Why use ultrasound for medical imaging?












0












$begingroup$


What advantage does ultrasound have over sound between 20-20000Hz that it is used in medical imaging over sound in that frequency range?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    your edits are quite helpful, but can I ask why you do edits so frequently?
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    37 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Tagging is important, it helps people find things, helps the system that auto-identified related content, and enables meaningful analysis of site usage patterns. BUt good tagging takes time, attention to detail, and a minimum level of expertise so that you can identify the relevant tags.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    34 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Homework-like question, lack of effort.
    $endgroup$
    – Pieter
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    you have a point, I’ll try to stop posting trivial questions from now on
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    1 min ago
















0












$begingroup$


What advantage does ultrasound have over sound between 20-20000Hz that it is used in medical imaging over sound in that frequency range?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$












  • $begingroup$
    your edits are quite helpful, but can I ask why you do edits so frequently?
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    37 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Tagging is important, it helps people find things, helps the system that auto-identified related content, and enables meaningful analysis of site usage patterns. BUt good tagging takes time, attention to detail, and a minimum level of expertise so that you can identify the relevant tags.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    34 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Homework-like question, lack of effort.
    $endgroup$
    – Pieter
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    you have a point, I’ll try to stop posting trivial questions from now on
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    1 min ago














0












0








0





$begingroup$


What advantage does ultrasound have over sound between 20-20000Hz that it is used in medical imaging over sound in that frequency range?










share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.







$endgroup$




What advantage does ultrasound have over sound between 20-20000Hz that it is used in medical imaging over sound in that frequency range?







energy acoustics frequency wavelength medical-physics






share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.











share|cite|improve this question









New contributor




Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









share|cite|improve this question




share|cite|improve this question








edited 1 hour ago









Qmechanic

108k122001245




108k122001245






New contributor




Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.









asked 1 hour ago









Ubaid HassanUbaid Hassan

19311




19311




New contributor




Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.





New contributor





Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.






Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor to this site. Take care in asking for clarification, commenting, and answering.
Check out our Code of Conduct.












  • $begingroup$
    your edits are quite helpful, but can I ask why you do edits so frequently?
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    37 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Tagging is important, it helps people find things, helps the system that auto-identified related content, and enables meaningful analysis of site usage patterns. BUt good tagging takes time, attention to detail, and a minimum level of expertise so that you can identify the relevant tags.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    34 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Homework-like question, lack of effort.
    $endgroup$
    – Pieter
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    you have a point, I’ll try to stop posting trivial questions from now on
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    1 min ago


















  • $begingroup$
    your edits are quite helpful, but can I ask why you do edits so frequently?
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    37 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Tagging is important, it helps people find things, helps the system that auto-identified related content, and enables meaningful analysis of site usage patterns. BUt good tagging takes time, attention to detail, and a minimum level of expertise so that you can identify the relevant tags.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    34 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    Homework-like question, lack of effort.
    $endgroup$
    – Pieter
    2 mins ago










  • $begingroup$
    you have a point, I’ll try to stop posting trivial questions from now on
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    1 min ago
















$begingroup$
your edits are quite helpful, but can I ask why you do edits so frequently?
$endgroup$
– Ubaid Hassan
37 mins ago




$begingroup$
your edits are quite helpful, but can I ask why you do edits so frequently?
$endgroup$
– Ubaid Hassan
37 mins ago












$begingroup$
Tagging is important, it helps people find things, helps the system that auto-identified related content, and enables meaningful analysis of site usage patterns. BUt good tagging takes time, attention to detail, and a minimum level of expertise so that you can identify the relevant tags.
$endgroup$
– dmckee
34 mins ago




$begingroup$
Tagging is important, it helps people find things, helps the system that auto-identified related content, and enables meaningful analysis of site usage patterns. BUt good tagging takes time, attention to detail, and a minimum level of expertise so that you can identify the relevant tags.
$endgroup$
– dmckee
34 mins ago












$begingroup$
Homework-like question, lack of effort.
$endgroup$
– Pieter
2 mins ago




$begingroup$
Homework-like question, lack of effort.
$endgroup$
– Pieter
2 mins ago












$begingroup$
you have a point, I’ll try to stop posting trivial questions from now on
$endgroup$
– Ubaid Hassan
1 min ago




$begingroup$
you have a point, I’ll try to stop posting trivial questions from now on
$endgroup$
– Ubaid Hassan
1 min ago










3 Answers
3






active

oldest

votes


















5












$begingroup$

I think the simple answer here is resolution.



Generally when imaging with waves (including light) the limit to resolution is a length that is similar to the wavelength, $lambda$.



If $f$ is the frequency and $c$ is the speed of the wave then the wavelength is given by



$$lambda = {c over f} $$



so the higher we make $f$ the smaller $lambda$ becomes and the better the resolution and the more detail we can see in scans....



The speed of sound in water is ~1500 m/s and with say 1.5 MHz = 1 500 000 Hz frequency we calculate



$$lambda = 0.001 {rm m} = 1 {rm mm}$$



At 20000 Hz $lambda = 75$ mm






share|cite|improve this answer











$endgroup$













  • $begingroup$
    Is it correct to say wavelength is inversely proportional to resolution? Or that sound wave frequency is directly proportional to resolution?
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    35 mins ago






  • 1




    $begingroup$
    The correct statement is in terms of wavelength. That said, for non-dispersive waves (which is reasonably true for sound) in consistent media (not really true for medical ultra-sounds) the wavelength statements implies the frequency one as a corollary.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    31 mins ago



















1












$begingroup$

Higher frequency provides higher resolution.






share|cite|improve this answer









$endgroup$





















    1












    $begingroup$

    Using waves for imaging, you want to distinguish points in the specimen. Consider the simplest case: you'd like to distinguish 2 points.



    The waves are coming from behind the specimen passing through the points or the waves are reflected on the points. Considering the phase relationship of the waves at the detector (i.e. investigating interference) because of the diffraction on the 1 point, even with focusing, one cannot get a single point on the detector. Take a look on the single slit diffraction and on the 2D version, on the Airy disk.



    On the focused image you will get concentric circles. For $alpha$, the angular distance between the two most visible, inner ones one gets
    $$lambda /left( {2d} right) = sin left( alpha right) approx alpha ,$$
    where $lambda$ corresponds to the wavelength and $d$ is the size of point.



    Two points are called resolvable if their picture on the detector are distinguishable, for example, if their Airy-disk are non-overlapping. That means, it will limit how close the distinguishable points can be. With a given pixel and size properties of the detector you can only modify $lambda$, and as it can be seen, lowering $lambda$ makes it possible to resolve even closer objects.



    And as it is known,
    $$lambda = c/f,$$
    where $c$ is the speed of the wave and $f$ is frequency, the higher the frequency, the smaller the wavelength is, increasing the achievable resolution.






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Maybe "enter link description here" is not the link description you want.
      $endgroup$
      – dmckee
      15 mins ago












    Your Answer








    StackExchange.ready(function() {
    var channelOptions = {
    tags: "".split(" "),
    id: "151"
    };
    initTagRenderer("".split(" "), "".split(" "), channelOptions);

    StackExchange.using("externalEditor", function() {
    // Have to fire editor after snippets, if snippets enabled
    if (StackExchange.settings.snippets.snippetsEnabled) {
    StackExchange.using("snippets", function() {
    createEditor();
    });
    }
    else {
    createEditor();
    }
    });

    function createEditor() {
    StackExchange.prepareEditor({
    heartbeatType: 'answer',
    autoActivateHeartbeat: false,
    convertImagesToLinks: false,
    noModals: true,
    showLowRepImageUploadWarning: true,
    reputationToPostImages: null,
    bindNavPrevention: true,
    postfix: "",
    imageUploader: {
    brandingHtml: "Powered by u003ca class="icon-imgur-white" href="https://imgur.com/"u003eu003c/au003e",
    contentPolicyHtml: "User contributions licensed under u003ca href="https://creativecommons.org/licenses/by-sa/3.0/"u003ecc by-sa 3.0 with attribution requiredu003c/au003e u003ca href="https://stackoverflow.com/legal/content-policy"u003e(content policy)u003c/au003e",
    allowUrls: true
    },
    noCode: true, onDemand: true,
    discardSelector: ".discard-answer"
    ,immediatelyShowMarkdownHelp:true
    });


    }
    });






    Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










    draft saved

    draft discarded


















    StackExchange.ready(
    function () {
    StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f472565%2fwhy-use-ultrasound-for-medical-imaging%23new-answer', 'question_page');
    }
    );

    Post as a guest















    Required, but never shown

























    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes








    3 Answers
    3






    active

    oldest

    votes









    active

    oldest

    votes






    active

    oldest

    votes









    5












    $begingroup$

    I think the simple answer here is resolution.



    Generally when imaging with waves (including light) the limit to resolution is a length that is similar to the wavelength, $lambda$.



    If $f$ is the frequency and $c$ is the speed of the wave then the wavelength is given by



    $$lambda = {c over f} $$



    so the higher we make $f$ the smaller $lambda$ becomes and the better the resolution and the more detail we can see in scans....



    The speed of sound in water is ~1500 m/s and with say 1.5 MHz = 1 500 000 Hz frequency we calculate



    $$lambda = 0.001 {rm m} = 1 {rm mm}$$



    At 20000 Hz $lambda = 75$ mm






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Is it correct to say wavelength is inversely proportional to resolution? Or that sound wave frequency is directly proportional to resolution?
      $endgroup$
      – Ubaid Hassan
      35 mins ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      The correct statement is in terms of wavelength. That said, for non-dispersive waves (which is reasonably true for sound) in consistent media (not really true for medical ultra-sounds) the wavelength statements implies the frequency one as a corollary.
      $endgroup$
      – dmckee
      31 mins ago
















    5












    $begingroup$

    I think the simple answer here is resolution.



    Generally when imaging with waves (including light) the limit to resolution is a length that is similar to the wavelength, $lambda$.



    If $f$ is the frequency and $c$ is the speed of the wave then the wavelength is given by



    $$lambda = {c over f} $$



    so the higher we make $f$ the smaller $lambda$ becomes and the better the resolution and the more detail we can see in scans....



    The speed of sound in water is ~1500 m/s and with say 1.5 MHz = 1 500 000 Hz frequency we calculate



    $$lambda = 0.001 {rm m} = 1 {rm mm}$$



    At 20000 Hz $lambda = 75$ mm






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$













    • $begingroup$
      Is it correct to say wavelength is inversely proportional to resolution? Or that sound wave frequency is directly proportional to resolution?
      $endgroup$
      – Ubaid Hassan
      35 mins ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      The correct statement is in terms of wavelength. That said, for non-dispersive waves (which is reasonably true for sound) in consistent media (not really true for medical ultra-sounds) the wavelength statements implies the frequency one as a corollary.
      $endgroup$
      – dmckee
      31 mins ago














    5












    5








    5





    $begingroup$

    I think the simple answer here is resolution.



    Generally when imaging with waves (including light) the limit to resolution is a length that is similar to the wavelength, $lambda$.



    If $f$ is the frequency and $c$ is the speed of the wave then the wavelength is given by



    $$lambda = {c over f} $$



    so the higher we make $f$ the smaller $lambda$ becomes and the better the resolution and the more detail we can see in scans....



    The speed of sound in water is ~1500 m/s and with say 1.5 MHz = 1 500 000 Hz frequency we calculate



    $$lambda = 0.001 {rm m} = 1 {rm mm}$$



    At 20000 Hz $lambda = 75$ mm






    share|cite|improve this answer











    $endgroup$



    I think the simple answer here is resolution.



    Generally when imaging with waves (including light) the limit to resolution is a length that is similar to the wavelength, $lambda$.



    If $f$ is the frequency and $c$ is the speed of the wave then the wavelength is given by



    $$lambda = {c over f} $$



    so the higher we make $f$ the smaller $lambda$ becomes and the better the resolution and the more detail we can see in scans....



    The speed of sound in water is ~1500 m/s and with say 1.5 MHz = 1 500 000 Hz frequency we calculate



    $$lambda = 0.001 {rm m} = 1 {rm mm}$$



    At 20000 Hz $lambda = 75$ mm







    share|cite|improve this answer














    share|cite|improve this answer



    share|cite|improve this answer








    edited 59 mins ago

























    answered 1 hour ago









    tomtom

    6,39711627




    6,39711627












    • $begingroup$
      Is it correct to say wavelength is inversely proportional to resolution? Or that sound wave frequency is directly proportional to resolution?
      $endgroup$
      – Ubaid Hassan
      35 mins ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      The correct statement is in terms of wavelength. That said, for non-dispersive waves (which is reasonably true for sound) in consistent media (not really true for medical ultra-sounds) the wavelength statements implies the frequency one as a corollary.
      $endgroup$
      – dmckee
      31 mins ago


















    • $begingroup$
      Is it correct to say wavelength is inversely proportional to resolution? Or that sound wave frequency is directly proportional to resolution?
      $endgroup$
      – Ubaid Hassan
      35 mins ago






    • 1




      $begingroup$
      The correct statement is in terms of wavelength. That said, for non-dispersive waves (which is reasonably true for sound) in consistent media (not really true for medical ultra-sounds) the wavelength statements implies the frequency one as a corollary.
      $endgroup$
      – dmckee
      31 mins ago
















    $begingroup$
    Is it correct to say wavelength is inversely proportional to resolution? Or that sound wave frequency is directly proportional to resolution?
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    35 mins ago




    $begingroup$
    Is it correct to say wavelength is inversely proportional to resolution? Or that sound wave frequency is directly proportional to resolution?
    $endgroup$
    – Ubaid Hassan
    35 mins ago




    1




    1




    $begingroup$
    The correct statement is in terms of wavelength. That said, for non-dispersive waves (which is reasonably true for sound) in consistent media (not really true for medical ultra-sounds) the wavelength statements implies the frequency one as a corollary.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    31 mins ago




    $begingroup$
    The correct statement is in terms of wavelength. That said, for non-dispersive waves (which is reasonably true for sound) in consistent media (not really true for medical ultra-sounds) the wavelength statements implies the frequency one as a corollary.
    $endgroup$
    – dmckee
    31 mins ago











    1












    $begingroup$

    Higher frequency provides higher resolution.






    share|cite|improve this answer









    $endgroup$


















      1












      $begingroup$

      Higher frequency provides higher resolution.






      share|cite|improve this answer









      $endgroup$
















        1












        1








        1





        $begingroup$

        Higher frequency provides higher resolution.






        share|cite|improve this answer









        $endgroup$



        Higher frequency provides higher resolution.







        share|cite|improve this answer












        share|cite|improve this answer



        share|cite|improve this answer










        answered 1 hour ago









        akhmeteliakhmeteli

        18.5k21844




        18.5k21844























            1












            $begingroup$

            Using waves for imaging, you want to distinguish points in the specimen. Consider the simplest case: you'd like to distinguish 2 points.



            The waves are coming from behind the specimen passing through the points or the waves are reflected on the points. Considering the phase relationship of the waves at the detector (i.e. investigating interference) because of the diffraction on the 1 point, even with focusing, one cannot get a single point on the detector. Take a look on the single slit diffraction and on the 2D version, on the Airy disk.



            On the focused image you will get concentric circles. For $alpha$, the angular distance between the two most visible, inner ones one gets
            $$lambda /left( {2d} right) = sin left( alpha right) approx alpha ,$$
            where $lambda$ corresponds to the wavelength and $d$ is the size of point.



            Two points are called resolvable if their picture on the detector are distinguishable, for example, if their Airy-disk are non-overlapping. That means, it will limit how close the distinguishable points can be. With a given pixel and size properties of the detector you can only modify $lambda$, and as it can be seen, lowering $lambda$ makes it possible to resolve even closer objects.



            And as it is known,
            $$lambda = c/f,$$
            where $c$ is the speed of the wave and $f$ is frequency, the higher the frequency, the smaller the wavelength is, increasing the achievable resolution.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Maybe "enter link description here" is not the link description you want.
              $endgroup$
              – dmckee
              15 mins ago
















            1












            $begingroup$

            Using waves for imaging, you want to distinguish points in the specimen. Consider the simplest case: you'd like to distinguish 2 points.



            The waves are coming from behind the specimen passing through the points or the waves are reflected on the points. Considering the phase relationship of the waves at the detector (i.e. investigating interference) because of the diffraction on the 1 point, even with focusing, one cannot get a single point on the detector. Take a look on the single slit diffraction and on the 2D version, on the Airy disk.



            On the focused image you will get concentric circles. For $alpha$, the angular distance between the two most visible, inner ones one gets
            $$lambda /left( {2d} right) = sin left( alpha right) approx alpha ,$$
            where $lambda$ corresponds to the wavelength and $d$ is the size of point.



            Two points are called resolvable if their picture on the detector are distinguishable, for example, if their Airy-disk are non-overlapping. That means, it will limit how close the distinguishable points can be. With a given pixel and size properties of the detector you can only modify $lambda$, and as it can be seen, lowering $lambda$ makes it possible to resolve even closer objects.



            And as it is known,
            $$lambda = c/f,$$
            where $c$ is the speed of the wave and $f$ is frequency, the higher the frequency, the smaller the wavelength is, increasing the achievable resolution.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$













            • $begingroup$
              Maybe "enter link description here" is not the link description you want.
              $endgroup$
              – dmckee
              15 mins ago














            1












            1








            1





            $begingroup$

            Using waves for imaging, you want to distinguish points in the specimen. Consider the simplest case: you'd like to distinguish 2 points.



            The waves are coming from behind the specimen passing through the points or the waves are reflected on the points. Considering the phase relationship of the waves at the detector (i.e. investigating interference) because of the diffraction on the 1 point, even with focusing, one cannot get a single point on the detector. Take a look on the single slit diffraction and on the 2D version, on the Airy disk.



            On the focused image you will get concentric circles. For $alpha$, the angular distance between the two most visible, inner ones one gets
            $$lambda /left( {2d} right) = sin left( alpha right) approx alpha ,$$
            where $lambda$ corresponds to the wavelength and $d$ is the size of point.



            Two points are called resolvable if their picture on the detector are distinguishable, for example, if their Airy-disk are non-overlapping. That means, it will limit how close the distinguishable points can be. With a given pixel and size properties of the detector you can only modify $lambda$, and as it can be seen, lowering $lambda$ makes it possible to resolve even closer objects.



            And as it is known,
            $$lambda = c/f,$$
            where $c$ is the speed of the wave and $f$ is frequency, the higher the frequency, the smaller the wavelength is, increasing the achievable resolution.






            share|cite|improve this answer











            $endgroup$



            Using waves for imaging, you want to distinguish points in the specimen. Consider the simplest case: you'd like to distinguish 2 points.



            The waves are coming from behind the specimen passing through the points or the waves are reflected on the points. Considering the phase relationship of the waves at the detector (i.e. investigating interference) because of the diffraction on the 1 point, even with focusing, one cannot get a single point on the detector. Take a look on the single slit diffraction and on the 2D version, on the Airy disk.



            On the focused image you will get concentric circles. For $alpha$, the angular distance between the two most visible, inner ones one gets
            $$lambda /left( {2d} right) = sin left( alpha right) approx alpha ,$$
            where $lambda$ corresponds to the wavelength and $d$ is the size of point.



            Two points are called resolvable if their picture on the detector are distinguishable, for example, if their Airy-disk are non-overlapping. That means, it will limit how close the distinguishable points can be. With a given pixel and size properties of the detector you can only modify $lambda$, and as it can be seen, lowering $lambda$ makes it possible to resolve even closer objects.



            And as it is known,
            $$lambda = c/f,$$
            where $c$ is the speed of the wave and $f$ is frequency, the higher the frequency, the smaller the wavelength is, increasing the achievable resolution.







            share|cite|improve this answer














            share|cite|improve this answer



            share|cite|improve this answer








            edited 13 mins ago

























            answered 16 mins ago









            DanielTuzesDanielTuzes

            1985




            1985












            • $begingroup$
              Maybe "enter link description here" is not the link description you want.
              $endgroup$
              – dmckee
              15 mins ago


















            • $begingroup$
              Maybe "enter link description here" is not the link description you want.
              $endgroup$
              – dmckee
              15 mins ago
















            $begingroup$
            Maybe "enter link description here" is not the link description you want.
            $endgroup$
            – dmckee
            15 mins ago




            $begingroup$
            Maybe "enter link description here" is not the link description you want.
            $endgroup$
            – dmckee
            15 mins ago










            Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.










            draft saved

            draft discarded


















            Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.













            Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.












            Ubaid Hassan is a new contributor. Be nice, and check out our Code of Conduct.
















            Thanks for contributing an answer to Physics Stack Exchange!


            • Please be sure to answer the question. Provide details and share your research!

            But avoid



            • Asking for help, clarification, or responding to other answers.

            • Making statements based on opinion; back them up with references or personal experience.


            Use MathJax to format equations. MathJax reference.


            To learn more, see our tips on writing great answers.




            draft saved


            draft discarded














            StackExchange.ready(
            function () {
            StackExchange.openid.initPostLogin('.new-post-login', 'https%3a%2f%2fphysics.stackexchange.com%2fquestions%2f472565%2fwhy-use-ultrasound-for-medical-imaging%23new-answer', 'question_page');
            }
            );

            Post as a guest















            Required, but never shown





















































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown

































            Required, but never shown














            Required, but never shown












            Required, but never shown







            Required, but never shown







            Popular posts from this blog

            How to label and detect the document text images

            Vallis Paradisi

            Tabula Rosettana