Determination of effective hydrophone sizes from

1 to 50 MHz according to IEC 62127-3:2022 using

short pulse excitation
Volker Wilkens Martin Weber
Ultrasonics Working Group Department of Physics
Physikalisch-Technische Bundesanstalt University of Helsinki
Braunschweig, Germany Helsinki, Finland
[email protected] [email protected]

Abstract—An existing setup for hydrophone directivity uses hydrophone excitation in the far field of two different
measurements and effective size determination was revised to planar source transducers to cover the frequency ranges 1
comply with the recent requirements of IEC 62127-3 Ed.2. MHz to 3 MHz (Karl Deutsch GmbH, Hürth, Germany,
Short pulse excitation is applied to efficiently characterize diameter: 12 mm) and 4 MHz to 20 MHz (Karl Deutsch
several different hydrophones in broad frequency ranges and GmbH, Hürth, Germany, diameter: 6 mm). The middle
with high frequency resolution. Effective size results agree with section (5 to 12 cycles) of single-frequency tonebursts
the more restricted data obtained earlier. Proposals for future comprising 25 cycles are measured after the hydrophone was
improvement of the standard are concluded from the carefully positioned at the lateral sound field maximum and
investigations performed.
perpendicular to the sound beam axis. By means of two
Keywords—ultrasound exposimetry, hydrophones, spatial
additional perpendicularly mounted manual translation
averaging, directional response, effective size stages, the sensitive element of the hydrophone is adjusted in
such a way that it is centered at the rotational axis of a
steppermotor-driven rotation stage to ensure the same portion
I. INTRODUCTION of the sound field being measured during rotation (Fig. 1).
The impact of spatial averaging in hydrophone This adjustment is controlled and optimized by
measurements of ultrasonic fields emitted by ultrasound measurements of short test pulses driven by voltage spikes
equipment recently gained increased attention [1]. It is and observation and minimization of the angle dependent
expected that new editions of safety and acoustic output phase shifts of the received pressure waveform for
measurement standards [2],[3] will spot at this aspect more symmetric rotation angles of, for instance, α = ±15° [13].
detailed to ensure harmonized declaration of acoustic output The directional responses are then obtained by measurement
as basis for safety and efficiency of medical devices. To of the angle-dependent voltage amplitudes U(α) related to the
enable the numerical compensation of the spatial averaging amplitudes at normal incidence U(0°). For each frequency
effect of hydrophones, the individual effective receiver size setting f, the effective radius a is determined by least-squares
must be determined [4]-[11]. The recent second edition of fitting of a function of the form:
the IEC hydrophone properties standard provides revised
measurement and data evaluation procedures [12]. This U (α ) 2 J1 ( ka sin(α ) )
contribution describes the update and modifications to = (1)
U (0°) ka sin(α )
comply with the recently amended specifications of an
experimental setup which has been in use for many years to the measured data, where J1 denotes the Bessel function of
already. In addition, usage of short pulse excitation instead of the first kind and first order, k = 2πf/c the wavenumber, and c
single frequency bursts was implemented to achieve several the speed of sound in water, respectively.
advantages comprising faster overall characterization,
smaller frequency increment and increased upper frequency
limit of hydrophone size data, as well as extending the
applicability to sensors providing low sensitivity, like fiber-
optic or robust membrane hydrophones for the detection of
high intensity focused ultrasound (HIFU).

II. EXPERIMENTAL METHODS

A. Previous directional response measurement setup

The hardware system for directional response
measurements and hydrophone effective size determination
at PTB was first implemented in 2002, described with some
details in [13], and only slightly adjusted over the years. A
large variety of hydrophones for biomedical applications
owned by PTB or customers have been characterized, mostly
to support hydrophone sensitivity calibrations which need
effective size data as input for corrections [14]. The system Fig. 1. Setup for hydrophone directional response measurements.
 Depending on the frequency and the hydrophone size, the from Fourier-transforming the time waveforms, calculating
range of data used for the fit was individually selected to the normalized directional responses at all selected
ensure that only the center part is used which generally frequencies, fitting to the responses the chosen model
shows good agreement with the simple diffraction theory. function, and determining the effective size versus frequency
Ranges were chosen to cover profiles to –6 dB where data.
possible, to be close to the criteria of IEC 62127-3 edition 1
where a derivation from the maximum and the two -3 dB and Fig. 2 shows the voltage-time signals for the different
-6 dB points instead of the data fitting was described. This hydrophone angles in the form of a color map for an example
setup did not allow measurements of directional responses of a nominal 0.6 mm membrane hydrophone (PTB 42). The
for frequencies beyond 20 MHz. Thus, data for higher corresponding directivity pattern is shown in Fig. 3. For a
frequencies were extrapolated using second order selection of 5 frequencies, the measured directional
exponential decay functions [13]. responses are also shown in Fig. 4, together with the
obtained fitting results using the rigid baffle piston model (1)
and the fitting range criteria explained in Section II.B.
B. New IEC 62127-3 Ed.2 criteria for effective size
determination
Least squares fitting of theoretical predictions to
directional response data instead of relying on 5 distinct
points (maximum, -3 dB and -6 dB points) is described in the
recent 2nd edition of IEC 62127-3 [12]. The default model

Angle (°)
shall still be the rigid baffle piston model describing
diffraction of a circular disc, cf. (1). However, other models
can be applied if justified, like the soft baffle piston model,
the unbaffled piston model, the rigid piston model, the Bacon
model [15], or a specific model for rectangularly shaped
hydrophone elements. Importantly, the angular range to be
used in the fitting is defined to be restricted to contain the
main lobe only, and extents to the -6 dB drops compared to Time (µs)
the central maximum, but no more than +/- 35° at most. The Fig. 2. Voltage-time signals measured in dependence on hydrophone angle
absolute upper limit ensures that for regular PVDF for a 0.6 mm membrane hydrophone (PTB 42).
membrane hydrophones the impact of sidelobes that often
occur starting at +/-38° is excluded. The angular increment
of measurements shall be chosen to ensure that the variation
between adjacent points in the directional response is not
more than 1 dB, and measurements shall be carried out in a
quasi-planar wave ultrasonic field. The effective size shall be
Angle (°)

determined as the average of two effective sizes obtained at

orthogonal rotational axes, for nominally non-circular
elements the directional response shall be measured for
additional axes. The effective size shall be determined for a
minimum of three frequencies covering the stated frequency
band of the hydrophone. However, it is recognized that the
effective hydrophone size usually is a function of the
frequency and an example plot of effective size versus Frequency (107 Hz)
frequency is provided. Fig. 3. Directivity pattern for frequencies from 1 MHz to 50 MHz of a
0.6 mm membrane hydrophone (PTB 42).
C. Updated setup using short pulse excitation 1 MHz
1.0 5 MHz
The existing setup for directional response measurements 10 MHz
was extended to comply with the criteria described in II.B 0.9 15 MHz
20 MHz
and to enable the usage of short pulse excitation instead of 0.8
Fit

single frequency tone bursts. The latter provides several

normalized voltage

0.7
advantages outlined in the introduction that similarly had
0.6
also been exploited in several hydrophone calibration
methods in the past [14]. Spike excitation from an in-house 0.5
made electrical generator drives the planar source transducer 0.4
(Karl Deutsch GmbH, Hürth, Germany, frequency range: 0.3
4 MHz to 20 MHz, diameter: 6 mm). As in II.A, the
0.2
hydrophone is positioned at a distance 200 mm away from
the transducer. A new measurement software was developed 0.1
to control the mechanical positioning and rotation, as well as 0.0
to perform the modified data acquisition through the -30 -20 -10 0 10 20 30
oscilloscope. Instead of signal amplitude measurements, the Angle (°)
revised system acquires and stores complete voltage-time
Fig. 4. Measured directivity and fitted curves for selected frequencies for a
signals. A measurement data evaluation tool was 0.6 mm membrane hydrophone (PTB 42). Data points above 0.5 are used
implemented that automatically performs all calculations for fitting.
 III. RESULTS
0.5
Needle-type Hydrophones
Several hydrophones of different types like membrane,
needle and capsule hydrophones and of different active Impulse
element size were characterized by directional response 0.4 Burst

Effective Radius (mm)

measurements using the revised setup in combination with
the data evaluation procedures and criteria of the recent PA 0500 SN 063
standard IEC 62127-3 Ed.2. Several of these hydrophones 0.3 dhighf = 500 µm

had also been characterized earlier using the setup described

in section II.II.A. including single frequency burst excitation. 0.2
Fig. 5 shows the results for five different membrane
hydrophones. The measurements were performed for both, PA 0200 SN 1297
dhighf = 200 µm
the rotational axis parallel to the leads and perpendicular to 0.1
the leads of the hydrophone element spot, and the mean PA 0075 SN 1434
values are depicted here. Also, the extrapolation curves dhighf = 100 µm

versus frequency (least-squares fit of a second-order 0.0

0 10 20 30 40 50
exponential decay function to the burst measurement results)
are depicted. The mean effective diameters at high Frequency (MHz)
frequencies dhighf are provided. These are slightly larger than Fig. 6. Effective radius versus frequency of several needle-type
the nominal electrode diameters because the polarized spots hydrophones.
of membrane hydrophones tend to be slightly larger than the
physical electrodes [13]. Increasing effective diameters for
0.5 Capsule-type Hydrophones
low frequencies are characteristic for membrane
hydrophones and are caused in a similar way as artifacts for Impulse
large incidence angles by Lamb waves. Deviations between 0.4 Burst

former burst measurement results and recent pulse

Effective Radius (mm)

measurement results are small as well as the deviations

between the new high frequency measurements and the 0.3
earlier extrapolations at high frequencies. Differences are HGL 0400 SN 1016
dhighf = 440 µm
mostly below 10 µm in radius. Only for the HMA 200 SN
1019 hydrophone, which is a rectangular electrode shape 0.2
HGL 0200 SN 007
hydrophone, the differences are slightly larger. This may be dhighf = 400 µm

attributed to a slightly different data range used in the earlier 0.1 HGL 0085 SN 1704
derivation. Using the model for rectangularly shaped dhighf = 100 µm

hydrophone elements for the HMA 200 SN 1019 results in a

similar effective size versus frequency curve, but a shift 0.0
towards a slightly smaller size with a dhighfrect = 360 µm 0 10 20 30 40 50
instead of dhighf = 440 µm is introduced. However, since the Frequency (MHz)
effective size is much larger than the nominal electrode size
for this particular device (electrode width: 200 µm), an Fig. 7. Effective radius versus frequency of several capsule-type
hydrophones.
almost circular spot-poled region of the PVDF membrane
can be assumed. For the smallest hydrophone, MH46, it can
Fig. 6 and Fig. 7 show the results obtained using the
be observed that the size slightly decreases even beyond 20
default fitting model for three differently sized needle-type
MHz, which obviously could not be predicted by the former
and three differently sized capsule-type hydrophones,
extrapolation approach. The other membrane hydrophones
respectively. The effective size versus frequency curves are
with nominal diameters of 200 mm or larger reach the
less predictable than those of the membrane hydrophones,
asymptotic high frequency diameter already at 20 MHz.
e.g. a simple exponential decay function may not cover all
0.5 Membrane Hydrophones features adequately. It was also observed that the direction of
maximum sensitivity was changing with frequency for some
Impulse hydrophones. Where available, comparison of older results
Burst
0.4 Burst extrapolation obtained with single frequency excitation shows good
Effective Radius (mm)

agreement. Only for the HGL 0085 SN 1704 capsule-type

0.3
PTB 42
dhighf = 600 µm
hydrophone some deviations occur. These may be attributed
IP037 to the former attempt to use only parts of the directional
dhighf = 540 µm
response that actually are well represented by the fitting
HMA 200 SN 1019
0.2 dhighf = 440 µm function while the current implementation rigorously uses
dhighfrect = 360 µm the range criteria as described in the standard, regardless of
the individual shape of the directional response pattern.
0.1 RS072
dhighf = 260 µm
The directional response pattern obtained for a robust
MH46 membrane hydrophone (SI04) [1],[16],[17] for HIFU field
dhighf = 120 µm
0.0 measurements is depicted in Fig. 8. Due to the stiff steel foil
0 10 20 30 40 50 cavitation protection front layer, the impact of Lamb waves
Frequency (MHz) occurs already at about ±18°. Reducing the data fitting range
Fig. 5. Effective radius versus frequency of several membrane from ±35° to ±18°, however, provides the effective size data
hydrophones. as shown in Fig. 9 using the default rigid baffle piston model.
 ACKNOWLEDGMENT
The authors wish to thank Dr Guangzhen Xing from the
National Institute of Metrology, Division of Mechanics and
acoustics, Beijing, China for his initial work on creating a
Angle (°)

new controlling software for the directional response

measurement setup.

REFERENCES
[1] G. R. Harris S. M. Howard, A. M. Hurrell, P. A. Lewin, M. E.
Schafer, K. A. Wear, V. Wilkens, and B. Zeqiri., “Hydrophone
measurements for biomedical ultrasound applications: A review,”
Frequency (107 Hz) IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 70, no. 2, pp.
85–100, Feb. 2023.
Fig. 8. Directivity pattern for frequencies from 1 MHz to 25 MHz of a
0.2 mm robust HIFU membrane hydrophone (SI04). [2] Medical electrical equipment - Part 2-37: Particular requirements for
the basic safety and essential performance of ultrasonic medical
0.6 diagnostic and monitoring equipment, International Standard IEC
SI04 60601-2-37:2007+AMD1:2015, CSV Ed.2.1, 2015.
dhighf = 225 µm
0.5 [3] Ultrasonics—Field Characterization—Test Methods for the
Effective Radius (mm)

Determination of Thermal and Mechanical Indices Related to

0.4 Medical Diagnostic Ultrasonic Fields, International Standard IEC
62359:10+AMD1:2017, CSV Ed.2.1, 2017.
0.3
[4] B. Zeqiri and A. D. Bond, “The influence of waveform distortion on
0.2
hydrophone spatial-averaging corrections—Theory and
measurement,” J. Acoust. Soc. Amer., vol. 92, no. 4, pp. 1809–1821,
0.1
Oct. 1992.
[5] E. G. Radulescu, P. A. Lewin, A. Goldstein, and A. Nowicki,
0.0 “Hydrophone spatial averaging corrections from 1 to 40 MHz,” IEEE
0 5 10 15 20 25 Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 48, no. 6, pp.
Frequency (MHz) 1575–1580, Nov. 2001.
Fig. 9. Effective radius versus frequency of a robust HIFU membrane [6] K. A. Wear, A. Shah, and C. Baker, “Correction for hydrophone
hydrophone (SI04). spatial averaging artifacts for circular sources,” IEEE Trans.
Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 67, no. 12, pp. 2674–
2691, Dec. 2020.
IV. CONCLUSIONS [7] K. A. Wear, “Hydrophone spatial averaging correction for acoustic
The effective hydrophone sizes obtained in compliance exposure measurements from arrays—Part I: Theory and impact on
with the recent standard show, in general, good agreement diagnostic safety indexes,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq.
Control, vol. 68, no. 3, pp. 358–375, Mar. 2021.
with the results obtained earlier. Typical measurement
[8] K. A. Wear, A. Shah, A. M. Ivory, and C. Baker, “Hydrophone spatial
uncertainties of radius data are in the range ±8 µm to ±15 µm averaging correction for acoustic exposure measurements from
(95 % coverage). The application of short pulses enables the arrays—Part II: Validation for ARFI and pulsed Doppler waveforms,”
characterization up to 50 MHz in a very efficient way. IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 68, no. 3, pp.
Formerly, data beyond 20 MHz had been derived by 376–388, Mar. 2021.
extrapolation only, and the measurements at several discrete [9] M. P. Cooling, V. F. Humphrey, and V. Wilkens, “Hydrophone area-
frequencies had been much more time consuming. Low averaging correction factors in nonlinearly generated ultrasonic
beams,” in Proc. J. Phys., Conf., 2011, vol. 279, no. 1, pp. 1–6.
sensitivity hydrophones like robust HIFU membrane
[10] O. Bessonova and V. Wilkens, “Investigation of spatial averaging
hydrophones can adequately be characterized with the effect of membrane hydrophones for working frequencies in the low
updated setup using larger amplitude excitation. The MHz range,” in Proc. DAGA-Darmstadt, 2012, pp. 937–938.
requirements of the recent standard on the angular range to [11] K. A. Wear and S. M. Howard, “Correction for spatial averaging
be used for the effective size derivation are applicable for artifacts in hydrophone measurements of high-intensity therapeutic
almost all cases. Even for very small hydrophone sizes in the ultrasound: An inverse filter approach,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason.,
range of 100 µm at low frequencies, the derivation works out Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol. 66, no. 9, pp. 1453–1464, Sep. 2019.
well using the range of ±35° though the sensitivity is almost [12] Ultrasonics—Hydrophones—Part 3: Properties of Hydrophones for
omnidirectional. For the robust HIFU membrane hydrophone Ultrasonic Fields, International Standard IEC 62127-3, Ed. 2, 2022.
the fitting range needed reduction. Alternatively, a modified [13] V. Wilkens and W. Molkenstruck, “Broadband PVDF membrane
hydrophone for comparisons of hydrophone calibration methods up to
model including the Lamb wave impact could be applied. 140 MHz,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control, vol.
54, no. 9, pp. 1784–1791, Sep. 2007.
In general, the standard is expected to lead to better
harmonized hydrophone characterization, and may support [14] M. Weber and V. Wilkens, “A comparison of different calibration
techniques for hydrophones used in medical ultrasonic field
improved spatial averaging correction quality within acoustic measurement,” IEEE Trans. Ultrason., Ferroelectr., Freq. Control,
output measurements on medical ultrasound devices. vol. 68, no. 5, pp. 1919–1929, May 2021.
However, the 1 dB criterion for adjacent data points of the [15] D. R. Bacon, “Characteristics of a pvdf membrane hydrophone for
directional response measurements becomes hard to be use in the range 1-100 MHz” IEEE Trans. SU., vol. 29, no. 1, pp. 18–
complied with at high frequencies beyond 20 MHz. 25, 1982.
Furthermore, it is recommended for a future revision of the [16] V. Wilkens, S. Sonntag, and O. Georg, “Robust spot-poled membrane
standard to always require the application of the rigid baffle hydrophones for measurement of large amplitude pressure waveforms
generated by high intensity therapeutic ultrasonic transducers,” J.
piston model as the mandatory method, with additional Acoust. Soc. Amer., vol. 139, no. 3, pp. 1319–1332, Mar. 2016.
model applications being optional, to ensure a common data [17] G. Xing, V. Wilkens, P. Yang, “Review of field characterization
basis for all hydrophone types applicable to the same spatial techniques for high intensity focused ultrasound,” Metrologia, vol.
averaging correction procedures. 58, 022001, DOI: 10.1088/1681-7575/abe02e, Feb. 2021.