Ultrasonic Diagnostics: Capabilities of Present Systems

  • P. N. T. Wells


No matter what the final display may be, similar considerations apply to the resolutions of all ultrasonic pulse-echo systems. In range, the resolution is determined by the duration of the pulse, and in azimuth and elevation, by the width of the beam. The pulse is generally the limiting component, and the dimensions of the scanned anatomy control the choice of wavelength. Gray scale display of a wide range of echo amplitude can give additional diagnostic information. In Doppler systems, zero-crossing detectors can give rise to errors, which can largely be avoided by the use of frequency spectrum analysis.


Range Resolution Ultrasonic Beam Storage Surface Doppler System Additional Diagnostic Information 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    Wells, P.N.T. (1969). “Physical principles of ultrasonic diagnosis”. Academic Press, London and New York.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    Wells, P.N.T. (1971). “The standardisation of electronic systems in pulse-echo diagnosis”. In “Ultrasonographla Medica”, ed. J. Bock et al., Vol. II, pp. 29–37. Weiner Medizinischen Akademie, Vienna.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    Wells, P.N.T. (1974). “The receiver in the pulse-echo system”. In “Ultrasonics in Medicine”, ed. M. de Vlieger et al., pp. 30–6. Excerpta Medica, Amsterdam; American Elsevier New York.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    Kossoff, G. (1963). “Design of narrow-beamwidth transducers”. J. acoust. Soc. Am., 35, 905–12.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Kossoff, G. (1992). “Improved techniques in cross sectional echography”. Ultrasonics, 10, 221–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Wells P.N.T. (1971). “Physical factors controlling the diagnostic value of two-dimensional ultrasonic liver scans”. In “Ultrasonograph!a Medica”, ed. J. Bock et al., Vol.1, pp. I63–76. Weiner Medizinischen Akademie, Vienna.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Taylor, K.J.W., Carpenter, D.A., and McCready, V.R. (1973). “Gray scale echography in the diagnosis of intrahepatic disease”. J. clin. Ultrasound, 1, 284–7.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Reneman, R.S. and Spencer, M.P. (1974). “Difficulties in processing of an analogue Doppler flow signal; with special reference to zero-crossing meters and quantification”. In “Cardiovascular Applications of Ultrasound”, ed. R.S. Reneman, pp. 32–42. North-Holland, Amsterdam; American Elsevier, New York.Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Flax, S.W., Wehster, J.G., and Updike, S.J. (l97l). “Statistical evaluation of the Doppler ultrasonic blood flowmeter”. Instr. Soc. Am. Trans., 10, 1–20.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Gosling, R.G., King, D.H., Newman, D.L., and Woodcock, J.P. (1969)• “Transcutaneous measurement of arterial blood-velocity by ultrasound”. In “Ultrasonics for Industry”, pp. 16–23. IPC Business Press, Guildford.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Light, L.H. (1972). “Ultrasonic Doppler techniques in blood velocity measurement”. In “Fluid Dynamic Measurements in the Industrial and Medical Environments”, ed. D.J. Cockrell, Vol. 1, pp. 332–9. Leicester University Press, Leicester.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1976

Authors and Affiliations

  • P. N. T. Wells
    • 1
  1. 1.Bristol General HospitalBristolUK

Personalised recommendations