., 28(5). pp. 177–185.
Hirsekorn, S. , van Andel, P. W. , and Netzelmann, U. , 1998, “ Ultrasonic Methods to Detect and Evaluate Damage in Steel,” Nondestr. Test. Eval., 15(6), pp. 373–393. [CrossRef]
Daniel, I. M. , Wooh, S. C. , and Komsky, I. , 1992, “ Quantitative Porosity characterization of composite Materials by Means of Ultrasonic Attenuation Measurements,” J. Nondestr. Eval., 11(1), pp. 1–8. [CrossRef]
Yim, H. J. , Kwak, H. , and Kim, J. H. , 2012, “ Wave Attenuation Measurement Technique for Nondestructive Evaluation of Concrete,” Nondestr. Test. Eval., 27(1), pp. 81–94. [CrossRef]
Doyle, T. E. , Factor, R. E. , Ellefson, C. L. , Sorensen, K. M. , Ambrose, B. J. , Goodrich, J. B. , Hart, V. P. , Jensen, S. C. , Patel, H. , and Neumayer, L. A. , 2011, “ High-Frequency Ultrasound for Intraoperative Margin Assessments in Breast Conservation Surgery: A Feasibility Study,” BMC Cancer, 11(1), p. 444. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Stromer, J. , and Ladani, L. , 2015, “ Investigating Ultrasonic Imaging in the Frequency Domain for Tissue Characterisation,” Nondestruct. Test. Eval., 31(3), pp. 209–218. [CrossRef]
Bude, R. , and Adler, R. , 1995, “ An Easily Made, Low‐Cost, Tissue‐Like Ultrasound Phantom Material,” J. Clin. Ultrason., 23(4), pp. 271–273. [CrossRef]
Stromer, J. , and Ladani, L. , 2018, “ Examination of a Spectral-Based Ultrasonic Analysis Method for Materials Characterization and Evaluation,” Biomed. Signal Process. Control, 40, pp. 454–461. [CrossRef]
Faran, J. J. , 1951, “ Sound Scattering by Solid Cylinders and Spheres,” J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 23(4), pp. 405–418. [CrossRef]
Morse, P. M. , and Ungard, K. U. , 1968, Theoretical Acoustics, Princeton University Press, Princeton, NJ.
Mechel, F. P. , 2002, Formulas of Acoustics, Springer-Verlag, Berlin.
Crocker, M. J. , 1998, Handbook of Acoustics, Wiley, New York.
Ishimaru, A. , 1978, Wave Propagation and Scattering in Random Media, Vol. 1, Academic Press, New York.
Wakefield, R. J. , and D'Agostino, M. A. , 2010, Essential Applications of Musculoskeletal Ultrasound in Rheumatology, Saunders Elsevier, Philadelphia, PA.
Arfken, G. , and Weber, H. J. , 2005, Mathematical Methods for Physicists, 6th ed., Elsevier, Burlington, MA.


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Photographs of phantoms used in this study: 9 μm size microspheres with 1 mm−3 density (a); 34 μm size microspheres with 25 mm−3 density (b); and 69 μm size microspheres with 50 mm−3 density (c). Due to some difficulty imaging the 5 μm phantoms, we do not have any images of these phantoms.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The pulse received through a small amount of coupling gel (a). The resulting frequency spectrum (b). This was the calibration spectrum used in our experiments. The bandwidth of the transducer is 22–41 MHz.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Flowchart for the experimental determination of peak density

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

Geometry used in the finite element model. Modeling domains are shown in (a). The four sets of randomly distributed microspheres are given in (a)–(d).

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Flowchart for determination of simulated peak density. This process is completed for each scatterer diameter as well as the different numbers of scatterers.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

Examples of the simulated frequency spectra for a single scatter of diameter : (a) 5 μm, (b) 9 μm, (c) 34 μm, and (d) 69 μm. This is the magnitude of the scattered pressure field on the entire face of the simulated transducer.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

Bar graphs showing the measured peak densities for the experiment and finite element model

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

Peak densities for the expanded model including larger and additional scatterers added to the simulation domain

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

Comparison of measurements taken for experimental phantoms: peak density (a) and pulse amplitude (b)

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Forward scattering according to Faran for each modeled sphere diameter: (a) 5 μm, (b) 9 μm, (c) 34 μm, and (d) 69 μm. Note that these may vary from the spectra in Fig. 6 because the previous figure sums the intensity of the pressure field across the transducer face. The graphs here show the scattered field in the pure forward direction only.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

Calculation of the total scattering using analytical techniques. Note that z-axis uses a logarithmic scale in order to show the full range of σs,total.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 12

Simulated peak densities for glass (a) and polystyrene (b). Comparison of σs,total and peak density for glass (c) and polystyrene scatterers (d). Note the logarithmic scale for σs,total.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 13

Main effects' plots for the simulated peak density (a) and the analytical cross section (b). Error bars in (a) correspond to the standard deviation.



Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In