| Literature DB >> 29914479 |
Graham Peyton1, Martyn G Boutelle2, Emmanuel M Drakakis2.
Abstract
BACKGROUND: Point of care ultrasonography has been the focus of extensive research over the past few decades. Miniaturised, wireless systems have been envisaged for new application areas, such as capsule endoscopy, implantable ultrasound and wearable ultrasound. The hardware constraints of such small-scale systems are severe, and tradeoffs between power consumption, size, data bandwidth and cost must be carefully balanced.Entities:
Keywords: Compressed sensing; Portable ultrasound; Quadrature sampling; Synthetic aperture imaging
Mesh:
Year: 2018 PMID: 29914479 PMCID: PMC6006598 DOI: 10.1186/s12938-018-0512-6
Source DB: PubMed Journal: Biomed Eng Online ISSN: 1475-925X Impact factor: 2.819
Fig. 1I/Q beamforming architectures. a Compressive SAB: low-rate samples are transmitted to a computational back-end for reconstruction and beamforming. b Quadrature SAB: synthetic aperture beamforming is carried out digitally in the baseband to form a 2D image, which may then be transmitted to a display device
Fig. 2Frame rate versus the number of transmit positions
Fig. 3Photograph of the PCB used for testing the AFE and beamforming algorithm on FPGA. (1) AFE (2) Spartan-6 on EFM-02 development board (3) UART FT232 chip USB connector (4) ADC10D020 Dual-Channel ADC. (5) ADM7155 voltage regulators
Fig. 4Simulating a noiseless stream of random Dirac pulses ( ). Original versus reconstructed signals are compared for (a) a sinc filter, b 4th order LPF
Fig. 5Time and amplitude estimation errors for various sampling kernels in the presence of noise for Dirac pulses ()
Fig. 6Time and amplitude estimation errors for oversampling factors of 1, 2, 4 and 8. In this case, a 2nd order LPF is used as the sampling kernel
Fig. 7Time and amplitude errors for various sampling kernels when , . Note how the error for the 4th order cascade follows that of the sinc kernel for low SNR values
Fig. 8Original versus reconstructed envelopes. In a, the original RF signal is overlayed against the ideal I/Q envelop generated in software. Low-rate samples are obtained using the hardware front-end and the I/Q envelop is reconstructed using FRI CS with the following parameters: b c d
Parameters and image quality measurements for the FRI compressive SAB method
| Experiment 1 | Experiment 2 | Experiment 3 | RF Ref | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 390 kHz | 1.02 MHz | 3.7 MHz | 10 MHz |
|
| 195 kHz | 510 kHz | 1.85 MHz | 5 MHz |
|
| 7 | 17 | 40 | N/A |
| 23 | 27 | 34 | 42 | |
| 4.49 | 3.13 | 2.07 | 1.2 | |
| 22 | 31 | 35 | 43.5 |
Image quality is quantified using SNR, lateral resolution (LR) and relative contrast (RC)
Fig. 9Images of a phantom containing cross-sectional wires. Compressive SAB was carried out with 48 transmit elements (), and a b and c
Fig. 12Images of a phantom containing cross-sectional wires. In a, b, quadrature beamforming is carried out with 16 and 48 transmit elements respectively (). In c beamforming is carried out in the RF domain with 48 elements
Fig. 10Lateral beamplots (, , mm) demonstrating the effect of L on the lateral resolution
Fig. 11RF and envelop signals obtained using analogue front-end The RF signal was demodulated by the AFE, yielding I/Q signals, where were used to calculate the envelop
Device utilisation summary on a Spartan-6 FPGA for , frame rate = 7 Hz, pixel resolution = and
| Logic utilisation | Units | Device utilisation (%) |
|---|---|---|
| Slice Registers | 7576 | 4 |
| Slice Look-up tables (LUTs) | 28,017 | 30 |
| LUT-FF pairs | 1926 | 3 |
| Block RAM/FIFO | 32 | 11 |
| DSP48A1s | 4 | 0.1 |
| Global Buffers (BUFG/BUFGCTRL) | 1 | 25 |
Parameters and image quality measurements for the quadrature SAB method
| Experiment 1 | Experiment 2 | Experiment 3 | RF Ref | |
|---|---|---|---|---|
|
| 3 | 16 | 48 | 48 |
| 29.1 | 33.6 | 38.2 | 42 | |
| 2.5 | 1.25 | 1.2 | 1.2 | |
| 30.2 | 35 | 39.5 | 43.5 |
Image quality is quantified using SNR, lateral resolution (LR) and relative contrast (RC). is the number of transmission positions
Fig. 13Lateral beamplots for 3, 16 and 48 transmitter positions (, mm)
Fig. 14Lateral beamplots for , 2 and 3 ( mm, )
Fig. 15Contrast relative to the average background value for various values ( mm, )
Performance comparison for various beamforming architectures
| Paper | Technology | Channels | Beamformer architecture | Center freq (MHz) | Delay resolution (ns) | Frame rate | Power/channel (mW) |
|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|---|
| This work | Spartan-6™ FPGA | 64 (1 Rx channel) | Quadrature, single channel, digital SAB |
| |||
| [ |
| Analogue, sample-and-hold sub-array beamformer |
|
|
| ||
| [ | 32 | Parallel digital delay-and-sum |
|
|
| ||
| [ | 32 | Analogue, sample-and-hold sub-array beamformer |
| 1.75– | – |
| |
| [ | 8 | Parallel delay-and-sum using analogue delay cells | 30–50 | 1.75– | – |
| |
| [ | Spartan-3 FPGA | 32 (16 Rx channels) | Pseudo-dynamic, extended aperture, digital beamformer |
| – | – |