Signal, Image and Video Processing

, Volume 13, Issue 3, pp 591–599 | Cite as

A frequency domain beamspace adaptive receive beamformer for ultrasound imaging systems: phantom simulation results

  • Avinash S. VaidyaEmail author
  • M. B. Srinivas
Original Paper


Traditional ultrasound imaging systems have a high sampling rate of 40–80 Msps and a data volume of few hundred million bits per frame. This work proposes a frequency domain beamspace receive beamformer to reduce this high sampling rate and data volume. In the proposed beamformer, analog RF signals are sampled in frequency domain and modified beamspace minimum variance beamformer is applied on the reconstructed signal. The proposed beamformer is simulated using phantoms of point scatters, disc–cyst and human kidney and compared with the time domain beamforming techniques by quantifying lateral resolution of the beams, contrast resolution and structural similarity of images. The measured metrics show a comparable image quality with reduction in the sampling rate by tenfold to 40-fold and the data volume by two- to fivefold.


Ultrasound imaging Frequency domain sampling Compressed adaptive beamformer 



Avinash S. Vaidya gratefully acknowledges the financial support received from Tata Consultancy Services through their TCS research scholar program.


  1. 1.
    Wagner, N., Eldar, Y.C., Friedman, Z.: Compressed beamforming in ultrasound imaging. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 60(9), 4643–4657 (2012)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  2. 2.
    Zhou, J., Hoyos, S., Sadler, B.M.: Asynchronous compressed beamformer for portable diagnostic ultrasound systems. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 61(11), 1791–1801 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    Vaidya, A.S., Srinivas, M.B.: Compressed Fresnel beamformer for portable ultrasound imaging system. In: 2015 11th Conference on Ph.D. Research in Microelectronics and Electronics (PRIME), pp. 294–297. University of Glasgow, UK (2015)Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Vaidya, A.S., Srinivas, M.B.: Frequency domain beamformer for point-of-care ultrasound imaging system. In: Proceedings of NIH-IEEE 2015 Strategic Conference on Healthcare Innovations and Point-of-Care Technologies for Precision Medicine. NIAID Conference Center, Bethesda, MD (2015)Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    Chernyakova, T., Eldar, Y.C.: Fourier-domain beamforming: the path to compressed ultrasound imaging. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 61(8), 1252–1267 (2014)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Mishali, M., Eldar, Y.C., Elron, A.J.: Xampling: signal acquisition and processing in union of subspaces. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 59(10), 4719–4734 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Tur, R., Eldar, Y.C., Friedman, Z.: Innovation rate sampling of pulse streams with application to ultrasound imaging. IEEE Trans. Signal Process. 59(4), 1827–1842 (2011)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Synnevag, J., Austeng, A., Holm, S.: Benefits of minimum-variance beamforming in medical ultrasound imaging. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 56(9), 1868–1879 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Korayem, R., Bendoukha, S.: A gradient descent implementation of the adaptive robust narrowband constrained LMS beamformer. Signal Image Video Process. 12(3), 463–470 (2018)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Han, Y., Tran, V.: Recursive Bayesian beamforming with uncertain projected steering vector and strong interferences. SIViP 10(5), 975–982 (2016)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Deylami, A.M., Asl, B.M.: A fast and robust beamspace adaptive beamformer for medical ultrasound imaging. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 64(6), 947–958 (2017)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Shan, T.J., Kailath, T.: Adaptive beamforming for coherent signals and interference. IEEE Trans. Acoust. 33(3), 527–536 (1985)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Synnevg, J.F., Nilsen, C.I.C., Holm, S.: P2b-13 speckle statistics in adaptive beamforming. In: 2007 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium Proceedings, pp. 1545–1548 (2007)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Ozbek, A.: Adaptive seismic noise and interference attenuation method (2002). US Patent 6,446,008
  15. 15.
    Nilsen, C.I.C., Hafizovic, I.: Beamspace adaptive beamforming for ultrasound imaging. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 56(10), 2187–2197 (2009)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Papoulis, A.: Generalized sampling expansion. IEEE Trans. Circuits Syst. 24(11), 652–654 (1977)MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Hoyos, S., Sadler, B.M.: Ultra-wideband analog-to-digital conversion via signal expansion. IEEE Trans. Veh. Technol. 54(5), 1609–1622 (2005)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Rao, K.R., Yip, P.: Discrete Cosine Transform: Algorithms, Advantages, Applications. Academic Press, Boston (2014)zbMATHGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Wang, Z., Bovik, A.C., Sheikh, H.R., Simoncelli, E.P.: Image quality assessment: from error visibility to structural similarity. IEEE Trans. Image Process. 13(4), 600–612 (2004)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Structural similarity index (SSIM) for measuring image quality.
  21. 21.
    Jensen, J.A.: Field: a program for simulating ultrasound systems. In: 10TH Nordicbaltic Conference on Biomedical Imaging, vol. 4, supplement 1, part 1, pp. 351–353 (1996)Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer-Verlag London Ltd., part of Springer Nature 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Electronics EngineeringBITS PilaniHyderabadIndia
  2. 2.BML Munjal UniversityGurgaonIndia

Personalised recommendations