This invention generally relates to consumer fishfinder systems, and more particularly to multibeam phased array sonar systems.
Consumer anglers have been using fishfinder sonar systems to successfully locate, and hopefully catch, fish since at least 1970 when a radiologist in Eufaula, Alabama, began modifying Heath Kit depth sounders to shield them from electrical noise from other equipment on the watercraft, leading ultimately to the start of the Humminbird® brand of consumer fishfinders. As the technology used in such consumer fishfinders progressed over the past half century from relatively simple two dimensional (2D) sonar displays to Side Imaging®, 3600, and MEGA Imaging all available from the assignee of the present application, so too has the sophistication and demands of the anglers who use such equipment. Indeed, the technology, resolution, and imaging has advanced to a degree that many anglers have a difficult time distinguishing the current images generated by such equipment from actual underwater pictures.
In an effort to continue such advancement in underwater sonar imaging for consumer fishfinders, methods of using frequency swept sonar or blazed arrays are being introduced. This technology utilizes a relatively broadband input signal to drive a transmit (TX) transducer, i.e. the TX pulse is a signal that sweeps a frequency range. The transducer acts much like a prism to white light, separating the different frequencies (colors) in different angular directions. For frequency swept sonar, the phase in the TX elements is arranged so that transmit-beams are fanned out at angles proportional to frequency as shown in
Unfortunately, the spread of the different frequency beams generated by the transducer only covers typically a fraction of the area of interest for an angler, i.e. the volume of water in which the fish may be swimming. As such, typically multiple transducers are required that are mechanically mounted at angles relative to one another to provide the coverage required of the water volume to satisfy the needs of modem anglers. Such mechanical constraints often lead to large packaging requirements to house the transducers. Such packaging produces drag when in the water that is not particularly desirable on the watercraft.
The use of multiple TX transducers in such frequency swept sonar systems also complicates the frequency discrimination of the target's location. This is because the same frequency is sent out at multiple different angles from the multiple different angled TX transducers needed to cover the required water volume. Such may result in the improper placement of a target on the display, often referred to as ghosts.
A further problem with such frequency swept sonar systems relates to the resolution differences of the different frequency beams. That is, a lower frequency sonar wave provides a lower resolution of the target than a higher frequency wave. However, because different frequencies are required to allow the TX transducer to generate the different sonar beams, the resulting resolution from the different frequency returns vary in resolution. This can lead to poor resolution on the display for different areas, frustrating the anglers who may be lead to believe that there is something wrong with their display or system.
There is a need, therefore, for a multibeam sonar system for consumer fishfinders that overcomes these and other problems existing in the art. Embodiments of the present invention provides such a multibeam sonar system for a consumer fishfinder. These and other advantages of the invention, as well as additional inventive features, will be apparent from the description of the invention provided herein.
Embodiments of the present invention provide multiplexed phased array multibeam sonar systems and methods for consumer fishfinders as shown in the accompanying drawings and described in various embodiments herein. Such embodiments should be taken by way of example and not by way of limitation.
In one embodiment, the multiplexed phased array multibeam sonar system includes a control head having a user display and a transducer unit coupled via a high speed data link to the control head. The transducer unit includes a transmit (TX) element configured to generate a sonar ping to ensonify an ensonification cone of water in which the transducer unit is deployed. The transducer unit also includes a receive (RX) array configured to receive sonar echoes resulting from the sonar ping contacting targets in the ensonification cone. A digital signal processor (DSP) that is configured to process the sonar echoes into sonar display information is also included in the transducer unit, along with a multiplexer (MUX) coupled between the RX array and the DSP. The MUX is configured to selectively couple at least a first portion of the RX array to the DSP during a first time and a second portion of the RX array during a second time. The transducer unit communicates the sonar display information via the high speed data link to the control head, and the control head plots the sonar display information received from the transducer unit on the user display.
In an embodiment the TX element is a curved ultrasonic transducer, and preferably a curved lead zirconate titanate (PZT) ultrasonic transducer tube. In an embodiment the TX element includes a curved reflector affixed thereto configured to provide directionality of ultrasonic energy of the sonar ping. In a preferred embodiment the TX element is configured to generate the sonar ping at 1.05 MHz carrier frequency (fc). The sonar ping is a compressed high intensity radiated pulse (CHIRP) having a bandwidth (SBW) of less than 50 KHz, preferably 35 KHz, in certain embodiments. In other embodiments the sonar ping is a continuous wave (CW) signal at 1.05 MHz carrier frequency (fc) of a predetermined length. In certain embodiments the MUX has a sampling frequency fs>2 SBW and fs<<fc, and preferably the MUX sampling frequency fs is 720 KHz.
In an embodiment, the RX array includes a plurality RX elements to enable resolution of a plurality of beams. In certain embodiments there are 128 RX elements to enable resolution of 128 beams. In an embodiment the transducer unit further includes a 16 channel analog front end (AFE) configured to condition the sonar echoes and convert them to digital for processing by the DSP that is coupled between the MUX and the DSP. In one embodiment the MUX comprises a bank of sixteen 8-1 multiplexers to provide the sonar echoes from the 128 RX elements to the 16 channels of the AFE at a sampling rate of 5 MHz.
Preferably, the DSP is configured to perform base banding and down sampling of the digital sonar echoes to effectively reduce data rate without losing sonar information. In such embodiments a down sampling factor is configurable from 4 to more than 40. In one embodiment the down sampling factor is one of 4 or 5 to generate a low factor decimation signal, and the DSP is configured to perform CHIRP correlation on the low factor decimation signal to generate a bandlimited spectrum. In a preferred embodiment the DSP is configured to perform high factor decimation on the bandlimited spectrum with a down sampling factor of 10.
In an embodiment the DSP is configured to process the sonar echoes into sonar display information for each of the plurality of beams via beamforming filtering, which preferably pulls down sonar echo data that lies outside of a usable dynamic range into a common system noise floor to suppress side lobe noise.
In certain embodiments the MUX selects the RX elements to be read in accordance with a predetermined multiplexing pattern. In certain embodiments the predetermined multiplexing pattern is pseudo-random. In certain embodiments the predetermined multiplexing pattern is controlled by the multiplexer connection order of the channel select lines for each multiplexer of the bank. In such an embodiment, preferably the predetermined multiplexing pattern is further controlled by changing a switching order of the channel select lines of the multiplexer connection order.
In an embodiment of the present invention, the multiplexed phased array multibeam sonar system includes a TX element that is configured to generate the sonar ping at 1.05 MHz and a RX array that includes 128 RX elements spaced at slightly less than λ/2 for the 1.05 MHz sonar ping to provide resolution of 128 beams having an angular resolution of 1.25°. In an embodiment the DSP utilizes a mixer vector to compensate for phase shift of the sonar echoes that occurs between the first time and the second time.
In other embodiments of the present invention, a method of generating a sonar image on the user display of a control head of a consumer sonar system having a transducer unit coupled via a high speed data link to the control head, the transducer unit including a transmit (TX) element, a receive (RX) array, a digital signal processor (DSP), and a multiplexer (MUX) coupled between the RX array and the DSP, is provided. The method includes in an embodiment the steps of generating a sonar ping by the TX element to ensonify an ensonification cone of water in which the transducer unit is deployed, receiving sonar echoes by the RX array resulting from the sonar ping contacting targets in the ensonification cone, selectively coupling by the MUX at least a first portion of the RX array to the DSP during a first time and a second portion of the RX array during a second time, processing by the DSP the sonar echoes into sonar display information, communicating by the transducer unit the sonar display information via the high speed data link to the control head, and plotting the sonar display information received from the transducer unit on the user display.
In an embodiment the step of generating a sonar ping includes generating the sonar ping at 1.05 MHz carrier frequency (fc). In one embodiment, the step of generating the sonar ping at 1.05 MHz carrier frequency (fc) comprises the step of generating a compressed high intensity radiated pulse (CHIRP) having a bandwidth (SBW) of less than 50 KHz. Certain embodiments may include the step of sampling the RX array by the MUX at a sampling frequency fs>2 SBW and fs<<fc. In another embodiment the step of generating the sonar ping comprises the step of generating a continuous wave (CW) signal at 1.05 MHz carrier frequency (fc) of a predetermined length.
In an embodiment the step of processing by the DSP includes the steps of base banding and down sampling of the sonar echoes to effectively reduce data rate without losing sonar information, and wherein the step of down sampling utilizes a down sampling factor configurable from 4 to more than 40. In one embodiment the down sampling factor is 4 to generate a low factor decimation signal, and wherein the step of processing further includes the step of generating a bandlimited spectrum by performing CHIRP correlation on the low factor decimation signal. In a preferred embodiment the step of processing further includes the step of performing high factor decimation on the bandlimited spectrum with a down sampling factor of 10.
In one embodiment where the RX array includes 128 RX elements to enable resolution of 128 beams, the step of processing includes the step of beamforming filtering each of the 128 beams by pulling down sonar echo data that lies outside of a usable dynamic range into a common system noise floor to suppress side lobe noise.
In an embodiment the step of selectively coupling includes the step of selectively coupling in accordance with a predetermined multiplexing pattern, and in certain embodiments in accordance with a pseudo-random predetermined multiplexing pattern. In an embodiment the step of selective coupling in accordance with the predetermined multiplexing pattern is controlled by the multiplexer connection order of the channel select lines for each multiplexer of the bank. In an embodiment, the step of processing includes the step of compensating for phase shift of the sonar echoes that occurs between the first time and the second time by utilizing a mixer vector.
Other aspects, objectives and advantages of the invention will become more apparent from the following detailed description when taken in conjunction with the accompanying drawings.
The accompanying drawings incorporated in and forming a part of the specification illustrate several aspects of the present invention and, together with the description, serve to explain the principles of the invention. In the drawings:
While the invention will be described in connection with certain preferred embodiments, there is no intent to limit it to those embodiments. On the contrary, the intent is to cover all alternatives, modifications and equivalents as included within the spirit and scope of the invention as defined by the appended claims.
Turning now to the drawings, there are illustrated various embodiments of the present invention along with graphical, pictorial, and other illustrations of the manner and modes by which the objects of the present invention are achieved and through which those skilled in the art will come to appreciate and understand the full scope of the inventive features of the various embodiments of the present invention. However, these drawings should be taken by way as example and not by way of limitation.
As discussed briefly above, the use of multibeam sonar systems for consumer fish finders greatly simplifies and enables angular location of the acoustic returns, e.g. fish swimming in the water. In a single beam sonar system the distance to target is easily determined based on time from transmit of the sonar signal until receipt of the sonar reflection as shown, e.g., in
In a multibeam fish finding sonar system such as schematically illustrated in corresponding front (
The challenges for multibeam fish finding sonar systems relate to these large numbers of input transducer channels. Indeed, depending on the desired accuracy, typically greater than sixteen channels are required. Processing this amount of sonar data requires intensive processing, typically in a digital signal processor (DSP). While commercial shipping industries often can afford such expensive processing power and size required for multibeam sonar systems, consumer fish finders are far more limited in their ability due to price point concerns, size of enclosures to enable such processing, and availability of lower cost alternatives to locate fish for the average consumer angler.
Recognizing these significant hurdles to incorporating such multibeam phased array sonar technology in a consumer fish finder, and recognizing the increased demand for more lifelike real time imagery by more sophisticated consumer anglers, embodiments of the present invention provide a unique solution to be discussed more fully hereinbelow to provide a low cost, high resolution multibeam sonar for real time underwater imaging.
Indeed,
This control and communications module 116 provides control signals to a transmit circuit 118 that controls the acoustic sonar signal generated by the transmit element 120 or elements. While various frequencies may be used in fish finding, one embodiment of the present invention generates a 1.05 MHz acoustic signal to provide enhanced resolution of the targets for the angler.
Acoustic returns are received by a separate receive array 122 and are processed in a receive circuit and processing module 124. Because the consumer fish finder 100 is deployed and used on an angler's watercraft, an inertial measurement unit (IMU) 126 is utilized to allow the receive circuit and processing module 124 to compensate for movement caused by wave action on the watercraft for stabilization of the displayed beam images 128. Once processed onboard of the transducer unit 108, the information is provided through the control and command module 116, via the high speed data link 104, to the control head 102 for display to the angler.
Because different anglers have different expectations based on their fishing style and quarry, the transducer unit 108 can be mounted in different ways on the watercraft 130 in order to project the acoustic wavefront 132 in different directions. While not limited thereto,
Indeed, because many anglers utilize their watercraft for various types of fishing and may need to adjust their fishing style therebetween, some embodiments of the present invention provide adjustability, either manually or electronically, of the mounting orientation of the transducer assembly. Such adjustability may be provided in one embodiment by a 6-axis swivel, ratchet mounting, etc. to allow the angler to fully customize how the system is used. Other embodiments also or alternatively provide a motorized angular sweep of the orientation of the transducer unit to enable full 360° coverage around and/or below their watercraft. Control of the sweep may also, in other embodiments, allow for sector scanning of less than the full 360°.
In one embodiment as illustrated in
The curvature and construction of the TX element 120, as shown for one embodiment in
As shown in
Once the processing has been completed at each instant, output data is sent via the data uploading 166 to the control head 102. Only data that will be displayed is sent to the control head 102 to reduce total data throughput. Because of the display resolution, the data is heavily decimated at the source before it is transferred to the control head 102 for display via the wedge plotting 168. In one exemplary embodiment of a control head display 128 illustrated in
In order to handle in an efficient and cost effective manner the heavy processing load required in the transducer unit 108 for sampling and processing the data generated, the control and processing architecture 170 illustrated in
In this embodiment the ACQ control 174 controls sampling signal and ping generation, start and stop of acquisition, and TVG. The analog front end (AFE) 176 includes signal conditioning and analog to digital conversion (ADC) for the data received by the RX array in a single integrated circuit (IC). In the illustrated embodiment an analog signal multiplexer 178 is used to multiplex the received analog data 180 from the 128 RX transducers (each receiving the high frequency sonar reflection signals of 1.05 MHz in one embodiment) to the 16 serial data channels 182 of the AFE 176 at a sampling rate of 5 MHz. In one embodiment, a bank of sixteen 8-1 multiplexers are used to provide the 16 serial data channels of the AFE 176. Each of the 16 channels 182 of the AFE 176 includes programmable amplifiers, a configurable antialiasing low pass filter, a 14 bit ADC, and configurable DSP filtering on the output.
It should also be mentioned that there are some significant difficulties of high frequency multiplexing within one transmit-receive cycle. Unlike medical ultrasound operating in the “near-field” region, where distances and time delays are so short they can multiplex between different transmit-receive cycles and still maintain good imagery, in “far-field” sonar that must operate in ranges of many feet instead of inches, multiplexing between different transmit-receive cycles is not possible. However, while this multiplexing of the received data increases the processing complexity, it greatly reduces the data load, thereby allowing for the achievement of the near real time, high resolution imagery in a size and price point that enables this technology to be employed in a consumer fish finder.
Once the data has been input to the FPGA 172 from the AFE 176, an input deserialization 184 occurs. With the 16 channels of the illustrated embodiment, the data has an input frequency calculated as 14 bits at a 5 MHz sampling rate, or an input frequency of 70 MHz. Each serial input sample is converted into a 14 bit parallel output, and all of this data is passed in parallel to the next module. In order to reduce the data rate without losing sonar information, this next module 186 of the FPGA 172 performs base banding and down sampling. The down sampling factor is configurable, is a function of the depth, and ranges from 4 to more than 40. This base banding and down sampling effectively reduces the input frequency from 5 MHz to an output frequency of 0.5 MHz.
As will be discussion in greater detail below, the output of this base banding and down sampling processing is a complex envelope having two values per input, real and imaginary. The complex components determine actual amplitude and phase of each sample. Because the complex output is low frequency, it can be down sampled without losing the sonar information needed in the beamforming process 188, similar to a typical digital heterodyne base banding process. This data is then stored in memory 190 and transmitted to the control head console via the high speed link, illustrated as an Ethernet TCP/IP 192 transmission, ultimately to provide the high resolution images demanded by modern anglers.
As may already be appreciate from the foregoing, the challenges for such an embodiment are related to the large number of inputs, i.e. the data 180 from the 128 RX element array with high frequency of 1.05 MHz for the ADC 176 to handle, which results in computationally intensive digital signal processing (DSP). However, through the use of an 8-1 analog signal multiplexer bank of sixteen multiplexers, the present embodiment is able to use a single 16-channel AFE (ADC) 176. The FPGA 170 has a large I/O bank as mentioned above that allows parallel and systolic processing.
What may not have been appreciated from the foregoing, however, is the multibeam sampling frequency problem with such a high resolution sonar system as has been described. However, because the multibeam sonar signal utilizes a 1.05 MHz carrier (fc) and a modulating frequency bandwidth ≈50 KHz, the minimum Nyquist sampling frequency to properly detect or sample the carrier frequency would be taught to be 2.1 MHz. However, the presently illustrated embodiment utilizes 8-to-1 multiplexing having a multiplexer switching frequency of 8 MHz. Unfortunately, the current state of multiplexers is not capable of switching that fast. However, since the sonar signal has a very narrow bandwidth (SBW<50 KHz), it is possible to sample and reconstruct the signal using a low sampling frequency fs such that 2SBW<fs<<fc. For example, with fs selected to be 720 KHz, the multiplexer switching frequency is reduced to only 5.8 MHz. This discovery enables implementation of the present embodiment with currently available technology.
To understand how this can be accomplished without a loss of fidelity of the sonar data, the following will describe the sonar ping process. The TX element transmits an interrogation pulse with carrier frequency of fc. Echoes produced by obstacles results in modulation 194 of the carrier fc 194 as shown in
To understand the process of undersampling to recover the signal's baseband, reference is now made to
Of course there are issues associated with undersampling that must be accounted for in order not to degrade the actual sonar data with extraneous information. That is, undersampling produces aliases that may overlap with other signals. As a result, the signal to noise ratio (SNR) degrades, especially if noise is within a band that overlaps the aliased spectrum. As such, the undersampling frequency Fus must be chosen such that the aliased band does not fall, e.g., within the bands of other sonar signals often used by anglers, as illustrated in
With these considerations in mind in the current embodiment of the present invention discussed above, processing the undersampled signal may be understood for such embodiment with reference to
However, while the undersampling frequency is chosen to minimize overlap of frequency components 238, 240 and is effective at such as may be seen by the middle graphical illustration of
To avoid this overlap resulting from high factor decimation of the undersampled signal, a prefilter can be used. CHIRP correlation is a good filter for this purpose; however, CHIRP correlation consumes many DSP resources, the minimization of which was why the signal was decimated in the first instance. To balance these effects so as to reduce the DSP resources and avoid mirrored images on the display, decimation at a low factor, e.g. 4 or 5, is used in order to minimize the stretching of the signal spectrum 236Dlf, 238Dlf, 240Dlf as shown in the top graphical image of
With such a narrow bandwidth of the spectrum after the low factor decimation and CHIRP correlation, i.e. once the CHIRP correlation has bandlimited the spectrum, it is then possible to reduce the DPS resource usage further by decimating this spectrum by a high factor, such as 10. While this second decimation will again stretch the (bandlimited) spectrum 236Dlf/CC/D, 238Dlf/CC/D, 240Dlf/CC/D, there is not any risk of any significant overlap as shown in the top graphic illustration of
Returning then to the discussion of base banding of the undersampled signal, and with reference to
To illustrate this process reference is now made to
The forging assumed sampling to determine the input signal by a single sensor. However, some embodiments of the present invention utilize multiple sensors (RX array elements) that are multiplexed. To understand the effect of such multiplexed sensor inputs, the following will discuss demodulating time multiplexed signals. In this discussion it is assumed that a constant sinusoidal signal is sampled with 2 identical sensors located very close to each other. Assume that the sampling of the sensors is interleaved and at the same sampling rate (FS1=FS2). A graph of such samples 274, 276 is shown in the top left graph of
This same methodology applies regardless of the number of sensors sampling the input signal. For example, this method can be used to demodulate a signal detected by eight sets of time multiplexed channels (eight samples 278, 280, 282, 284, 286, 288, 290, 292) as shown in
As shown in
As mentioned briefly above, the design of the mixer accounts for the “interleaving delay” of the sets of samples. Specifically, because the reflected acoustic sonar signal is detected by the RX array whose elements are read in groups at different times in view of the multiplexing thereof in some embodiments, the mixer needs to compensate for the phase shift that has occurred in the signal during such time. In one embodiment having 128 RX elements in the RX array that are sampled (multiplexed) in 8 groups of 16, the mixer vector of each of these (designated T0-T7) 304, 306, 308, 310, 312, 314, 316, 318 is shown in
The grouping of the multiplexing of the RX elements may take several forms in different embodiments. As an example, the RX elements may be read in successive groups of 16 starting from one end of the RX array to the other, such as [0, 1, 2 . . . 13, 14, 15], [16, 17, 18 . . . 29, 30, 31], etc. Other embodiments may read serial groups from each end to the middle or from the middle to both ends. In other embodiments, the RX elements are read in groups of interleaved individual RX elements, e.g. [0, 16 . . . 112] or groups of interleaved grouped RX elements. Other groupings of individual RX elements are used in other embodiments, including different grouping sizes for different size multiplexers.
The selection and ordering of the multiplexed signals from the RX elements is important in preventing certain distortions that may otherwise appear on the sonar display and would need to be filtered out or otherwise dealt with in order to provide a display that accurately only shows only the desired target returns. Indeed, as shown in the polar plot of the spatial spectrum plot of
Ideally, in the absence of noise, it would be possible to perfectly reconstruct the signal using the multiplexed samples in successive order for consecutive time slots without the spokes 326. However, due to noise, each set of multiplexed samples contain elements that cannot be cancelled. If the multiplexing pattern is repetitive, that is if the pattern includes a time sliced portion of each of the RX element's received signals in successive order for consecutive time slots as shown in
To better understand this issue it is instructive to note that, in order to sample 128 input signals with a 16-channel AFE, a multiplexing system using sixteen 8:1 multiplexers is required. The configuration of these multiplexers and the channel switching sequence implemented can affect the quality of the multibeam image as just demonstrated. The multiplexers used in one embodiment are controlled with a three-bit binary channel select that selects the output channel based on Table 1. In this table, ‘A’ is the most significant bit (MSB), and ‘C’ is the least significant bit (LSB).
In order to sample all of the input elements, the multiplexer must cycle through all eight channels, sampling each input at a separate instant in time. With sixteen multiplexers, each sampling instant captures sixteen inputs, and over the course of the multiplexing cycle, all 128 input elements are sampled. If the multiplexer channels are selected in successive order (0-7) as introduced above, the timing will look like that shown in
Similarly, the spatial spectrum when the sampling set includes 16 contiguous RX elements in successive order for consecutive time slots, as shown in the spatial spectrum plot of
While the filtering of such multiplexing noise is possible, the computational resources, cost, and complexity would be prohibitive, particularly when it is realized that manipulation and judicious selection of the element sampling sequencing can effectively eliminate the perception of any such noise spoke on the sonar display. Indeed, by pseudo-randomizing the multiplexing pattern, i.e. sampling the RX elements in pseudo-random order for consecutive time slots, the perceptible display of the noise spokes is minimized.
That is, for these multiplexers any channel order can be chosen. For example, if the channels in a multiplexer are sampled in the order [0 6 1 5 3 2 4 7] instead of 0-7, the timing will look like
In one embodiment of the present invention, to eliminate this periodicity in the data across multiplexers the channel-select lines are independently controlled for each multiplexer. However, this adds complexity to the FPGA design and the PCB layout. Some amount of pseudo-randomness can be achieved without adding extra lines by connecting the existing channel-select lines in a different order for different multiplexers. The binary select lines would still cycle through the channels 0-7, but the order for that multiplexer would be different. Table 2 lists the possible combinations where ‘A’, ‘B’, and ‘C’ represent the channel select lines in the given connection order.
Using just the three lines, there are a total of six possible channel-select orders that can be used to break up the patterns in the multiplexer outputs, including the consecutive output described above. The timing diagrams for those options are shown in
If more variation is desired, in other embodiments additional multiplexing patterns can be created by inverting one or more of the signals. For example, by inverting the ‘A’ channel-select signal and using the inverted signal in place of the A signal for some of the multiplexers, six more patterns can be obtained. Those patterns are shown in
Using one inverted signal creates 12 total unique timing patterns from which to choose. Adding a second inverted line doubles that to 24 unique patterns, and a third inverted line results in 48 unique patterns that can be applied to the 16 multiplexers. Using various combinations of these patterns, there will be multiple options to keep the spacing between elements sampled at a given instant pseudo-random.
With this technique in this embodiment, a minimum of two inverted signals are required to get 16 unique timing patterns. However, similar results can be obtained with a single inverter if the timing pattern from the first half of the array is mirrored onto the second half. As shown in Table 3 below, this means that if the first eight multiplexers have the unique switching patterns A-H, the final eight multiplexers should have the patterns H′-A′, where H′ is the mirror of the pattern H. Two timing patterns and their mirrors are shown in
In an alternant embodiment, variation in the multiplexing output can also be added by changing the order that the transducer signals are connected to the multiplexer inputs. Randomizing the order of the transducer signals into the multiplexers mentioned above does create a truly random output, but it also complicates the routing of the signals on the PCB. There are simpler changes that can add variation without overly complicating the PCB layout. Specifically, in this embodiment the input lines of some of the multiplexers are connected in reverse order, which effectively doubles the number of unique multiplexing patterns without additional inverters or channel-select lines. An example of this is shown in Table 4 below.
These individual switching techniques in each of the preceding embodiments will reduce the overall number of noise spokes and artifacts in the image, but they do not eliminate the noise in the system that caused those spokes. Instead of forming distinct lines/spokes, the noise will be spread throughout the image, slightly raising the noise floor of the data. In addition, a single noise spoke at 0° (the center of the image) will still be present. This is a result of common mode noise across all the channels, not the multiplexing scheme. Because of these effects, filtering and noise reduction in the front end are necessary even with these improvements. Despite this tradeoff, the spokes are the most noticeable points of noise in the image, and minimizing them is an important step to getting a clean and uniform image.
In a further embodiment, and recognizing that the strategies employed in the above embodiments should help reduce the noise spokes and artifacts in the image, they may not be able to completely remove the problems. However, combining multiple strategies can help visibly to reduce some of the spokes in the image. For example, in one embodiment the multiplexer channel-select lines are connected differently to individual multiplexers as described above. Then, the order in which the select-lines are switched by the FPGA is also changed.
While the connections to the multiplexers are fixed in hardware, in one embodiment the digital switching order can be changed as needed, even during a receive session. If the switching order is changed between every multiplexer cycle, the timing pattern will be different each time as well. If the spokes are in different places on the screen for different patterns, changing these patterns each time will prevent those lines from appearing in the image at a consistent angle. Instead, the effect of the spokes will be spread around the image and appear as noise in the image. While this would not eliminate the effect of the spokes, it would greatly reduce the appearance of lines on the screen.
The embodiments discussed above are all viable ways to change the multiplexer output order and remove the noise spokes from the image. In a preferred embodiment, two additional multiplexer channel-select lines are used to assign every multiplexer a unique connection order. Instead of using a separate inverter chip as in one embodiment, the lines are routed from and controlled by the FPGA. The transducer input lines to alternating multiplexers are also reversed in a preferred embodiment to increase variation in the multiplexer output order. This method ensures a pseudo-random multiplexing order that minimizes the noise spokes in the image. It also provides the best performance without overly complicating the layout.
Having now discussed the various embodiments, attention is now returned to the mixing implemented in certain embodiments of the present invention. In one embodiment the mixer is implemented as a circular table in the FPGA to reduce computation complexity required if the mixer vectors for each multiplexed set were calculated each time. After mixing, the complex data of the 128 RX elements carry the phase and amplitude data of the wave fronts at the RX transducer array. As should now be apparent, the mixer effective frequency is 8*fc_virt, where 8 is the multiplexer factor and fc_virt is the transducer virtual frequency after undersampling.
Of course, the reflected acoustic signal is typically not received by only one of the RX elements of the RX array, and so understanding how this reflected acoustic wave front is seen by the RX array is important. For phased arrays of various embodiments of the present invention it is useful to consider a frequency to direction analogy as will be discussed relative to
In a transducer RX array 338, elements are all sampled at single instant t (actually or virtually if multiplexed and compensated as discussed above). The pressure level at each element at that instant in time depends on the direction of the wavefront 334, and the pressure pattern 336 in the array 338 is analogous to frequency in time domain sample arrays. The phase between the elements eliminates ambiguity, and spacing the elements by λ/2 is analogous to the Nyquist limit in time domain sampling. The number of cycles in the pressure pattern's “frequency” is proportional to the beam width (or resolution as discussed below) in that direction. Because the “spatial frequency” is analogous to direction as shown in the various examples of
The beam resolution after beamforming may be understood with reference to
With an understanding now of beamforming in certain embodiments of the present invention, comparison will now be made to FFT with reference to
With the FFT issues in mind, one embodiment utilizes a beamformer matrix which is an array E of 128 elements that allows the beamformer to discriminate 128 direction beams (although it could discriminate more in embodiments with overlapping). Each direction to be discriminated requires a complex FIR of 128 elements. This produces a beamforming matrix M of 128×128 elements. Y(k) is the directivity pattern for that instant at each sampling instant k such that Y(k)=E(k)*M. As may be seen from
This beamforming is a filter that is used to transform the multi-channel time sampled array data into spatial data, creating spatially targeted beams of data. The beamformer is designed to balance the beam width of the main beam versus the shape and level of side lobes. Because there will always be a non-zero side lobe level, energy from an actual target will leak into other beams. Those side lobes will appear as noise 356 in the display, such as shown in
To reduce the presence of these radial rings 356 on the display, beamforming is used as a filter, as will be discussed with reference to
The beamforming filtering of a preferred embodiment recognizes that, for any given range sample, there is a usable dynamic range (C 366). This usable dynamic range (C 366) is the range from the peak 368 of the strongest target 362 to the highest peak side lobes 370. Within this usable dynamic range 366, individual targets (e.g. B 364) will be seen on the display. Weaker targets outside of this usable dynamic range 366, however, will blend into the side lobes, constituting a noise floor for this range sample. Considering all range samples, such as the display in
To create a clean display, however, all range samples are processed to suppress the side lobe noise floor to a common background noise level. This suppression is illustrated at (D 372) by the dashed line 374 in
To further illustrate the directionality discrimination ability of the various embodiments of the present invention, it is instructive to consider the RX transducer array in terms of the number of elements versus the number of beams. It is clear that an array of N samples will have a Discrete Fourier Transform (DFT) representation of N frequencies. N samples yield at most N/2 orthogonal sinusoidals (cosine and sine). These are combined into N complex sinusoidals to form the “basis” of the DFT as shown in
All references, including publications, patent applications, and patents cited herein are hereby incorporated by reference to the same extent as if each reference were individually and specifically indicated to be incorporated by reference and were set forth in its entirety herein.
The use of the terms “a” and “an” and “the” and similar referents in the context of describing the invention (especially in the context of the following claims) is to be construed to cover both the singular and the plural, unless otherwise indicated herein or clearly contradicted by context. The terms “comprising,” “having,” “including,” and “containing” are to be construed as open-ended terms (i.e., meaning “including, but not limited to,”) unless otherwise noted. Recitation of ranges of values herein are merely intended to serve as a shorthand method of referring individually to each separate value falling within the range, unless otherwise indicated herein, and each separate value is incorporated into the specification as if it were individually recited herein. All methods described herein can be performed in any suitable order unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise clearly contradicted by context. The use of any and all examples, or exemplary language (e.g., “such as”) provided herein, is intended merely to better illuminate the invention and does not pose a limitation on the scope of the invention unless otherwise claimed. No language in the specification should be construed as indicating any non-claimed element as essential to the practice of the invention.
Preferred embodiments of this invention are described herein, including the best mode known to the inventors for carrying out the invention. Variations of those preferred embodiments may become apparent to those of ordinary skill in the art upon reading the foregoing description. The inventors expect skilled artisans to employ such variations as appropriate, and the inventors intend for the invention to be practiced otherwise than as specifically described herein. Accordingly, this invention includes all modifications and equivalents of the subject matter recited in the claims appended hereto as permitted by applicable law. Moreover, any combination of the above-described elements in all possible variations thereof is encompassed by the invention unless otherwise indicated herein or otherwise clearly contradicted by context.
This patent application claims the benefit of U.S. Provisional Patent Application No. 62/985,609, filed Mar. 5, 2020, the entire teachings and disclosure of which are incorporated herein by reference thereto.
Number | Name | Date | Kind |
---|---|---|---|
3389372 | Halliday | Jun 1968 | A |
4546459 | Congdon | Oct 1985 | A |
4692722 | Reichel et al. | Sep 1987 | A |
5013979 | Birleson | May 1991 | A |
5916210 | Winston | Jun 1999 | A |
5923617 | Thompson et al. | Jul 1999 | A |
6292433 | Gilbert et al. | Sep 2001 | B1 |
6445646 | Handa | Sep 2002 | B1 |
6661739 | Benjamin et al. | Dec 2003 | B1 |
6678210 | Rowe | Jan 2004 | B2 |
6821251 | Alexandru | Nov 2004 | B2 |
7542376 | Thompson et al. | Jun 2009 | B1 |
7606114 | Bachelor et al. | Oct 2009 | B2 |
7889600 | Thompson et al. | Feb 2011 | B2 |
8390300 | Ems et al. | Mar 2013 | B2 |
8463458 | Wood et al. | Jun 2013 | B2 |
8593903 | Pocwiardowski | Nov 2013 | B2 |
8606432 | Wood et al. | Dec 2013 | B1 |
8638362 | Thompson et al. | Jan 2014 | B1 |
8811120 | Bachelor et al. | Aug 2014 | B2 |
RE45379 | Rowe | Feb 2015 | E |
8964507 | Bachelor et al. | Feb 2015 | B2 |
9523770 | Ruffa | Dec 2016 | B1 |
9664783 | Brown et al. | May 2017 | B2 |
9739884 | Proctor et al. | Aug 2017 | B2 |
9766328 | Black et al. | Sep 2017 | B2 |
9784825 | Brown et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9784826 | Matson et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9784832 | Proctor et al. | Oct 2017 | B2 |
9812118 | Matson et al. | Nov 2017 | B2 |
9846232 | Thompson et al. | Dec 2017 | B1 |
10018719 | Proctor et al. | Jul 2018 | B2 |
10067228 | Steenstrup et al. | Sep 2018 | B1 |
10191153 | Gatland | Jan 2019 | B2 |
10197674 | Thompson et al. | Feb 2019 | B2 |
10247822 | Proctor et al. | Apr 2019 | B2 |
10310062 | Coleman et al. | Jun 2019 | B2 |
10338195 | Stokes et al. | Jul 2019 | B2 |
10454398 | Hanseler et al. | Oct 2019 | B2 |
10545226 | Wigh et al. | Jan 2020 | B2 |
10677921 | Murphy et al. | Jun 2020 | B2 |
10719077 | Clark et al. | Jul 2020 | B2 |
10764342 | Daniel et al. | Sep 2020 | B2 |
10802141 | Stokes | Oct 2020 | B2 |
10852428 | Stokes et al. | Dec 2020 | B2 |
10852429 | Gatland | Dec 2020 | B2 |
10890660 | Wigh et al. | Jan 2021 | B2 |
10914810 | Laster et al. | Feb 2021 | B2 |
10942027 | Johnson et al. | Mar 2021 | B2 |
10942028 | Johnson et al. | Mar 2021 | B2 |
10989537 | Stokes et al. | Apr 2021 | B2 |
11022687 | Darrow | Jun 2021 | B2 |
11054521 | Steenstrup et al. | Jul 2021 | B2 |
11181637 | Gatland et al. | Nov 2021 | B2 |
11204416 | Matson et al. | Dec 2021 | B2 |
11226412 | Thompson et al. | Jan 2022 | B2 |
11250615 | Stokes | Feb 2022 | B2 |
11372102 | Proctor et al. | Jun 2022 | B2 |
11435427 | Laster et al. | Sep 2022 | B2 |
11500054 | Clark | Nov 2022 | B2 |
11525907 | Wigh et al. | Dec 2022 | B2 |
11536820 | Wigh et al. | Dec 2022 | B2 |
11585921 | Proctor et al. | Feb 2023 | B2 |
11630198 | Rivers et al. | Apr 2023 | B2 |
11668820 | Steenstrup et al. | Jun 2023 | B2 |
11703560 | Clark | Jul 2023 | B2 |
11796661 | Caspall | Oct 2023 | B2 |
20030223310 | Benjamin et al. | Dec 2003 | A1 |
20060050615 | Swisher | Mar 2006 | A1 |
20080114239 | Randall | May 2008 | A1 |
20100225303 | Min | Sep 2010 | A1 |
20110013485 | Maguire | Jan 2011 | A1 |
20110249125 | Wallack | Oct 2011 | A1 |
20140269191 | Iverson et al. | Sep 2014 | A1 |
20150265253 | Kim | Sep 2015 | A1 |
20160259050 | Proctor et al. | Sep 2016 | A1 |
20170123062 | Coleman | May 2017 | A1 |
20170212230 | Wigh et al. | Jul 2017 | A1 |
20180100922 | Wigh et al. | Apr 2018 | A1 |
20180217244 | Coleman et al. | Aug 2018 | A1 |
20190072951 | Clark et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190079185 | Steenstrup et al. | Mar 2019 | A1 |
20190188365 | Gurin | Jun 2019 | A1 |
20190242994 | Wanis et al. | Aug 2019 | A1 |
20190265354 | Antao | Aug 2019 | A1 |
20190268390 | Daniel et al. | Aug 2019 | A1 |
20190277806 | Huang | Sep 2019 | A1 |
20200072953 | Wigh et al. | Mar 2020 | A1 |
20200103512 | Brown et al. | Apr 2020 | A1 |
20200127631 | Chayat | Apr 2020 | A1 |
20200158842 | Wigh et al. | May 2020 | A1 |
20200256967 | Wigh et al. | Aug 2020 | A1 |
20200292701 | Darrow | Sep 2020 | A1 |
20200341463 | Clark et al. | Oct 2020 | A1 |
20200400801 | Sloss | Dec 2020 | A1 |
20210085290 | Martin | Mar 2021 | A1 |
20210096244 | Wigh et al. | Apr 2021 | A1 |
20210206459 | Johnson et al. | Jul 2021 | A1 |
20210255627 | Snyder | Aug 2021 | A1 |
20210286074 | Steenstrup et al. | Sep 2021 | A1 |
20220035026 | Proctor | Feb 2022 | A1 |
20220035027 | Proctor | Feb 2022 | A1 |
20220171043 | Neumann et al. | Jun 2022 | A1 |
20220268926 | Hooper | Aug 2022 | A1 |
20220268927 | Hooper | Aug 2022 | A1 |
20220326018 | Rivers et al. | Oct 2022 | A1 |
20220373662 | Crawford et al. | Nov 2022 | A1 |
20220373678 | Combs et al. | Nov 2022 | A1 |
20230074053 | Wigh et al. | Mar 2023 | A1 |
20230088987 | Brown et al. | Mar 2023 | A1 |
20230111196 | Proctor et al. | Apr 2023 | A1 |
20230251375 | Wigh et al. | Aug 2023 | A1 |
20230358885 | Laster | Nov 2023 | A1 |
20230367008 | Freeman et al. | Nov 2023 | A1 |
Number | Date | Country |
---|---|---|
3107720 | Aug 2021 | CA |
109073750 | Dec 2018 | CN |
109073752 | Dec 2018 | CN |
4043915 | Aug 2022 | EP |
2569160 | Jun 2019 | GB |
WO 2018140645 | Aug 2018 | WO |
WO 2019010022 | Jan 2019 | WO |
Entry |
---|
Texas Instruments, “8-Line to 1-Lin Data Selector/Multiplexor”, SN74HC151-Q1 (Year: 2008). |
Texas Instruments, “AFE5818 16-Chennel, Ultrasound, Analog Front-End” (Year: 2015). |
Tan, Li, “Multirate DSP, part 1: Upsampling and downsampling”, https://www.eetimes.com/multirate-dsp-part-1-upsampling-and-downsampling/ (Year: 2008). |
He Z, Zheng F, Ma Y, Kim HH, Zhou Q, Shung KK. A sidelobe suppressing near-field beamforming approach for ultrasound array imaging. J Acoust Soc Am. May 2015;137(5):2785-90. doi: 10.1121/1.4919318. PMID: 25994706; PMCID: PMC5392098. (Year: 2015). |
H Li et al 2015, Piezoelectric transducer design for a miniaturized injectable acoustic transmitter, Smart Mater. Struct. 24 115010 (Year: 2015). |
J. Salinas and W. R. Bernecky, “Real-time sonar beamforming on a MasPar architecture,” Proceedings of SPDP '96: 8th IEEE Symposium on Parallel and Distributed Processing, New Orleans, LA, USA, 1996, pp. 226-229 (Year: 1996). |
Tan, Li, “Digital Signal Processing, Fundamentals and Applications: Chapter 12”, pp. 557-615, Academic Press (Year: 2008). |
https://pressbooks.online.ucf.edu/phy2054ehk/chapter/the-electromagnetic-spectrum/; known prior to Feb. 23, 2021. |
https://www.chegg.com/homework-help/questions-and-answers/sort-modulation-happening-electromagnetic-wave-graph-amplitude-modulation-frequency-modula-q28592736; known prior to Feb. 23, 2021. |
https://www.allaboutcircuits.com/technical-articles/dsp-basics-of-digital-down-conversion-digital-signal-processing/; known prior to Feb. 23, 2021. |
https://www.electronicdesign.com/technologies/analog/article/21798689/choose-the-right-fft-window-function-when-evaluating-precision-adcs; known prior to Feb. 23, 2021. |
R. L. Thompson, J. Seawall and T. Josserand, “Two dimensional and three dimensional imaging results using blazed arrays,” MTS/IEEE Oceans 2001. An Ocean Odyssey. Conference Proceedings (IEEE Cat. No. 01CH37295), Honolulu, HI, USA, 2001, pp. 985-988 vol.2, doi: 10.1109/OCEANS.2001.968250. |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Undersampling#/media/File:Bandpass_sampling_depiction.svg; known prior to Feb. 23, 2021. |
https://en.wikipedia.org/wiki/Spectrogram#/media/File:Waterfall_plot_of_a_whistle.png; known prior to Feb. 23, 2021. |
https://mathworld.wolfram.com/SphericalWedge.html; known prior to Feb. 23, 2021. |
https://www.researchgate.net/figure/Short-time-Fourier-transform-STFT-with-envelope-and-two-sample-overlap_fig7 231828310; known prior to Feb. 23, 2021. |
Number | Date | Country | |
---|---|---|---|
62985609 | Mar 2020 | US |