Metrological support of acoustic measuring devices in the medium frequency range

A.N. Grekov, N.A. Grekov, E.N. Sychov

Institute of Natural and Technical Systems, RF, Sevastopol, Lenin St., 28


DOI: 10.33075/2220-5861-2020-2-117-126

UDC 534.6  


 The article discusses methods of measuring the speed of sound, scattering and attenuation in a liquid, on the basis of which modern acoustic measuring instruments operating in situ are built. It is noted that in real conditions, any acoustic measurement schemes are not ideal and, depending on the specific structure, can give different results. In acoustic measurements, it is not always possible to unambiguously draw a line between absorption and scattering; sometimes the local case of acoustic attenuation can be interpreted as the limiting case of scattering. Also, the difficulty in determining the acoustic scattering coefficient in liquids is associated with the variety of the liquids themselves, the shape and composition of the scatterers; in this regard, at present, a verification scheme with standards for determining acoustic scattering has not been created.

   It is shown in the work that the studied liquids do not have reliable reference scatterers, and, therefore, estimates must be made from statistical ensembles of scatterers, which limits the accuracy and spatial resolution of the estimates obtained.

   The technical and metrological characteristics of the measuring channels of modern acoustic instruments of Western and Russian production are presented, including those developed by the authors of this article. Sound speed and back acoustic scattering meters, as well as prototypes of multifunctional acoustic meters are analyzed. Recommendations are given on the use of GOST in acoustic measurements and it is stated that the metrological characteristics of newly created acoustic measuring instruments operating in situ are at the level of State primary standards.

Keywords: metrological support, calibration, speed of sound, sound scattering, attenuation and absorption of sound, measurement method, measuring channels, profilographs, accuracy, uncertainty, standards.

Full text in PDF(RUS)


  1. Kaatze U., Eggers F., Lautscham K. Ultrasonic velocity measurements in liquids with high resolution – techniques, selected applications and perspectives // Meas. Sci. Technol. 2008. Vol. 19. 062001. DOI:10.1088/09570233/19/6/062001
  2. Lautscham K., Wente F., Schrader W., Kaatze U. High resolution and small volume automatic ultrasonic velocimeter for liquids // Meas. Sci. Technol. 2000. Vol. 11. P. 1432–1439.
  3. Montrose C.J., Solovyev V.A., Litovitz T.A. Brillouin Scattering and relaxation in liquids // J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1967. Vol. 43. P. 117–130.
  4. Loheider S., Vogler G., Petscherizin I., Soltwisch M., Quittmann D. Brillouin scattering on the glass former GeSBr2 // J. Chem. Phys. 1990. Vol. 93. P. 5436–5447.
  5. Cedrone N.P., Curran D.R. Electronic pulse methods for measuring the velocity of sound in liquids and solids // J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1954. Vol. 26. P. 963–966.
  6. Carstensen E.L. Measurement of dispersion of velocity of sound in liquids // J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1954. Vol. 26. P. 858–861.
  7. Forgacs R.L. Improvements in the sing-around technique for ultrasonic velocity measurements // J. Acoust.Soc. Am. 1960. Vol. 32. P. 1697–1698.
  8. Hosoda M., Takagi K., Ogawa H., Nomura H., Sakai K. Rapid and precise measurement system for ultrasonic velocity by pulse correlation method designed for chemical analysis Japan // J. Appl. Phys. 2005. Vol. 44. P. 3268–3271.
  9. Alexandrov A.A., Larkin D.K. Experimental determination of the speed ultrasonic in water over a wide range of temperatures and pressures // Teploenergetika. 1976. № 2. P. 75–78.
  10. (date of the application: 12.04.2020).
  11. Grekov A.N., Grekov N.A., Sychov E.N. Sound velocity  profilers  and the algorithm for determining the  density of  water  for  the  oceanographic  range // Monitoring systems of environment. 2017. № 8 (28). P. 11–15.
  12. Del Grosso V.A., Mader С.W. Speed of sound in pure water // J. Acoust. Soc. Amer. 1972. Vol. 52. N 5. P. 1442–1446.
  13. Del Grosso V.A. Sound speed in pure water and sea water // J. Acoust. Soc, Amer. 1970. Vol. 47. P. 947–949.
  14. Barlow A.J., Yazgan E. Phase-change method for measurements of ultrasonic wave velocity and determination of the speed of sound in water, Brit. // J. Appl. Phys. 1966. Vol. 17. P. 807–819.
  15. Kroebel W., Mahrt К.H. Recent results of absolute sound velocity measurements in pure water and sea water at atmospheric pressure // Acoustica. 1976. Vol. 35. P. 154–164.
  16. Grekov A.N., Grekov N.A.,  Shishkin Y.E. Investigation of a sound speed profilograph characteristics and correction of measurement results // Monitoring systems of environment. 2017. № 10 (30). P. 24–30.
  17. Measurements and tests in shipbuilding and related industries (SUDOMETRIKA-2018): materials of the Seventh Intern. scientific and technical conf. / ed. V.A. Granovsky. SPb.: Concern Central Research Institute “Elektropribor” JSC, 2018. 190 p.
  18. GOST R IEC 62127-1-2009 GSI Parameters of ultrasonic fields. General requirements for measurement methods and methods for describing fields in the frequency range from 0.5 to 40.
  19. GOST R IEC 61161-2019 State system for ensuring the uniformity of measurements (GSI). The power of ultrasound in liquids. General requirements for performing measurements by balancing the radiation force.
  20. GOST R IEC 61391-2-2012 GSI. Medical ultrasonic diagnostic equipment. General requirements for techniques for measuring maximum sounding depth and dynamic range.
  21. Alum (1995), Methods for Specifying Acoustic Properties of Tissue Mimicking Phantoms and Objects: Stage 1. American Institute of Ultrasound in Medicine 14750 Sweitzer Lane, Laurel, MD 20707.
  22. Wear K., Stiles Т., Frank G. et al. Interlaboratory comparison of ultrasonic backscatter coefficient measurements from 2 to 9 MHz // J. Ultrasound Med, 2005, 24. P. 1235–1250.
  23. Madsen E., Dohg F., Frank G. et al. Interlaboratory comparison of ultrasonic backscatter, attenuation, and speed measurements // J. Ultrasound Med, 1999. 18. P. 615–631.
  24. Madsen E. “Ultrasonically soft-tissue-mimicking materials”. In The Medical Physics of CT and Ultrasound: Tissue Imaging and Characterization, Fullerton G. and Zagzebski J., editors, AAPM Monograph 6, American Association of Physicists in Medicine, 335 E. 45th Street, New York, NY, 1980. 10017, P. 531–550.
  25. Madsen E., Zagzebski J., Macdonald M. and Frank G. Ultrasound focal lesion detectability phantoms // Medical Physics, 1991. 18. P. 1171–1180.
  26. Thijssen J.M., Weijers G. and Korte C.L. Objective Performance Testing and Quality Assurance of Medical Ultrasound Equipment // Ultrasound Med & Biol., 2007. 33. P. 460–471.
  27. ICRU Report 61 (1998): Tissue Substitutes, Phantoms and Computational Modelling in Medical Ultrasound. International Commission on Radiation Units and Measurements, Bethesda, MD, USA.
  28. Madsen E., Zagzebski J., Banjavic R. and Jutila R. Tissue-mimicking materials for ultrasound phantoms // Medical Physics, 1978, 5. P. 391–394.
  29. Madsen E., Zagzebski J., Medina I., Frank G. Performance Testing of Transrectal US Scanners // Radiology, 1994, 190 (1). P. 77–80.
  30. Madsen E.L., Frank G.R., Dong F. Liquid or solid ultrasonically tissue-mimicking materials with very low scatter // Ultrasound Med & Biol, 1998. 24 (4). P. 535–542.
  31. Wilson Т., Zagzebsk J., Li Y.D. A test phantom for estimating changes in the effective frequency of an ultrasonic scanner // J. Ultrasound in Med, 2002, 21 (9). P. 937–945.
  32. Grekov A.N., Grekov N.A., Sychov E.N., Kuzmin K.A. Development of in situ acoustic instruments for the aquatic environment study // Monitoring systems of environment. 2019. № 2 (36). P. 22-29. DOI: 10.33075/2220-5861-2019-2-22-29.