Research note

The voltage sensitivity of miniature

piezoelectric plastic ultrasonic probes

R.C. CHIVERS and P.A. LEWIN

Consideration is given to the specification of the voltage sensitivity of piezoelectric

polymer hydrophones, and a parameter of merit suggested which reflects the quality
of the design and construction of the probe. Values calculated for this parameter for
probes described in the literature to date vary considerably and emphasize the impor-
tance of careful description of the measurement arrangement.

KEYWORDS: ultrasonics, piezoelectric transducers, sensitivity

Introduction t, or by difference of the effective area of the probe from

The growing interest in the use of miniature piezoelectric
ultrasonic probes in precision ultrasonics (for example,
see Refs 1 and 2), and in the use of piezoelectric plastic
elements in such probes, ‘-’ leads naturally to an interest
in the comparison of the performance of these probes,
particularly in terms of the voltage sensitivity achieved. In
briefly identifying the factors that may contribute to the
voltage sensitivity of a probe of this type, we would like to
propose the use of a figure of merit which may be particu-
larly indicative of the extent to which an actual design
meets the theoretical intentions of the designer, and which
is independent of the dimensions of the probe element.
the nominal value. Definition and use of a method for
measuring the effective area at the frequency of interest
may reduce the source of variation due to this factor
(although variation in this factor is probably one of the most
sensitive indices of construction quality).
Relation to end-of-cable voltage sensitivity
In general, however, it is difficult to measure the open
circuit voltage sensitivity MO, since, as is shown in Fig. 1b,
the electrical capacitance of the element C, is loaded by
stray capacitances CS and/or the cable capacitance C,. To a
first approximation C, is given (in conventional notation) by

Definition of a figure of merit (2)

Schematic forms (constructional and electrical) of such a
probe can be seen in Fig. 1. In Fig. la, an element of area A Making the element thinner to obtain a broader frequency
and thickness t is connected to a voltage (pre)amphfier response lowers the impedance of the element, thus reducing
via a section of cable. The simplest equivalent electrical the effect of C, and C,; while reducing the area to obtain
circuit is shown in Fig. lb. The element is represented by a better resolution or directionality has the opposite effect.
capacitance C,, the cable by a capacitance C, and the The voltage sensitivity at the input to the (pre)amplifier,
(complex) input impedance of the (pre)amplifier by 2. In Me,, is given by
practice the open circuit voltage output of an element Me, = ct Mot
manufactured from a given material is proportional both ct + cs + cc
to the electroded area of the element ‘A ‘and t. Thus in the
first instance it may be argued that if the design performances
of two probes made from the same material are to be compared
at a given frequency, the figure of merit S that is appropriate is

SE_ M
. I
At -l/h-
a Cable (Pre) amplifier
where MO, is the open circuit voltage sensitivity expressed in
units of V PPa-’ or its derivatives, and S is expressed, for
example, in units of V(@a m3)-l. Variation in S may be
caused by inhomogeneities in the material itself (causing
variation of the ga3 piezoelectric constant), by variations in I c*l_ c,_L

R.C. Chivers is at the Physics Department, University of Surrey,

b
5
61 T1 T1 I I
Guildford GU2 5XH, UK. P.A. Lewin is at the Technical Univer-
sity of Denmark, Lyngby, DK2800, Denmark. Paper received 10 Fig. 1 a -schematic representation of a hydrophone probe;
March 1982. b - simplified equivalent electrical circuit

0041-624X/82/060279-03/$03.00 0 1982 Butterworth & Co (Publishers) Ltd

ULTRASONICS. NOVEMBER 1982 279

If the hydrophone has no integral preamplifier, the major
loading on C, comes from the cable capacitance C, . Me,
is then the ‘end-of-cable’ voltage sensitivity which is actually
measured in ractice and which should be quoted for
applications. : It ts clear that reducing the length of the
cable will improve Met, so that, if possible, the comparison
of different designs of probes should be made without the
complication of this factor. Combining (1) to (3) we may
arrive at a figure of merit for the design performance:
s = M0, - (C, + C,)M,,
At C, At
= Met (e fo Alt + Cc)
(4)
eeo A2
pass filter with a -3 dB point at f= 1/(2n R,CT), where
Cr = C, + C, + C,. For the figures quoted above, a 40 pF
element at the end of 1/2m of cable has a -3 dB cut-off
at about 1.6 kHz.
Extension for an integrated preamplifier
In the foregoing discussion it has been assumed that the
hydrophone did not have a voltage preamplifier or impe-
dance converter close to the plastic element. A similar
analysis may be used based on Fig. lb without the cable
capacitance C, . Knowledge of the input capacitance and
resistance of the preamplifier, and its gain (positive or
negative) G permits an equation similar to (4) to be written
S = @t + ‘d M

As expected, when C, < C,, the cable has virtually no effect.
At the other extreme (Ct < C,, that is, severe cable loading)
and it can be seen that S is very sensitive to the effective
area at a given frequency of operation, but independent of
the thickness of the material used. Thus, if account is taken
of the effective area at a particular frequency, variations in
Swill be caused mainly by variations in the dielectric con-
stant . There appears to be not only distinct frequency and
temperature dependence of the dielectric constant for poly-
meric piezoelectric material?~ 9 but also a range of 1S-20%
in the values specified in the literature.s-lo
Reports of constructed probes indicate elements of radius
between 0.25 and 2.0 mm, and thickness between 9 and
30 ,um. The capacitance of these elements varies from
1.5 pF to 200 pF, and even % m of low capacitance coaxial
cable (typically 90 pF m-‘) needs consideration.
(5)
C,AtG ”
where Met is the (unloaded) output from the preamplifier
and C, is the measured input capacitance of the preamplifier.
Implicit in the formulation of (5) is the fact that any stray
capacitances due to the connections between the element
and the preamplifier will be reflected in S, the figure of
merit, since the minimization of these is an important
design feature.
Evaluation of this figure of merit for probes described in
the literature is difficult since few reports give sufficient
information on the constructional details (for example,
cable length or capacitance), or on the measurement tech-
nique. Also, as yet, few effective radii appear to have been
published for miniature probes. Some of the data that is
available in the literature is shown in Table 1, together with
the varying assumptions that have been made by the present
authors in calculating the figure of merit. It has been
assumed that the cable was of a capacitance of 90 pF m-i .

In practice, the measurement ofM,, will be affected by the It appears that the figure of merit suggested is typically of
impedance of the voltage preamplifier at the end of the the order of a few tenths of a volt per micropascal per
cable (2 in Fig. 1b). Writing 1/Z as (I/&) + jwC, (typical cubic metre, but that there is some considerable variation.
values are R, N 1 MR and C, = 30 pF), the effect of this While the index suggested may be extremely helpful in
impedance can be seen to be two-fold. Firstly, it will cause comparing the design performance of hydrophones of
division of potential so that at high frequencies only a frac- differing sizes and construction, it can be seen from the
tion C,/(C, t C, t C,) of the voltage generated by the variation observed how important it is for reports to
element will be recorded. Secondly, assuming the element specify all the relevant components of the construction
and cable resistances to be very high, it will act as a high- and measuring systems, as mentioned above. The analysis
Table 1
First Element Element Element Cable Amplifier Calculated
author and diameter thickness capacitance capacitance capacitance Quoted Assumptions of present figure of merit
date [mm1 bml C,[PFI C,[pFI C, [PFI sensitivity calculations/comments S[V@Pa m3)-‘l

DeReggi3 2.0 25 8 27* - -230 dB re lV@a-’ 30 cm of cable specified 0.18

(1977)
Shotto@ 4.0 25 32” - - 1 /JI Pa-l No cable loading 0.0032
(1g80) 4.0 25 32” (45) - 1 PV Pa-l % m cable loading (45 pF) 0.0077
lde’ 1.0 30 3.0 - - -118 dB re 1 V Pa-l No cable loading 0.054
(‘98’) 1.0 30 3.0 (45) - -118 dB re 1 V Pa-1 % m cable loading 0.856
0.5 30 0.8 - -136dBrelVPa-’ No cable loading 0.027
0.5 30 0.8 (45) - -136 dB re 1 V Pa-’ % m cable loading 1.53

Lewin’l 1.0 25 2.0* 90 - -236 dB re 1 VI.Iparl 1 m, 90 pF cable specified 0.17

(1g81) 0.6 25 0.72” 90 - -272 dB re 1 VpPa-l 1 m, 90 pF cable specified 0.46
Bacon12 1.0 9 5.5* - - 0.1 /JJ Pa-l No cable loading 0.014
(1980) 1.0 g 5.5” (45) - 0.1 PV Pa-l % m cable 0.13

*calculated values. ( ) estimated values

280 ULTRASONICS. NOVEMBER 1982

described may, with appropriate modifications, be extended
to hydrophones with piezoelectric ceramic elements. The
analysis given is confined to a discussion of voltage pre-
amplifiers. A similar analysis, with appropriate modifica-
tions, may be performed for hydrophones with charge
preamplifiers. These allow relatively long cables to be used
between the sensitive element and the preamplifier without
sacrificing end-ofcable sensitivity. The main disadvantage
of the charge amplifier is the increase in their inherent
noise that accompanies an increase in the connecting cable
length. A discussion of the merits of different calibration
procedures, and questions of signal-to-noise ratio and dynamic
range will be presented in future communications.
Note in pro05 Only after this note had been submitted was
the authors’ attention drawn to the publication by De
Reggi et al (JAcoust SocAm 69 (1981) 853-859) on
polymer probes similar to those discussed above. Although
the authors regret this omission, a similar analysis may be
easily performed by the interested reader.
References
1 Lewiu, P.A.,Chivers, R.C. Two Miniature Piezoelectric
Ceramic Ultrasonic Probes,J. Whys.E. 14 (1981) 1420-1424
2 Chivers, R.C., Aindow, JD. Preliminary Measurement of
Ultrasonic Phase Distributions Acoust. Letf. 4 (1980) 114-l 17
ULTRASONICS. NOVEMBER 1982
DeReggi, AS., Edelman, S., Roth, S. Piezoelectric Polymer
Receiving Arrays for Ultrasonic Applications,J. Acoust. Sot.
Am. 61 (1977) Supp. No. 1, S17-18
Chivers, R.C., Lewin,P.A. A Comparison of Different Designs
of Miniature Hydrophone Probes. In ‘Ultrasonics Inter-
national 79, IPk Giildford (1979) 434-446
Wilson, D.T., TancreIl, RN,., Calleramd, J. PVF, Polymer
Microprobe, Proc. IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, (1979)
506-510
Shot&m, KC., Bacou, D.R., Quilliam, R.M. A pvdf Mem-
brane Hydrouhone for Operation in the Range 0.5 MHz to
15 MHz; lJl&sonics 18 (1980) 123-126 -
Ide, M., Ohdaira, E. Miniature Hydrophone for Pulse Ultra-
sonic Field, Japan J, App. Phys. (1981) (in press)
Leung, W.P., Yung, K.K. Internal Losses in Polyvinylidene
Fluoride (PVF, ) Transducers, J. Appl. Phys. 50 (19 80)
8031-8033
Ravinet, P., Hue, J., Voluet, G., Hartemann, P., Brousson,
D., Micheron, F. Acoustic and Dielectric Losses in PVF, . In
‘Proc. IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium’ (1980) 1017-1022
10 CaIlerame, J., TancreIl, R.H., WiIson, D.T. Comparison of
Ceramic and Polymer Transducers for Medical Imaging.
In ‘Proc. IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium’ (1978) 117-121
(1978) 117-121
11 Lewin, P.A. Miniature Piezoelectric Polymer Ultrasonic
Hydrophone Probes, Ultrasonics 19 (1981) 213-216
12 Bacon, D.R. Properties of a PVDF Hydrophone with a 100
MHz Bandwidth for Studying Medical, Non-linear and
other fields, In ‘Proc. IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium’ (1980)
582-585
281