Ultrasound Scatter and Attenuation | Ultrasound Physics | Radiology Physics Course #8

[@masoodandalib8676]

There is no word that could be used to pay thanks to your work on this subject. It is priceless.

[@autumngriffith1631]

I’m so grateful for these videos! Thank you for making them. These are a HUGE help in my studying for ultrasound physics.

[@masoodandalib8676]

Happiness at face at the end of topic reflects your satisfaction that your viewers have understood every bit of your talk. Thanks for coherence, continuity, clarity and not missing even minute things that could be needed by someone to understand the concept. Unique in your kind. Stay BLESSED .. Ameen.

[@moeinzandiehvakili6151]

Thank a lot Michael, your lectures are very easy to follow and right to the point :)

[@Naseemazeemi]

Once you find this channel, there is no going back ❤

[@catherinekaram4139]

your videos are incredible!! thank you for all the work you have put in!!

[@fazaltahir4216]

Thanks a lot sir Michael, u work is phenomenal 😊

[@m.affansaleem5764]

Comparing US terms with the terms in X rays was awesome.

[@radiologytutorials]

Yay! I'm glad you liked the comparison 😊

[@GloriousDash]

5:46 loved the analogy!

[@radiologytutorials]

Yay! I'm glad 😊

[@megabearcare]

This course is just fantastic.

[@chrischow4948]

Answer explanations in the Q bank would be fantastic!

[@radiologytutorials]

There are answer explanations Chris 👍🏼

[@vktakays7308]

Ur great Mr Michael

[@radiologytutorials]

Thank you 🙏🏻 appreciate it!

[@SelegiasAgaba]

You the best 👏

[@franciskarajki2275]

Hello! Where are these attenuation coefficient values coming from? Searching for these on the internet, I come across quite different values.

[@mdabdulhafeezmalik45]

Wonderful🎉🎉

[@RadGab17]

I'm confused about calculating Half Value Thickness. Do you need the graph in order to do the math, or just the formula? I'm confused how you get the half value thickness of a 4 MHz beam from your equation. I understand you do 0.5x4 from the equation, but where do you go from there?

[@moeinzandiehvakili6151]

I was also confused about this initially. You don't need the graph to calculate it. He is just showing it on the graph for demonstration purposes. Once you calculate how much dB is lost per cm of a tissue , then you can calculate how many cm is required for losing 3dB ( Note: 3dB is equivalent of losing 50% of Intensity base on the logarithmic equation ). Hope this helps

[@khushbootekriwal6796]

Sir, you told according to Huygen’s formula near field is directly proportional to frequency, but higher frequency means less distance of near field right?

[@radiologytutorials]

Hi Khushboo. Great question. Higher frequency actually results in a longer near field (which can be counterintuitive). What you’re likely thinking of is that higher frequency gets attenuated faster (less depth). Near field is purely talking about the beam shape/ geometry not how quickly the waves are attenuated. Video #15 in this series, “ultrasound beam” should clarify this a bit more for you 👍🏼 hope that makes sense

[@khushbootekriwal6796]

Thanku so much sir Yes, i was contemplating depth of field with near field. Cleared ☺️ Must say the lectures are crisp and conceptual

[@radiologytutorials]

Excellent 👌🏼

[@rubes3927]

Handsome 😍