Review

A Review of Acoustic Impedance Matching

Techniques for Piezoelectric Sensors and
Transducers
Vivek T. Rathod
Department of Electrical and Computer Engineering, Michigan State University, East Lansing,
MI 48824, USA; [email protected]

Received: 17 May 2020; Accepted: 16 July 2020; Published: 21 July 2020

Abstract: The coupling of waves between the piezoelectric generators, detectors, and propagating
media is challenging due to mismatch in the acoustic properties. The mismatch leads to the
reverberation of waves within the transducer, heating, low signal-to-noise ratio, and signal
distortion. Acoustic impedance matching increases the coupling largely. This article presents
standard methods to match the acoustic impedance of the piezoelectric sensors, actuators, and
transducers with the surrounding wave propagation media. Acoustic matching methods utilizing
active and passive materials have been discussed. Special materials such as nanocomposites,
metamaterials, and metasurfaces as emerging materials have been presented. Emphasis is placed
throughout the article to differentiate the difference between electric and acoustic impedance
matching and the relation between the two. Comparison of various techniques is made with the
discussion on capabilities, advantages, and disadvantages. Acoustic impedance matching for
specific and uncommon applications has also been covered.

Keywords: acoustic impedance; ultrasonic transducer; matching layer; piezoelectric sensor;

biomedical imaging; nondestructive evaluation; structural health monitoring; acoustic emission;
energy harvesting

1. Introduction
Piezoelectric materials serve with a wide variety of applications when used in many ways. As
bulk materials, they fulfill the purpose of actuation and sensing in macro and large devices. Some
applications of bulk piezoelectric materials are biomedical ultrasound [1–3], piezoelectric–catalysis-
based environmental remediation [4], structural control [5–7], vibration control [8,9], vibration
sensing [10,11], and structural health monitoring [12–14]. As thin films ranging from few micrometers
to nanometers, they have seen growing use in applications such as force microscopy [15], nano-
positioning [16], micromechanical systems (MEMS) [17–19] and nanoelectromechanical systems
(NEMS) [20,21], energy harvesters [22,23], etc. Some well-known applications of thin films are MEMS
microphone [24], headphone [24], loudspeaker [24–26], acoustic emission sensor [27,28], vibration
sensor [10,14], inertial sensor [19], tactile sensors [29–31], power harvesting [32,33], ultrasound
transducers [34–38], and guided wave sensors [39–41]. Thin films are preferably made of nontoxic
piezopolymers or piezocomposites. From the past two decades, major improvements in the
piezoelectric material properties and manufacturing techniques have reduced the manufacturing cost
[42–47]. The low cost and excellent properties have led to the surge in their use as materials for the
internet of things (IOT) applications [48,49]. The above-mentioned applications involve the operation
at quasi-static, infrasonic, audio, and ultrasonic frequencies [50]. The development of high-frequency
ultrasonic imaging has pushed the limits of these technologies, resulting in diagnostic capability with

Sensors 2020, 20, 4051; doi:10.3390/s20144051 www.mdpi.com/journal/sensors

Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 2 of 65

microscopic information of living tissue involving eye, skin, and vascular muscles [51,52]. Therefore,
piezoelectric materials are used most widely in biomedical applications [53] such as ultrasonography
[54–62], due to the ability to produce real-time high resolution 3D images of biological tissue,
eliminating the need for hazardous X-rays. Special applications such as scanning acoustic
microscopy, cellular stimulation, and particle manipulation are the results of very high-frequency
ultrasound ≥100 MHz [63–66].
The efficient performance of piezoelectric devices depends on the proper matching of electric
and acoustic impedances, especially when considered in their design stages. With a rising
development of piezoelectric devices, there is a need for versatile tools to assist with the electric and
acoustic impedance matching, especially on a common platform. However, the requirement of broad
interdisciplinary knowledge from a variety of disciplines such as acoustics, vibration, electrical,
electronics, signal processing, imaging, anatomy, physiology, materials, etc., has made the design
procedures available so far mostly empirical. The design and manufacturing procedures of highly
efficient transducers and sensors remain with most manufacturers as trade secrets of the highest
order [67]. A word of caution is needless to distinguish electric impedance from mechanical or
acoustic impedance, since these two serve different purposes but are dependent on each other. Figure
1 shows a schematic of a pitch–catch and pulse–echo system with details of the transducer with
acoustic impedance matching layers and its associated electronics.

(a)

(b)
Figure 1. Schematic of elements involved in the acoustic and electric impedance matching (a) for a
pulse–echo mode where the same piezoelectric element is used both as actuator and sensor i.e.,
transducer with same acoustic matching layers, backing material, and electric impedance matching
network, and (b) for a pitch–catch mode where the different piezoelectric elements are used as an
actuator and sensor with different electric impedance matching networks, backing material, and
acoustic matching layers.

Figure 2 shows the process flow of electric and acoustic impedance matching while designing a
piezoelectric transducer system. Electric impedance matching enables an efficient transfer of electric
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 3 of 65

power whereas acoustic matching enables the proper transfer of acoustic energy. Electrical
impedance matching involves the design of the electric matching circuit that connects the driving or
receiving circuit to the transducer. It also involves the design of the geometry and electric property
of the cable and transducer. Acoustic impedance matching involves the selection of materials and
geometric design of the matching layer, backing layer, and the piezoelectric element. The passive
matching techniques involves the matching of acoustic passive layers with the piezoelectric element,
whereas the active matching technique involves the modification of piezoelectric element properties,
eliminating the need for matching layers. A change of geometry during acoustic matching may
change the electric property, which leads to redesigning of the electric impedance matching network.
Thus, both electric and acoustic impedance matching involves the transducer design considerations
in common, especially the piezoelectric element, which is directly related. Thus, highly optimized
design can only result when both electric and acoustic impedance matching are considered together.
Such an optimized design is possible using commercial software and an iterative design procedure.
Often, the transducer and driving/receiver circuit available commercially have fixed
specifications, which cannot be altered. In addition, components available commercially for the
design of electric impedance matching circuit are difficult to know before the design of the
transducer. Thus, for the most uncommon uses in the laboratory, limited uses in industries, and for
special applications, the transducer is designed first followed by its electric impedance matching with
source and receiver [68]. The acoustic impedance matching of a transducer involves the matching of
piezoelectric element properties with the media in which the acoustic signal is being transmitted. The
design is carried out for a given operating frequency or for a given frequency range with possible
information of wave propagation media (air, water, biological tissue etc.) and operating environment
(temperature, corrosion, radiation etc.) [69].

Figure 2. Schematic showing the process flow of electric and acoustic impedance matching involved
in the design of piezoelectric receiver or transducer systems. The design elements indicated by dotted
lines are uncommon and are used in the design of highly advanced transducers (such as very high
frequency, high signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and low-power considerations).

High-performance transducers involve a design process where choosing active materials with
high electromechanical coupling factor is one of the easiest ways. Another option is an improvement
in the acoustic design including both matching layers and the backing. Apart from acoustic matching,
the backing material is designed to achieve proper isolation to minimize reflection within the
piezoelectric element and transducer casing, as shown in Figure 1. Based on the processing method
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 4 of 65

and poling direction, the acoustic and piezoelectric properties of the piezoelectric materials can differ,
which has to be considered while designing the acoustic impedance matching layers. In addition,
there are limitations on the way of using the piezoelectric material depending upon the polarization
direction, anisotropy of elastic constants, and electrical and thermal considerations. In highly efficient
designs especially for the pitch–catch type of operation, the exciter (actuator) and receiver (sensor)
are designed with a different type of piezoelectric elements for which different matching layers and
backing material are needed. In advanced transducer designs, the material properties of the
piezoelectric element are modified to assist with the acoustic impedance matching. The transducer
design process is complicated due to various factors influencing the design ranging from application
needs to the limitations posed by the availability of material and hardware components for
fabrication. Thus, a common tool is unavailable to design acoustic and electric impedance matching
for the transducer system together.
A detailed review of electric impedance matching techniques for piezoelectric materials used in
the configuration of sensors, actuators, and transducers has been provided in Ref. [70]. In this paper,
the focus has been laid on the acoustic impedance matching techniques for piezoelectric devices.
Depending on the requirements of an application and limitations arising due to the design constraints
of the electric and acoustic elements of the transducer system, the acoustic impedance matching
procedure may be dependent or independent. The independent design involves the matching of
acoustic impedance of piezoelectric element(s) to the wave propagating medium. The dependent
procedure involves iterative process or trials where the matching layers are redesigned to achieve
optimal performance for varying the acoustic and electric configuration of the piezoelectric element
[71]. Each iteration of the dependent procedure is like an independent procedure. Many techniques
have been reported so far to match the acoustic impedance of piezoelectric element with the wave
propagating medium. These techniques involve changing the geometry or material property of the
matching layer or the piezoelectric element itself (for example, piezocomposites with varying filler
or fiber content).
Section 1 provides a brief review of common piezoelectric and acoustic matching layer materials
used for acoustic impedance matching. Section 2 presents the available tools to assist in the various
stages of acoustic impedance matching. Special materials that are different from the conventional
materials developed for acoustic impedance matching have been discussed in Section 3. Section 4
discusses the acoustic impedance matching techniques developed for specific types of transducers.
Section 5 discusses the acoustic impedance matching techniques that consider requirements arising
from specific applications. Section 6 presents the concluding remarks.

1.1. Theory of Piezoelectricity and Vibration Modes

Most of the transducers used in biomedical, nondestructive evaluation (NDE), and structural
health monitoring (SHM) applications operate based on the principle of piezoelectricity.
Piezoelectricity is a phenomenon where an electrical charge is generated under the application of
mechanical stress or vice versa. The elastic and electrical properties in piezoelectric materials are
coupled. Therefore, mechanical parameters such as stress 𝜎 and strain 𝜀 , and the electrical
parameters such as electric field 𝐸 and dielectric displacement 𝐷 are related by constitutive
relations [72]. For an unstressed non-piezoelectric medium, the electrical relation is given by
𝐷 =ϵ 𝐸 , (1)
where ϵ is the stress-free permittivity matrix of the piezoelectric medium. The stress-free
permittivity of piezoelectric material is obtained by measuring it with stress-free boundary
conditions. At zero electric field, the mechanical relation for the same medium is given by
𝜀 =𝑆 𝜎 , (2)
where 𝑆 is the tensor representing the short-circuit mechanical compliances of the medium. The
elements of 𝑆 are measured using the strain developed for the applied stress with the electrodes
of the piezoelectric material being shorted. The shorting of electrodes results in the electrical
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 5 of 65

boundary conditions with zero field across faces but allows the charge to flow from the positive to
the negative terminal. Thus, shorting prevents any effect on compliance measurement due to
piezoelectricity. The interaction of electrical and mechanical variables in a linear regime is described
by the constitutive relations given by

𝐷 =𝑑 𝜎 +𝜖 𝐸 (3)
𝜀 =𝑆 𝜎 +𝑑 𝐸 , (4)
where 𝑑 is a tensor of the piezoelectric material. Equation (3) is called the sensing law, which
describes the direct piezoelectric effect and is used to estimate the total charge and thereby the voltage
developed by the receiver or sensor or transducer in a sensing configuration. Equation (4) is called
the actuation law; it describes the converse piezoelectric effect and is used to estimate the stress and
thereby the force developed by an exciter, actuator, or transducer in an actuating configuration.
Depending upon the piezoelectric material geometry and poling direction, the above Equations (3)
and (4) are applied to determine the outcome parameters such as force or voltage. These parameters
are further related to material properties in various ways depending on the modes of operation and
application. Therefore, these performance parameters are many and have been reported by
researchers and engineers to assist in the design of transducers and their acoustic matching layers.
These parameters will be further discussed in this section. Figure 3 shows the commonly used shapes
of piezoelectric materials and their vibration modes. Here, poling is along axis 3. Polarization
destroys the isotropy in the direction of poling and retains it in any other direction perpendicular to
it (i.e., directions along axes 1 and 2). The set of independent piezoelectric and dielectric constants for
this symmetry are 𝑑 , 𝑑 , 𝑑 , 𝜖 and 𝜖 . The 𝑑 coefficient describes the electric polarization
generated in the same direction as the stress applied and is called the longitudinal coefficient [72].
The 𝑑 coefficient describes the electric polarization generated in a direction perpendicular to the
direction of the applied stress and is called the transverse coefficient [11,72]. The property 𝑑 is a
commonly used property in biomedical ultrasound, NDE probes, vibration control, and energy
harvesting applications. The property 𝑑 is utilized by SHM, energy harvesting, vibration control,
monitoring, etc [11,40,41,73]. The 𝑑 shear piezoelectric coefficient describes the polarization
generated, which is inclined to the direction of applied stress [74].
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 6 of 65

Figure 3. Typical vibration modes and corresponding piezoelectric coupling factors [75].

Although a piezoelectric material can exhibit many piezoelectric coefficients and have many
properties, they are selected depending on the desired vibration mode and operating modes.
Consider an example for the vibrational mode with a predominant involvement of the thickness. For
an application where the thickness or out-of-plane vibration measurement is desired, the
piezoelectric element with greater 𝑑 property is selected, with 𝑑 and 𝑑 being ignored.

1.2. Piezoelectric Operating Modes and Sensitivity

Possible operating modes are pitch–catch (acts either as sensor or actuator) and pulse–echo (acts
as both sensor and actuator). An important property of a sensor is the sensitivity 𝑔. 𝑡, which is the
open circuit charge developed due to applied stress, where 𝑡 is the thickness of the piezoelectric
element. The coefficient 𝑔 is related to the piezoelectric coefficient 𝑑 by the relation 𝑔 = 𝑑/(𝜖 𝜖 ),
where 𝜖 is the relative permittivity of the piezoelectric element and 𝜖 is the permittivity of free
space. This relation is a coefficient realized from Equation (3) by ignoring the indices and noting that
the external field 𝐸 is zero and 𝐷 = 𝜖𝐸, where 𝜖 = 𝜖 𝜖 and 𝐸 is the generated electric field. This
sensing condition yields 𝐸 = 𝑔𝜎, relating applied stress to the electric field generated across the
piezoelectric element. In hydrophone applications, properties such as 𝑑 and 𝑑 are taken into
account due to equal stress from all directions in the piezoelectric element by the figure of merit
(FOM) relation 𝑑 𝑔 , where 𝑑 = 𝑑 + 2𝑑 and 𝑔 = 𝑔 + 2𝑔 . The piezoelectric charge
coefficient 𝑑 characterizes transmission capability, whereas the piezoelectric voltage coefficient
𝑔 implies reception capability. Both coefficients are to be maximized when the same transducer is
used for transmission and reception (for example, the pulse–echo measurement technique). In low-
intensity ultrasound applications, 𝑔 is given more importance. A large dielectric constant 𝜖 with
relative permittivity of 𝜖 ~100 plays an important role in electric impedance matching between the
transducer and the driving/reception electronics by maximizing the voltage coefficient. Dielectric
losses can be considered by relation 𝑑 𝑔 /tan𝛿 . Substantial acoustic energy is dissipated if the
dielectric loss factor tan𝛿 is not minimized [53]. Another property related to losses is the mechanical
quality factor 𝑄 , which is the amount of mechanical loss due to internal friction or acoustic
viscosity. It is desirable for the 𝑄 to be minimum, but in some cases where the generation of short
acoustic pulse is required, a compromise is selected 𝑄 = 2–10 to avoid ringing [76].
The electromechanical coupling factor 𝑘 is another important property in piezoelectric
materials that indicates the effectiveness of conversion of electrical energy to mechanical energy and
vice versa. The following are the common coupling factors of piezoelectric ceramics [77,78] that are
defined as
𝑑
𝑘 = (5)
𝑆 𝜖
𝑑
𝑘 = (6)
𝑆 𝜖
𝑑
𝑘 = , (7)
𝑆 𝜖
where subscripts 4 and 5 refer to planes normal to the 1 and 2 axes, respectively. For the thickness
mode transducer, the thickness coupling coefficient 𝑘 should be high with low planar mode
coupling 𝑘 . The electromechanical coupling factors depend on all the properties required for both
sensors as well as actuators such as elastic, piezoelectric, and dielectric properties. Therefore, the
electromechanical coupling factor is a good measure of transducer properties of a piezoelectric
material operating in pulse–echo mode or pitch–catch (both transmit and receive) mode. The lead
zirconate titanate (PZT)-4 material is widely used as an ultrasonic transducer material. The properties
of commonly used piezoelectric ceramics and polymers are discussed next.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 7 of 65

1.3. Commonly Used Piezoelectric Materials as an Active Matching Layer

Material properties greatly influence the performance of piezoelectric devices operating
especially at high frequencies. The advent of composites and nanocomposites gave tremendous
material combinations to design transducers with a good piezoelectric element and its associated
matching layer. Sometimes, piezoelectric material properties are altered to match directly with the
propagating media. In such cases, the matched piezoelectric materials are called an active matching
layer. This eliminates the requirement of a passive matching layer. A slight altering of piezoelectric
materials can facilitate the material selection and design of a passive acoustic matching layer.
Therefore, piezoelectric material properties have been very crucial in the optimal design of
transducers along with their acoustic matching layers, which this paper summarizes in greater detail.
Piezoceramic wafers, piezopolymer films, and piezocomposite materials are commonly used as an
active element of sensors, actuators, energy harvesters, and transducers. The electric, mechanical, and
acoustic properties differ for bulk and thin-film piezoelectric materials. While bulk materials have
been standardized where many different manufacturers report similar properties, thin-film materials
differ drastically in the preparation procedure, as the control parameters involved in their processing
are many. Therefore, they are not standardized, and it is difficult to list the properties for thin-film
sensors. The common bulk piezoelectric materials are listed in Table 1. Piezoelectric substances can
be broadly classified as natural materials and synthetic materials. Naturally occurring piezoelectric
materials are quartz SiO2, berlinite, sucrose, Rochelle salt NaKC4H4O6.4H2O, topaz, and a tourmaline
group of minerals. Synthetic piezoelectric materials are further classified as synthetic crystals,
ceramics, and polymers. Synthetic piezoelectric crystals are gallium orthophosphate (GaPO4) and
langasite (La3Ga5SiO14) [79]. Synthetic piezoelectric ceramics are barium titanate (BaTiO3), lead
titanate (PbTiO3), lead zirconate titanate (Pb[ZrxTi1−x]O3 0 ≤ x ≤ 1), potassium niobate (KNbO3), lithium
niobate (LiNbO3), lithium tantalate (LiTaO3), sodium tungstate (NaWO3), zinc oxide (ZnO),
aluminium nitride (AlN), scandium–aluminum nitride [80], etc. Synthetic piezoelectric polymers are
materials such as polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) and copolymers of vinylidene fluoride (VDF) with
trifluoroethylene (TrFE), or with tetrafluroethylene (TeFE) [10,11,81]. The common bulk piezoelectric
materials, their processing techniques, and the resulting acoustic and electric properties needed for
acoustic impedance matching are explained next.

1.3.1. Piezoelectric Ceramics

The bulk piezoceramic is prepared by high-temperature sintering at 600–700 °C [82] yielding
high density and non-piezoelectric ceramics that constitute ferroelectric crystallites with random
orientation. These non-piezoelectric ceramics are made piezoelectric by poling treatment in a chosen
direction to align the electric dipoles. Poling is done under a realizable high electric field typically
below the breakdown field 2–5 kV/mm and below the ferroelectric Curie point at 80–150 °C [83]. This
poling direction governs the vibration modes shown in Figure 3. To influence the domain structure
for the enhancement of piezoelectricity, the poled ceramics are cooled through the Curie temperature.
The electroding is done by depositing metals such as gold, silver, chromium, or nickel.
Out of the available piezoceramic materials, lead zirconate titanate PZT (Pb[ZrxTi1−x]O3) (PZT)
founded by Jaffe et al. [84] is most widely used because of its strong and stable piezoelectric
characteristics, high strength, high Curie point (temperature above which they are non-polar), and
ease of fabrication [77]. Most piezoelectric ceramics are based on nominal composition 52–54 mol%
lead zirconate and 46–48 mol% lead titanate, which is called PZT. This composition is doped with
different elements by different manufacturers with proprietary formulas for different compositions.
Some commonly used compositions are PZT-5 with Nb-doping, PZT-6 with Cr-doping, PZT-7 with
La-doping, and PZT-4 with Fe-doping. The properties of these piezoelectric ceramics commonly
employed by transducer designers can be found in Ref [77,85] and have been listed in Table 1.
Most PZT ceramics are characterized by high elastic moduli, high dielectric constant, low elastic
and dielectric loss and high electromechanical coupling factor. However, during processing stages
such as calcination and sintering, lead oxide vaporizes in environment accumulating in organisms
and causing damage to the nervous system. Also, these are potentially toxic during manufacturing,
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 8 of 65

use and mainly disposal [86]. Thus, lead-free piezoelectric materials such as Barium Titanate
(BaTiO3), Lithium Niobate (LiNbO3), Sodium Bismuth Titanate (Na0.5Bi0.5TiO3), Potassium Bismuth
Titanate (K0.5Bi0.5TiO3), Potassium Sodium Diniobate (K0.5Na0.5NbO6), Bismuth Ferrite (BiFeO3) whose
properties are comparable to that of PZT have attracted lots of attention [87–89]. The overall
piezoelectric properties of lead-free materials such as barium titanate, lithium niobate and potassium
sodium diniobate are slightly lower [90] when compared with PZT materials as seen in Table 1. The
natural materials such as quartz and Rochelle salt have very lower piezoelectric properties when
compared to synthetic materials [85]. Therefore, synthetic materials are preferred for transducer
applications unless other acoustic properties outweigh the electric properties for some applications.
Due to the inherent brittle nature of piezoelectric ceramics and piezoelectric crystals,
piezoceramic thin films [91,92] and coatings [93,94] are being explored. High-frequency imaging
(>20 MHz), micro-sensors or actuators, and energy harvesting require thick and thin piezoceramic
films. The scanning electron microscope uses ultra-thin piezoceramic films with the thickness of
around 6–20 𝜇m. Piezoceramic thin films are difficult to fabricate and have inferior piezoelectric
properties. Piezoelectric film fabrication techniques such as screen-printing, tape-casting, aerosol
deposition, composite sol–gel, electrophoretic deposition, and ink-jet printing produce piezoelectric
films with thickness <50 µm preserving the piezoelectric properties of bulk materials. The Lead
Magnesium Niobate-Lead Titanate-Lead Zirconate Titanate (PMN–PT–PZT) composite films have
been developed using the sol–gel fabrication technique for 200 MHz transducer applications [95]. A
range of dielectric constants 1000–5000 can be manufactured using the PZN-PT system that enables
optimum electrical impedance matching by tuning it [78]. Ultra-high 𝑑 = 2000 pC/N associated
with the PZN–PT system suits their use in high energy density and a high-frequency actuator. The
PZN–PT piezoelectric materials are single crystals whose machining is difficult.

1.3.2. Piezoelectric Polymers

The low yield strains, high brittleness, high density, high acoustic impedance, toxic nature, and
high manufacturing cost of piezoelectric ceramics have limited their use in many applications.
Following the discovery of piezoelectricity in stretched and poled PVDF films by Kawai in 1969 [96],
piezopolymers have found space in such applications especially related to sensing. Later,
piezoelectricity was also found in polymers, such as polyurethane [97]. Single crystalline films of
ferroelectric copolymers of vinylidene fluoride and trifluoroethylene P(VDF/TrFE) were prepared by
Ohigashi et al. [98]. The studies have been extended to polymers and copolymers of vinylidene
cyanide, vinylacetate, polyvinylidene cyanide copolymers, aromatic and aliphatic polyureas,
polyvinyl chloride, aromatic polyamides (odd nylons), PVDF copolymers with trifluoroethylene
(P[VDF-TrFE]), tetrafluoroethylene (P[VDF-TFE]), hexafluoropropylene (P[VDF-HFP]), PVDF blends
with polymethyl methacrylate (PMMA), polyvinyl fluoride, polyvinyl acetate, and ferroelectric
liquid crystal polymers [99]. Advantages of piezoelectric polymers are their low dielectric constant,
low acoustic impedance [100], excellent insulation properties, flexibility, low cost, biocompatibility,
toughness, chemical inertness, mechanical durability, abrasion resistance, nontoxic nature, and
radiation stability. The current manufacturing capabilities and lower piezoelectricity compared to
piezoceramics limit the piezoelectric polymers to thin-film applications, restricting their use as
sensors. Non-polymer piezoelectric materials have very high acoustic impedance when compared to
water and tissue. For water immersion-based NDT and biomedical ultrasound, matching layers are
employed to improve the coupling efficiency. However, this introduces insertion loss and
attenuation. Taking advantage of good acoustic impedance matching with water and biological
tissue, piezopolymers have also been considered as suitable materials for transducer applications.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 9 of 65

Table 1. Electric and acoustic properties of commonly used bulk piezoceramic materials for transducer applications. PMN–PT: lead magnesium niobate-lead titanate,
PZT: lead zirconate titanate.

Piezoceramic Lead Zirconate Titanate (Synthetic)

Lead-Free Piezoceramics (Synthetic)
[67,75,77,85,101,102]

KNaNb2O6 LiNbO3 PMN–PT

Properties PZT4 PZT5A PZT5H PZT6B PZT7A PZT8 BaTiO3 [85] (33% PT)
[85] [85,103]
[67]

Curie Point (°C) 325 365 200 350 350 300 115 420 1150 130
𝑑 (pC/N) 285 374 593 71 153 225 190 127 6 5500
𝑑 (pC/N) −122 −171 −265 −27 −60 −97 −78 −51 -
𝑑 (pC/N) 495 585 130 360 330 260 306 69
𝜖 1300 1700 460 425 1000 1700 495 25
𝑘 0.70 0.71 0.75 0.37 0.67 0.64 0.50 0.60 0.23 0.94
𝑘 −0.33 −0.34 0.36 −0.15 −0.30 −0.30 0.21 −0.27 -
𝑘 0.71 0.69 0.38 0.68 0.55 0.48 −0.46 0.60
𝑔 (Vm-N) 0.025 0.0166 0.0125
𝑆 (10−12 m2/N) 15.5 18.8 9.35 13.9 13.5 - - -
𝑆 (10−12 m2/N) 12.3 16.4 9.0 10.7 11.5 - - -
𝜖 /𝜖 1470 - - 39 680–800
𝜖 𝑆/𝜖 635 830 1470 385 235 580 - - - 680–800
Mechanical Q 75 65 32
𝜌 (kg/m3) 7700 7700 7500 5400 4640 8060
𝑐 (m/s) 4600 4580 4000 7640 4610
𝑍 (MRayl) 36.15 30.00 34.35 30.00 32.00 30 34 37.15
T Parameters measured in stress free conditions, E parameters measured in short circuit conditions, 𝑍 —acoustic impedance, 𝑆 compliance constants, 𝜌—
density, 𝑐—velocity of sound in media, 1 Rayl = 1 N-s/m = 1 kg m s [101].
3 −2 −1
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 10 of 65

At present, stretched and poled PVDF has the strongest piezoelectric response of all polymers.
The PVDF films are prepared from powder or granules using the solvent casting method [104] or
melt crystallization (such as the hot press method [11] and melt extrusion [105]). For MEMS
applications, the less expensive lithography technique is available [106]. The PVDF can exist in at
least four different phases called 𝛼, 𝛽, 𝛾, and 𝛿 [105,107–110]. Solvent or melt crystallization below
160 °C results in apolar 𝛼-phase PVDF. The stretching of PVDF films 4–5 times at 80 °C transforms
the apolar 𝛼 phase to polar 𝛽 phase [107,111,112]. The stretched 𝛽 phase is polar, but the dipoles
of the crystals are oriented randomly. The PVDF is poled using thermal or corona poling [113,114] in
the desired direction depending on the desired mode of vibration.
The P(VDF-TrFE) synthesized with different TrFE molar ratios crystallize directly in the
ferroelectric phase without stretching [115]. It possesses a higher degree of ferroelectric and
piezoelectric properties than PVDF due to the higher degree of crystallinity. However, poling is
required to impart piezoelectricity in these films. The properties of piezopolymers depend on phase
and poling. In addition, since the Curie point of piezopolymers is lower, the temperature during any
further stages of transducer fabrication should be the lowest possible to prevent any loss of
piezoelectricity due to depolarization and any change of material phase. The properties of bulk
piezopolymers are different than those of thin films [116]. The piezoelectric properties of PVDF and
P(VDF-TrFE) materials discussed in [74,113,117–119] and [120] respectively are given in Table 2.
Piezopolymers have an intrinsically low Q factor requiring very light damping, which is easily
achievable with air backing. Such property gives a superior damping factor with wider bandwidth
when compared to piezoceramic materials. The piezopolymers outperform the piezoceramics by the
sensing performance reflected by the 𝑔 constants.

Table 2. Properties of bulk piezopolymers.

P(VDF-TrFE) Parylene-C Amorphous polyimide PI-(𝜷-

Properties PVDF [74,113,117–119,121]
[120,121] [121] CN) APB/OPDA [121]
Curie Point (°C) 160 115 - -
Max temp (°C) 90 100 - 220
𝑑 (pC/N) −13.6 −33.5 2.0 5.3–16.5
𝑑 (pC/N) 5.3 10.7 - -
𝑑 (pC/N) 1.5 10.1 - -
𝑑 (pC/N) −27 −36.3 - -
𝑔 (Vm-N) −0.32 −0.38 - -
𝑘 (percent) 4.4 6.2 0.02 0.048–0.15
𝑘 (percent) 3 - - -
𝑘 [100] 0.15–0.2 0.3 - -
𝑌 (GPa) 2.5–3.2 1.1–3 2.8 2–3
𝑆 (GN/m2) 3.70 3.01 - -
𝑆 (GN/m2) 3.20 2.99 - -
𝐶 (GN/m2) 1.51 3.33 - -
𝑆 (GN/m2) 0.7 0.69 - -
𝜖 12 12 3.15 4
𝜖 /𝜖 6.9 7.40 - -
𝜖 /𝜖 8.6 7.95 - -
𝜖 /𝜖 7.6 7.90 - -
Tan 𝛿 0.018 0.018 - 0.01
Tan 𝛿 0.05 0.05 0.06 0.06
𝑄 [100] 10 25 - -
𝜌 (kg/m3) 1760 1880 1100–1290 1420
𝑐 (m/s) 2260 2400 2350 -
𝑍 (MRayl) 20 4.51 2.58 -
𝑌 is the Young’s modulus, PVDF is polyvinylidene fluoride, Tan 𝛿 is the dielectric loss, Tan 𝛿 is
the mechanical loss, 𝑄 is the mechanical quality factor, and 𝑘 is the electromechanical coupling
coefficient.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 11 of 65

1.3.3. Piezoelectric Composites

Piezopolymer films such as PVDF and P(VDF-TrFE) have good flexibility but are poor
piezoelectric performers as compared to piezoceramic wafers. The mechanical and piezoelectric
properties of piezopolymer films also degrade with thermal exposure [122,123]. For some designs,
maximizing the piezoelectric sensitivity and minimizing the density becomes necessary to obtain a
good acoustic matching with media such as water. In some designs, the transducer must be made
mechanically flexible to conform to a curved surface. In some cases, matching layers alone do not
achieve proper impedance matching for which the properties of the piezoelectric element need to be
modified. Such modification can reduce the piezoelectric properties slightly but can provide great
acoustic impedance matching with the wave propagation media. Thus, in such situations, designers
often face difficulty in finding suitable materials, as a single-phase material in nature that
simultaneously satisfies these requirements is unavailable.
Piezocomposite transducers have been developed further to overcome several drawbacks of
piezoceramics such as the brittleness of piezoelectric ceramic, the low sensitivity of piezopolymers,
and acoustic impedance mismatch with wave propagating media. For hydrophone applications,
piezocomposites offer the required anisotropy to sense the varying hydrostatic pressure, which is
otherwise not possible by piezoceramics. This is because for most of the piezoceramics, 𝑑 = 𝑑
and 𝑑 ≈ −2𝑑 , for which 𝑑 ≈ 0 [124]. Piezocomposites can be tailored for low acoustic
impedance, fewer spurious modes [125], and an intermediate dielectric constant.
Most flexible piezocomposites have two phases, a stiff phase comprising piezoceramic or piezo
crystal and a soft phase comprising the polymer. A piezocomposite is a diced ceramic with polymer-
filled spaces [126]. The composite has the flexibility to provide heat dissipation or structural support.
The material has natural damping and can be easily designed as an array. The characteristic acoustic
impedance is around 10 MRayl, which is much closer to water and tissue. There are 10 original
notations and 16 extended notations [127] to describe the composites, depending on the connectivity
of a number of dimensions associated with each phase [128–130]. Some of them such as 0-0, 1-0, 2-0,
3-0, 1-1, 2-1, 3-1, 2-2, 3-2, or 3-3 are internationally accepted (see Figure 4). The first digit refers to the
number of dimensions of connectivity for the piezoelectric phase, and the second digit refers to the
electromechanically inactive polymer phase.
An array of piezocomposite transducers has been made by blending piezo powder, piezo-rods,
or piezo fibers with various resins to simultaneously impart flexibility and higher sensitivity. To
achieve higher piezoelectric properties, piezopolymers are used as active resin (or matrix) [121].
Recently, 1-3, 0-3, and 2-2 piezocomposites are commonly explored due to their importance in
military and commercial applications [131]. Methods of fabricating 1-3 piezocomposites such as dice-
and-fill, injection molding, lost mold, and others are relatively complex [132,133]. With the computer-
aided design flexibility and additive manufacturing technology, this problem is being solved [133].
The preparation of 0-3 composites is relatively simple and involves mixing inorganic particles in
polymer followed by curing [134].
Poled film sheets made of PZT powder and epoxy resin mixture show superior performance as
compared to the PVDF sensors of the same dimensions [135]. Egusa and Iwasawa [136] developed
piezoelectric paint using a PZT powder as filler and epoxy resin as a binder. They tested its ability as
a vibration sensor at frequencies up to 1 MHz. Active Fiber Composite (AFC) transducers have
extruded piezoceramic fibers embedded in an epoxy matrix and have interdigitated electrodes that
are symmetrically arranged on both surfaces [137]. Due to the presence of fine ceramic fibers and
increased specific strength, conformability to curved surfaces is observed in AFC as compared to
monolithic piezoceramic materials. Similar to AFCs, macro fiber composites (MFCs) have fibers but
have a rectangular cross-section instead of a circular shape to significantly reduce the small-batch
manufacturing costs [138]. The transverse elastic modulus 𝐸 can be estimated by the Reuss model
[139] for piezocomposites utilizing piezoelectric rods or fibers given by
𝑉 𝑉
𝐸 = + , (8)
𝐸 𝐸
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 12 of 65

where 𝑉 and 𝑉 are the volume fraction of the piezoelectric fibers and matrix, respectively. 𝐸
and 𝐸 are the Young’s modulus of the fiber and matrix, respectively. The longitudinal elastic
modulus 𝐸 along the direction of the rod or fiber can be estimated by the Voigt constant strain
model [139] given by
𝐸 =𝑉 𝐸 +𝑉 𝐸 . (9)
A detailed discussion on the estimation of coupling coefficient and quality factor for
piezocomposite-based transducers is discussed in [140,141], especially for hydrostatic transducers.
Although analytical and numerical models are available to estimate the material properties of
piezocomposites [142–145], they are ineffective due to the complexity of their processing parameters
and resulting variations in the material properties [146]. For this reason, it is not possible to find all
measured values of electric and mechanical properties in the literature. This problem leads to the
designer’s inability to compare the performance of different materials for transducer design via
acoustic and electric impedance matching. Some common piezocomposites used for transducer
applications have been listed in Table 3 with their piezoelectric and acoustic properties. Table 4 lists
some other common transducer materials. The highest coupling coefficients of piezocomposites favor
their use in energy-harvesting applications. The MFCs outweigh other types of piezocomposites in
most aspects including the hydrostatic sensing parameter 𝑑 . For this reason, they are the most
explored materials at present.
Piezocomposites as transducers have gained high importance since the early 1980s [140,147] as
they do not require a matching layer and pose less dependence on the matching layer properties.
Composite piezoelectric materials with several connectivity patterns provide improvement in the
desired properties of piezoelectric element for applications involving acoustic matching with
hydrostatic conditions. The major reason is due to the capability of tailoring the density and
directional elastic properties. Such acoustic matching results in low 𝑄 (3–10) with high bandwidth
and better pulse reproduction. The acoustic properties of composites developed specifically for
acoustic impedance matching will be discussed in Section 3 in greater detail.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 13 of 65

Table 3. Properties of piezocomposites with different types of piezoelectric fillers such as fibers and particles. MFC: macro fiber composite.

PMN- Macrovoi Perforate Honeycom Perforate Weav Laminat

MFC ZNo/SU-8 BURPS
Properties 0.29PT/Epoxy d d b d e e
[121,148,149] 20% [151]
[121,150] [85] [152] [85] [152] [85] [85,153]
Connectivity 1-3 1-3 0-3 3-3 3-0 0-3 3-1 3-2 2-3 2-2
PZT
PZT(50
Filler PZT PMN-0.29PT ZNo Void PZT PZT PZT - (15–
%)
30%)
Silicone
Matrix Epoxy Epoxy SU-8 20% Epoxy PZT Polymer Epoxy - Epoxy
rubber
Max use temp (°C) 130 130 180 - - - - - - -
𝐸 = 30.34; 𝐸 = 15.86;
Elastic Constants
𝐺 = 5.52; - - - - - - - - -
(GPa)
𝜐 = 0.31
𝑑 (pC/N) 714 - - 120 150 28.3 100 329 80 50
𝑔 (pC/N) - - - 27 30 32 30 128 65 16.6
410 to
𝑑 (pC/N) 374 1200 5–8 160 - - - 290 -
440
−188 to
𝑑 (pC/N) 170 - 5 - - - - - -
−200
𝑘 (percent) 0.53 0.9 0.07–0.12 - - - - - - -
𝑘 (percent) 0.34 - 0.07 - - - - - - -
𝜖 850 2000 7 500 560 100 400 290 140 340
𝜌 (kg/m3) 5440–7500 5000 - - - - - - - -
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 14 of 65

Table 4. Acoustic properties of typical piezoelectric transducer materials and media [154–160].

Typical 𝝆 𝒁𝑨𝑪𝑶 = 𝝆𝒄
Material 𝒄 (m/s) Attenuation or Loss
Function (kg/m3) (MRayl)
LiNbO3 Crystal Active element 7360 4688 34.5 -
Quartz Active element 2650 5740 15.2 -
PZT5A [100,161] Active element 7750 4350 33.7 0.02 (dB/cm.MHz)
PZT4 Active element - - 36.15 -
PMN–PT Active element 8100 3950 32.0 -
Parylene Matching layer 2350 1100 2.58 -
Gold Matching layer 3240 19700 63.8 -
Aluminium Matching layer 2700 6320 17 -
Steel Matching layer 7700 5900 45 -
Glass Matching layer 3000 5000 15 -
Perspex Matching layer 1180 2730 3.2 -
Polystrene Matching layer 1060 2350 2.5 -
AAO–epoxy Matching layer 2745 3460 9.5 -
HDPE Matching layer 951 2339 2.22 12.41 (Np/m)
Syntactic foam Matching layer 704 2486 1.75 41.3 (Np/m)
1.68 (dB/mm at 3.2
2 µm Al2O3/Epotek 301 Matching layer 2300 2800 6.4
MHz)
Teflon Matching layer 2200 1390 2.97 -
Polycarbonate Matching layer 1220 2300 2.75 -
Acrylonitrile-butadiene-styrene Matching layer 1060 2510 2.68 -
Polypropylene Matching layer 920 2740 2.4 -
Polysulfone Matching layer 1240 2240 2.78 -
Mylar Matching layer 1380 2540 3.00 -
1.04 (dB/mm at 3.2
Epotek 301 Lens/Epoxy 1048 2640 2.8
MHz)
Conductive 11.8 (dB/mm at 3.2
E-Solder 3022 1850 3200 5.92
backing MHz)
Tungsten powder/µ
Backing layer 3570 1820 6.5 -
bubbles/Epotek 301
5µm Tungsten powder/micro Heavy backing 16 (dB/mm at 3.2
8925 1800 16.0
bubbles/Epotek 301 layer MHz)
Epoxy EPO-TEK 301 Insulation 2650 1150 3.05 -
1450– 1.445–1.5;
Water Media 997 0.002 (dB/cm.MHz)
1498 1.48 [155]
Air (Rayl) Media 1.225 343 0.000420 1.64 (dB/cm.MHz)
Tissue (Blood) Media - - 1.66 0.15 (dB/cm.MHz)
Tissue (Fat) Media - - 1.38 0.6 (dB/cm.MHz)
Tissue (Bone) Media - - 7.75 2–15 (dB/cm.MHz)
Tissue (Skin) Media - - 1.99 9.2 (dB/cm.MHz)
Concrete [162] Media - - 8.36–11.3 -
HDPE is high density poly ethylene, AAO is anodic aluminum oxide and EPO-TEK is a registered trademark of
Epoxy Technology, Inc., and is an adhesive.

Figure 4. Common piezocomposite configurations used in transducers and their connectivity [103].
Reprinted by permission of the publisher (Taylor & Francis Ltd, http://www.tandfonline.com ).

1.4. Theory of Acoustic Impedance Mismatch and Transducer Performance Parameters

Consider a typical bulk wave ultrasonic transducer shown in Figure 5 with its main parts such
as the piezoelectric element, backing material, matching layers, casing, and electrical connector with
contacts. Some transducers may have an electrical matching and tuning network housed inside their
casing. One or more acoustic impedance matching layers at the front face of the transducer serve as
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 15 of 65

the wear plates. The transmission media can be the intended wave receiving object or intermediate
couplants such as gels, air, and water. The thickness and the acoustic impedance of the piezoelectric
element, backing material, and matching layers govern the center frequency and bandwidth of such
a transducer.

Figure 5. Schematic of a piezoelectric ultrasonic transducer cross-section showing various parts.

The huge impedance mismatch between the piezoelectric element made of ceramic and the
surrounding wave propagating media (tissue, air, water, etc.) results in low sensitivity and a narrow
bandwidth, significantly lengthens ultrasound pulses, and lengthens transducer ring-down time
[51,163–165]. This effect is also similar to the unmatched backing layer. Table 4 shows the relative
difference of acoustic impedance between the piezoelectric element and the propagation media. The
reflection 𝑢 and transmission 𝑢 wave velocity for normal incidence is given by [71]
2𝑍
𝑢 = 𝑢 =𝑅 𝑢 (10)
𝑍 +𝑍
𝑍 −𝑍
𝑢 = 𝑢 =𝑅 𝑢 , (11)
𝑍 +𝑍
where 𝑢 is the incident wave velocity, 𝑅 is the ratio of transmitted wave amplitude, and 𝑅 is
the ratio of reflected wave amplitude. The acoustic impedance 𝑍 is the product of acoustic velocity
𝑣 and density 𝜌 of the wave propagating media. It is given by [166]
𝑍 = 𝑣𝜌. (12)
The bulk wave velocity 𝑣, also called longitudinal wave velocity in isotropic solids, is related to
Young’s modulus 𝐸 and Poisson’s ratio 𝜗 as [156]
𝐸(1 − 𝜗) 𝐾 + 4𝐺/3 𝜒 + 2𝜇
𝑣 = = = , (13)
𝜌(1 + 𝜗)(1 − 2𝜗) 𝜌 𝜌
where 𝐾 is the bulk modulus, 𝐺 is the shear modulus, and 𝜒 and 𝜇 are Lame’s constant. Acoustic
impedance is directionally dependent, especially in composites, as the acoustic velocity differs along
with different directions. Acoustic impedance is also expressed in terms of basic material properties
as the ratio of acoustic pressure 𝑃 to the product of velocity 𝑣 and surface area 𝐴 as

𝑍= . (14)

Specific acoustic impedance is the most important property in tissue imaging, and it is defined
as the product of acoustic impedance and surface area 𝑍𝐴 = 𝑃/𝑣. Acoustic impedance for the specific
area 𝑍 in terms of the open circuit elastic constant 𝐶 for a thickness mode transducer is given by
[155]

𝑍 = 𝜌𝐴𝑣 = 𝐴 𝜌𝐶 . (15)

The acoustic impedance can be expressed in terms of elastic constants as [167]

𝐸 = 𝑍 (1 + 𝜗)(1 − 2𝜗)/[𝜌(1 − 𝜗)]. The acoustic impedance of materials governs the energy transfer
from the piezoelectric element to wave propagation media and vice versa. Often large differences
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 16 of 65

cause a reflection of acoustic energy resulting in low energy transmission by waves. The amplitude
reflection coefficient 𝑅 and transmission coefficient 𝑇 depend on the acoustic impedance of
materials in medium 1 from which the wave originates and transmits to medium 2 as given by [162]
𝐴 𝑍 −𝑍
𝑇= =1+ (16)
𝐴 𝑍 +𝑍
𝐴 𝑍 −𝑍
𝑅= = , (17)
𝐴 𝑍 +𝑍
where 𝑍 and 𝑍 are the acoustic impedances of medium 1 and 2 respectively. 𝐴 , 𝐴 , and 𝐴 are
the amplitudes of transmitted, reflected, and incident waves, respectively. The reflected waves
produce oscillations in the transducer if damping is absent. Damping is usually achieved by the
backing layer. If 𝐴 and 𝐴 are amplitudes of the first and second cycle of oscillation, then the
damping coefficient is given by
𝑍 +𝑍 𝑍 +𝑍
⎧ , 𝑍 > 𝑍 , 𝑍 or 𝑍 < 𝑍 , 𝑍 ,
𝐴 ⎪ 𝑍 −𝑍 𝑍 −𝑍
𝜂= = (18)
𝐴 ⎨ 𝑍 +𝑍 𝑍 +𝑍
⎪ , 𝑍 > 𝑍 > 𝑍 or 𝑍 < 𝑍 < 𝑍 ,
⎩ 𝑍 −𝑍 𝑍 −𝑍
where 𝑍 , 𝑍 , and 𝑍 are the acoustic impedances of the piezoelectric element, backing layer, and
matching layer, respectively. The damping coefficient is related to the mechanical quality factor 𝑄
by
𝜋
𝑄= . (19)
𝑙𝑛 𝜂
A −3 dB bandwidth 𝐵𝑊 is easily estimated by modeling the transducer as a mass suspended
by spring in a damped media. The relation for 𝐵𝑊 discussed by Krautkramer and Krautkramer
[168] is given by
𝑓
𝐵𝑊 = , (20)
𝑄
where 𝑓 is the resonant frequency of the transducer. The bandwidth can be increased by matching
the characteristic impedances of the backing and front-end layers with the piezoelectric element.
Acoustic matching with the backing material increases 𝜂 and therefore increases the energy loss.
Thus, 𝐵𝑊 is enhanced at the expense of transducer efficiency. If 𝜂 is not large, 𝑓 is similar to the
characteristic frequency of the transducer 𝑓 given by
𝑣
𝑓 = (21)
2𝑑
where 𝑑 is the thickness of the transducer. The 𝐵𝑊 can also be estimated from the experimental
frequency response obtained using standard test equipment given by [169]
𝑓 −𝑓
𝐵𝑊 = (22)
𝑓
where 𝑓 and 𝑓 are the lower and upper −6 dB frequencies. The center frequency of the Fast Fourier
Transforms (FFT) spectrum 𝑓 is given by
𝑓 +𝑓
𝑓 = . (23)
2
Similarly, the effective electromechanical coupling factor can be expressed in terms of resonance
𝑓 and anti-resonance 𝑓 frequencies measured from experiments as

𝑓 −𝑓
𝑘 = . (24)
𝑓
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 17 of 65

As per the IEEE standard, the thickness mode electromechanical coupling coefficient (𝑘 ) is given
by [170–172]

𝜋𝑓 𝜋𝑓 −𝑓
𝑘 = tan . (25)
2𝑓 2 𝑓

Insertion loss for a transducer operated in a pulse–echo mode (using the same electronics for
actuation and reception) can be measured by [36]
𝑃 𝑉 /𝑅 𝑉
𝐼𝐿 = 10log = 10log = 20log , (26)
𝑃 𝑉 /𝑅 𝑉
where 𝑉 and 𝑉 are the echo voltage and excitation voltage, respectively. 𝑃 and 𝑃 are the
transducer output power and transducer input power, respectively. Impedance matching layers
mitigate the enormous impedance mismatch between the piezoelectric element and the transmission
media. The reduction or elimination of acoustic mismatch results in the efficient energy transfer
greatly increasing the performance of ultrasonic sensors and transducers. Several design procedures
for acoustic matching layers will be discussed in Section 2. Many equations discussed in this section
are not directly related to the acoustic matching applications but are required to estimate properties
that are useful to design acoustic impedance matching layers and serves as a guideline or data for the
design process. These also serve to better understand the acoustic parameters and their relations. As
the review paper is specifically concerned with acoustic matching for acoustic applications, the
general acoustic applications have been briefly discussed in this section. Acoustic matching is not
carried out commonly due to the difficulty associated with finding the required guidelines.
Therefore, the applications involving acoustic matching are limited, and these limited applications
have been covered wherever possible. Section 1 mainly provides guidelines for the designer thereby
filling the gap, which prevents the design of acoustic impedance matching for the rapidly evolving
broad range of applications such as the internet of things. Special acoustic matching techniques for
specific acoustic applications have been covered exclusively in Section 3 and Section 4.

2. Acoustic Matching Tools and Methods

Although acoustic matching layer design has been studied extensively with the proposal of
multiple matching layers with optimum properties, such materials can be difficult to obtain. In
addition, the requirement of very thin layers at high frequencies increases the manufacturing cost
considerably or makes the design process difficult. In addition, achieving high sensitivity with broad
bandwidth remains a challenge [52,173]. Last but not the least, attenuation increases with the addition
of the matching layers. The matching configurations available for bulk wave transducers are half-
wavelength ( 𝜆 /2) [174], single quarter-wavelength ( 𝜆 /4), one-eighths 𝜆 /8 [175], and similar
configurations to 𝜆/4 such as (n + 1)𝜆/4 [176], stacks of 𝜆/4 layers [177], and a stack of very thin
matching layers whose total acoustic thickness is 𝜆/4. Quarter wavelength matching is a traditional
mechanism requiring a specific acoustic impedance and thickness equivalent to quarter wavelength
[178–180]. The outer layer receives key attention during the design of matching involving multiple
layers. The outer layer needs to closely match the acoustic impedance of the surrounding media. The
availability of consistent materials with very low acoustic impedance, very low attenuation, and the
desired thickness for the designed geometry and frequency is limited. Most matching techniques
involve the design of layers for single operating frequency. The acoustic matching techniques can be
mainly classified as traditional method, transmission line method, and discrete element-based spring
mass technique. While traditional methods are simple and straightforward, transmission line theory
is more advanced and accurate. Certain parameters are difficult to determine using transmission line
theory for which the spring mass technique is introduced, which uses transmission line theory. These
acoustic matching methods are discussed below.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 18 of 65

2.1. Traditional Quarter Wavelength Matching Method

Acoustic impedance matching using quarter-wavelength 𝜆/4 matching layers without extensive
dependence on any specific material impedance can be done using two ways with slightly different
results [176]. The first way is a traditional way involving the optimization of energy transmission at
two interfaces involving different media with an intermediate matching layer [181]. This method
relies on the specific impedance of the matching layer material. For example, the piezoelectric
element, matching layer, and wave propagation media having acoustic impedances 𝑍 , 𝑍 , and 𝑍
respectively. The piezoelectric element acting as a transmitter and/or receiver is shown in Figure 1.
The transmitted wave to the wave propagation media through the matching layer is the sum of
contributions due to each multiple reverberation. A quarter-wavelength matching layer ensures that
all transmitting reverberations have the same phase, thereby ensuring constructive and destructive
interference [176,182–184]. The ratio of transmitted energy flux to the incident energy flux is given by
𝑇𝑇 𝑍
Υ = , (27)
1−𝑅 𝑅 𝑍
where, 𝑇 = 2𝑍 /(𝑍 + 𝑍 ) and 𝑇 = 2𝑍 /(𝑍 + 𝑍 ) are the transmitted wave ratios, and 𝑅 =
(𝑍 +𝑍 )/(𝑍 + 𝑍 ) and 𝑅 = (𝑍 +𝑍 )/(𝑍 + 𝑍 ) are the reflected wave ratios. The energy
transmission through the matching layer is at its maximum if the matching layer has an acoustic
impedance 𝑍 , which is the geometric mean of the acoustic impedance [155,185] of the two media
given by

𝑍 = 𝑍 𝑍 . (28)
Multiple matching layers can be employed to maximize the transmitted energy when
attenuation due to reverberation losses are low within the matching layers. This results in an
improved spectral performance of the transducer [159,186–188]. Quarter-wavelength matching
involving 𝑛 matching layers has an acoustic impedance in any 𝑗 layer given by [176]

( ) ( ) ( )
𝑍 = 𝑍 𝑍 . (29)

Oakley [189] has considered the effect of noise due to the thermal effect and amplifier to design
a piezoelectric element and a matching layer for the transducer using the Krimholtz, Leedom, and
Matthaei (KLM) model.

2.2. Transmission-Line Approach

Another way of determining the quarter-wavelength matching layer properties is by imposing
the optimum bandwidth and maximum efficiency using of the Krimholtz, Leedom, and Matthaei
(KLM) transmission line model [71]. The effect of backing and matching layers together with insertion
loss in essential to obtain good impulse response [182]. This ensures high sensitivity, broad
bandwidth with low ripple, and short duration. A common case of high-frequency matching involves
the matching of high-performance piezoelectric materials (lithium niobate (LiNbO3), lead zirconate
titanate (PZT), and lead magnesium niobate-lead titanate (PMN–PT)) with medium such as water or
tissue [71]. In such a case, tuning the acoustic properties of the matching layer material involves
mixing a high-impedance material with a low-impedance polymer with a certain ratio. The
fabrication accuracy is high at low frequency, as the wavelength is large. At a high frequency, the
quarter-wavelength requirement of the matching layer becomes impractical to achieve. The reasons
being (1) a noticeable variation of thickness compared to a very small wavelength, (2) surface
roughness, and (3) a variation of material properties within the layer as the particle size approaches
the wavelength. Therefore, a method based on microwave transmission line theory is developed to
design the acoustic matching layers as an electric impedance matching network [190]. At high
frequencies and for broadband impulse actuation, the piezoelectric material must be considered as a
transmission line to design the matching layers. Otherwise, considerable acoustic attenuation needs
to be introduced to obtain a good impulse response by minimizing the ringing effect, which results
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 19 of 65

in a Gaussian shape response [191]. The KLM method-based transmission line approach takes
account of such considerations. The microwave transmission line method uses the KLM method to
design the matching network, which is discussed first.
Consider a piezoelectric wafer vibrating in the thickness mode due to the applied voltage 𝑉 , as
illustrated in Figure 6a. For such a configuration, the Masons model considers the electric effects due
to the insertion loss, acoustic load, and backing impedance on the acoustic port (see Figure 6b).
However, this method does not consider the effect of piezoelectric wafers cascaded with matching
and backing materials. The three elements across the secondary of the transformer are interpreted as
an acoustic transmission line resulting from cascading. At the acoustic port, the voltage 1 V represents
a unit force and current 1 A represents a unit velocity. In the Mason’s model, the current is developed
across both the transmission line and the secondary of the transformer. This leads to the difficulty in
determining the lumped components of the cascaded piezoelectric wafer. Therefore, methods that
also include the effect of the matching layer on the acoustic ports using the Masons model [192] are
trial-and-error based [182,186,193,194]. The difficulty associated with the Masons model in
interpreting the combined effect due to electric and acoustic matching schemes has led to the design
procedures based on the KLM model [195,196]. Its electric representation as shown in Figure 6c has
a single coupling point through a coupling transformer instead of a cumbersome distributed coupling
of the piezoelectric transmission line. Lumped electrical elements and acoustic wave properties can
be clearly distinguished for design purposes allowing the connection of an acoustic transmission line
of arbitrary impedance connected to the electric port. This allows an easy determination of matching
the layers’ properties, since acoustic matching uses transmission line formalism, whereas electrical
matching uses lumped components. The effects of the matching layers and their bonding on
inductances, capacitances, and electrical resistance can be easily determined and accounted in the
design of the transducer.

(a)

(b)
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 20 of 65

(c)
Figure 6. (a) Schematic of a piezoelectric wafer operating in the thickness mode with its geometry
showing the poling direction, voltage across electrodes 𝑉 and direction of forcing (𝐹 , 𝐹 ), and
velocity (𝑈 , 𝑈 ). (b) Mason’s electric equivalent circuit. (c) Krimholtz, Leedom, and Matthaei (KLM)
electric equivalent circuit. Here, 𝜌 = density, 𝜔 = angular frequency, 𝛽 = dielectric impermeability,
𝐶 = elastic stiffness, 𝑔 = piezoelectric constant, and 𝑣 = acoustic wave velocity in the direction
of acoustic wave propagation.

2.2.1. Single and Multi-Layer Matching

The KLM transmission line model is used to impose optimum bandwidth and maximum
efficiency to determine the number of matching layers and their acoustic impedances. The number
of matching layers is first determined using the acoustic impedances of the piezoelectric element 𝑍
and propagating media 𝑍 and the piezoelectric coupling coefficient of the piezoelectric element 𝑘 .
For a single quarter-wavelength matching layer (𝜆/4), the acoustic impedance of the matching layer
𝑍 as proposed and modified for broadband considerations by Desilets et al. [71,197] is given by
/ /
𝑍 =𝑍 𝑍 . (30)
Similarly, for double 𝜆/4 layers, the acoustic impedance of the first matching layer 𝑍 is
given by [157]
/ /
𝑍 =𝑍 𝑍 (31)
and the acoustic impedance of the second matching layer 𝑍 is given by
/ /
𝑍 =𝑍 𝑍 . (32)
For a single layer, matching the energy transfer from the matching layer to the propagating
media based on the transmission line theory is given by [167]

𝑇 =1− . (33)

2.2.2. Cascaded Layer Matching

Using the KLM model-based electric representation of cascaded matching layers, the matching
layers are designed based on quarter-wavelength criteria for the efficient transmission of wave
components of selected frequency. This idea is based on the acoustic filter reported by Ma et al. [190],
which had dual-frequency filtering capability with high-frequency reception and low-frequency
transmission. The acoustic filter design uses microwave transmission-line theory [198–200], which
transmits low-frequency waves and receives high-frequency waves, thereby blocking the reception
of low-frequency waves completely. The schematic of such a dual-frequency acoustic filter used in
super-harmonic microscopy is shown in Figure 7a. Thus, for low-frequency and narrow-banded
excitation, the wave components transmit very efficiently with minimal reflections. The high-
frequency (HF) band-stop filter is designed by creating mismatch by introducing 𝑍 and 𝑍 ,
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 21 of 65

which is practically fulfilled by ensuring the HF wave pulse length to be shorter than twice the length
of the LF element thickness (See Figure 7b). Assuming matched backing 𝑍 = 𝑍 , the input
impedance at the front end of AF layer is given by
𝑍 cosh(𝛾 𝑙) + 𝑍 sinh(𝛾 𝑙)
𝑍 =𝑍 , (34)
𝑍 cosh(𝛾 𝑙) + 𝑍 sinh(𝛾 𝑙)
where 𝛾 = 𝜔/𝑣 is a propagation constant, 𝑙 is the thickness of the layer, and 𝛾 = 𝛼 + 𝑖𝛽 .
When the matching layer is thin with low attenuation, the attenuation coefficient 𝛼 = 0. The
transmission coefficient of intensity through the matching layer AF is given by
4𝑍 𝑍
𝑇 = , (35)
(𝑍 + 𝑍 ) cos (𝛽 𝑙) + (𝑍 + 𝑍 𝑍 /𝑍 ) sin (𝛽 𝑙)
when 𝛽 𝑙 = (2𝑛 + 1)𝜆 /4 with 𝑛 = 0,1,2, …. , the matching layer AF functions as a quarter
wavelength impedance transformer as Equation (34) reduces to 𝑍 = 𝑍 𝑍 . Similarly, matching
layer HM is designed as 𝐿 = 𝜆 /4.
The band-pass filter acts as a passive amplifier for the low-frequency acoustic wave, as shown
in Figure 7c. The active element LF is a voltage stress source with Thevenin’s impedance of 𝑍 . For
the low-frequency wave, the medium is considered large with no phase delay between stress and
strain for which it can be assumed as a pure resistive load 𝑍 . The cascaded element and matching
layers are comparable to the wavelength, with each element acting as a part of the transmission line.
The input impedance can be calculated using ABCD parameters as
𝑃 𝐴 𝐵 𝐴 𝐵 𝐴 𝐵 𝑃
= , (36)
𝑉 𝐶 𝐷 𝐶 𝐷 𝐶 𝐷 𝑉
where 𝑃 corresponds to the pressure and 𝑉 corresponds to the velocity in respective materials. The
ABCD matrices with subscripts denote the transmission line section of each layer defined as
𝐴 𝐵 cosh(𝛾 𝑙) 𝑍 sinh(𝛾 𝑙)
= , (37)
𝐶 𝐷 sinh(𝛾 𝑙)/Z cosh(𝛾 𝑙)
where 𝑍 is the characteristic impedance of the respective transmission line. In the absence of
attenuation, the pressure transmission coefficient is

𝑇 = ∗ . (38)

In the presence of attenuation, the pressure transmission coefficient is estimated as the scattering
parameter 𝑆 of a two-port transmission line. Tools such as AWR Microwave Office [201] from
AWR corp., EI Segundo, CA, USA and PIEZOCAD [202] from Sonic Concepts Inc., Bothell, WA, USA
are available to simulate such circuits for the fine-tuning of a matching network. While the
transmission line method allows distributed calculation, an arbitrary number of layers, arbitrary
impedances, and a clear display of matching in the Smith Chart, the electromechanical correlation is
difficult in some cases. Myhre et al. [203] used a similar cascaded layer concept with matching layers
to design acoustic impedance matching layers for a dual-frequency transducer used for imaging and
ultrasound therapy.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 22 of 65

Figure 7. Schematic of piezoelectric cascaded structure and its equivalent circuit with the ability of (a)
dual-frequency filter design, (b) high-frequency reception, and (c) low-frequency transmission.
Reprinted from [190], with the permission of AIP Publishing.

2.3. Mass-Spring Approach

The mass-spring based approach is based on using high impedance material as a mass and low
impedance material as spring [204–206]. Figure 8 shows the schematic of the two-layer matching
provided to a piezoelectric element. Its equivalent mechanical and electric representations as a mass
spring and microwave transmission line are shown, neglecting the presence of the damping layer.
The equivalent impedance of mass-spring systems is tuned to achieve a resonator system with
efficient acoustic wave propagation. The resonant frequency 𝜔 and acoustic impedance at the
driven end of the spring derived by Toda and Thompson [204] for such spring-mass approximation
is given by

𝜔 = 𝐾/𝑀 (39)
𝐾𝑀
𝑍 = (40)
𝑍
where 𝑍 is the load impedance of the medium such as water, tissue, etc., in which the wave
propagates, stiffness 𝐾 = 𝜌 𝑣 /𝑙 , and mass with partial influence on wave motion 𝑀 = 𝜌 𝑙 +
0.4𝜌 𝑙 . The subscripts 𝑠, 𝑚, 𝑝, and 𝑙 in various parameters stand for spring, mass, piezoelectric
element, and media (as load). For the given piezoelectric spring and mass materials, the thickness of
the matching layer constituting of spring and mass can be estimated numerically to resonate at the
center frequency of excitation. For a comparison of the spring-mass model with the microwave
transmission line model, consider the equivalent electrical impedance seen at each layer as shown in
Figure 8. The impedances are given by
𝑍 + 𝑍 tanh(𝛾 𝑡 )
𝑍 =𝑍 (41)
𝑍 + 𝑍 tanh(𝛾 𝑡 )
𝑍 + 𝑍 tanh(𝛾 𝑡 )
𝑍 =𝑍 , (42)
𝑍 + 𝑍 tanh(𝛾 𝑡 )
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 23 of 65

where 𝛾 is the frequency-dependent propagation constant. Similar to the spring-mass model where
the desired resonant frequency is obtained by tuning the matching layer thickness, the thickness of
the matching layers is numerically estimated to generate matched 𝑍 in the case of the microwave
transmission line model. In both models, 𝑍 is frequency dependent. The mass-spring approach
provides a straightforward approach to estimate lumped elements and the resulting impedance, but
its accuracy depends on the assumption of equivalent mass and the requirement of a significant
higher impedance of the mass than the spring. It also excludes the consideration of piezoelectric
material properties.

Figure 8. Schematic of a piezoelectric element with two-layer matching showing mechanical (spring-
mass) and electrical (transmission line) equivalent models. Reprinted from [154], with the permission
of AIP Publishing.

2.4. Wave Propagation Model

Wave propagation in piezoelectric material, matching layers, backing, and wave propagation
media can be modeled in many ways [207,208]. The mass-spring model is based on thin layer
approximation where layer thickness 𝑡 < 𝜆/4 and 𝜔 < 𝜔 . Therefore, a more accurate one-
dimensional wave propagation model is suggested to be used in such cases. A layer with impedance
𝑍 loaded with impedance 𝑍 on the outer surface or downstream and impedance 𝑍 seen from
the inner surface results in a partially reflected wave from the outer surface causing phase delay due
to propagation over a distance 𝑑. The impedances are related by the relation [204,209,210]

𝑍 =𝑍 . (43)

This is a more generic relation that is frequently used in microwave transmission line design,
which has been used for the design of both the acoustic impedance of the matching layer and the
backing layer absorber. The above equation is applied to the multi-layer structure where the first 𝑍
is considered as radiation impedance and 𝑍 is estimated considering the material parameters of
𝑍 . Next, this 𝑍 is considered as a new 𝑍 for the next layer. This sequential calculation of many
layers accounts for any number of reflections using polynomials [211].

2.5. Backing Absorber

Traditionally, the backing material used is conductive epoxy such as E-solder [212] with high
attenuation (120 dB/mm at 30 MHz) and relatively low acoustic impedance (5.9 MRayl). It provides
low insertion loss and well-shaped short pulses suitable for medical imaging if designed together
with front face matching layers. Nicolaides et al. [213] studied the effect of backing materials such as
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 24 of 65

polyvinyl chloride (PVC), aluminum, brass, fiberglass, and a combination of PVC and brass on the
performance of an underwater transducer with 1–3 piezocomposite material. Fiberglass or a
combination of PVC and brass backing plates proved to have the best match as backing layers.
Tungsten-loaded epoxy [159,214] has higher acoustic impedance 8–20 MRayl. The variation of
acoustic impedance is achieved by varying the content of tungsten. The varying acoustic impedance
is useful to tune the backing for broad bandwidth. Besides being lossy, the backing materials should
be rigid to provide support to the fragile active elements. Grewe et al. [215] showed an increase in
filler particle size or a decrease in volume fraction of filler leading to an increase in composite
attenuation for a tungsten/vinyl composite backing-based transducer.
The difficulties associated with obtaining both high sensitivity and large bandwidth have led to
multiple backing absorber layers. The design method is similar to multiple front-end acoustic
impedance matching layer(s). The absorber layer(s) are simultaneously designed with acoustic
impedance matching layer(s). As a perfectly matched backing absorber reduces sensitivity, the
absorber must be designed with an appropriate mismatch. A heavy-metal/polymer rubber composite
serves as a satisfactory material for the backing but the inconsistent mixing causes variation in the
desired acoustic impedance properties that affect performance, especially at high frequency [182,216].
Toda and Thompson considered a multi-layer design for acoustic impedance and backing absorber
zones for a transducer. They compared results obtained from the mass-spring approach and wave
propagation model. Their design consisting of metal–polymer inner layers and a quarter-wavelength
outer polymer layer yielded 50%, −6 dB bandwidth at 3.2 MHz. A polymer–metal backing made of
10 layers of copper tape was used as an absorber for a 715 µm thick PZT active element. The
attenuation of this material was measured and found to be 222 dB/cm at 3 MHz.

2.6. Degradation and Endurance

Most of the transducers do not suffer from degradation unless exposed to high-temperature
levels and radiation. Some applications where transducers are subjected to heat and radiation are
industrial, thermal power plants, and nuclear power plants [69]. Plastics and its derivatives such as
composites have low material and fabrication costs when compared to metals. The properties of
plastics or composites such as impedance and attenuation can be tailored for acoustic matching. The
most common failure modes due to radiation and thermal exposure have considerable resemblance
failures at high temperature [217]. Metals do not exhibit degradation from gamma radiation, which
is the main cause of degradation. The properties of an ultrasonic transducer’s backing layer such as
acoustic impedance and attenuation can change considerably with radiation exposure. Several
plastics such as Teflon used as matching layers should be avoided [218–221] for use in a radiative
environment. Radiation increases the cross-linking of polymers, reducing flexibility and toughness
[222]. Swelling, gas production, residual stress, thermal expansion, and discoloration is seen for
accumulated doses of approximately 106 Grays [223]. Interfacial stresses may arise, causing
delamination and failure.
The radiation resistance of other materials has been discussed in [218,220,221,224]. The
delamination at the interfaces such as piezo element–backing, piezo element–matching layer, or piezo
element–wear plate can occur. Several works suggest a significant degradation of the materials used
in the matching layer and wear plate such as blistering, bubbling, discoloration, and deformation
seen during ultrasonic inspections of CANDU reactor components [69]. Therefore, some transducers
incorporate design changes to avoid materials susceptible to radiation. Endurance test results with
respect to organic materials used in ultrasonic piezoelectric transducers [225] suggest radiation-
resistant adhesives to maintain the bond line integrity of the matching layer. Alternative methods
such as dry bonding and pressurized dry coupling, pressurized liquid coupling serve as an
alternative option, but they can be expensive and unreliable [217,226,227].
Debonding of the backing layer from the piezoelectric element causes a distortion of the signal
by excessive ringing. A reduction of bandwidth and poor time resolution due to ultrasonic echoes
can appear. Such failures such as blistering of the matching layer, delamination and detachment of
backing layer discoloration, water leakage, loss of bandwidth, efficiency drop, and loss of sensitivity
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 25 of 65

of 3–13 dB without failures were seen for a gamma dose of 1–2 MGy [228–230]. Periodic recalibration
and recovery by post-irradiation biased annealing [223,231–234] can be carried out for mitigating
minor damage to the piezoelectric element. However, the damage in other components of the
transducer may render the transducer inefficient. Lead metaniobate is employed as the piezoelectric
element for its superior temperature stability [231]. The PCB Piezotronics [235] provides piezoelectric
devices for accumulated gamma doses of approximately 1 MGy. Researchers have proposed the use
of faceplates and matching layers after 0.46–0.65 MGy of absorbed dose for stability after fabrication
[236]. Plastics used as backing, a 1/4-wave acoustic impedance matching layer, and protective face
need to have strong radiation resistance for which several epoxy systems are suitable [220]. The
thermal mismatch between transducer layers can be avoided during the design stage by selecting
materials with closely matching thermal expansion coefficients.

3. Special Acoustic Matching Layer Materials

The unsuitability of high impedance PZT materials for hydrophone and biomedical applications
require matching layers. High to very high-frequency applications require material properties that
are commercially unavailable and have called for the development for alternate materials. In this
section, we discuss several novel materials other than the one reported in Section 1.3.

3.1. Composites and Nanocomposites as a Passive Matching Layer

The 0–3 nanocomposites based on Al2O3 [237], CeO2 [238], SiO2 [239], TiO2 [240], and Ag [212] at
high frequencies 10–100 MHz have nonuniformity and high attenuation (>20 dB/mm at center
frequency) caused by particle scattering. A large volume fraction (>40%) of particles is difficult to be
embedded in the matrix due to the wetting problem. Changing the type of connectivity such as
silicon–epoxy 1-3 and 2-2 composite matching layers fabricated by deep reactive ion etching serve as
alternatives [187,241,242]. Table 5 lists various materials used as passive acoustic matching layers in
piezoelectric transducers and compares their performance.

Table 5. Comparison of acoustic properties of passive composite and nanocomposite matching layer
and their performance.

Matching
Transducer Active Acoustic Matching Layer
𝒁𝑨𝑪𝑶 Bandwidth Loss Ref
Type Element Load Material
(MRayl)
Lead
Ultrasonic 2-way
zirconate Human AAO–epoxy 1-3 9.1 and 2.4
imaging (12 68% (−6 dB) insertion [157]
titanate piezo tissue composite for 2 layers
MHz) −22.7 dB
ceramic
Ultrasonic
Human 2.8 to 5.1 for
imaging (40 LiNbO3 alumina/polymer 35% (−6 dB) 15 dB/mm [237]
tissue single layer
MHz)
Medical (signal
Zinc oxide cerium 4.0 to 7.0 for
ultrasound Water enhanced by 0.5 dB/µm [238]
layer oxide/polymer single layer
(100 MHz) 100%)
Medical
PZT Human Silicon oxide 4.4 to 5.8 for
ultrasound - - [239]
piezoceramics tissue colloidal/polymer single layer
(>50 MHz)
Ultrasonic
imaging (1 Silicon Water Su8/TiO2 3.0 to 6.0 - 0.5 dB/µm [240]
GHz)
Medical
PZT Human silicon-polymer
ultrasound 5.54 to 6.32 50% (−6 dB) - [241]
piezoceramics tissue 1-3 composites
(15 MHz)

Fang et al. [157] used anodic aluminum oxide–epoxy 1-3 composite matching layers and
designed two-layer matching as per transmission line method using the KLM model (see Section 2.2.1
for the method). The acoustic impedance of the PZT-5A ceramic and load medium 1.5 MRayls for the
human body was matched. The calculated acoustic impedance of the first and second layers was 9.1
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 26 of 65

MRayls and 2.4 MRayls, respectively. An AAO–epoxy composite as the first matching layer and pure
epoxy (Epotek 301) as the second matching layer with properties listed in Table 4 were chosen. The
backing material with high attenuation (−50 dB in the backing thickness at center frequency) widens
the bandwidth by absorbing the radiated ultrasonic energy and reducing the ringing. It reduced the
sensitivity [77,243] for which the bandwidth and signal amplitude was enhanced by a backing layer
made of a mixture of Epotek 301 epoxy, tungsten powder, and microbubbles with properties [244]
listed in Table 4. The KLM model-based simulation software Piezo CAD was used to predict the
performance, which revealed a center frequency of 11.2 MHz with a bandwidth (−6 dB) of 70%. The
PZT-5A ceramic with an active area of 2.0 × 2.0 mm2 and a thickness of 170 µm was used as the active
element of the transducer. The bottom electrode of this active element was bonded to a copper wire
terminated with a BNC connector. Then, the mixture of tungsten powder/micro bubbles/Epotek 301
was cast on the bottom electrode and filled the metal housing as the backing layer. Finally, the double
matching layers were bonded to this top electrode under an external pressure with about 20,000 Pa
by pressing a piece of metal as shown in Figure 9. Experimentally obtained voltage response and
spectrum measurements showed a broad bandwidth of 68% (−6 dB) and a two-way insertion loss of
−22.7 dB estimated from Equation (20) and Equation (26), respectively.

Figure 9. (a) Schematic diagram of the designed PZT-5A transducer and (b) cross-sectional SEM of
AAO–epoxy 1-3 composite. Reprinted from [157], Copyright (2016), with permission from Elsevier.

Novel thermoplastic nanocomposite foams are being considered for air-coupled ultrasonic
applications for their superior performance as well as cost-effective manufacturing. A chemical
blowing agent (CBA) liberates a blowing gas (CO2, H2O, NH3) in the foaming process under thermal
decomposition [245,246]. Instead of relatively light Al2O3 (𝜌 = 3.94 g/cm3) particles, Tiefensee et al.
[238] used CeO2 particles (𝜌 = 7.13 g/cm3) to reach an acoustic impedance of 6.8 MRayl for coupling
from most piezoelectric ceramics into water. The density of the matching layer between 2.0 and 3.0
g/cm3 was needed, for which 10 nm and 15 nm CeO2 nanoparticles served the purpose. Upon curing
with an epoxy, a silane nanocomposite was formed with an inorganic particle network. A TEM
picture of a nanocomposite with 10 wt % cerium oxide particles prepared with microtome cutting is
shown in Figure 10a. The particles were homogeneously distributed in the matrix that had a sound
velocity of 2100 m/s. Materials with 34 wt % and 75 wt % nanoparticle content (9–37 vol.%
respectively) were prepared to vary the acoustic impedance as it varied the density, as shown in
Figure 10b. The acoustic impedance varied between 4 and 7 MRayl linearly with the density and with
an attenuation of around 0.5 dB/µm.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 27 of 65

(a)

(b)
Figure 10. (a) A TEM picture of the epoxy matrix embedded with cerium oxide particles (10 wt %
CeO2). (b) Variation of acoustic impedance of cerium oxide/epoxy functionalized organic–inorganic
hybrid polymer nanocomposite. Reprinted from [238], Copyright (2010), with permission from
Elsevier.

Backing materials damp out transducer ringing by absorbing the acoustic energy from the
backward propagating energy and from unwanted shear waves. This also shortens the pulse duration
and broadens the bandwidth, reducing the transducer sensitivity. Backing materials should have
good acoustic coupling to the piezoelectric element. Similar acoustic impedances will transmit
acoustic waves into the backing materials without reflection from the interface. The backing material
with high attenuation property also eliminates any energy from reflecting to the piezoelectric
element. Usually, a single layer of backing serves these purposes. Epoxy resin loaded with tungsten
powder is the frequently used backing material. A wide range of acoustic impedance values results
by changing the content of tungsten powder (101 MRayl) in epoxy resin (3–4 MRayl) [101].

3.2. Acoustic Metamaterials and Metasurfaces

Traditional quarter-wavelength matching improves the energy transmission at the operating
frequency with the proper matching material. These techniques lead to a narrow pass-band window
of operation for which they are unsuitable for short pulse operation (broadband) to obtain good
resolution for applications such as medical diagnostics, nondestructive evaluation, and underwater
acoustics. New emerging ferroelectric single-crystal materials such as PMN–PT [78,247–255] have an
exceptional piezoelectric performance with 5 times higher strain energy densities and significantly
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 28 of 65

higher electromechanical couplings than other piezoelectric ceramics [249,250]. Recently, materials
such as phononic crystals and acoustic metamaterials have resulted in many novel applications such
as sound blocking [256,257], imaging [258,259], acoustic cloaking [260–264], absorption [265–271],
multiple exceptional point [272,273], and topological acoustics [274–280]. Phononic crystals block the
wave propagation by acoustic band gaps. Acoustic metamaterials are made of periodic artificial
structures referred as “meta-atoms”. Each meta-atom has a size larger than the conventional atom
and much smaller than the radiated wavelength and these are thereby used for the deep control and
manipulation of acoustic waves [281]. Acoustic metamaterials have zero to negative refractive index
offering new possibilities for the control of sound at the subwavelength scale [282]. Acoustic
metamaterials exhibit negative mass density [253,283–285], negative bulk modulus [252,286–288],
negative shear modulus [289], extreme anisotropy [290–292], and coiling behavior [293,294]. Acoustic
metamaterials involve the collection of subwavelengths called unit cells or metamaterial bricks. These
are characterized by effective mass density and bulk modulus.
Traditional approaches for acoustic impedance matching using metamaterials include the use of
Fabry–Pérot resonances [295–297] and gradient index structures. The Fabry–Pérot resonance
approach is sensitive to geometric size and frequency, whereas the gradient index approach requires
complex geometries. Some of these shortcomings have been overcome by using artificial acoustic
materials [298–304]. Matching layers with continuously changing acoustic impedance, especially
with exponential variation, provide satisfactory transmission and reflection properties [305].
Impedance matching with phononic crystals and acoustic metamaterials holds the possibility of near-
unity transmittance [255,299,301,305,306].
Li et al. [307] proposed a 1 mm thick gradient layer matching scheme to provide a solution for
the unsolved problem of an efficient broadband acoustic impedance matching scheme. The scheme
consisted of an anisotropic cone-structured acoustic metamaterial matching layer with periodically
arranged subwavelength silica–epoxy composite unit cells. The volume fraction of the silica cone was
designed to decrease away from the piezoelectric material, as shown in Figure 11. It provided
gradually changing acoustic impedance 11.4–3.0 MRayls along the direction of wave propagation.
Fabrication was carried out by etching the peeled silica optical fiber bundles with hydrofluoric acid
solution providing a −6 dB percentage bandwidth of approximately 100% around the resonant
frequency. The monotonic and continuous acoustic impedance variation along the thickness is shown
in Figure 12, and it varies as per the equation for 1–3 composites given by

2(1 − 𝑛)(𝐶 − 𝐶 )
𝑍= 𝑛 𝐶 − + (1 − 𝑛)𝐶 /[𝜌𝑛 + 𝜌 (1 − 𝑛)] , (44)
𝑛(𝐶 + 𝐶 ) + (1 − 𝑛)(𝐶 + 𝐶 )

where 𝐶 and 𝐶 (𝑖, 𝑗 = 1,2) are the elasticity coefficients of the metamaterial, 𝜌 and 𝜌 are the
densities, 𝑛 is the volume fraction of silica given by

𝑛= 1− . (45)
√

Equation (45) represents the variation of 𝑛 with the distance 𝑡 along the cone with the length 𝐿.
With such a broadband window, ultrasonography systems can utilize the full potential of single-
crystal piezoelectric materials.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 29 of 65

Figure 11. Pyramidal cone metamaterial matching layer showing (a) hexagonal close-packed silica
columns with maximum acoustic impedance nearing silica, (b) top side of the matching layers
showing the tips of the silica fibers with the lowest acoustic impedance, (c) the cross-section of the
metamaterial matching layer, and (d) the 3D topography showing the pyramidal cone arrays.
Reproduced from [307], an open-source article licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0
International License.

Figure 12. A continuous and monotonic distribution of the equivalent acoustic impedance along the
thickness direction of a metamaterial matching layer. Reproduced from [307], an open-source article
licensed under a Creative Commons Attribution 4.0 International License.

Most of the matching techniques are suitable for a normal incidence of waves. Perfect acoustic
absorbers require wide-angle impedance matching for applications in noise control and stealth
technology. Imaging enhances with wide-angle matching. Such abilities are demonstrated using
ultra-transparent media for use in photonics [308,309]. Liu et al. [309] proposed a wide-angle matched
acoustic metamaterials using a spatially dispersive effective medium theory by matching silicone
rubber of huge impedance mismatch with water. One and two-dimensional acoustic structures were
matched to achieve near 100% transmission. To match the impedance of the effective medium with
water, 𝑍 = 𝑍 the conservation of the tangential component of wave vector at the interface
𝑘 , = 𝑘 gives the condition of impedance matching as
𝜌 , 𝜌 , 𝜌
= ,
𝜔 𝜌 , 𝑘 −𝑘 (46)
−𝑘
𝐾
,
where 𝑘 = 𝜔 𝜌 /𝐾 , 𝑍 = 𝜔 is the wave impedance of media (water), 𝑍 = 𝜔 is the
,
wave impedance of effective medium, and 𝑘 , and 𝑘 , are the wave vectors along the 𝑥 and 𝑦
directions respectively related to 𝑘 by dispersion 𝑘 , + 𝑘 , = 𝑘 . The dispersion of effective
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 30 of 65

medium is given by + = , where 𝜌 , and 𝜌 , are the effective mass density

, ,
along the 𝑥 and 𝑦 directions. The wavenumber of the acoustic matching layer is given by 𝑘 =
( )
𝑘 𝑥 + 𝑘 𝑦. For a wide range of incident angles, the shifted spatial dispersion is given by +
𝑘 = 𝑘 [149,308,310], where 𝑝 denotes the displacement from the Brillouin-zone center, and 𝑞
determines the ratio of the 𝑘 and 𝑘 axes of the ellipse. Further, from above Equation (46), the
spatially dispersive parameters are obtained as

𝑝± 𝑞 𝑘 −𝑘 𝜌
(47)
𝜌 , (𝑘 ) = ±
𝑘 −𝑘

𝜔 𝑘 𝑘 −𝑘
− =± 𝑝± 𝑞 𝑘 −𝑘 . (48)
𝐾 (𝑘 ) 𝜌 , (𝑘 ) 𝜌
The above Equations (47) and (48) presents a solution for 𝜌 , and 𝜌 , that satisfies
impedance matching.
Unlike metamaterials that are generally referred to 3D structures, acoustic metasurfaces are 2D
metamaterials designed from thin material layers of subwavelength thickness to manipulate sound
[311]. The unit cell of the 2D acoustic matching layer was constructed by two kinds of porous silicone
rubber rods periodically aligned as shown in Figure 13a. The periodic structure formed a square
lattice in the y–z plane. The silicone rubber rod having 𝜌 = 1039.5 kg/m3 and 𝑐 = 679.4 m/s is
sandwiched by the silicone rubber rod 𝜌 = 1033.8 kg/m3 and 𝑐 = 246.4 m/s, as shown in Figure
13b. The filling ratio of the air-filled porous silicone rubber is altered for property tuning [312]. The
parameters shown are 𝑑 = 0.6a, 𝑑 = 0.1a, and 𝑑 = 0.4a. Here, a is the lattice constant. The band
structure is presented in Figure 13b. The equal-frequency contour of the third is shown in Figure 13c.
The shear modulus of the silicone rubber is smaller than the bulk modulus showing negligible
transverse modes [313,314]. The equal-frequency contour is an ellipse centered at the X point with a
shift in the 𝑘 direction implying spatial dispersion within the matching layer to obtain a wide-angle
impedance-matching effect. The impedance difference between the matching layer and water
showed a very small impedance difference around the central frequency for a large range of 𝑘 (See
Figure 13d), allowing broadband and wide-angle impedance matching between the matching layer
and water. The effective parameters further coincided very well (see Figure 13e) over a large range
of 𝑘 , indicating a wide-angle impedance matching within the matching layer with spatial
dispersion. The broadband and wide-angle impedance matching were further studied by
transmittance for acoustic waves passing through the matching slab consisting of n(= 4, 5, 6, 15) unit
cells in the x-direction. Figure 14 shows almost 100% transmission for all θ < 75°.
Acoustic impedance matching was done by Memoli et al. [315] using 3D metamaterial bricks to
obtain a focused beam by fabricating quantal metasurface. Jahdali and Wu [302] reported the design
of acoustic lenses tailored by acoustic metasurfaces comprising rigid thin plates with periodically
distributed subwavelength slits. The impedance of the lens was matched with background media,
and the focusing capability was demonstrated.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 31 of 65

Figure 13. (a) Schematic of a 2D impedance-matched acoustic matching layer. (b) Band structure
where the red dashed line denotes the central frequency 𝑓 /𝑐 = 0.357 and inset showing the unit
cell. (c) The equal-frequency contour of the third band. The red and blue dashed lines denote the equal
frequency contours of the acoustic matching layer and water at 𝑓 /𝑐 = 0.357, respectively. (d)
Impedance difference between the acoustic matching layer and water. (e) Effective parameters 𝜌
and 𝐾 of the 2D acoustic matching layer. Reprinted with permission from [309], DOI:
https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.2.045201, Copyright (2018) by the American Physical
Society.

Figure 14. Incident-angle-dependent transmittance of acoustic waves propagating through an

acoustic metamaterial matching layer with n = 4, 5, 6, 15 unit cells. Reprinted with permission from
[309], DOI: https://doi.org/10.1103/PhysRevMaterials.2.045201, Copyright (2018) by the American
Physical Society.

4. Acoustic Matching for Specific Transducer or Sensor Type

4.1. Very High-Frequency Ultrasonic Transducers

High-frequency (>20 MHz) transducers utilizing piezocomposites have been extensively studied
for ultrasonic imaging [128]. Piezoelectric composites utilizing piezo rods embedded in the passive
polymer matrix have received great attention. Shen et al. [316] developed 1–3 type (Na,K)NbO3 based
Pb-free piezocomposites for high-frequency transducer applications. Spark plasma sintering was
used to prepare Li/Ta-modified KNN ceramics with an optimized nominal composition of
(Na0.535K0.485)0.95Li0.05(Nb0.8Ta0.2)O3 (NKLNT). A 1–3 composite based on NKLNT was fabricated using
the dice-fill method [317]. Good electrical properties were achieved with a high piezoelectric constant
(𝑑 = 5140 pC/N), low acoustic impedance (𝑍 = 56.6 MRayls), high electromechanical coupling
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 32 of 65

coefficient (𝑘 = 0.655), reduced dielectric constant (𝜖 = 302), piezoelectric voltage coefficient (𝑔 =

52.4.4 × 10−3 m2/C), and mechanical quality factor (𝑄 = 18). A very broad bandwidth of 89.7% at −6 dB
and at 29 MHz was developed.
Requirements of satisfying specific acoustic impedance and precise thickness have been
problematic, especially for broadband very high-frequency ultrasonic transducers (>100 MHz).
Difficulty in achieving ultra-thin matching layers for a high-frequency range for the quarter-
wavelength matching method has led to the use of the mass-spring approach and transmission line
approach. These approaches have been discussed in Sections 2.2 and 2.3, respectively. Fei et al. [154]
used these approaches to match the acoustic impedance of a 100 MHz transducer with water. The
loci of the transducer impedance shown in the Smith chart of Figure 15 is normalized to 12.13 MRayl,
indicating optimization lines for the transmission line as ‘Calc’ and the KLM spring-mass model as
‘Fabr’. Both methods estimated an impedance of 12.13 MRayl for 250 nm gold thickness and 2.5 µm
parylene thickness. The shifting of impedance from edge to center indicates the matching of the
complex value of acoustic impedance and reflection coefficient using the two layers. The continuous
variation of the impedance during optimization using the Smith chart leads to the capability of
impedance matching without strict dependence on the specific impedances of the materials. Figure
16 shows the fabricated transducer and its pulse–echo response obtained with and without matching
layers. Parylene layer was vapor-deposited, and the gold layer was sputtered. The amplitude was
enhanced by 68.6%, whereas −6 dB bandwidth was enhanced from 30.2% to 58.3%. Such acoustic
impedance-matching techniques can be further developed to suit modern composite acoustic devices
such as High-tone Bulk Acoustic Resonators (HBAR) and Solid Mounted Resonator (SMR) operating
at microwave operational frequencies (20 GHz) [318–321]. These devices of thin film piezoelectric
materials have interesting frequency response characteristics concerned with the acoustical
performance and are of great importance as sensors.

Figure 15. Smith chart showing the acoustic impedance loci of transducer normalized to 12.13 MRayl
and obtained using the transmission line model (Calc.) and KLM-based spring-mass model (Fabr.).
Reprinted from [154], with the permission of AIP Publishing.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 33 of 65

Figure 16. Schematic and photo of the 100 MHz LiNbO3 transducer with matching layers shown on
the left. A comparison is made on the right showing the pulse–echo experimental response of the
transducer before and after the matching layers deposition on the top surface. Reprinted from [154],
with the permission of AIP Publishing.

4.2. Piezoelectric Micromachined Ultrasonic Transducers

Microelectromechanical systems (MEMS), fabricated by means of micromachining technology,
have advantages including small size and batch fabrication with low manufacturing cost, flexibility
in frequency ranges, and high resolution. MEMS ultrasound devices are commonly known as
micromachined ultrasonic transducers (MUTs) with piezoelectric form (pMUT). The pMUTs have
linear drive responses, high vertical deformation, and require lower driving voltage, but they suffer
from lower electromechanical coupling factors. Muralt and Baborowski [322] discussed the best
possible coupling coefficient of a piezoelectric heteromorphous membrane amounting to typically
60% in bulk PZT, since half of the vibrating structure is passive. Thus, the coupling coefficient is 10%
to 20% less than 𝑘 used in bulk transducers. They further discussed the applications that need
high coupling. Akhbari et al. [323,324] discussed the electric equivalent model of pMUTs, which can
be readily used for acoustic impedance layer-matching designs. Lee et al. [325] used collagen-filled
deep reactive ion etched back-side hole for acoustic impedance matching for 2D pMUT arrays and a
Petri dish on a fluorescence microscope. The targeted application was cell stimulation. Akasheh et al.
[326] altered the impedance of micromachined piezoelectric films to match with the acoustic
impedance of water for use in AC acoustic transducers.

4.3. Air and Liquid Coupled Transducers

Airborne transducers have become valuable in developing systems related to robotics [327],
material characterization, in situ monitoring, acoustic microscopy, nondestructive evaluation [328–
330], human–computer interaction [331–336], ultrasonic vortex generation [337], tactile [338], and
metrology [339]. Unlike liquid-coupled ultrasonic transducers, air-coupled ultrasonic transducers are
clean and easy to use [335,340–343]. It also avoids cleaning or drying and possible moisture damage
to the parts being inspected [344]. Therefore, the noncontact NDE is fast and saves inspection time
and cost in an industrial setting [345]. The noncontact transducers are often bulky when compared to
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 34 of 65

contact transducers and are very carefully designed to achieve high power efficiency and signal
quality for industrial use. They suffer either from the limitation in the availability of materials for
effective impedance matching and their associated attenuation losses. The high difference of acoustic
impedance of a piezoelectric ceramic element 𝑍 = 30 MRayl and air 𝑍 = 0.000425 MRayl requires
multiple matching layers. Even transducers coupled with water that have 𝑍 = 1.5 MRayl need multi-
layer matching. Multi-layer matching causes internal reverberations of the transmitted wave. The
ratio of transmitted to incident acoustic energy from the matching layer to the air is given by

𝑇𝑇𝑒 𝑍
Υ = , (49)
1−𝑅 𝑅 𝑒 𝑍

where 𝑇 , = 2𝑍 , /(𝑍 , + 𝑍 , ) represents the ratio of transmitted to incident wave amplitude and
𝑅 , = (2𝑍 , − 𝑍 , )/(𝑍 , + 𝑍 , ) represents the ratio of the reflected wave amplitude to the
incident wave amplitude. The loss in dB is given by
Υ (dB) = 10log(Υ ). (50)
Thus, the attenuation in the matching layer is regarded as a one-way insertion loss, regardless
of the other components of the transducers and excitation. Therefore, the loss that is dependent
purely on the material is of great importance in the development and selection of special materials
for matching layers. Gomez Alvarez-Arenas [176] studied the optimum impedance of the matching
layer required for materials having different attenuation loss coefficients. The performance had a
little dependency on attenuation loss for water-coupled transducers, as most of the energy was
transmitted within the first reflection. The estimated optimum value for an air-coupled transducer
was 0.12 MRayl, and that for a water-coupled transducer was 6.4 MRayl. An important aspect of the
attenuation coefficient is the variation with frequency. If the variation is linear with frequency, such
as that seen in constant-Q materials, the insertion loss is independent. However, certain materials
such as porous solids especially used as the matching layers in air-coupled ultrasound have variation
described by a power law with 0.5–4 as a value for the exponent. The power law is given by

Υ =Υ𝑓 , (51)
where Υ = 𝛼 𝑣. Complex mechanisms such as viscosity, thermal dissipation, friction, viscoelasticity,
and multi-phase scattering give rise to such a power law, which is difficult to theoretically establish
[346,347]. Air-coupled transducers require an outer matching layer to possess 0.04–0.3 MRayl with
Υ = 0.14 Np. In addition, broadband transducers require less or a linear dependency of attenuation
coefficient with frequency. Such a requirement is difficult to achieve. Silica aerogel has an acoustic
impedance of 0.1 MRayl and Υ = 0.06 Np, but it is difficult to machine [348–351]. The silicon-loaded
microspheres developed have a tradeoff with low impedance 0.3 MRayl and low attenuation Υ =
0.6 Np.
An interesting approach is the use of a porous membrane, which was reported for the first time
using polyolefin material [352] with 𝚼𝒕 = 0.276 Np. Cellulose nitrate membrane showed better
properties with 𝑍 = 0.12 MRayl and 𝚼𝒕 = 0.25 Np [353,354]. Polyethersulphone and nylon
membranes with a pore size of 0.1 µm exhibit even lower attenuation of 0.044 Np and 0.14 Np
respectively, with a proper acoustic impedance of 0.1–0.313 MRayl. Various other membrane filters
have been reported to have 𝑍 = 0.08–0.63 MRayl and 𝚼𝒕 = 0.1–0.6 Np with 𝜆/4 and a resonant
frequency of 0.3–2 MHz.
Instead of passive matching layers, active matching layers have been used widely in air-coupled
ultrasound. Galbraith and Hayward [355] proposed piezoelectric membranes made of poled PVDF
as air-coupled ‘‘hydrophones’’ or ‘‘aerophones,’’. Heterogeneous cellular polymer ferroelectrets have
shown strong piezoelectricity [356–358]. Sborikas et al. [359] used cellular polypropylene (PP) films
as a piezoelectric element, which has an acoustic impedance of 0.024–0.027 MRayl closely matching
with an acoustic impedance of air (400 Rayl) to develop an air-borne transducer for the inspection of
fabrics. Acoustic impedance was changed by obtaining films of different density 251–606 kg/m3 using
expansion and thermal treatment-based fabrication, as shown in Figure 17. The matching of acoustic
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 35 of 65

impedance eliminated the requirement of matching layers. They obtained a bandwidth of 35% at −6
dB with a resonance frequency around 150 kHz. The acoustic transmittivity was found to be 6 mPa/V.
The highest 𝑘 = 0.045 was seen at a density of 596 kg/m3, which is lower compared to piezoceramics.
However, the figure of merit (FOM) [128,140] was found to be higher for PP films, which considers
both 𝑘 and 𝑍 . Polymer ferroelectrets have also been considered to develop a water-coupled
transducer [360], as the acoustic impedance of the ferroelectret film is closer to the acoustic impedance
of water (𝑍 = 1.48 MRayls). de Medeiros et al. [361] proposed an ultrasonic hydrophone based on a
piezoelectret made of fluoroethylene–propylene films 𝑍 = 0.03 MRayl [362–367] to be used in
ultrasonic imaging and vibroacoustography [368,369]. Nylon 𝑍 = 2.0–2.3 MRayl was employed as a
matching layer to match the acoustical impedance with water.

Figure 17. Acoustic impedance and electromechanical coupling factor k (obtained from the fit of
dielectric spectra) for the given sample density range. Reprinted from [359], Copyright (2015), with
permission from Elsevier.

To acoustically match piezoelectric crystal with air, the acoustic impedance of piezoelectric
crystal needs to be around 80 kRayl. Such a solid material is difficult to find among natural solid
materials. Highly porous solid foam with a compliant web can meet the density and stiffness
requirement but gives rise to a narrow frequency range of operation. Scattering of the wave around
cell boundaries needs to be avoided to prevent de-phasing. Such a material is silica aerogel, which
can be used between piezoceramics and air as a matching layer [349]. Toda [370] proposed a different
type of layer consisting of a thin membrane placed at a distance of a piezoelectric transducer via a
perforated film showing a significant improvement (up to 10 dB) in a narrow frequency band of
approximately 40 kHz.
Piezocomposites improve acoustic impedance matching when compared to bulk piezoceramics
but in a rather narrow frequency band [353,371–373]. Even some sophisticated matching layer(s)-
based transducers [176,346,374] using silica aerogels (0.015 MRayl) and thin porous filtration
membranes work in a relatively narrow bandwidth. A porous layer was combined with a low-density
rubber as layers, resulting in a better amplitude enhancement falling only 20 dB from a maximum at
0.50–2.0 MHz [354]. Bovtun et al. [375] used ferroelectric films by integrating them with high
impedance amplifiers for acoustic wave transmission in air.
Castaings et al. [376] used 1–3 composite active elements to develop matched air-coupled
transducers for the nondestructive evaluation of composite laminates. Piezo-ceramic rods embedded
in a polymer provided matching to minimize the enormous acoustic impedance mismatch between
air and the transducer. Mechanical impedance of the transducers was controlled by adjusting the
ceramic/polymer volume fraction. This was extremely important, as the response is nearly zero with
the unavoidable loss due to the reflection between air and composite laminate [377]. The reflection
coefficient at the top surface of the component approaches unity, and transmission of the reflected
wave from the defect has the transmission coefficient nearly equal to zero, and thus very little energy
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 36 of 65

is transmitted back to the receiver. The signature from defect being much smaller than the initial
specular reflection from the surface makes it impossible to use normal incidence single-sided
inspection, as the signals of interest will be overloaded by the specular reflection. Therefore, oblique
incidence testing was considered.
Chimenti [335] considered the study of transduction performance with incidence angle for an
application involving the testing of concrete. Aging concrete infrastructure was estimated to cost
almost 3.6 trillion dollars for quality reinstatement in 2017 [378]. Durability is mostly affected by
microcracking, which increase with time [379]. Nondestructive assessment of these structures is
limited to small structures using noncontact ultrasound [380,381]. Contact-based ultrasound offers
the capability to assess large structures but is impractical to evaluate large infrastructure. Inspection
engineers are left with the choice to improve noncontact ultrasound techniques. Noncontact air-
coupled ultrasound offers through-thickness assessment by enabling rapid data collection and a real-
time display of intuitive scan results. The major hurdle in the development was imposed by large
acoustic impedance mismatch from the transducer (𝑍 = 36.15 MRayl) to air (𝑍 = 0.00042 MRayl) and
then from air to concrete interfaces (𝑍 = 8.36–11.13 MRayl). Multiple reflections reduce the received
energy drastically. The resulting reflection coefficient from PZT to air is nearly –1 (−0.999, see
Equation (17) in Section 1.4) calling for the utilization of acoustic impedance matching layers.
Chimenti [335] operated the transducer at its electrical resonance and receiver at its mechanical
resonance to maximize their efficiency. The variation of reflection coefficient with the angle of
incidence of the transmitted beam is shown in Figure 18 for the air–aluminum interface. It shows a
very small range of critical angles and a minimum value of reflection coefficient at the first critical
angle, which is still near unity. The onset of total reflection is within 8°. Even for an air–plexiglass
interface, the onset of total reflection occurs before 20°. Acoustic matching layers for air-coupled and
liquid-coupled ultrasonic transducers have been also proposed for applications in the food industry
such as drying, apple firmness, defoaming, and decontamination [382–385].

(a)
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 37 of 65

(b)
Figure 18. Reflection coefficient of an (a) air–aluminum interface and (b) air–plexiglass interface.
Reprinted from [335], Copyright (2014), with permission from Elsevier.

4.4. Phased Array Transducers

Ultrasonic arrays are used in sonar and medical imaging due to their acoustic beam focusing
and steering capabilities [386,387]. Properties such as non-diffraction, self-bending, twisting, and
focusing of the wave front are of main interest [388–390]. Lau et al. [159] proposed a double 𝜆/8
matching layer scheme for acoustic impedance matching for a 16-element phased array transducer
with PMN–PT single crystal (72 mol% of PMN) active elements. The double 𝜆/8 layers resulted in a
quarter 𝜆/4 matching layer design. An element center-to-center spacing was 0.28 mm. A highly
attenuating backing with matched acoustic impedance comprising two types of backing listed in
Table 4 as tungsten powder, microbubbles, and epoxy composite was considered. The acoustic
impedances of two matching layers were estimated as per the two-layer quarter wavelength
matching method mentioned in Section 2.2.1. The PMN-28% PT had an acoustic impedance of 25.0
MRayls. For acoustic impedance of the load (tissue or water) 1.5 MRayls, the calculated values of
acoustic impedance of the two layers were 7.5 MRayls and 2.3 MRayls, respectively. The layer with
higher acoustic impedance was placed adjacent to the piezoelectric element. The model was
simulated using PiezoCAD at a design frequency of 3.2 MHz. The transducer with a light backing
provided a 6 dB transducer bandwidth of over 80%. With the hard backing, the bandwidth was up
to 100% for conventional quarter-wavelength matching. With the double acoustic impedance
matching layers, the bandwidth reached 130%. The pulse–echo response of the phased array
transducer showed a response and frequency spectrum with a center frequency of 4.0 MHz and with
the −6 dB bandwidth of 110% as estimated from the equations described in Section 1.4. The two-way
insertion loss was –46.5 dB after compensation for attenuation and reflection from the stainless-steel
target. A ring down is seen, indicating partially damped vibration. With the combination of double
𝜆/8 matching layers and hard backing, a transducer bandwidth over 100% is realizable. Similarly,
Yongfen et al. [391] used a two-layer acoustic matching method to match the acoustic impedance of
planar ultrasonic-receiving-array with 16 × 16 elements made of PbTiO3 with the acoustic impedance
of oil. Tungsten-loaded epoxy backing was used.
Zhou et al. [36] proposed an advanced endoscopic ultrasonic radial array transducer design
using 0.7Pb(Mg1/3Nb2/3)O3-0.3PbTiO3(PMN–PT) single crystal/epoxy 1–3 composite. The matching
layer was designed considering the load due to tissues of lungs, liver, gallbladder, pancreas, and
aorta [392–394] for endoscopic applications. The transducer array with 64 elements had dimensions
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 38 of 65

30.08 mm × 11 mm × 0.165 mm(thickness). The resonance of each element was 6.5 MHz. The backing
layer was composed of polyether-modified epoxy resin with tungsten powder and micro-bubbles
having high acoustic attenuation to reduce the ring-down time of the transducer. The backing layer
was highly flexible to be wrapped onto the copper cylinder. The front-face matching layer was
designed considering λ/4 criteria proposed by Desilets et al. [71] as given by Equation (30) and was
calculated using the acoustic impedance values 12 MRayl for PMN–PT/epoxy 1–3 composite and
approximately 1.5 MRayl for load medium (tissue or water). The matching layer 3.9 MRayl was made
by mixing low-viscosity epoxy (Epo-Tek 301) with approximately 5 µm alumina powder. The −6 dB
bandwidth was 102%. It also exhibited a low two-way insertion loss of −32.3 dB.
Passive phased array provides local phase delay by steering the wave front from a single source.
Apart from shaping the phase and achieving fine spatial resolution, overcoming the local impedance
mismatch is required when using acoustic metamaterials [252,253,264,283,293,395,396] and
metasurfaces [265,397–401]. Li et al. [296] presented a passive screen stacked up by an array of passive
elements forming a hybrid structure. It consisted of a straight pipe of height ℎ and four Helmholtz
resonators (HRs) of height ℎ with the element dimensions w = λ/2 and h = λ/10, as shown in Figure
19a. Figure 19b shows the fabricated samples of the eight elementary units to vary the phase from 0
to 2π considering sound waves of resonant wavelength λ = 10 cm at a frequency f0 = 3430 Hz in air.
The phase shift produced by such design is given by

𝑦 𝐻 (52)
∅(𝑦) = −𝑘 𝑦 − 2𝑟 −𝑘 𝑦− +𝐿 −𝐿
𝑟 2

where 𝐿 = 120 cm is the distance of the source from the screen, and 𝐻 = 80 cm is the screen length.
A loudspeaker of dimension is 3 × 3 cm2 was used to form a wave front, and the sound fields were
measured using a ¼ in microphone. The sound field simulated with the white dotted rectangular
region for seeking experimental measurements is shown in Figure 19c, whereas Figure 19d shows the
experimental measurements. The sound pressure level along the trajectory showed the difference in
the near field from imperfect sound absorption by wedge-shaped foams at the metascreen that led to
the presence of standing waves in between them.

(a)

(b)
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 39 of 65

(c)

(d)
Figure 19. (a) Element design showing a hybrid structure consisting of a straight pipe and four
Helmholtz resonators. (b) Fabricated samples with eight elementary units. (c) Simulated sound field
where the field at 𝑥 > 0 is normalized by the maximum value. Comparison of the experimental
measurements with numerical simulation along the white-colored trajectory in (d). Reprinted with
permission from [296] Copyright (2015) by the American Physical Society.

Brown et al. [402] showed the variation of acoustic impedance of PVDF with temperature from
4.7 MRayl at −40 °C (𝑣 = 2630 m/s) to 3.1 MRayl at 80 °C (𝑣 = 1730 m/s). The acoustic impedance of
the acrylic test blocks 3.1 MRayl matched closely with the PVDF, suggesting that the designers
carefully consider the effect of temperature on the acoustic matching properties and finally the
transducer design. They used Mason’s model to account for the change in the properties such as
dielectric and mechanical losses with temperature. The temperature dependence becomes more
important in medical ultrasound where the transducers are continuously operated for imaging and
therapeutic applications. Brown [160] has also presented the use of MylarTM material as matching and
protective layers for ultrasonic transducers. Suggestions for design consideration considering various
other materials for acoustic matching have been given.

4.5. High-Temperature Ultrasound

Ultrasonic transducers for applications at high temperatures have been widely employed within
nuclear power industries to inspect steel components at temperatures up to 400 °C. Automotive,
aeroengine industries, and materials research use high-temperature transducers [403]. Ultrasonic
monitoring is often used to characterize advanced materials during manufacturing at elevated
temperatures and during nondestructive evaluation. Ultrasound Doppler velocimetry is another
application where hot melts flows are monitored. High temperatures liquid metals inside modern
reactors cooled by liquid metals such as Pb/Bi alloy [227,404,405] have wetting limitations and
corrosive environment, posing difficulties for the ultrasonic measurements. Space exploration
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 40 of 65

applications of piezoelectric transducers represent several extreme environments with combinations

of high temperatures (460 °C), high pressure (9 MPa), and corrosiveness [406,407].
Materials such as polyamides withstand extremely high temperatures while maintaining good
ultrasonic properties. They are suitable for the design of acoustic impedance-matching layers for
high-temperature transducer applications. Crystals backings and matching layers must be tested, and
if necessary, passive cooling is achieved by transducer housings for continuous or long-term
operation [226]. A prototype ultrasonic probe proposed by Mrasek et al. [408] involves an inconel-
600 λ/2 membrane (approximately 0.6 mm) closing the front of austenite housing with matching
acoustic impedance at 800 °C. Several piezoelectric materials serve as active elements for high-
temperature ultrasound such as modified bismuth titanate [409], lithium niobate LiNbO3 single
crystal for temperature up to 1000 °C [410] and Z-cut lithium niobite crystal pillars embedded in a
matrix of alumina cement Al2O3 forming 1–3 connectivity composite materials for operating
temperatures above 400 °C [411]. These materials require the development of acoustic impedance
materials for their efficient use in high-temperature applications.
Amini et al. [412] introduced a porous ceramic backing layer to operate at 700 °C for broadband
ultrasonic transducer applications. A 36° Y-cut lithium niobate (LiNbO3) single crystal was used as
the piezoelectric element. Zirconia-based backing layer was optimized for the acoustic impedance
and attenuation by appropriate selection of its porosity and pore size. Brazing alloy with high
temperature and chemical stability was used to bond the transducer layers.

4.6. Acoustic Filters

The analog filters are used as devices in multi-frequency microwave [413], optical [414], and
recently mechanical [415] wave control systems. Multi-frequency mechanical or acoustic systems
comprise acoustic filters made of polarization patterned piezoelectric solids or periodic structures
(phononic crystals) [416–419] and acoustic diodes and switches (combined periodic and nonlinear
systems) [396,420–425]. Spatially asymmetric wave propagation using dual-frequency ultrasound
transducers [426] favors super-harmonic microscopy [427]. Dual-frequency ultrasound transducer
transmits a fundamental wave that blocks its backward propagation. Ma et al. [190] estimated the
insertion loss of an AF layer as a transmission line using the Smith chart for low-frequency (upper
half) and high-frequency (lower half) ranges. The Smith chart represents the loci of the reflection
coefficient from the center. As indicated in Figure 20 at high frequency, the matched condition 𝑍
(center) shifts to free-moving condition 𝑍 . At 𝑙 = 𝜆 /4, the reflection coefficient is maximum with
a zero phase yielding very high insertion loss. The AWR software further showed an insertion loss
of 10–20 dB with less than 1 dB propagation loss. Experiments performed with 𝑓 = 30 MHz and
𝑓 = 3.5 MHz. Active materials made of PMN-0.33PT had 𝑍 =𝑍 = 36.8 MRayl. Alumina powder
mixed with epoxy 𝑍 = 5.53 MRayl served as an AF material. Parylene C 𝑍 = 3.16 MRayl served
as an HF matching layer. The thickness was selected such that 𝐿 = 0.25𝜆 and 𝐿 = 0.5𝜆 . The
backing layer chosen as plastic 𝑍 = 3.0 MRayl had no effect on performance. The operation of the
transducer in pulse–echo mode (in a water bath) showed the aliasing echo as shown in Figure 21
when the AF matching layer was absent. In the presence of an AF layer between HF and LF elements,
the aliasing echoes were suppressed.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 41 of 65

Figure 20. Acoustic filter design calculation using a Smith chart showing the loci of reflection
coefficient normalized to the impedance of the piezoelectric material. The numbers followed by AM
indicate relative impedance. Reprinted from [190], with the permission of AIP Publishing.

Figure 21. High-frequency pulse–echo response (a) without AF layer and (b) with AF layer. Reprinted
from [190], with the permission of AIP Publishing.

5. Acoustic Matching for Specific Applications

5.1. Biomedical Applications

The matching of an ultra high-frequency (>100 MHz) ultrasound probe made of high-impedance
material with biological tissue and liquid such as water or coupling gel requires a matching layer
[387]. For strong acoustic coupling, the transducer’s acoustic impedance should be closely matched
to that of body tissue (1.5 MRayls). This also minimizes the reflection from the transducer/skin
interface, leading to a low insertion loss. Matching layers assist in the realization of acoustic coupling
with the tissue.

5.1.1. Medical Imaging

The reverberations in the medical ultrasound transducers that cause multiple copies of
signatures represent as false copies of anatomical structure and degrade the image quality. This paves
a way for potential misdiagnosis [1–3]. Bertocci et al. [428] presented a method to characterize the
reverberations in medical ultrasound transducers. The modeling and simulation of reverberations
presented by Kochanski et al. [429] aim in the development of fault detection in medical ultrasound
transducers due to reverberations. Identification [430], reverberation cancellation, and reverberation
suppression [431,432] are among other works that have reported the complications that arise due to
acoustic impedance mismatch. Lee et al. [433] developed a dual-frequency oblong-shaped focused
probe for intravascular ultrasound-based tissue harmonic imaging. The first acoustic matching layer
had 2.0–3.5 µm silver particles mixed with matrix 7.334 MRayl and had a thickness of 14 µm for the
outer elements and 6 µm for the central element. A layer of Parylene C 2.59 MRayl served as
protection and electrical shielding layer with a thickness of 7 µm and served as the second matching
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 42 of 65

layer for the 70-MHz center element. The thickness was determined using the PiezoCAD software
package (Sonic Concept, Woodinville, WA, USA) through its simulation capabilities. Experiments
showed a −6 dB fractional bandwidth to be 50% at 33 MHz in the pulse–echo mode.

5.1.2. Thermal Therapy

Thermal therapy using ultrasound has been used for the treatment of tumors. High-intensity
focused ultrasound is a thermal noninvasive treatment methodology alternative to open surgery or
chemotherapy for the treatment of non-superficial tumor. Ultrasound used for imaging has a very
high frequency of operation where the transducer can be used at high intensities suitable for thermal
therapy. Thus, dual-frequency or broadband transducers are preferred instead of using discrete
frequency multiple transducers for imaging and thermal therapy. Conventional ultrasound-based
probes utilizing PZT4 or PZT8 (𝑍 ≅ 35 MRayl) ceramics have a narrow bandwidth of 6% but
good efficiency of 93%. Chopra et al. [434] noted that the addition of a matching layer (𝑍=~7.3 MRayl)
based on the quarter-wavelength criteria 𝑍 𝑍 and tissue impedance 𝑍 = 1.5225
MRayl, in the absence of a backing layer, gives a broad bandwidth of 64% but with a reduced
efficiency of 10%. Further increasing the acoustic impedance of the matching layer nearing the
acoustic impedance of piezo ceramic produced two well-spaced frequencies with a high efficiency of
88% and narrow bandwidth. The separation of frequencies served well for ultrasound thermal
therapy with narrow bandwidth continuous wave operation and narrow bandwidth high-frequency
imaging.
A piezocomposite transducer can transmit acoustic intensity in order of 10 W/cm2 with 60%
efficiency for 60 s, which is suitable for therapeutic applications [126]. A piezocomposite material
possessing around 8–12 MRayl allows good energy transfer with a wide bandwidth and with efficient
coupling to water or tissue [435]. With the flexibility of the polymer phase with the bending capability
of embedded piezoelectric fibers or rods or particles, the fabrication of transducers with the concave
or convex surface is easily realized. However, the low mechanical quality factor of piezocomposites
results in heat generation alongside high-power or high-intensity acoustic transmission. The low
thermal conductivity of the polymer phase adds to the problem of thermal dissipation, giving rise to
heat accumulation and the depolarization of piezoelectric material due to heat. Acoustic impedance
matching with a proper choice of piezoelectric material can provide better designs.
Acoustic pressure that is high enough to exceed the cavitation threshold increases the
temperature, and this leads to shortening of the thermal therapy treatment duration [436]. Cavitation
produces mechanical and chemical effects such as sonoluminescence and sonochemical reactions in
tissues for potential therapeutic applications [437–442], lithotripsy [443], and histotripsy [444].
Usage of the second harmonic in the diagnostic ultrasound field is widely used, especially in
low-frequency medical application [445]. Superimposing the second harmonic upon the fundamental
harmonic increases the cavitation bubbles when compared to only single-frequency waves [446,447].
Zaini et al. [448] used high impedance-matching layers for a transducer consisting of seven
electrically independent square elements. It was designed for a frequency of 2 MHz for generating
the second harmonic. The width and height of each element was 8.8 mm, as shown in Figure 22. The
thickness ratio of the piezocomposite and heavy matching layer was modified with initial thickness
values of a piezocomposite and heavy matching layer of 0.95 mm and 0.46 mm, respectively. By
increasing the thickness of the heavy matching layer to 0.506 mm and decreasing the thickness of the
piezocomposite to 0.903 mm, the amplitude of the fundamental component at 1 MHz was decreased,
and the second harmonic at 2 MHz was increased. The fundamental and second harmonic amplitudes
can be tuned by varying the thickness ratio of the piezocomposite and the heavy matching layer. The
simulation and experimental results with a heavy matching layer produced both the fundamental
and second harmonic, as shown in Figure 23.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 43 of 65

Figure 22. (a) Heavy matching layer transducer and (b) its internal configuration. Reproduced from
[448] with permission from Copyright (2016) The Japan Society of Applied Physics.

Figure 23. Comparison of transducer output with a heavy matching layer, without a heavy matching
layer, and with a conventional approach. Reproduced from [448] with permission from Copyright
(2016) The Japan Society of Applied Physics.

5.1.3. Dental
Piezoelectric vibrators with kilohertz-frequency vibrating tips have been used for scaling teeth,
and limited developments have been realized for the diagnostic imaging of tooth when compared to
medical diagnostics [449]. Imaging has been realized involving surrounding organs such as tongue,
major salivary gland, lymph nodes, facial, and neck muscles to detect diseases such as carcinomas,
periapical lesions, and temporomandibular joint disorders [450]. The reason for limited
advancements in the imaging of tooth and the immediate surrounding areas is the anisotropic
material properties [451], causing drastic variation in the velocity measurements depending on the
position and direction [449]. The geometry of the tooth adds to the prevailing complexities, making
the imaging erroneous. The properties of the tooth and its surrounding tissue are listed in Table 6.

Table 6. Acoustic properties of typical dental media. 𝒄𝒍 and 𝒄𝒕 represent the longitudinal and
transverse wave velocity [449,452,453].

Material 𝒄𝒍 (m/s) 𝒄𝒕 (m/s) 𝝆 (kg/m3) 𝒁𝑨𝑪𝑶 = 𝝆𝒄 (MRayl)

Enamel 6250 3100 3000 18.8
Dentin 3800 1900 2000 7.6
Cementum 3200 - - 6.5
Dental Pulp 1570 800 1000 1.57
Ligament 1580 - - 1.7
Gingiva 1540 - - 1.63
Amalgam 4350 2260 7750 33.7
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 44 of 65

5.1.4. Opthalmic
Ultrasound imaging provides noninvasive cross-sectional images of soft tissues [178] such as
eye and blood vessels with high-frequency transducers, as high resolution is needed. The image
resolution requirement has prompted intensive studies as it assists in diagnosing disease and tissue
damage or abnormality at very early stages. Very high (approximately 100 MHz) [128] to ultra-high
(100–300 MHz) [172] frequency designs provide such resolutions. Design, fabrication, and
characterization have been proposed by Zhang et al. [454] to develop a press-focused LiNbO3
transducer. It consisted of a 36° Y cut LNO single crystal with one matching layer to meet the very
high-frequency requirement. A simulation software PiezoCAD (Sonic Concepts, Woodinville, WA)
based on the KLM model was used to design the transducer aperture size and optimize the thickness.
Large bandwidth (92% at −6 dB) was achieved at a frequency of 75 MHz for a pulse–echo response.
The scanning of pig eyes showed fine structures showing a lateral resolution of 110 µm and an axial
resolution of 𝑅 = 13.09 µm. These resolutions are estimated [173] by
𝜆 𝑣
𝑅 = = (53)
2 𝐵𝑊 2𝑓 𝐵𝑊
𝜆𝐹 𝑣𝐹
𝑅 = (54)
𝑓
where 𝑣 is the speed of sound, 𝑓 is the center frequency, 𝐵𝑊 is the bandwidth, 𝐹 is the ratio of
focal distance to aperture dimension, and 𝜆 is the wavelength.

5.1.5. Implants
Wireless implantable devices are popular since the 1970s when they were introduced based on
the inductive powering principle [455]. However, these devices operate with transmitter and receiver
coils placed less than 4–10 mm apart [456]. Deeply placed implants cannot operate based on the
inductive principle. Ultrasonic powering has overcome this challenge [457], as ultrasonic waves can
propagate in the body tissues with small dissipation, even in the frequency range of 1–10 MHz.
Devices of size 10–50 mm have been reported with the capability to power and operate at the tissue
depths of 5–10 cm [458,459]. Omnidirectional ultrasonic transducers producing high intensity
focused ultrasound provides proper reception of signals overcoming reflections at interfaces such as
fat/muscle or bone/tissue. High-intensity ultrasound is harmful due to thermal and other mechanical
effects [460–462]. The treatment of hyperthermia with the intensity of 1–1000 W/cm2 for a few seconds
[463] and imaging applications involving the Food and Drug Administration (FDA), USA-approved
intensity of 720 mW/cm2 [464,465] have been used so far to avoid the thermal bioeffect, which is a
major hazard. Song et al. [155] presented an ultrasonic powered implantable device located 10 cm
away from the transmitter. Assuming the operation at a resonant frequency, they modeled the power
transfer using a Thevenin equivalent model [466], where the power output available at the receiver
end 𝑃 is proportional to the input power 𝑃 as per the relation
𝑍
𝑃 𝛼𝑇𝜙
𝑍 +𝑍 (55)
𝜂= = ,
𝑃 𝐶 𝐶 𝑉
where 𝑃 = 𝐶 𝑉 𝑓 /2 , 𝑓 = 𝑣/(2𝑑) is the resonant frequency of operation, 𝑣 is the acoustic
velocity in the piezoelectric material, 𝑑 is the piezoelectric material thickness, 𝑇 ≈ 2𝑍 𝑣 is the
ultrasonic pressure, 𝛼 = 𝑒 is the tissue attenuation, 𝜇 is the attenuation coefficient, 𝑑 is the
implant depth in the tissue, 𝑉 is the input source voltage, 𝑍 is the electric load impedance at the
receiver due to implanting conditions, and 𝑍 is the output impedance due to the receiver
capacitance 𝐶 . The capacitance of the transmitter 𝐶 and receiver 𝐶 is modeled as
𝜖 𝜖 𝐴
𝐶= , (56)
𝑑
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 45 of 65

where 𝜖 is the clamped relative complex permittivity. The 𝑉 is fixed to limit 𝑇 to radiate power
within FDA limits (720 mW/cm2). This condition is used further to design the impedance of the
matching layer based on a single quarter layer matching using a transmission line model as given by
Equation (30) and as described in Section 2.2.1. The electric-to-mechanical energy conversion or vice
versa is conveniently represented by the transformer with a turn ratio of Φ: 1 described by the
relation
1
Φ= ,
ℎ 𝛽𝑡 (57)
2 sin
𝜔𝑍 2
where 𝛽 = 2𝜋/𝜆 , 𝜆 is the wavelength and ℎ = 𝑘 𝐶 /(𝜖 𝜖 ) is the piezoelectric pressure
constant related to electromechanical coupling coefficient 𝑘 . The I-V characteristics from
experiments revealed the availability of 10 mW/cm2 acoustic power at the receiver placed 20 cm far
from the source as per the far-field criteria [467] 𝑁 = , where 𝑁 is the far-field distance and 𝐷 is
the dimension of the transducer. The efficiencies of 2.7% was seen in 2 × 4 × 2 mm3 receivers. The
quarter-layer impedance-matching layer for the transmitter was made of 40% by wt iron oxide-
loaded epoxy having around 6.75 MRayl acoustic impedance [237,468].

5.2. Cavitation
The acoustic cavitation phenomenon has been employed in many applications such as high-
power ultrasound [469–472], inertial cavitation erosion [473] and dispersion, surface cleaning, and
degreasing [474]. Quantifying acoustic cavitation is helpful to determine physical erosion and
chemical species produced by bubble collapse [475,476]. A lack of suitable measurement sensors for
determining noninertial (stable) cavitation or inertial (transient) cavitation has inhibited the
development of high-power measurement systems [470,475,477]. Chemiluminescent or
sonoluminescent cavitation detection and measurement techniques have high spatial and temporal
resolution but are limited to transparent media [477]. Features of the acoustic emission spectra from
cavitation can be modeled from theoretical analysis including sharp harmonics and ultraharmonics
arising from the nonlinear motion of the bubble oscillator and broadband white-noise output due to
violent inertial cavitation [478]. White noise from cavitation is measured using miniature piezo-
electric detectors (hydrophones) [479].
Zeqiri et al. [480] presented an ultrasonic cavitation sensor design specifically for monitoring
acoustic emissions generated by small microbubbles. A 110 µm layer of piezoelectrically active film
enabled acoustic emissions measurements beyond 10 MHz. The absorber was designed to shield the
outside vibrations by increasing the density of the absorbing material to match the acoustic
impedance to water at kilohertz frequencies. Polyurethane layers containing Expancel concentrations
2.7–25 vol.% with thickness from 3 mm to 4 mm were fabricated. Acoustic transmission property was
determined as discussed in [481], and the transmission loss as a function of the concentration of
Expancel microspheres was obtained. The transmission loss of the material was dependent on the air
fraction values and was found to be as high as 90 dB/(cm MHz). The speed of sound propagation
determined at 1 MHz rapidly decreased to 960 m/s at 25% Expancel loading.

6. Conclusions
This review article presented the theory of smart materials in the context of their use in sensors
and transducers considering various aspects of acoustic impedance-matching layer design. The
important aspects of the material properties and vibration modes of smart materials to be considered
while designing the acoustic matching layers has been discussed. Conventional materials and special
materials used to design active and passive acoustic impedance matching layers for specific
applications and transducer type has been presented. Acoustic impedance matching techniques use
several models, methods, and tools for the efficient design of transducers and were discussed
considering the limitations or requirements posed by transducer type. Another section was devoted
to the discussion of acoustic impedance-matching techniques considering the requirements posed by
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 46 of 65

a specific application, especially in the biomedical field for frequencies ranging from ultra-high (>100
MHz) to microwave (20 GHz). Apart from composite materials, metamaterials hold a promising
future in designing both active elements and passive layers to achieve better acoustic impedance
matching that dramatically increases the transducer efficiency, bandwidth, or both.

Funding: This work received no external funding.

Acknowledgments: The author would like to acknowledge Anjana Jain (Materials Science Division, National
Aerospace Laboratories, Bengaluru, India), Thulasi Durai (CSMST, National Aerospace Laboratories, Bengaluru,
India), and Gangadharan Raju (Department of Mechanical and Aerospace Engineering, IIT Hyderabad, India)
for valuable discussions and work done together on sensors and transducers. It served as a motivating factor to
realize this review paper for bridging the present gap of acoustic matching tools required for the development
of efficient piezoelectric sensors and transducers.

Conflicts of Interest: The author declares no conflict of interest.

References
1. Win, K.K.; Wang, J.; Zhang, C.; Yang, R. Identification and Removal of Reverberation in Ultrasound
Imaging. In Proceedings of the 2010 5th IEEE Conference on Industrial Electronics and Applications;
Taichung, Taiwan, 15–17 June 2010; pp. 1675–1680.
2. Scanlan, K.A. Sonographic artifacts and their origins. Am. J. Roentgenol. 1991, 156, 1267–1272.
3. Gibson, N.M.; Dudley, N.J.; Griffith, K. A computerised quality control testing system for B-mode
ultrasound. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2001, 27, 1697–1711.
4. Liang, Z.; Yan, C.-F.; Rtimi, S.; Bandara, J. Piezoelectric materials for catalytic/photocatalytic removal of
pollutants: Recent advances and outlook. Appl. Catal. B Environ. 2019, 241, 256–269.
5. Sunar, M.; Rao, S.S. Recent advances in sensing and control of flexible structures via piezoelectric materials
technology. Appl. Mech. Rev. 1999, 52, 1–16.
6. Hu, N.; Burgueño, R. Buckling-induced smart applications: recent advances and trends. Smart Mater. Struct.
2015, 24, 63001.
7. Bent, A.A.; Pizzochero, A.E. Recent Advances in Active Fiber Composites for Structural Control. In
Proceedings of the Smart Structures and Materials 2000: Industrial and Commercial Applications of Smart
Structures Technologies; Newport Beach, CA, United States, 12 June 2000; Volume 3991.
8. Benjeddou, A. Advances in hybrid active-passive vibration and noise control via piezoelectric and
viscoelastic constrained layer treatments. J. Vib. Control 2001, 7, 565–602.
9. Moheimani, S.O.R. A survey of recent innovations in vibration damping and control using shunted
piezoelectric transducers. IEEE Trans. Control Syst. Technol. 2003, 11, 482–494.
10. Jain, A.; Kumar, J.S.; Srikanth, S.; Rathod, V.T.; Roy Mahapatra, D. Sensitivity of polyvinylidene fluoride
films to mechanical vibration modes and impact after optimizing stretching conditions. Polym. Eng. Sci.
2013, 53, 707–715.
11. Rathod, V.T.; Mahapatra, D.R.; Jain, A.; Gayathri, A. Characterization of a large-area PVDF thin film for
electro-mechanical and ultrasonic sensing applications. Sensors Actuators, A Phys. 2010, 163, 164–171.
12. Chakraborty, N.; Rathod, V.T.; Roy Mahapatra, D.; Gopalakrishnan, S. Guided wave based detection of
damage in honeycomb core sandwich structures. NDT E Int. 2012, 49, 27–33.
13. Rathod, V.T.; Roy Mahapatra, D. Ultrasonic Lamb wave based monitoring of corrosion type of damage in
plate using a circular array of piezoelectric transducers. NDT E Int. 2011, 44, 628–636.
14. Giridhara, G.; Rathod, V.T.; Naik, S.; Roy Mahapatra, D.; Gopalakrishnan, S. Rapid localization of damage
using a circular sensor array and Lamb wave based triangulation. Mech. Syst. Signal Process. 2010, 24, 2929–
2946.
15. Gruverman, A.; Kalinin, S. V. Piezoresponse force microscopy and recent advances in nanoscale studies of
ferroelectrics. J. Mater. Sci. 2006, 41, 107–116.
16. Spanner, K.; Vorndran, S. Advances in Piezo-nanopositioning Technology. In Proceedings of the 2003
IEEE/ASME International Conference on Advanced Intelligent Mechatronics (AIM 2003), Kobe, Japan, 20–
24 July 2003; Volume 2, pp. 1338–1343.
17. Khoshnoud, F.; de Silva, C.W. Recent advances in MEMS sensor technology – biomedical applications.
IEEE Instrum. Meas. Mag. 2012, 15, 8–14.
18. Eom, C.-B.; Trolier-McKinstry, S. Thin-film piezoelectric MEMS. MRS Bull. 2012, 37, 1007–1017.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 47 of 65

19. Tadigadapa, S.; Mateti, K. Piezoelectric MEMS sensors: State-of-the-art and perspectives. Meas. Sci. Technol.
2009, 20, 092001.
20. Muralt, P. Recent progress in materials issues for piezoelectric MEMS. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2008, 91, 1385–
1396.
21. Ekinci, K.L. Electromechanical transducers at the nanoscale: actuation and sensing of motion in
nanoelectromechanical systems (NEMS). Small 2005, 1, 786–797.
22. Kim, H.S.; Kim, J.-H.; Kim, J. A review of piezoelectric energy harvesting based on vibration. Int. J. Precis.
Eng. Manuf. 2011, 12, 1129–1141.
23. Anton, S.R.; Sodano, H.A. A review of power harvesting using piezoelectric materials (2003–2006). Smart
Mater. Struct. 2007, 16, R1.
24. Bauer, S.; Gerhard-Multhaupt, R.; Sessler, G.M. Ferroelectrets: Soft electroactive foams for transducers.
Phys. Today 2004, 57, 37–43.
25. Saarimaki, E.; Paajanen, M.; Savijarvi, A.; Minkkinen, H.; Wegener, M.; Voronina, O.; Schulze, R.; Wirges,
W.; Gerhard-Multhaupt, R. Novel heat durable electromechanical film: processing for electromechanical
and electret applications. IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul. 2006, 13, 963–972.
26. Ko, W.-C.; Tseng, C.-K.; Leu, I.-Y.; Wu, W.-J.; Lee, A.S.-Y.; Lee, C.-K. Use of 2-(6-mercaptohexyl) malonic
acid to adjust the morphology and electret properties of cyclic olefin copolymer and its application to
flexible loudspeakers. Smart Mater. Struct. 2010, 19, 55007.
27. Rathod, V.T.; Hiremath, S.R.; Roy Mahapatra, D. Strength and Fatigue Life Evaluation of Composite
Laminate with Embedded Sensors. In Proceedings of the SPIE - The International Society for Optical
Engineering, San Diego, CA, USA, 10 April 2014; Volume 9062.
28. Feng, G.-H.; Tsai, M.-Y. Acoustic emission sensor with structure-enhanced sensing mechanism based on
micro-embossed piezoelectric polymer. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2010, 162, 100–106.
29. Zou, L.; Ge, C.; Wang, Z.J.; Cretu, E.; Li, X. Novel tactile sensor technology and smart tactile sensing
systems: a review. Sensors (Basel). 2017, 17, 2653.
30. Tiwana, M.I.; Redmond, S.J.; Lovell, N.H. A review of tactile sensing technologies with applications in
biomedical engineering. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2012, 179, 17–31.
31. Lindahl, O.A.; Constantinou, C.E.; Eklund, A.; Murayama, Y.; Hallberg, P.; Omata, S. Tactile resonance
sensors in medicine. J. Med. Eng. Technol. 2009, 33, 263–273.
32. Saadon, S.; Sidek, O. A review of vibration-based MEMS piezoelectric energy harvesters. Energy Convers.
Manag. 2011, 52, 500–504.
33. Cook-Chennault, K.A.; Thambi, N.; Sastry, A.M. Powering MEMS portable devices--a review of non-
regenerative and regenerative power supply systems with special emphasis on piezoelectric energy
harvesting systems. Smart Mater. Struct. 2008, 17, 43001.
34. Jadidian, B.; Hagh, N.M.; Winder, A.A.; Safari, A. 25 MHz ultrasonic transducers with lead- free
piezoceramic, 1-3 PZT fiber-epoxy composite, and PVDF polymer active elements. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2009, 56, 368–378.
35. Döring, J.; Bovtun, V.; Gaal, M.; Bartusch, J.; Erhard, A.; Kreutzbruck, M.; Yakymenko, Y. Piezoelectric and
electrostrictive effects in ferroelectret ultrasonic transducers. J. Appl. Phys. 2012, 112, 84505.
36. Zhou, D.; Cheung, K.F.; Chen, Y.; Lau, S.T.; Zhou, Q.; Shung, K.K.; Luo, H.S.; Dai, J.; Chan, H.L.W.
Fabrication and performance of endoscopic ultrasound radial arrays based on PMN-PT single
crystal/epoxy 1-3 composite. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2011, 58, 477–484.
37. Liu, C.; Djuth, F.; Hu, C.; Chen, R.; Zhang, X.; Li, X.; Zhou, Q.; Shung, K. Micromachined High Frequency
PMN-PT/Epoxy 1–3 Composite Ultrasonic Annular Arrays. In Proceedings of the 2010 IEEE International
Ultrasonics Symposium, San Diego, CA, USA, 11–14 October 2010; pp. 658–661.
38. Sun, P.; Wang, G.; Wu, D.; Zhu, B.; Hu, C.; Liu, C.; Djuth, F.T.; Zhou, Q.; Shung, K.K. High frequency PMN-
PT 1-3 composite transducer for ultrasonic imaging application. Ferroelectrics 2010, 408, 120–128.
39. Rathod, V.T.; Roy Mahapatra, D. Ultrasonic Guided Wave Sensing Properties of PVDF Thin Film With
Inter Digital Electrodes. In Proceedings of the SPIE - The International Society for Optical Engineering, San
Diego, CA, USA, 10 April 2014; Volume 9062.
40. Rathod, V.T.; Raju, G.; Udpa, L.; Udpa, S.; Deng, Y. Embedded Thin Film Sensors Based Multi-mode
Guided Wave Filter. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE Sensors, New Delhi, India, 28–31 October 2018.
41. Rathod, V.T.; Raju, G.; Udpa, L.; Udpa, S.; Deng, Y. Multimode guided wave extraction capabilities using
embedded thin film sensors in a composite laminated beam. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2020, 309, 112040.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 48 of 65

42. Haertling, G.H. Ferroelectric ceramics: history and technology. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 1999, 82, 797–818.
43. Dagdeviren, C.; Joe, P.; Tuzman, O.L.; Park, K.-I.; Lee, K.J.; Shi, Y.; Huang, Y.; Rogers, J.A. Recent progress
in flexible and stretchable piezoelectric devices for mechanical energy harvesting, sensing and actuation.
Extrem. Mech. Lett. 2016, 9, 269–281.
44. Look, D.C. Recent advances in ZnO materials and devices. Mater. Sci. Eng. B 2001, 80, 383–387.
45. Dias, C.J.; Igreja, R.; Marat-Mendes, R.; Inacio, P.; Marat-Mendes, J.N.; Das-Gupta, D.K. Recent advances in
ceramic-polymer composite electrets. IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul. 2004, 11, 35–40.
46. Zheng, T.; Wu, J.; Xiao, D.; Zhu, J. Recent development in lead-free perovskite piezoelectric bulk materials.
Prog. Mater. Sci. 2018, 98, 552–624.
47. Bauer, F.; Fousson, E.; Zhang, Q.M. Recent advances in highly electrostrictive P(VDF-TrFE-CFE)
terpolymers. IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul. 2006, 13, 1149–1154.
48. Iannacci, J. Microsystem based Energy Harvesting (EH-MEMS): Powering pervasivity of the Internet of
Things (IoT) – A review with focus on mechanical vibrations. J. King Saud Univ. - Sci. 2019, 31, 66–74.
49. Baali, H.; Djelouat, H.; Amira, A.; Bensaali, F. Empowering technology enabled care using IoT and smart
devices: a review. IEEE Sens. J. 2018, 18, 1790–1809.
50. Rossing, T. Introduction to Acoustics. In Springer Handbook of Acoustics; Rossing, T., Ed.; Springer New
York: New York, NY, USA, 2007; pp. 1–6.
51. Shung, K.K.; Zippuro, M. Ultrasonic transducers and arrays. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag. 1996, 15, 20–30.
52. Lockwood, G.R.; Turnball, D.H.; Christopher, D.A.; Foster, F.S. Beyond 30 MHz [applications of high-
frequency ultrasound imaging]. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol. Mag. 1996, 15, 60–71.
53. Smith, W.A. Composite Piezoelectric Materials for Medical Ultrasonic Imaging Transducers - A Review. In
Proceedings of the Sixth IEEE International Symposium on Applications of Ferroelectrics, Bethlehem, PA,
USA, 8–11 June 1986; pp. 249–256.
54. Callen, P.W. Ultrasonography in Obstetrics and Gynecology; Elsevier Health Sciences: Amsterdam, The
Netherlands, 2011.
55. Shung, K.K. Diagnostic Ultrasound: Imaging and Blood Flow Measurements; CRC Press: Boca Raton, FL,
USA, 2015.
56. Errico, C.; Pierre, J.; Pezet, S.; Desailly, Y.; Lenkei, Z.; Couture, O.; Tanter, M. Ultrafast ultrasound
localization microscopy for deep super-resolution vascular imaging. Nature 2015, 527, 499–502.
57. Osmanski, B.-F.; Pezet, S.; Ricobaraza, A.; Lenkei, Z.; Tanter, M. Functional ultrasound imaging of intrinsic
connectivity in the living rat brain with high spatiotemporal resolution. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 5023.
58. Viessmann, O.M.; Eckersley, R.J.; Christensen-Jeffries, K.; Tang, M.X.; Dunsby, C. Acoustic super-
resolution with ultrasound and microbubbles. Phys. Med. Biol. 2013, 58, 6447–6458.
59. Macé, E.; Montaldo, G.; Cohen, I.; Baulac, M.; Fink, M.; Tanter, M. Functional ultrasound imaging of the
brain. Nat. Methods 2011, 8, 662–664.
60. Dirk Böse, M.D.; von Birgelen, C.; Raimund Erbel, R. Intravascular ultrasound for the evaluation of
therapies targeting coronary atherosclerosisa. J. Am. Coll. Cardiol. 2007, 49, 925–932.
61. Abou-Elkacem, L.; Bachawal, S. V; Willmann, J.K. Ultrasound molecular imaging: Moving toward clinical
translation. Eur. J. Radiol. 2015, 84, 1685–1693.
62. Ranade, S.S.; Woo, S.-H.; Dubin, A.E.; Moshourab, R.A.; Wetzel, C.; Petrus, M.; Mathur, J.; Bégay, V.; Coste,
B.; Mainquist, J.; et al. Piezo2 is the major transducer of mechanical forces for touch sensation in mice.
Nature 2014, 516, 121–125.
63. Lam, K.H.; Hsu, H.-S.; Li, Y.; Lee, C.; Lin, A.; Zhou, Q.; Kim, E.S.; Shung, K.K. Ultrahigh frequency lensless
ultrasonic transducers for acoustic tweezers application. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2013, 110, 881–886.
64. Khuri-Yakub, B.T. Scanning acoustic microscopy. Ultrasonics 1993, 31, 361–372.
65. Lee, J.; Lee, C.; Kim, H.H.; Jakob, A.; Lemor, R.; Teh, S.-Y.; Lee, A.; Shung, K.K. Targeted cell immobilization
by ultrasound microbeam. Biotechnol. Bioeng. 2011, 108, 1643–1650.
66. Zhu, B.; Fei, C.; Wang, C.; Zhu, Y.; Yang, X.; Zheng, H.; Zhou, Q.; Shung, K.K. Self-focused AlScN film
ultrasound transducer for individual cell manipulation. ACS Sensors 2017, 2, 172–177.
67. Shung, K.K.; Cannata, J.M.; Zhou, Q.F. Piezoelectric materials for high frequency medical imaging
applications: A review. J. Electroceramics 2007, 19, 141–147.
68. McKeighen, R.E. Design guidelines for medical ultrasonic arrays. In Proceedings of the SPIE, Medical
Imaging 1998: Ultrasonic Transducer Engineering; San Diego, CA, USA, 1 May 1998; Volume 3341.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 49 of 65

69. Sinclair, A.N.; Chertov, A.M. Radiation endurance of piezoelectric ultrasonic transducers – A review.
Ultrasonics 2015, 57, 1–10.
70. Rathod, V.T. Review of electric impedance matching techniques for piezoelectric sensors, actuators and
transducers. Electronics 2019, 8, 169.
71. Desilets, C.S.; Fraser, J.D.; Kino, G.S. The design of efficient broad-band piezoelectric transducers. IEEE
Trans. Sonics Ultrason. 1978, 25, 115–125.
72. Leo, D.J. Engineering Analysis of Smart Material Systems, John Wiley & Sons, Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2007;
pp. 1–23.
73. Rathod, V.T.; Deng, Y. Structural Compatibility of Thin Film Sensors Embedded in a Composite Laminate.
In Proceedings of the Active and Passive Smart Structures and Integrated Systems XIII; Denver, CO, USA,
21 March 2019; Volume 10967.
74. Nix, E.L.; Ward, I.M. The measurement of the shear piezoelectric coefficients of polyvinylidene fluoride.
Ferroelectrics 1986, 67, 137–141.
75. Rathod, V.T. Ultrasonic Guided Wave based Models, Devices and Methods for Integrated Structural Health
Monitoring, PhD Thesis, Indian Institute of Science, Bengaluru, India., 2014.
76. Smith, W.A.; Shaulov, A.Y.; Auld, B.A. Tailoring the Properties of Composite Piezoelectric Materials for
Medical Ultrasonic Transducers. In the IEEE 1985 Ultrasonics Symposium, San Francisco, CA, USA, 16–18
October 1985; pp 642–647.
77. Gallego-Juarez, J.A. Piezoelectric ceramics and ultrasonic transducers. J. Phys. E.: Sci. Instrum. 1989, 22, 804–
816.
78. Park, S.E.; Shrout, T.R. Characteristics of relaxor-based piezoelectric single crystals for ultrasonic
transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1997, 44, 1140–1147.
79. Park, S.E.; Shrout, T.R. Ultrahigh strain and piezoelectric behavior in relaxor based ferroelectric single
crystals. J. Appl. Phys. 1997, 82, 1804–1811.
80. Umeda, K.; Kawai, H.; Honda, A.; Akiyama, M.; Kato, T.; Fukura, T. Piezoelectric properties of ScAlN thin
films for piezo-MEMS devices. In Proceedings of the 2013 IEEE 26th International Conference on Micro
Electro Mechanical Systems (MEMS), Taipei, Taiwan, 20–24 January 2013; pp. 733–736.
81. Rathod, V.T.; Swamy, J.K.; Jain, A.; Mahapatra, D.R. Ultrasonic Lamb wave sensitivity of P(VDF–TrFE) thin
films. ISSS J. Micro Smart Syst. 2018, 7, 35–43.
82. Baklouti, S.; Bouaziz, J.; Chartier, T.; Baumard, J.-F. Binder burnout and evolution of the mechanical
strength of dry-pressed ceramics containing poly(vinyl alcohol). J. Eur. Ceram. Soc. 2001, 21, 1087–1092.
83. Takahiro, Y.; Masako, K.; Norikazu, S. Influence of poling conditions on the piezoelectric properties of PZT
ceramics. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Electron. 2000, 11, 425–428.
84. Jaffe, B.; Roth, R.S.; Marzullo, S. Piezoelectric properties of lead zirconate-lead titanate solid-solution
ceramics. J. Appl. Phys. 1954, 25, 809–810.
85. Tressler, J.F.; Alkoy, S.; Newnham, R.E. Piezoelectric sensors and sensor materials. J. Electroceramics 1998,
2, 257–272.
86. Liu, C. Recent developments in polymer MEMS. Adv. Mater. 2007, 19, 3783–3790.
87. Maeder, M.D.; Damjanovic, D.; Setter, N. Lead free piezoelectric materials. J. Electroceramics 2004, 13, 385–
392.
88. Aksel, E.; Jones, J.L. Advances in lead-free piezoelectric materials for sensors and actuators. Sensors 2010,
10, 1935–1954.
89. Panda, P.K. Review: environmental friendly lead-free piezoelectric materials. J. Mater. Sci. 2009, 44, 5049–
5062.
90. Safari, A.; Abazari, M. Lead-free piezoelectric ceramics and thin films. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq.
Control 2010, 57, 2165–2176.
91. Setter, N.; Damjanovic, D.; Eng, L.; Fox, G.; Gevorgian, S.; Hong, S.; Kingon, A.; Kohlstedt, H.; Park, N.Y.;
Stephenson, G.B.; et al. Ferroelectric thin films: Review of materials, properties, and applications. J. Appl.
Phys. 2006, 100, 51606.
92. Muralt, P.; Polcawich, R.G.; Trolier-McKinstry, S. Piezoelectric thin films for sensors, actuators, and energy
harvesting. MRS Bull. 2009, 34, 658–664.
93. Rathod, V.T.; Mahapatra, D.R.; Jeyaseelan, A.A.; Dutta, S. Ultrasonic guided wave sensing characteristics
of large area thin piezo coating. Smart Mater. Struct. 2017, 26, 105009.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 50 of 65

94. Rathod, V.T.; Roy Mahapatra, D.; Jeyaseelan, A.; Dutta, S. Large-area Piezoceramic Coating with IDT
Electrodes for Ultrasonic Sensing Applications. In Proceedings of the SPIE, San Diego, CA, USA, 11 April
2013; Volume 8693, p. 86930L.
95. Hsu, H.-S.; Benjauthrit, V.; Zheng, F.; Chen, R.; Huang, Y.; Zhou, Q.; Shung, K.K. PMN-PT–PZT composite
films for high frequency ultrasonic transducer applications. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2012, 179, 121–124.
96. Kawai, H. The piezoelectricity of poly(vinylidene fluoride). Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 1969, 8, 975–976.
97. Zhenyi, M.; Scheinbeim, J.I.; Lee, J.W.; Newman, B.A. High field electrostrictive response of polymers. J.
Polym. Sci. Part B Polym. Phys. 1994, 32, 2721–2731.
98. Ohigashi, H.; Omote, K.; Gomyo, T. Formation of “single crystalline films” of ferroelectric copolymers of
vinylidene fluoride and trifluoroethylene. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1995, 66, 3281–3283.
99. Lang, S.B.I. Bibliography on piezoelectricity and pyroelectricity of polymers 1961–1980. Ferroelectrics 1981,
32, 191–245.
100. Foster, F.S.; Harasiewicz, K.A.; Sherar, M.D. A history of medical and biological imaging with
polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2000, 47, 1363–
1371.
101. Chen, Q.X.; Payne, P.A. Industrial applications of piezoelectric polymer transducers. Meas. Sci. Technol.
1995, 6, 249–267.
102. Hooker, M.W. Properties of PZT-Based Piezoelectric Ceramics Between -150 and 250°C; NASA/: CR-1998-
208708, National Aeronautics and Space Administration: Langley Research Center, Hampton,VA, USA,
1998.
103. Bowen, L.; Gentilman, R.; Fiore, D.; Pham, H.; Serwatka, W.; Near, C.; Pazol, B. Design, fabrication, and
properties of sonopanelTM 1–3 piezocomposite transducers. Ferroelectrics 1996, 187, 109–120.
104. Siemann, U. Solvent cast technology - a versatile tool for thin film production. In Scattering Methods and the
Properties of Polymer Materials; Stribeck, N., Smarsly, B., Eds.; Springer Berlin Heidelberg: Berlin,
Heidelberg, 2005; pp. 1–14.
105. Mhalgi, M.V; Khakhar, D.V; Misra, A. Stretching induced phase transformations in melt extruded
poly(vinylidene fluoride) cast films: Effect of cast roll temperature and speed. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2007, 47,
1992–2004.
106. Becker, H.; Gärtner, C. Polymer microfabrication technologies for microfluidic systems. Anal. Bioanal. Chem.
2008, 390, 89–111.
107. Gregorio Jr., R.; Ueno, E.M. Effect of crystalline phase, orientation and temperature on the dielectric
properties of poly (vinylidene fluoride) (PVDF). J. Mater. Sci. 1999, 34, 4489–4500.
108. Inderherbergh, J. Polyvinylidene fluoride (PVDF) appearance, general properties and processing.
Ferroelectrics 1991, 115, 295–302.
109. Jayasuriya, A.C.; Schirokauer, A.; Scheinbeim, J.I. Crystal-structure dependence of electroactive properties
in differently prepared poly(vinylidene fluoride/hexafluoropropylene) copolymer films. J. Polym. Sci. Part
B Polym. Phys. 2001, 39, 2793–2799.
110. He, X.; Yao, K.; Gan, B.K. Ferroelectric poly(vinylidene fluoride-hexafluoropropylene) thin films on silicon
substrates. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2007, 139, 158–161.
111. Vijayakumar, R.P.; Khakhar, D. V; Misra, A. Studies on α to β phase transformations in mechanically
deformed PVDF films. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2010, 117, 3491–3497.
112. Gregorio Jr., R. Determination of the α, β, and γ crystalline phases of poly(vinylidene fluoride) films
prepared at different conditions. J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 2006, 100, 3272–3279.
113. Sessler, G.M. Piezoelectricity in polyvinylidenefluoride. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1981, 70, 1596–1608.
114. Kaura, T.; Nath, R.; Perlman, M.M. Simultaneous stretching and corona poling of PVDF films. J. Phys. D.
Appl. Phys. 1991, 24, 1848–1852.
115. Hadji, R.; Nguyen, V.S.; Vincent, B.; Rouxel, D.; Bauer, F. Preparation and characterization of P(VDF-
TrFE)/Al2O3 nanocomposite. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2012, 59, 163–167.
116. Harrison, J.S.; Ounaies, Z. Piezoelectric Polymers. In Encyclopedia of Polymer Science and Technology; John
Wiley & Sons Inc.: Hoboken, NJ, USA, 2002.
117. Fukada, E. History and recent progress in piezoelectric polymers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq.
Control 2000, 47, 1277–1290.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 51 of 65

118. Varadan, V.V; Roh, Y.R.; Varadan, V.K.; Tancrell, R.H. Measurement of all the Elastic and Dielectric
Constants of Poled PVDF Films. In Proceedings of the IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Montreal, QC,
Canada, 3–6 October 1989; Volume 2, pp. 727–730.
119. Schewe, H. Piezoelectricity of Uniaxially Oriented Polyvinylidene Fluoride. In Proceedings of the 1982
Ultrasonics Symposium, San Diego, CA, USA, 27–29 October 1982; pp. 519–524.
120. Wang, H.; Zhang, Q.M.; Cross, L.E.; Sykes, A.O. Piezoelectric, dielectric, and elastic properties of
poly(vinylidene fluoride/trifluoroethylene). J. Appl. Phys. 1993, 74, 3394–3398.
121. Ramadan, K.S.; Sameoto, D.; Evoy, S. A review of piezoelectric polymers as functional materials for
electromechanical transducers. Smart Mater. Struct. 2014, 23, 33001.
122. Rathod, V.T.; Roy Mahapatra, D.; Jain, A.; Gayathri, A. Ultrasonic Performance of the PVDF Thin Film
Sensors Under Thermal Fatigue. In Proceedings of the SPIE, San Diego, CA, USA, 28 March 2012; Volume
8342.
123. Rathod, V.T.; Jain, A. Ultrasonic guided wave sensitivity of piezopolymer films subjected to thermal
exposure. ISSS J. Micro Smart Syst. 2018, 7, 15–24.
124. Klicker, K.A.; Biggers, J.V; Newnham, R.E. Composites of PZT and epoxy for hydrostatic transducer
applications. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 1981, 64, 5–9.
125. Safari, A.; Janas, V.F.; Bandyopadhyay, A. Development of fine-scale piezoelectric composites for
transducers. AIChE J. 1997, 43, 2849–2856.
126. Chapelon, J.-Y.; Cathignol, D.; Cain, C.; Ebbini, E.; Kluiwstra, J.-U.; Sapozhnikov, O.A.; Fleury, G.; Berriet,
R.; Chupin, L.; Guey, J.-L. New piezoelectric transducers for therapeutic ultrasound. Ultrasound Med. Biol.
2000, 26, 153–159.
127. Pilgrim, S.M.; Newnham, R.E.; Rohlfing, L.L. An extension of the composite nomenclature scheme. Mater.
Res. Bull. 1987, 22, 677–684.
128. Newnham, R.E.; Skinner, D.P.; Cross, L.E. Connectivity and piezoelectric-pyroelectric composites. Mater.
Res. Bull. 1978, 13, 525–536.
129. Levassort, F.; Lethiecq, M.; Desmare, R.; Hue, T.H. Effective electroelastic moduli of 3-3(0-3)
piezocomposites. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1999, 46, 1028–1034.
130. Newnham, R.E. Composite electroceramics. Ferroelectrics 1986, 68, 1–32.
131. Halloran, J.W. Freeform fabrication of ceramics. Br. Ceram. Trans. 1999, 98, 299–303.
132. Smith, W.A. The role of Piezocomposites in Ultrasonic Transducers. In Proceedings of IEEE Ultrasonics
Symposium, Montreal, QC, Canada, 3-6 October 1989; Volume 2, pp. 755–766.
133. Akdogan, E.K.; Allahverdi, M.; Safari, A. Piezoelectric composites for sensor and actuator applications.
IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2005, 52, 746–775.
134. Prashanthi, K.; Naresh, M.; Seena, V.; Thundat, T.; Ramgopal Rao, V. A novel photoplastic piezoelectric
nanocomposite for MEMS applications. J. Microelectromechanical Syst. 2012, 21, 259–261.
135. Badcock, R.A.; Birt, E.A. The use of 0-3 piezocomposite embedded Lamb wave sensors for detection of
damage in advanced fibre composites. Smart Mater. Struct. 2000, 9, 291–297.
136. Egusa, S.; Iwasawa, N. Piezoelectric paints as one approach to smart structural materials with health-
monitoring capabilities. Smart Mater. Struct. 1998, 7, 438–445.
137. Bent, A.A.; Hagood, N.W. Piezoelectric fiber composites with interdigitated electrodes. J. Intell. Mater. Syst.
Struct. 1997, 8, 903–919.
138. Wilkie, W.K.; Bryant, R.G.; High, J.W.; Fox, R.L.; Hellbaum, R.F.; Jalink Jr., A.; Little, B.D.; Mirick, P.H. Low-
cost Piezocomposite Actuator for Structural Control Applications. In Proceedings of the SPIE, Newport
Beach, CA, USA, 12 June 2000; Volume 3991.
139. Lees, S.; Davidson, C.L. Ultrasonic measurement of some mineral filled plastics. IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason.
1977, 24, 222–225.
140. Gururaja, T.R.; Schulze, W.A.; Cross, L.E.; Newnham, R.E.; Auld, B.A.; Wang, Y.J. Piezoelectric composite
materials for ultrasonic transducer applications. Part I: Resonant modes of vibration of PZT rod-polymer
composites. IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason. 1985, 32, 481–498.
141. Smith, W.A.; Auld, B.A. Modeling 1-3 composite piezoelectrics: thickness-mode oscillations. IEEE Trans.
Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1991, 38, 40–47.
142. Guinovart-Dı́az, R.; Bravo-Castillero, J.; Rodrı́guez-Ramos, R.; Sabina, F.J.; Martı́nez-Rosado, R. Overall
properties of piezocomposite materials 1–3. Mater. Lett. 2001, 48, 93–98.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 52 of 65

143. Kar-Gupta, R.; Venkatesh, T.A. Electromechanical response of 1–3 piezoelectric composites: An analytical
model. Acta Mater. 2007, 55, 1093–1108.
144. Geng, X.; Zhang, Q.M. Evaluation of piezocomposites for ultrasonic transducer applications influence of
the unit cell dimensions and the properties of constituents on the performance of 2-2 piezocomposites. IEEE
Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1997, 44, 857–872.
145. Hossack, J.A.; Hayward, G. Finite-element analysis of 1-3 composite transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1991, 38, 618–629.
146. Park, K.-I.; Lee, M.; Liu, Y.; Moon, S.; Hwang, G.-T.; Zhu, G.; Kim, J.E.; Kim, S.O.; Kim, D.K.; Wang, Z.L.; et
al. Flexible nanocomposite generator made of BaTiO3 nanoparticles and graphitic carbons. Adv. Mater.
2012, 24, 2999–3004.
147. Gururaja, T.R.; Schulze, W.A.; Shrout, T.R.; Safari, A.; Webster, L.; Cross, L.E. High frequency applications
of PZT/polymer composite materials. Ferroelectrics 1981, 39, 1245–1248.
148. Matt, H.M.; di Scalea, F.L. Macro-fiber composite piezoelectric rosettes for acoustic source location in
complex structures. Smart Mater. Struct. 2007, 16, 1489–1499.
149. Yang, Y.; Tang, L.; Li, H. Vibration energy harvesting using macro-fiber composites. Smart Mater. Struct.
2009, 18, 115025.
150. Zhang, Y.; Wang, S.; Liu, D.; Zhang, Q.; Wang, W.; Ren, B.; Zhao, X.; Luo, H. Fabrication of angle beam
two-element ultrasonic transducers with PMN–PT single crystal and PMN–PT/epoxy 1–3 composite for
NDE applications. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2011, 168, 223–228.
151. Rittenmyer, K.; Shrout, T.; Schulze, W.A.; Newnham, R.E. Piezoelectric 3–3 composites. Ferroelectrics 1982,
41, 189–195.
152. Safari, A.; Newnham, R.E.; Cross, L.E.; Schulze, W.A. Perforated PZT-polymer composites for piezoelectric
transducer applications. Ferroelectrics 1982, 41, 197–205.
153. Zhang, Q.M.; Chen, J.; Wang, H.; Zhao, J.; Cross, L.E.; Trottier, M.C. A new transverse piezoelectric mode
2-2 piezocomposite for underwater transducer applications. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control
1995, 42, 774–781.
154. Fei, C.; Ma, J.; Chiu, C.T.; Williams, J.A.; Fong, W.; Chen, Z.; Zhu, B.; Xiong, R.; Shi, J.; Hsiai, T.K.; et al.
Design of matching layers for high-frequency ultrasonic transducers. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 107, 123505.
155. Song, S.H.; Kim, A.; Ziaie, B. Omnidirectional ultrasonic powering for millimeter-scale implantable devices.
IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2015, 62, 2717–2723.
156. Crecraft, D.I. Ultrasonic instrumentation: principles, methods and applications. J. Phys. E: Sci. Instrum. 1983,
16, 181–189.
157. Fang, H.J.; Chen, Y.; Wong, C.M.; Qiu, W.B.; Chan, H.L.W.; Dai, J.Y.; Li, Q.; Yan, Q.F. Anodic aluminum
oxide–epoxy composite acoustic matching layers for ultrasonic transducer application. Ultrasonics 2016, 70,
29–33.
158. Amoroso, L.; Ramadas, S.N.; Klieber, C.; Gomez Alvarez-Arenas, T.E.; McNally, T. Novel Nanocomposite
Materials for Improving Passive Layers in Air-coupled Ultrasonic Transducer Applications. In Proceedings
of the 2019 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS), Glasgow, UK, 6–9 October 2019; pp. 2608–
2611.
159. Lau, S.T.; Li, H.; Wong, K.S.; Zhou, Q.F.; Zhou, D.; Li, Y.C.; Luo, H.S.; Shung, K.K.; Dai, J.Y. Multiple
matching scheme for broadband 0.72Pb(Mg1/3Nb2/3)O3−0.28PbTiO3 single crystal phased-array
transducer. J. Appl. Phys. 2009, 105, 94908.
160. Brown, L.F. Design considerations for piezoelectric polymer ultrasound transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2000, 47, 1377–1396.
161. Zhang, S.; Li, F.; Yu, F.; Jiang, X.; Lee, H.Y.; Luo, J.; Shrout, T.R. Recent developments in piezoelectric
crystals. J. Korean Ceram. Soc 2018, 55, 419–439.
162. Choi, H.; Popovics, J.S. NDE application of ultrasonic tomography to a full-scale concrete structure. IEEE
Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2015, 62, 1076–1085.
163. Hoskins, P.R.; Thrush, A.; Martin, K. Diagnostic Ultrsound; Greenwich Medical Media Limited: London,
2003.
164. Whittingham, T.A. Broadband transducers. Eur. Radiol. 1999, 9, S298–S303.
165. Xiang, S.H.; Zhang, Y.T. Matching Layer Optimization Between Ultrasound Transducer and Human
Tissues. In Proceedings of the 17th International Conference of the Engineering in Medicine and Biology
Society, Montreal, Quebec, Canada, 20–23 September 1995; Volume 1, pp. 623–624.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 53 of 65

166. Lu, J.-Y.; Zou, H.; Greenleaf, J.F. Biomedical ultrasound beam forming. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 1994, 20, 403–
428.
167. Kino, G.S. Acoustic Waves: Devices, Imaging, and Analog Signal Processing; Prentice-Hall: Englewood
Cliffs, NJ, 1987.
168. Krautkramer, J.; Krautkramer, H. Ultrasonic Testing of Materials; Springer-Vedag: New York, NY, USA, 1975.
169. Wang, W.; Or, S.W.; Yue, Q.; Zhang, Y.; Jiao, J.; Ren, B.; Lin, D.; Leung, C.M.; Zhao, X.; Luo, H. Cylindrically
shaped ultrasonic linear array fabricated using PIMNT/epoxy 1-3 piezoelectric composite. Sensors Actuators
A Phys. 2013, 192, 69–75.
170. Wang, K.; Ermilov, S.A.; Su, R.; Brecht, H.P.; Oraevsky, A.A.; Anastasio, M.A. An imaging model
incorporating ultrasonic transducer properties for three-dimensional optoacoustic tomography. IEEE
Trans. Med. Imaging 2011, 30, 203–214.
171. Yue, Q.; Liu, D.; Wang, W.; Di, W.; Lin, D.; Wang, X.; Luo, H. Fabrication of a PMN-PT single crystal-based
transcranial doppler transducer and the power regulation of its detection system. Sensors 2014, 14, 24462–
24471.
172. Fei, C.; Chiu, C.T.; Chen, X.; Chen, Z.; Ma, J.; Zhu, B.; Shung, K.K.; Zhou, Q. Ultrahigh frequency (100 MHz–
300 MHz) ultrasonic transducers for optical resolution medical imagining. Sci. Rep. 2016, 6, 28360.
173. Zhou, Q.; Lau, S.; Wu, D.; Shung, K.K. Piezoelectric films for high frequency ultrasonic transducers in
biomedical applications. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2011, 56, 139–174.
174. Kelly, S.P.; Hayward, G.; Gomez, T.E. An Air-coupled Ultrasonic Matching Layer Employing Half
Wavelength Cavity Resonance. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Atlanta, GA, USA,
7–10 October 2001; Volume 2, pp. 965–968.
175. Haller, M.I.; Khuri-Yakub, B.T. Micromachined 1–3 composites for ultrasonic air transducers. Rev. Sci.
Instrum. 1994, 65, 2095–2098.
176. Alvarez-Arenas, T.E.G. Acoustic impedance matching of piezoelectric transducers to the air. IEEE Trans.
Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2004, 51, 624–633.
177. Gibiat, V.; Lefeuvre, O.; Woignier, T.; Pelous, J.; Phalippou, J. Acoustic properties and potential applications
of silica aerogels. J. Non. Cryst. Solids 1995, 186, 244–255.
178. Hsu, H.-S.; Zheng, F.; Li, Y.; Lee, C.; Zhou, Q.; Kirk Shung, K. Focused high frequency needle transducer
for ultrasonic imaging and trapping. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2012, 101, 24105.
179. Cannata, J.M.; Williams, J.A.; Zhou, Q.; Ritter, T.A.; Shung, K.K. Development of a 35-MHz piezo-
composite ultrasound array for medical imaging. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2006, 53,
224–236.
180. Bezanson, A.; Adamson, R.; Brown, J.A. Fabrication and performance of a miniaturized 64-element high-
frequency endoscopic phased array. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2014, 61, 33–43.
181. Wells, P.N.T. Ultrasound imaging. Phys. Med. Biol. 2006, 51, R83--R98.
182. Kossoff, G. The effects of backing and matching on the performance of piezoelectric ceramic transducers.
IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason. 1966, 13, 20–30.
183. Souquet, J.; Defranould, P.; Desbois, J. Design of low-loss wide-band ultrasonic transducers for noninvasive
medical application. IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason. 1979, 26, 75–80.
184. Goll, J.H. The design of broad-band fluid-loaded ultrasonic transducers. IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason. 1979,
26, 385–393.
185. Szabo, T.L. Chapter 5 - Transducers. In Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging: Inside Out (Second Edition); Szabo,
T.L., Ed.; Academic Press: Boston, MA, USA, 2014; pp. 121–165.
186. Goll, J.H.; Auld, B.A. Multilayer impedance matching schemes for broadbanding of water loaded
piezoelectric transducers and high Q electric resonators. IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason. 1975, 22, 52–53.
187. Manh, T.; Nguyen, A.-T.T.; Johansen, T.F.; Hoff, L. Microfabrication of stacks of acoustic matching layers
for 15MHz ultrasonic transducers. Ultrasonics 2014, 54, 614–620.
188. Haller, M.I.; Khuri-Yakub, B.T. Tapered Acoustic Matching Layers. In Proceedings of the 1993 IEEE
Ultrasonics Symposium, Baltimore, MD, USA, 31 October-03 November 1993; Volume 1, pp. 505–508.
189. Oakley, C.G. Calculation of ultrasonic transducer signal-to-noise ratios using the KLM model. IEEE Trans.
Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1997, 44, 1018–1026.
190. Ma, J.; Steer, M.B.; Jiang, X. An acoustic filter based on layered structure. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 106, 111903.
191. Sittig, E.K. High-speed ultrasonic digital delay line design: A restatement of some basic considerations.
Proc. IEEE 1968, 56, 1194–1202.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 54 of 65

192. Mason, W.P. Electromechanical Transducers and Wave Filters; D. Van Nostrand Company: Princeton, NJ, USA,
1948.
193. Reeder, T.M.; Winslow, D.K. Characteristics of microwave acoustic transducers for volume wave
excitation. IEEE Trans. Microw. Theory Tech. 1969, 17, 927–941.
194. Sittig, E.K. 5 - Design and Technology of Piezoelectric Transducers for Frequencies Above 100 MHz. In;
Mason, W.P., Thurston, R.N., Eds.; Physical Acoustics; Academic Press, 1972; Vol. 9, pp. 221–275.
195. Krimholtz, R.; Leedom, D.A.; Matthaei, G.L. New equivalent circuits for elementary piezoelectric
transducers. Electron. Lett. 1970, 6, 398–399.
196. Leedom, D.A.; Krimholtz, R.; Matthaei, G.L. Equivalent circuits for transducers having arbitrary even- or
odd-symmetry piezoelectric excitation. IEEE Trans. Sonics Ultrason. 1971, 18, 128–141.
197. Rhee, S.; Ritter, T.A.; Shung, K.K.; Wang, H.; Cao, W. Materials for Acoustic Matching in Ultrasound
Transducers. In Proceedings of the 2001 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Atlanta, GA, USA, 7–10 October
2001; Volume 2, pp. 1051–1055.
198. Stewart, G.W. Acoustic wave filters. Phys. Rev. 1922, 20, 528–551.
199. Stewart, G.W. Acoustic wave filters: an extension of the theory. Phys. Rev. 1925, 25, 90–98.
200. Lindsay, R.B. Note on the theory of acoustic wave filters. Phys. Rev. 1929, 34, 652–655.
201. Cadence Microwave Office Available online: https://www.awr.com/awr-software/products/microwave-
office (accessed on May 14, 2020).
202. Concepts, S. PiezoCADTM Available online: https://sonicconcepts.com/software/ (accessed on May 14,
2020).
203. Myhre, O.F.; Johansen, T.F.; Johan Angelsen, B.A. Analysis of acoustic impedance matching in dual-band
ultrasound transducers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2017, 141, 1170–1179.
204. Toda, M.; Thompson, M. Novel multi-layer polymer-metal structures for use in ultrasonic transducer
impedance matching and backing absorber applications. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2010,
57, 2818–2827.
205. Toda, M.; Thompson, M. Detailed investigations of polymer/metal multilayer matching layer and backing
absorber structures for wideband ultrasonic transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2012,
59, 231–242.
206. Brown, J.A.; Sharma, S.; Leadbetter, J.; Cochran, S.; Adamson, R. Mass-spring matching layers for high-
frequency ultrasound transducers: a new technique using vacuum deposition. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2014, 61, 1911–1921.
207. Rose, J.L. Ultrasonic Guided Waves in Solid Media; Cambridge University Press: Cambridge, UK, 2014.
208. Royer, D.; Dieulesaint, E.; de Gennes, P.-G. Ondes élastiques dans les solides. Tome 1 Tome 1; Masson: Paris,
France, 1996.
209. Kinsler, L.E.; Frey, A.R. Fundamentals of Acoustics; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1962;
210. O’Donnell, M.; Busse, L.J.; Miller, J.G. 1. Piezoelectric Transducers. In Ultrasonics; Edmonds, P.D., Ed.;
Methods in Experimental Physics; Academic Press, 1981; Vol. 19, pp. 29–65.
211. Temkin, S. Elements of Acoustics; Wiley: New York, NY, USA, 1981.
212. Cannata, J.M.; Ritter, T.A.; Chen, W.H.; Silverman, R.H.; Shung, K.K. Design of efficient, broadband single-
element (20-80 MHz) ultrasonic transducers for medical imaging applications. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2003, 50, 1548–1557.
213. Nicolaides, K.; Nortman, L.; Tapson, J. The effect of backing material on the transmitting response level
and bandwidth of a wideband underwater transmitting transducer using 1-3 piezocomposite material.
Phys. Procedia 2010, 3, 1041–1045.
214. Webster, R.A.; Button, T.W.; Meggs, C.; MacLennan, D.; Cochran, S. P3K-5 Passive Materials for High
Frequency Ultrasound Components. In Proceedings of the 2007 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, New York,
NY, USA, 28–31 October 2007; pp. 1925–1928.
215. Grewe, M.G.; Gururaja, T.R.; Shrout, T.R.; Newnham, R.E. Acoustic properties of particle/polymer
composites for ultrasonic transducer backing applications. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control
1990, 37, 506–514.
216. Lutsch, A. Solid mixtures with specified impedances and high attenuation for ultrasonic waves. J. Acoust.
Soc. Am. 1962, 34, 131–132.
217. Karpelson, A.; Trelinski, M. Operation of highly focussed immersion ultrasonic transducers at elevated
temperatures. NDT.net 2004, 9.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 55 of 65

218. Holmes-Siedle, A.; Adams, L. Handbook of Radiation Effects; Oxford Univ Press, Inc.: Oxford, MS, USA, 1993.
219. Milkovich, S.M.; Herakovich, C.T.; Sykes, G.F. Space radiation effects on the thermo-mechanical behavior
of graphite-epoxy composites. J. Compos. Mater. 1986, 20, 579–593.
220. Vandergriff, K.U. Designing Equipment for Use in Gamma Radiation Environments; Oak Ridge National Lab.:
Oak Ridge, TN, USA, 1990.
221. Parkinson, W.W.; Sisman, O. The use of plastics and elastomers in nuclear radiation. Nucl. Eng. Des. 1971,
17, 247–280.
222. Bonin, H.W.; Bui, V.T.; Pak, H.; Poirier, E.; Harris, H. Radiation effects on aluminum-epoxy adhesive joints.
J. Appl. Polym. Sci. 1998, 67, 37–47.
223. Schwank, J.R.; Nasby, R.D.; Miller, S.L.; Rodgers, M.S.; Dressendorfer, P.V. Total-dose radiation-induced
degradation of thin film ferroelectric capacitors. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 1990, 37, 1703–1712.
224. Clegg, D.W.; Collyer, A.A. Irradiation Effects on Polymers; Springer: Berlin/Heidelberg, Germany, 1991.
225. Haider, M.F.; Giurgiutiu, V.; Lin, B.; Yu, L.; Lam, P.-S.; Verst, C. Effects of Gamma radiation on resonant
and antiresonant characteristics of piezoelectric wafer active sensors. ASME J. Nondestruct. Eval. 2018, 2,
011001.
226. Kažys, R.; Voleišis, A.; Voleišienė, B. High temperature ultrasonic transducers: review. Ultrasound 2008, 63,
7–17.
227. Kazys, R.; Voleisis, A.; Sliteris, R.; Mazeika, L.; Van Nieuwenhove, R.; Kupschus, P.; Abderrahim, H.A.
High temperature ultrasonic transducers for imaging and measurements in a liquid Pb/Bi eutectic alloy.
IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2005, 52, 525–537.
228. Holbert, K.E.; McCready, S.S.; Heger, A.S.; Harlow, T.H.; Spearing, D.R. Performance of piezoresistive and
piezoelectric sensors in pulsed reactor experiments; Los Alamos National Laboratory: Santa Fe, NM, USA, 2004.
229. Rempe, J.; Daw, J.; Knudson, D.; Schley, R.; Unruh, T.; Chase, B.; Palmer, J. In-Pile Instrumentation to Support
Fuel Cycle Research and Development - Fy12 Status Report; Idaho National Laboratory (INL): Idaho Falls, IA,
USA, 2012.
230. Sinclair, A.N.; Malkin, R. Sensors for Ultrasonic Nondestructive Testing (NDT) in Harsh Environments.
Sensors 2020, 20, 456.
231. Holbert, K.E.; Sankaranarayanan, S.; McCready, S.S. Response of lead metaniobate acoustic emission
sensors to gamma irradiation. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 2005, 52, 2583–2590.
232. Lee, S.C.; Teowee, G.; Schrimpf, R.D.; Birnie, D.P.; Uhlmann, D.R.; Galloway, K.F. Total-dose radiation
effects on sol-gel derived PZT thin films. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 1992, 39, 2036–2043.
233. Boychenko, D. V; Nikiforov, A.Y.; Skorobogatov, P.K.; Sogoyan, A.V. Radiation Effects in Pezoelectric
Sensor. In Proceedings of the 2007 9th European Conference on Radiation and its Effects on Components
and Systems, Deauville, France, 10–14 September 2007; pp. 1–4.
234. Benedetto, J.M.; Moore, R.A.; McLean, F.B.; Brody, P.S.; Dey, S.K. The effect of ionizing radiation on sol-gel
ferroelectric PZT capacitors. IEEE Trans. Nucl. Sci. 1990, 37, 1713–1717.
235. Piezotronics PCB Very High Temperature Triaxial Charge Mode Accelerometer With UHT-12TM Element,
Available online: https://www.pcb.com/contentstore/mktgcontent/LinkedDocuments/Vibration/TM-VIB-
EX356A73_lowres.pdf (accessed on 10 May 2020).
236. Smilie, R.W.; Iddings, F.A. Mechanisms of transducer failure in a gamma radiation field. Mater. Eval. 1983,
41, 1409–1411.
237. Zhou, Q.; Cha, J.H.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, R.; Cao, W.; Shung, K.K. Alumina/epoxy nanocomposite matching
layers for high-frequency ultrasound transducer application. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control
2009, 56, 213–219.
238. Tiefensee, F.; Becker-Willinger, C.; Heppe, G.; Herbeck-Engel, P.; Jakob, A. Nanocomposite cerium oxide
polymer matching layers with adjustable acoustic impedance between 4 MRayl and 7 MRayl. Ultrasonics
2010, 50, 363–366.
239. Wang, H.; Cao, W.; Zhou, Q.F.; Shung, K.K.; Huang, Y.H. Silicon oxide colloidal/polymer nanocomposite
films. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2004, 85, 5998–6000.
240. Wang, S.; Campistron, P.; Carlier, J.; Callens-Debavelaere, D.; Nongaillard, B.; NDieguene, A.; Nassar, G.;
Soyer, C.; Zhao, X. Su-8-based nanocomposites for acoustical matching layer. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2009, 56, 1483–1489.
241. Manh, T.; Jensen, G.U.; Johansen, T.F.; Hoff, L. Microfabricated 1–3 composite acoustic matching layers for
15MHz transducers. Ultrasonics 2013, 53, 1141–1149.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 56 of 65

242. Manh, T.; Jensen, G.U.; Johansen, T.F.; Hoff, L. Modeling and Characterization of a Silicon-epoxy 2-2
Composite Material. In Proceedings of the 2012 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium, Dresden,
Germany, 7–10 October 2012; pp. 2234–2237.
243. Kim, K.-B.; Hsu, D.K.; Ahn, B.; Kim, Y.-G.; Barnard, D.J. Fabrication and comparison of PMN-PT single
crystal, PZT and PZT-based 1-3 composite ultrasonic transducers for NDE applications. Ultrasonics 2010,
50, 790–797.
244. Chen, Y.; Zhou, D.; Lam, K.H.; Cheung, K.F.; Dai, J.; Chan, H.L.W. Endoscopic ultrasound radial array
transducers fabricated with PZT tube by a rotate-and-dice method. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2013, 201, 357–
362.
245. Lee, L.J.; Zeng, C.; Cao, X.; Han, X.; Shen, J.; Xu, G. Polymer nanocomposite foams. Compos. Sci. Technol.
2005, 65, 2344–2363.
246. Reglero Ruiz, J.A.; Vincent, M.; Agassant, J.-F.; Sadik, T.; Pillon, C.; Carrot, C. Polymer foaming with
chemical blowing agents: Experiment and modeling. Polym. Eng. Sci. 2015, 55, 2018–2029.
247. Chen, J.; Panda, R. Review: Commercialization of Piezoelectric Single Crystals for Medical Imaging
Applications. In Proceedings of the IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 18–21
September 2005; Vol. 1, pp. 235–240.
248. Zhou, Q.; Lam, K.H.; Zheng, H.; Qiu, W.; Shung, K.K. Piezoelectric single crystal ultrasonic transducers for
biomedical applications. Prog. Mater. Sci. 2014, 66, 87–111.
249. Ming Lu, X.; Proulx, T.L. Single Crystals vs. PZT Ceramics for Medical Ultrasound Applications. In
Proceedings of the IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Rotterdam, The Netherlands, 18–21 September 2005; Vol.
1, pp. 227–230.
250. Yin, Z.-W.; Luo, H.-S.; Wang, P.-C.; Xu, G.-S. Growth, characterization and properties of relaxor
ferroelectric PMN-PT single crystals. Ferroelectrics 1999, 229, 207–216.
251. Wang, Y.; Deng, K.; Xu, S.; Qiu, C.; Yang, H.; Liu, Z. Applications of antireflection coatings in sonic crystal-
based acoustic devices. Phys. Lett. A 2011, 375, 1348–1351.
252. Fang, N.; Xi, D.; Xu, J.; Ambati, M.; Srituravanich, W.; Sun, C.; Zhang, X. Ultrasonic metamaterials with
negative modulus. Nat. Mater. 2006, 5, 452–456.
253. Liu, Z.; Zhang, X.; Mao, Y.; Zhu, Y.Y.; Yang, Z.; Chan, C.T.; Sheng, P. Locally resonant sonic materials.
Science 2000, 289, 1734–1736.
254. Popa, B.-I.; Cummer, S.A. Design and characterization of broadband acoustic composite metamaterials.
Phys. Rev. B 2009, 80, 174303.
255. Elliott, A.S.; Venegas, R.; Groby, J.P.; Umnova, O. Omnidirectional acoustic absorber with a porous core
and a metamaterial matching layer. J. Appl. Phys. 2014, 115, 204902.
256. Cheng, Y.; Zhou, C.; Yuan, B.G.; Wu, D.J.; Wei, Q.; Liu, X.J. Ultra-sparse metasurface for high reflection
of low-frequency sound based on artificial Mie resonances. Nat. Mater. 2015, 14, 1013–1019.
257. Liu, C.; Bai, P.; Lai, Y. Sound-impenetrable holes in water based on acoustic complementary medium. EPL
(Europhysics Lett.) 2016, 115, 58002.
258. Zhang, S.; Yin, L.; Fang, N. Focusing ultrasound with an acoustic metamaterial network. Phys. Rev. Lett.
2009, 102, 194301.
259. Kaina, N.; Lemoult, F.; Fink, M.; Lerosey, G. Negative refractive index and acoustic superlens from multiple
scattering in single negative metamaterials. Nature 2015, 525, 77–81.
260. Cummer, S.A.; Schurig, D. One path to acoustic cloaking. New J. Phys. 2007, 9, 45.
261. Zhang, S.; Xia, C.; Fang, N. Broadband acoustic cloak for ultrasound waves. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011, 106, 24301.
262. Zigoneanu, L.; Popa, B.-I.; Cummer, S.A. Three-dimensional broadband omnidirectional acoustic ground
cloak. Nat. Mater. 2014, 13, 352–355.
263. Jiang, X.; Liang, B.; Zou, X.; Yin, L.; Cheng, J. Broadband field rotator based on acoustic metamaterials.
Appl. Phys. Lett. 2014, 104, 83510.
264. Shen, C.; Xu, J.; Fang, N.X.; Jing, Y. Anisotropic complementary acoustic metamaterial for canceling out
aberrating layers. Phys. Rev. X 2014, 4, 41033.
265. Ma, G.; Yang, M.; Xiao, S.; Yang, Z.; Sheng, P. Acoustic metasurface with hybrid resonances. Nat. Mater.
2014, 13, 873–878.
266. Wei, P.; Croënne, C.; Tak Chu, S.; Li, J. Symmetrical and anti-symmetrical coherent perfect absorption for
acoustic waves. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2014, 104, 121902.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 57 of 65

267. Duan, Y.; Luo, J.; Wang, G.; Hang, Z.H.; Hou, B.; Li, J.; Sheng, P.; Lai, Y. Theoretical requirements for
broadband perfect absorption of acoustic waves by ultra-thin elastic meta-films. Sci. Rep. 2015, 5, 12139.
268. Yang, M.; Meng, C.; Fu, C.; Li, Y.; Yang, Z.; Sheng, P. Subwavelength total acoustic absorption with
degenerate resonators. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2015, 107, 104104.
269. Leroy, V.; Strybulevych, A.; Lanoy, M.; Lemoult, F.; Tourin, A.; Page, J.H. Superabsorption of acoustic
waves with bubble metascreens. Phys. Rev. B 2015, 91, 20301.
270. Mei, J.; Ma, G.; Yang, M.; Yang, Z.; Wen, W.; Sheng, P. Dark acoustic metamaterials as super absorbers for
low-frequency sound. Nat. Commun. 2012, 3, 756.
271. Song, J.Z.; Bai, P.; Hang, Z.H.; Lai, Y. Acoustic coherent perfect absorbers. New J. Phys. 2014, 16, 33026.
272. Ding, K.; Ma, G.; Xiao, M.; Zhang, Z.Q.; Chan, C.T. Emergence, coalescence, and topological properties of
multiple exceptional points and their experimental realization. Phys. Rev. X 2016, 6, 21007.
273. Shi, C.; Dubois, M.; Chen, Y.; Cheng, L.; Ramezani, H.; Wang, Y.; Zhang, X. Accessing the exceptional points
of parity-time symmetric acoustics. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 11110.
274. Yang, Z.; Gao, F.; Shi, X.; Lin, X.; Gao, Z.; Chong, Y.; Zhang, B. Topological acoustics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015,
114, 114301.
275. Zhang, Z.; Wei, Q.; Cheng, Y.; Zhang, T.; Wu, D.; Liu, X. Topological creation of acoustic pseudospin
multipoles in a flow-free symmetry-broken metamaterial lattice. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2017, 118, 84303.
276. Lu, J.; Qiu, C.; Ke, M.; Liu, Z. Valley vortex states in sonic crystals. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016, 116, 93901.
277. Lu, J.; Qiu, C.; Ye, L.; Fan, X.; Ke, M.; Zhang, F.; Liu, Z. Observation of topological valley transport of sound
in sonic crystals. Nat. Phys. 2017, 13, 369–374.
278. Yang, Z.; Zhang, B. Acoustic type-II Weyl nodes from stacking dimerized chains. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016, 117,
224301.
279. He, C.; Ni, X.; Ge, H.; Sun, X.-C.; Chen, Y.-B.; Lu, M.-H.; Liu, X.-P.; Chen, Y.-F. Acoustic topological insulator
and robust one-way sound transport. Nat. Phys. 2016, 12, 1124–1129.
280. Fleury, R.; Khanikaev, A.B.; Alù, A. Floquet topological insulators for sound. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7, 11744.
281. Lee, D.; Nguyen, D.M.; Rho, J. Acoustic wave science realized by metamaterials. Nano Converg. 2017, 4, 3.
282. Cummer, S.A.; Christensen, J.; Alù, A. Controlling sound with acoustic metamaterials. Nat. Rev. Mater.
2016, 1, 16001.
283. Yang, Z.; Mei, J.; Yang, M.; Chan, N.H.; Sheng, P. Membrane-type acoustic metamaterial with negative
dynamic mass. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2008, 101, 204301.
284. Yao, S.; Zhou, X.; Hu, G. Experimental study on negative effective mass in a 1D mass-spring system. New
J. Phys. 2008, 10, 43020.
285. Lee, S.H.; Park, C.M.; Seo, Y.M.; Wang, Z.G.; Kim, C.K. Acoustic metamaterial with negative density. Phys.
Lett. A 2009, 373, 4464–4469.
286. Ding, Y.; Liu, Z.; Qiu, C.; Shi, J. Metamaterial with simultaneously negative bulk modulus and mass
density. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2007, 99, 93904.
287. Lee, S.H.; Park, C.M.; Seo, Y.M.; Wang, Z.G.; Kim, C.K. Composite acoustic medium with simultaneously
negative density and modulus. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2010, 104, 54301.
288. Yang, M.; Ma, G.; Yang, Z.; Sheng, P. Coupled membranes with doubly negative mass density and bulk
modulus. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2013, 110, 134301.
289. Wu, Y.; Lai, Y.; Zhang, Z.-Q. Elastic metamaterials with simultaneously negative effective shear modulus
and mass density. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011, 107, 105506.
290. Li, J.; Fok, L.; Yin, X.; Bartal, G.; Zhang, X. Experimental demonstration of an acoustic magnifying
hyperlens. Nat. Mater. 2009, 8, 931–934.
291. Garcia-Chocano, V.M.; Christensen, J.; Sánchez-Dehesa, J. Negative refraction and energy funneling by
hyperbolic materials: an experimental demonstration in acoustics. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2014, 112, 144301.
292. Shen, C.; Xie, Y.; Sui, N.; Wang, W.; Cummer, S.A.; Jing, Y. Broadband acoustic hyperbolic metamaterial.
Phys. Rev. Lett. 2015, 115, 254301.
293. Liang, Z.; Li, J. Extreme acoustic metamaterial by coiling up space. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2012, 108, 114301.
294. Zhu, X.; Li, K.; Zhang, P.; Zhu, J.; Zhang, J.; Tian, C.; Liu, S. Implementation of dispersion-free slow acoustic
wave propagation and phase engineering with helical-structured metamaterials. Nat. Commun. 2016, 7,
11731.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 58 of 65

295. Peng, S.; Qiu, C.; He, Z.; Ye, Y.; Xu, S.; Tang, K.; Ke, M.; Liu, Z. Extraordinary acoustic shielding by a
monolayer of periodical polymethyl methacrylate cylinders immersed in water. J. Appl. Phys. 2011, 110,
14509.
296. Li, Y.; Jiang, X.; Liang, B.; Cheng, J.; Zhang, L. Metascreen-based acoustic passive phased array. Phys. Rev.
Appl. 2015, 4, 24003.
297. Tang, K.; Qiu, C.; Lu, J.; Ke, M.; Liu, Z. Focusing and directional beaming effects of airborne sound through
a planar lens with zigzag slits. J. Appl. Phys. 2015, 117, 24503.
298. Zigoneanu, L.; Popa, B.-I.; Cummer, S.A. Design and measurements of a broadband two-dimensional
acoustic lens. Phys. Rev. B 2011, 84, 24305.
299. D’Aguanno, G.; Le, K.Q.; Trimm, R.; Alù, A.; Mattiucci, N.; Mathias, A.D.; Aközbek, N.; Bloemer, M.J.
Broadband metamaterial for nonresonant matching of acoustic waves. Sci. Rep. 2012, 2, 340.
300. Xie, Y.; Konneker, A.; Popa, B.-I.; Cummer, S.A. Tapered labyrinthine acoustic metamaterials for
broadband impedance matching. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013, 103, 201906.
301. Fleury, R.; Alù, A. Metamaterial buffer for broadband non-resonant impedance matching of obliquely
incident acoustic waves. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2014, 136, 2935–2940.
302. Al Jahdali, R.; Wu, Y. High transmission acoustic focusing by impedance-matched acoustic meta-surfaces.
Appl. Phys. Lett. 2016, 108, 31902.
303. Tang, W.; Ren, C. Total transmission of airborne sound by impedance-matched ultra-thin metasurfaces. J.
Phys. D. Appl. Phys. 2017, 50, 105102.
304. Ding, Y.; Statharas, E.C.; Yao, K.; Hong, M. A broadband acoustic metamaterial with impedance matching
layer of gradient index. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2017, 110, 241903.
305. Pedersen, P.C.; Tretiak, O.; He, P. Impedance-matching properties of an inhomogeneous matching layer
with continuously changing acoustic impedance. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1982, 72, 327–336.
306. Guild, M.D.; García-Chocano, V.M.; Kan, W.; Sánchez-Dehesa, J. Acoustic metamaterial absorbers based
on multilayered sonic crystals. J. Appl. Phys. 2015, 117, 114902.
307. Li, Z.; Yang, D.-Q.; Liu, S.-L.; Yu, S.-Y.; Lu, M.-H.; Zhu, J.; Zhang, S.-T.; Zhu, M.-W.; Guo, X.-S.; Wu, H.-D.;
et al. Broadband gradient impedance matching using an acoustic metamaterial for ultrasonic transducers.
Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 42863.
308. Yao, Z.; Luo, J.; Lai, Y. Photonic crystals with broadband, wide-angle, and polarization-insensitive
transparency. Opt. Lett. 2016, 41, 5106–5109.
309. Liu, C.; Luo, J.; Lai, Y. Acoustic metamaterials with broadband and wide-angle impedance matching. Phys.
Rev. Mater. 2018, 2, 45201.
310. Luo, J.; Yang, Y.; Yao, Z.; Lu, W.; Hou, B.; Hang, Z.H.; Chan, C.T.; Lai, Y. Ultratransparent media and
transformation optics with shifted spatial dispersions. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2016, 117, 223901.
311. Assouar, B.; Liang, B.; Wu, Y.; Li, Y.; Cheng, J.-C.; Jing, Y. Acoustic metasurfaces. Nat. Rev. Mater. 2018, 3,
460–472.
312. Ba, A.; Kovalenko, A.; Aristégui, C.; Mondain-Monval, O.; Brunet, T. Soft porous silicone rubbers with
ultra-low sound speeds in acoustic metamaterials. Sci. Rep. 2017, 7, 40106.
313. Brunet, T.; Leng, J.; Mondain-Monval, O. Soft Acoustic Metamaterials. Science 2013, 342, 323–324.
314. Manzanares-Martinez, B.; Ramos-Mendieta, F. Transverse elastic waves in superlattices: The Brewster
acoustic angle. Phys. Rev. B 2000, 61, 12877–12881.
315. Memoli, G.; Caleap, M.; Asakawa, M.; Sahoo, D.R.; Drinkwater, B.W.; Subramanian, S. Metamaterial bricks
and quantization of meta-surfaces. Nat. Commun. 2017, 8, 14608.
316. Shen, Z.-Y.; Li, J.-F.; Chen, R.; Zhou, Q.; Shung, K.K. Microscale 1–3-type (Na,K)NbO3-based Pb-free
piezocomposites for high-frequency ultrasonic transducer applications. J. Am. Ceram. Soc. 2011, 94, 1346–
1349.
317. Shen, Z.-Y.; Xu, Y.; Li, J.-F. Fabrication and electromechanical properties of microscale 1–3-type
piezoelectric composites using (Na,K)NbO3-based Pb-free piezoceramics. J. Appl. Phys. 2009, 105, 104103.
318. Sorokin, B.P.; Kvashnin, G.M.; Novoselov, A.S.; Bormashov, V.S.; Golovanov, A. V; Burkov, S.I.; Blank,
V.D. Excitation of hypersonic acoustic waves in diamond-based piezoelectric layered structure on the
microwave frequencies up to 20GHz. Ultrasonics 2017, 78, 162–165.
319. Zhang, H.; Pang, W.; Yu, H.; Kim, E.S. High-tone bulk acoustic resonators on sapphire, crystal quartz, fused
silica, and silicon substrates. J. Appl. Phys. 2006, 99, 124911.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 59 of 65

320. Zhang, Y.; Wang, Z.; Cheeke, J.D.N. Resonant spectrum method to characterize piezoelectric films in
composite resonators. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2003, 50, 321–333.
321. Lakin, K.M. Thin film resonator technology. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2005, 52, 707–716.
322. Muralt, P.; Baborowski, J. Micromachined ultrasonic transducers and acoustic sensors based on
piezoelectric thin films. J. Electroceramics 2004, 12, 101–108.
323. Akhbari, S.; Sammoura, F.; Lin, L. Equivalent circuit models for large arrays of curved and flat piezoelectric
micromachined ultrasonic transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2016, 63, 432–447.
324. Akhbari, S.; Sammoura, F.; Eovino, B.; Yang, C.; Lin, L. Bimorph piezoelectric micromachined ultrasonic
transducers. J. Microelectromechanical Syst. 2016, 25, 326–336.
325. Lee, W.; Kim, S.; Jung, J.; Kang, W.; Shin, E.; Moon, C.; Choi, H. Mechanosensitive Channel Stimulation
System Using Low-Intensity Ultrasound by Piezoelectric Micromachined Ultrasonic Transducer Array. In
Proceedings of the 2016 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS), Tours, France, 18–21 September
2016; pp. 1–4.
326. Akasheh, F.; Myers, T.; Fraser, J.D.; Bose, S.; Bandyopadhyay, A. Development of piezoelectric
micromachined ultrasonic transducers. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2004, 111, 275–287.
327. Jiménez, A.; Hernández, Á.; Ureña, J.; Pérez, M.C.; Álvarez, F.J.; Marziani, C. De; García, J.J.; Villadangos,
J.M. EMFi-based ultrasonic transducer for robotics applications. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2008, 148, 342–
349.
328. Rupitsch, S.J.; Lerch, R.; Strobel, J.; Streicher, A. Ultrasound transducers based on ferroelectret materials.
IEEE Trans. Dielectr. Electr. Insul. 2011, 18, 69–80.
329. Ealo, J.; Camacho, J.; Seco, F.; Fritsch, C. Ultrasonic air-coupled inspection of textile materials using
ferroelectret-based phased arrays. AIP Conf. Proc. 2010, 1211, 933–940.
330. Gaal, M.; Döring, J.; Bartusch, J.; Lange, T.; Hillger, W.; Brekow, G.; Kreutzbruck, M. Ferroelectret
transducers for air-coupled ultrasonic testing of fiber-reinforced polymers. AIP Conf. Proc. 2013, 1511, 1534–
1540.
331. Prieto, J.C.; Jimenez, A.R.; Guevara, J.; Ealo, J.L.; Seco, F.; Roa, J.O.; Ramos, F. Performance evaluation of
3D-LOCUS advanced acoustic LPS. IEEE Trans. Instrum. Meas. 2009, 58, 2385–2395.
332. Fariñas, M.D.; Sancho-Knapik, D.; Peguero-Pina, J.J.; Gil-Pelegrín, E.; Gómez Álvarez-Arenas, T.E. Shear
waves in vegetal tissues at ultrasonic frequencies. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2013, 102, 103702.
333. Gan, T.H.; Hutchins, D.A.; Billson, D.R. Preliminary studies of a novel air-coupled ultrasonic inspection
system for food containers. J. Food Eng. 2002, 53, 315–323.
334. Hoshi, T.; Takahashi, M.; Iwamoto, T.; Shinoda, H. Noncontact tactile display based on radiation pressure
of airborne ultrasound. IEEE Trans. Haptics 2010, 3, 155–165.
335. Chimenti, D.E. Review of air-coupled ultrasonic materials characterization. Ultrasonics 2014, 54, 1804–1816.
336. Dahl, T.; Ealo, J.L.; Bang, H.J.; Holm, S.; Khuri-Yakub, P. Applications of airborne ultrasound in human–
computer interaction. Ultrasonics 2014, 54, 1912–1921.
337. Ealo, J.L.; Prieto, J.C.; Seco, F. Airborne ultrasonic vortex generation using flexible ferroelectrets. IEEE Trans.
Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2011, 58, 1651–1657.
338. Hazas, M.; Hopper, A. Broadband ultrasonic location systems for improved indoor positioning. IEEE Trans.
Mob. Comput. 2006, 5, 536–547.
339. Robertson, T.J.; Hutchins, D.A.; Billson, D.R.; Rakels, J.H.; Schindel, D.W. Surface metrology using reflected
ultrasonic signals in air. Ultrasonics 2002, 39, 479–486.
340. Grandia, W.A.; Fortunko, C.M. NDE Applications of Air-coupled Ultrasonic Transducers. In Proceedings
of the 1995 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium. Seattle, WA, USA, 7–10 November 1995; Volume 1, pp. 697–709.
341. Fang, Y.; Lin, L.; Feng, H.; Lu, Z.; Emms, G.W. Review of the use of air-coupled ultrasonic technologies for
nondestructive testing of wood and wood products. Comput. Electron. Agric. 2017, 137, 79–87.
342. Blomme, E.; Bulcaen, D.; Declercq, F. Recent observations with air-coupled NDE in the frequency range of
650 kHz to 1.2 MHz. Ultrasonics 2002, 40, 153–157.
343. Blomme, E.; Bulcaen, D.; Declercq, F. Air-coupled ultrasonic NDE: experiments in the frequency range 750
kHz–2 MHz. NDT E Int. 2002, 35, 417–426.
344. Neuenschwander, J.; Furrer, R.; Roemmeler, A. Application of air-coupled ultrasonics for the
characterization of polymer and polymer-matrix composite samples. Polym. Test. 2016, 56, 379–386.
345. Stoessel, R.; Krohn, N.; Pfleiderer, K.; Busse, G. Air-coupled ultrasound inspection of various materials.
Ultrasonics 2002, 40, 159–163.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 60 of 65

346. Gómez Álvarez-Arenas, T.E.; Montero de Espinosa, F.R.; Moner-Girona, M.; Rodrı́guez, E.; Roig, A.;
Molins, E. Viscoelasticity of silica aerogels at ultrasonic frequencies. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2002, 81, 1198–1200.
347. Buckingham, M.J. Theory of acoustic attenuation, dispersion, and pulse propagation in unconsolidated
granular materials including marine sediments. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1997, 102, 2579–2596.
348. Schlief, T.; Gross, J.; Fricke, J. Ultrasonic attenuation in silica aerogels. J. Non. Cryst. Solids 1992, 145, 223–
226.
349. Krauß, O.; Gerlach, R.; Fricke, J. Experimental and theoretical investigations of SiO2-aerogel matched
piezo-transducers. Ultrasonics 1994, 32, 217–222.
350. Gerlach, R.; Kraus, O.; Fricke, J.; Eccardt, P.-C.; Kroemer, N.; Magori, V. Modified SiO2 aerogels as acoustic
impedance matching layers in ultrasonic devices. J. Non. Cryst. Solids 1992, 145, 227–232.
351. Magori, V. Ultrasonic Sensors in Air. In Proceedings of the 1994 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Cannes,
France, 31 October–3 November 1994; Volume 1, pp. 471–481.
352. Yano, T.; Tone, M.; Fukumoto, A. Range finding and surface characterization using high-frequency air
transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1987, 34, 232–236.
353. Hayward, G.; Gachagan, A. An evaluation of 1–3 connectivity composite transducers for air-coupled
ultrasonic applications. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1996, 99, 2148–2157.
354. Kelly, S.P.; Hayward, G.; Alvarez-Arenas, T.E.G. Characterization and assessment of an integrated
matching layer for air-coupled ultrasonic applications. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2004,
51, 1314–1323.
355. Galbraith, W.; Hayward, G. Development of a PVDF membrane hydrophone for use in air-coupled
ultrasonic transducer calibration. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1998, 45, 1549–1558.
356. Dansachmüller, M.; Minev, I.; Bartu, P.; Graz, I.; Arnold, N.; Bauer, S. Generation and detection of
broadband airborne ultrasound with cellular polymer ferroelectrets. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2007, 91, 222906.
357. Ealo, J.L.; Seco, F.; Jimenez, A.R. Broadband EMFi-based transducers for ultrasonic air applications. IEEE
Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2008, 55, 919–929.
358. Bovtun, V.; Döring, J.; Bartusch, J.; Beck, U.; Erhard, A.; Yakymenko, Y. Ferroelectret non-contact ultrasonic
transducers. Appl. Phys. A 2007, 88, 737–743.
359. Sborikas, M.; Ealo, J.L.; Wegener, M. Piezoelectric cellular PP films with enhanced performance for low
frequency ultrasound. Sensors Actuators A Phys. 2015, 225, 41–46.
360. Kressmann, R. New piezoelectric polymer for air-borne and water-borne sound transducers. J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. 2001, 109, 1412–1416.
361. de Medeiros, L.J.; Kamimura, H.A.S.; Altafim, R.A.P.; Carneiro, A.A.O.; Amorim, M.F.; Altafim, R.A.C.
Piezoelectret-based hydrophone: an alternative device for vibro-acoustography. Meas. Sci. Technol. 2015,
26, 95102.
362. Altafim, R.A.C.; Basso, H.C.; Altafim, R.A.P.; Lima, L.; de Aquino, C.V; Neto, L.G.; Gerhard-Multhaupt, R.
Piezoelectrets from thermo-formed bubble structures of fluoropolymer-electret films. IEEE Trans. Dielectr.
Electr. Insul. 2006, 13, 979–985.
363. Zhang, X.; Hillenbrand, J.; Sessler, G.M. Thermally stable fluorocarbon ferroelectrets with high
piezoelectric coefficient. Appl. Phys. A 2006, 84, 139–142.
364. Altafim, R.A.P.; Qiu, X.; Wirges, W.; Gerhard, R.; Altafim, R.A.C.; Basso, H.C.; Jenninger, W.; Wagner, J.
Template-based fluoroethylenepropylene piezoelectrets with tubular channels for transducer applications.
J. Appl. Phys. 2009, 106, 14106.
365. Zhang, X.; Cao, G.; Sun, Z.; Xia, Z. Fabrication of fluoropolymer piezoelectrets by using rigid template:
Structure and thermal stability. J. Appl. Phys. 2010, 108, 64113.
366. Zhang, X.; Hillenbrand, J.; Sessler, G.M.; Haberzettl, S.; Lou, K. Fluoroethylenepropylene ferroelectrets
with patterned microstructure and high, thermally stable piezoelectricity. Appl. Phys. A 2012, 107, 621–629.
367. Fang, P.; Wang, F.; Wirges, W.; Gerhard, R.; Basso, H.C. Three-layer piezoelectrets from fluorinated
ethylene-propylene (FEP) copolymer films. Appl. Phys. A 2011, 103, 455–461.
368. Fatemi, M.; Greenleaf, J.F. Vibro-acoustography: an imaging modality based on ultrasound-stimulated
acoustic emission. Proc. Natl. Acad. Sci. U.S.A. 1999, 96, 6603–6608.
369. Urban, M.W.; Alizad, A.; Aquino, W.; Greenleaf, J.F.; Fatemi, M. A review of vibro-acoustography and its
applications in medicine. Curr. Med. Imaging Rev. 2011, 7, 350–359.
370. Toda, M. New type of matching layer for air-coupled ultrasonic transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2002, 49, 972–979.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 61 of 65

371. Haller, M.I.; Khuri-Yakub, B.T. 1–3 Composites for Ultrasonic Air Transducers. In Proceedings of the IEEE
1992 Ultrasonics Symposium, Tucson, AZ, USA, 20-23 October 1992; Volume 2, pp. 937–939.
372. Gachagan, A.; Hayward, G.; Kelly, S.P.; Galbraith, W. Characterization of air-coupled transducers. IEEE
Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1996, 43, 678–689.
373. Hayward, G.; Bennett, J.; Hamilton, R. A theoretical study on the influence of some constituent material
properties on the behavior of 1-3 connectivity composite transducers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1995, 98, 2187–
2196.
374. Gomez, T.E.; de Espinosa, F.M.; Rodriguez, E.; Roig, A.; Molins, E. Fabrication and Characterization of
Silica Aerogel Films for Air-coupled Piezoelectric Transducers in the Megahertz Range. In Proceedings of
the 2002 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Munich, Germany, 8–11 October 2002; Volume 2, pp. 1107–1110.
375. Bovtun, V.; Döring, J.; Wegener, M.; Bartusch, J.; Beck, U.; Erhard, A.; Borisov, V. Air-coupled ultrasonic
applications of ferroelectrets. Ferroelectrics 2008, 370, 11–17.
376. Castaings, M.; Cawley, P.; Farlow, R.; Hayward, G. Single sided inspection of composite materials using
air coupled ultrasound. J. Nondestruct. Eval. 1998, 17, 37–45.
377. Castaings, M.; Cawley, P. The generation, propagation, and detection of Lamb waves in plates using air-
coupled ultrasonic transducers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1996, 100, 3070–3077.
378. ASCE America’s Infrastructure Scores a D+ Available online: https://www.infrastructurereportcard.org/
(accessed on 10 May 2020).
379. Metha, P.K.; Monteiro, P.J.M. Concrete: Microstructure, Properties, and Materials; 4th Ed.; McGraw-Hill: New
York, NY, USA, 2005.
380. Chai, H.K.; Momoki, S.; Kobayashi, Y.; Aggelis, D.G.; Shiotani, T. Tomographic reconstruction for concrete
using attenuation of ultrasound. NDT E Int. 2011, 44, 206–215.
381. Aggelis, D.G. Wave propagation through engineering materials; assessment and monitoring of structures
through non-destructive techniques. Mater. Struct. 2013, 46, 519–532.
382. Ozuna, C.; Cárcel, J.A.; García-Pérez, J. V; Mulet, A. Improvement of water transport mechanisms during
potato drying by applying ultrasound. J. Sci. Food Agric. 2011, 91, 2511–2517.
383. Kim, K.-B.; Lee, S.; Kim, M.-S.; Cho, B.-K. Determination of apple firmness by nondestructive ultrasonic
measurement. Postharvest Biol. Technol. 2009, 52, 44–48.
384. Mulet, A.; Cárcel, J.A.; Sanjuán, N.; Bon, J. New food drying technologies - use of ultrasound. Food Sci.
Technol. Int. 2003, 9, 215–221.
385. Charoux, C.M.G.; Ojha, K.S.; O’Donnell, C.P.; Cardoni, A.; Tiwari, B.K. Applications of airborne ultrasonic
technology in the food industry. J. Food Eng. 2017, 208, 28–36.
386. Drinkwater, B.W.; Wilcox, P.D. Ultrasonic arrays for non-destructive evaluation: A review. NDT E Int. 2006,
39, 525–541.
387. Lee, W.; Roh, Y. Ultrasonic transducers for medical diagnostic imaging. Biomed. Eng. Lett. 2017, 7, 91–97.
388. Durnin, J.; Miceli, J.J.; Eberly, J.H. Diffraction-free beams. Phys. Rev. Lett. 1987, 58, 1499–1501.
389. Siviloglou, G.A.; Broky, J.; Dogariu, A.; Christodoulides, D.N. Observation of accelerating airy beams. Phys.
Rev. Lett. 2007, 99, 213901.
390. Nye, J.F.; Berry, M.V. Dislocations in wave trains. Proc. R. Soc. Lond. A. Math. Phys. Sci. 1974, 336, 165–190.
391. Yongfen, L.; Shengchang, J.; Yanming, L. Phased-ultrasonic receiving-planar array transducer for partial
discharge location in transformer. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2006, 53, 614–622.
392. Annema, J.T.; Veseliç, M.; Rabe, K.F. EUS-guided FNA of centrally located lung tumours following a non-
diagnostic bronchoscopy. Lung Cancer 2005, 48, 357–361.
393. Prasad, P.; Schmulewitz, N.; Patel, A.; Varadarajulu, S.; Wildi, S.M.; Roberts, S.; Tutuian, R.; King, P.;
Hawes, R.H.; Hoffman, B.J.; et al. Detection of occult liver metastases during EUS for staging of
malignancies. Gastrointest. Endosc. 2004, 59, 49–53.
394. Lachter, J.; Zelikovsky, S. EUS changes diagnosis from pancreatic to gallbladder carcinoma. Int. J.
Gastrointest. Cancer 2002, 32, 161–164.
395. Gucunski, N.; Boone, S.D.; Zobel, R.; Ghasemi, H.; Parvardeh, H.; Kee, S.-H. Nondestructive Evaluation
Inspection of the Arlington Memorial Bridge Using a Robotic Assisted Bridge Inspection Tool (RABIT). In
Proceedings of the Nondestructive Characterization for Composite Materials, Aerospace Engineering, Civil
Infrastructure, and Homeland Security 2014, San Diego, CA, USA, 10 April 2014; Volume 9063, pp. 148–
160.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 62 of 65

396. Christensen, J.; de Abajo, F.J.G. Anisotropic metamaterials for full control of acoustic waves. Phys. Rev. Lett.
2012, 108, 124301.
397. Zhao, J.; Li, B.; Chen, Z.; Qiu, C.-W. Manipulating acoustic wavefront by inhomogeneous impedance and
steerable extraordinary reflection. Sci. Rep. 2013, 3, 2537.
398. Li, Y.; Jiang, X.; Li, R.; Liang, B.; Zou, X.; Yin, L.; Cheng, J. Experimental realization of full control of reflected
waves with subwavelength acoustic metasurfaces. Phys. Rev. Appl. 2014, 2, 64002.
399. Xie, Y.; Wang, W.; Chen, H.; Konneker, A.; Popa, B.-I.; Cummer, S.A. Wavefront modulation and
subwavelength diffractive acoustics with an acoustic metasurface. Nat. Commun. 2014, 5, 5553.
400. Tang, K.; Qiu, C.; Ke, M.; Lu, J.; Ye, Y.; Liu, Z. Anomalous refraction of airborne sound through ultrathin
metasurfaces. Sci. Rep. 2014, 4, 6517.
401. Mei, J.; Wu, Y. Controllable transmission and total reflection through an impedance-matched acoustic
metasurface. New J. Phys. 2014, 16, 123007.
402. Brown, L.F.; Mason, J.L. Disposable PVDF ultrasonic transducers for nondestructive testing applications.
IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1996, 43, 560–568.
403. McNab, A.; Kirk, K.J.; Cochran, A. Ultrasonic transducers for high temperature applications. IEE Proc. - Sci.
Meas. Technol. 1998, 145, 229–236.
404. Kazys, R.; Sliteris, R.; Voleisis, A.; Voleisiene, B.; Abderrahim, A.; Kupschus, P. Development of Ultrasonic
Transducers for Ranging and Imaging in Heavy Liquid Metal. In Proceedings of the Sensors, 2004 IEEE,
Vienna, Austria, 24–27 October 2004; Volume 2, pp. 646–649.
405. Kazys, R.; Voleisis, A.; Sliteris, R.; Voleisiene, B.; Mazeika, L.; Kupschus, P.H.; Abderrahim, H.A.
Development of ultrasonic sensors for operation in a heavy liquid metal. IEEE Sens. J. 2006, 6, 1134–1143.
406. Sherrit, S.; Bao, X.; Bar-Cohen, Y.; Chang, Z. Resonance Analysis of High-temperature Piezoelectric
Materials for Actuation and Sensing. In Proceedings of the SPIE, San Diego, CA, USA, 21 July 2004; Vol.
5387.
407. Sherrit, S. Smart Material/actuator Needs in Extreme Environments in Space. In Proceedings of the SPIE,
San Diego, CA, USA, 16 May 2005; Volume 5761.
408. Mrasek, H.; Gohlke, D.; Matthies, K.; Neumann, E. High temperature ultrasonic transducers. NDTnet 1996,
1.
409. Stevenson, T.; Martin, D.G.; Cowin, P.I.; Blumfield, A.; Bell, A.J.; Comyn, T.P.; Weaver, P.M. Piezoelectric
materials for high temperature transducers and actuators. J. Mater. Sci. Mater. Electron. 2015, 26, 9256–9267.
410. Baba, A.; Searfass, C.T.; Tittmann, B.R. High temperature ultrasonic transducer up to 1000 °C using lithium
niobate single crystal. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 97, 232901.
411. Shepherd, G.; Cochran, A.; Kirk, K.J.; McNab, A. 1–3 connectivity composite material made from lithium
niobate and cement for ultrasonic condition monitoring at elevated temperatures. Ultrasonics 2002, 40, 223–
226.
412. Amini, M.H.; Sinclair, A.N.; Coyle, T.W. High temperature ultrasonic transducer for real-time inspection.
Phys. Procedia 2015, 70, 343–347.
413. Dubois, M.-A.; Muralt, P. Properties of aluminum nitride thin films for piezoelectric transducers and
microwave filter applications. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1999, 74, 3032–3034.
414. Magnusson, R.; Wang, S.S. New principle for optical filters. Appl. Phys. Lett. 1992, 61, 1022–1024.
415. Ma, J.; Martin, K.H.; Dayton, P.A.; Jiang, X. A preliminary engineering design of intravascular dual-
frequency transducers for contrast-enhanced acoustic angiography and molecular imaging. IEEE Trans.
Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2014, 61, 870–880.
416. Rupp, C.J.; Dunn, M.L.; Maute, K. Switchable phononic wave filtering, guiding, harvesting, and actuating
in polarization-patterned piezoelectric solids. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 96, 111902.
417. Qiu, C.; Liu, Z.; Mei, J.; Shi, J. Mode-selecting acoustic filter by using resonant tunneling of two-dimensional
double phononic crystals. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2005, 87, 104101.
418. Romero-García, V.; Sánchez-Pérez, J.V; Garcia-Raffi, L.M. Tunable wideband bandstop acoustic filter based
on two-dimensional multiphysical phenomena periodic systems. J. Appl. Phys. 2011, 110, 14904.
419. Oudich, M.; Assouar, M.B.; Hou, Z. Propagation of acoustic waves and waveguiding in a two-dimensional
locally resonant phononic crystal plate. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2010, 97, 193503.
420. Zhu, X.; Zou, X.; Liang, B.; Cheng, J. One-way mode transmission in one-dimensional phononic crystal
plates. J. Appl. Phys. 2010, 108, 124909.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 63 of 65

421. Zhao, D.; Ye, Y.; Xu, S.; Zhu, X.; Yi, L. Broadband and wide-angle negative reflection at a phononic crystal
boundary. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2014, 104, 43503.
422. Li, X.-F.; Ni, X.; Feng, L.; Lu, M.-H.; He, C.; Chen, Y.-F. Tunable unidirectional sound propagation through
a sonic-crystal-based acoustic diode. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2011, 106, 84301.
423. Liang, B.; Yuan, B.; Cheng, J. Acoustic diode: rectification of acoustic energy flux in one-dimensional
systems. Phys. Rev. Lett. 2009, 103, 104301.
424. Liang, B.; Guo, X.S.; Tu, J.; Zhang, D.; Cheng, J.C. An acoustic rectifier. Nat. Mater. 2010, 9, 989–992.
425. Huang, Y.; Sun, H.; Xia, J.; Yuan, S.; Ding, X. Multi-band asymmetric acoustic transmission in a bended
waveguide with multiple mechanisms. Appl. Phys. Lett. 2016, 109, 13501.
426. Martin, K.H.; Lindsey, B.D.; Ma, J.; Lee, M.; Li, S.; Foster, F.S.; Jiang, X.; Dayton, P.A. Dual-frequency
piezoelectric transducers for contrast enhanced ultrasound imaging. Sensors 2014, 14, 20825–20842.
427. Bouakaz, A.; Frigstad, S.; Cate, F.J.T.; de Jong, N. Super harmonic imaging: a new imaging technique for
improved contrast detection. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2002, 28, 59–68.
428. Bertocci, F.; Francalanci, L.; De Luca, R.; Bassani, M.; Gelli, F.; Palchetti, P. Design of Medical Ultrasound
Probe: Measurement System for the Characterization of Reverberations. In Proceedings of the 2018 IEEE
International Symposium on Medical Measurements and Applications (MeMeA), Rome, Italy, 11–13 June
2018; pp. 1–6.
429. Kochański, W.; Boeff, M.; Hashemiyan, Z.; Staszewski, W.J.; Verma, P.K. Modelling and numerical
simulations of in-air reverberation images for fault detection in medical ultrasonic transducers: A feasibility
study. J. Sensors 2015, 2015, 796439.
430. Duarte, M.A.; Machado, J.C.; Pereira, W.C.A. A method to identify acoustic reverberation in multilayered
homogeneous media. Ultrasonics 2004, 41, 683–698.
431. Brende, O.M.; Angelsen, B. Adaptive reverberation noise delay estimation for reverberation suppression
in dual band ultrasound imaging. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2015, 138, 3341–3351.
432. Tay, P.C.; Acton, S.T.; Hossack, J.A. A wavelet thresholding method to reduce ultrasound artifacts. Comput.
Med. Imaging Graph. 2011, 35, 42–50.
433. Lee, J.; Shin, E.J.; Lee, C.; Chang, J.H. Development of dual-frequency oblong-shaped-focused transducers
for intravascular ultrasound tissue harmonic imaging. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2018,
65, 1571–1582.
434. Chopra, R.; Luginbuhl, C.; Foster, F.S.; Bronskill, M.J. Multifrequency ultrasound transducers for conformal
interstitial thermal therapy. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2003, 50, 881–889.
435. Lee, H.J.; Zhang, S.; Bar-Cohen, Y.; Sherrit, S. High temperature, high power piezoelectric composite
transducers. Sensors 2014, 14, 14526–14552.
436. Holt, R.G.; Roy, R.A. Measurements of bubble-enhanced heating from focused, mhz-frequency ultrasound
in a tissue-mimicking material. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2001, 27, 1399–1412.
437. Khokhlova, V.A.; Bailey, M.R.; Reed, J.A.; Cunitz, B.W.; Kaczkowski, P.J.; Crum, L.A. Effects of nonlinear
propagation, cavitation, and boiling in lesion formation by high intensity focused ultrasound in a gel
phantom. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2006, 119, 1834–1848.
438. Farny, C.H.; Glynn Holt, R.; Roy, R.A. The correlation between bubble-enhanced HIFU heating and
cavitation power. IEEE Trans. Biomed. Eng. 2010, 57, 175–184.
439. Kaneko, Y.; Maruyama, T.; Takegami, K.; Watanabe, T.; Mitsui, H.; Hanajiri, K.; Nagawa, H.; Matsumoto,
Y. Use of a microbubble agent to increase the effects of high intensity focused ultrasound on liver tissue.
Eur. Radiol. 2005, 15, 1415–1420.
440. Liu, H.-L.; Chen, W.-S.; Chen, J.-S.; Shih, T.-C.; Chen, Y.-Y.; Lin, W.-L. Cavitation-enhanced ultrasound
thermal therapy by combined low- and high-frequency ultrasound exposure. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2006,
32, 759–767.
441. Sokka, S.D.; King, R.; Hynynen, K. MRI-guided gas bubble enhanced ultrasound heating in in Vivo rabbit
thigh. Phys. Med. Biol. 2003, 48, 223–241.
442. Bailey, M.R.; Couret, L.N.; Sapozhnikov, O.A.; Khokhlova, V.A.; Haar, G.; Vaezy, S.; Shi, X.; Martin, R.;
Crum, L.A. Use of overpressure to assess the role of bubbles in focused ultrasound lesion shape in vitro.
Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2001, 27, 695–708.
443. Yoshizawa, S.; Ikeda, T.; Ito, A.; Ota, R.; Takagi, S.; Matsumoto, Y. High intensity focused ultrasound
lithotripsy with cavitating microbubbles. Med. Biol. Eng. Comput. 2009, 47, 851–860.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 64 of 65

444. Xu, Z.; Raghavan, M.; Hall, T.L.; Chang, C.; Mycek, M.; Fowlkes, J.B.; Cain, C.A. High speed imaging of
bubble clouds generated in pulsed ultrasound cavitational therapy - histotripsy. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2007, 54, 2091–2101.
445. Wojcik, G.; Mould, J.; Ayter, S.; Carcione, L. A Study of Second Harmonic Generation by Focused Medical
Transducer Pulses. In Proceedings of the 1998 IEEE Ultrasonics Symposium, Sendai, Japan, 5–8 October
1998; Volume 2, pp. 1583–1588.
446. Yasuda, J.; Asai, A.; Yoshizawa, S.; Umemura, S. Efficient generation of cavitation bubbles in gel phantom
by ultrasound exposure with negative-followed by positive-peak-pressure-emphasized waves. Jpn. J. Appl.
Phys. 2013, 52, 07HF11.
447. Takagi, R.; Yoshizawa, S.; Umemura, S. Cavitation inception by dual-frequency excitation in high-intensity
focused ultrasound treatment. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 2011, 50, 07HF14.
448. Zaini, Z.; Osuga, M.; Jimbo, H.; Yasuda, J.; Takagi, R.; Yoshizawa, S.; Umemura, S. Study on heavy matching
layer transducer towards producing second harmonics. Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 2016, 55, 07KF15.
449. Ghorayeb, S.R.; Bertoncini, C.A.; Hinders, M.K. Ultrasonography in dentistry. IEEE Trans. Ultrason.
Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2008, 55, 1256–1266.
450. Hayashi, T. Application of ultrasonography in dentistry. Jpn. Dent. Sci. Rev. 2012, 48, 5–13.
451. Lees, S.; Rollins Jr., F.R. Anisotropy in hard dental tissues. J. Biomech. 1972, 5, 557–566.
452. Blodgett, D.W. Ultrasonic Assessment of Tooth Structure. In Proceedings of the SPIE, San Jose, CA, USA,
27 June 2002; Volume 4617.
453. Kossoff, G.; Sharpe, C.J. Examination of the contents of the pulp cavity in teeth. Ultrasonics 1966, 4, 77–83.
454. Zhang, T.; Chen, R.; Zhang, Z.; Li, R.; Tang, X.; Wang, X.; Shung, K.K.; Zhou, Q. High Frequency Single
Crystal Ultrasonic Transducers up to 100 Mhz for High Resolution Ophthalmic Imaging Applications. In
Proceedings of the 2017 IEEE International Ultrasonics Symposium (IUS), Washington, DC, USA, 6–9
September 2017; pp. 1–4.
455. Ko, W.H.; Liang, S.P.; Fung, C.D.F. Design of radio-frequency powered coils for implant instruments. Med.
Biol. Eng. Comput. 1977, 15, 634–640.
456. Zeng, F.G.; Rebscher, S.; Harrison, W.; Sun, X.; Feng, H. Cochlear implants: system design, integration, and
evaluation. IEEE Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2008, 1, 115–142.
457. Roes, M.G.L.; Duarte, J.L.; Hendrix, M.A.M.; Lomonova, E.A. Acoustic energy transfer: a review. IEEE
Trans. Ind. Electron. 2013, 60, 242–248.
458. Ozeri, S.; Shmilovitz, D. Ultrasonic transcutaneous energy transfer for powering implanted devices.
Ultrasonics 2010, 50, 556–566.
459. Ozeri, S.; Shmilovitz, D.; Singer, S.; Wang, C.-C. Ultrasonic transcutaneous energy transfer using a
continuous wave 650 kHz Gaussian shaded transmitter. Ultrasonics 2010, 50, 666–674.
460. Dalecki, D. Mechanical bioeffects of ultrasound. Annu. Rev. Biomed. Eng. 2004, 6, 229–248.
461. Behrens, S.; Spengos, K.; Daffertshofer, M.; Schroeck, H.; Dempfle, C.E.; Hennerici, M. Transcranial
ultrasound-improved thrombolysis: diagnostic vs. therapeutic ultrasound. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 2001, 27,
1683–1689.
462. Barnett, S.B.; Rott, H.-D.; Haar, G.R.; Ziskin, M.C.; Maeda, K. The sensitivity of biological tissue to
ultrasound. Ultrasound Med. Biol. 1997, 23, 805–812.
463. Bailey, M.R.; Khokhlova, V.A.; Sapozhnikov, O.A.; Kargl, S.G.; Crum, L.A. Physical mechanisms of the
therapeutic effect of ultrasound (a review). Acoust. Phys. 2003, 49, 369–388.
464. Songhvi, N.T.; Hynynen, K.; Lizzi, F.L. New developments in therapeutic ultrasound. IEEE Eng. Med. Biol.
Mag. 1996, 15, 83–92.
465. Nyborg, W.L. Safety of medical diagnostic ultrasound. Semin. Ultrasound, CT MRI 2002, 23, 377–386.
466. Martin, R.W.; Sigelmann, R.A. Force and electrical Thevenin equivalent circuits and simulations for
thickness mode piezoelectric transducers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1975, 58, 475–489.
467. Jensen, J.A.; Svendsen, N.B. Calculation of pressure fields from arbitrarily shaped, apodized, and excited
ultrasound transducers. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 1992, 39, 262–267.
468. Trogé, A.; O’Leary, R.L.; Hayward, G.; Pethrick, R.A.; Mullholland, A.J. Properties of photocured epoxy
resin materials for application in piezoelectric ultrasonic transducer matching layers. J. Acoust. Soc. Am.
2010, 128, 2704–2714.
469. Prosperetti, A. Physics of acoustic cavitation in liquids: H. G. Flynn’s review 35 years later. J. Acoust. Soc.
Am. 1998, 103, 2970.
Sensors 2020, 20, 4051 65 of 65

470. Leighton, T.G. 2 - Cavitation Inception and Fluid Dynamics. In The Acoustic Bubble; Leighton, T.G., Ed.;
Academic Press: Cambridge, MA, USA, 1994; pp. 67–128.
471. Young, F.R. Cavitation; Imperial College Press: London, UK, 1999.
472. Apfel, R.E. 7. Acoustic Cavitation. In Methods in Experimental Physics; Edmonds, P.D., Ed.; Academic Press:
Cambridge, MA, USA, 1981; Volume 19, pp. 355–411.
473. Dular, M.; Bachert, B.; Stoffel, B.; Širok, B. Relationship between cavitation structures and cavitation
damage. Wear 2004, 257, 1176–1184.
474. Marangopoulos, I.P.; Martin, C.J.; Hutchison, J.M.S. Measurement of field distributions in ultrasonic
cleaning baths: Implications for cleaning efficiency. Phys. Med. Biol. 1995, 40, 1897–1908.
475. Frohly, J.; Labouret, S.; Bruneel, C.; Looten-Baquet, I.; Torguet, R. Ultrasonic cavitation monitoring by
acoustic noise power measurement. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2000, 108, 2012–2020.
476. Roy, R.A.; Atchley, A.A.; Crum, L.A.; Fowlkes, J.B.; Reidy, J.J. A precise technique for the measurement of
acoustic cavitation thresholds and some preliminary results. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 1985, 78, 1799–1805.
477. Hodnett, M.; Zeqiri, B. A strategy for the development and standardisation of measurement methods for
high power/cavitating ultrasonic fields: review of high power field measurement techniques. Ultrason.
Sonochem. 1997, 4, 273–288.
478. Ilyichev, V.I.; Koretz, V.L.; Melnikov, N.P. Spectral characteristics of acoustic cavitation. Ultrasonics 1989,
27, 357–361.
479. Niemczewski, B. A comparison of ultrasonic cavitation intensity in liquids. Ultrasonics 1980, 18, 107–110.
480. Zeqiri, B.; Gelat, P.N.; Hodnett, M.; Lee, N.D. A novel sensor for monitoring acoustic cavitation. Part I:
Concept, theory, and prototype development. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control 2003, 50, 1342–
1350.
481. Zeqiri, B.; Bickley, C.J. A new anechoic material for medical ultrasonic applications. Ultrasound Med. Biol.
2000, 26, 481–485.

© 2020 by the author. Licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons Attribution
(CC BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).