People | Locations | Statistics |
---|---|---|
Naji, M. |
| |
Motta, Antonella |
| |
Aletan, Dirar |
| |
Mohamed, Tarek |
| |
Ertürk, Emre |
| |
Taccardi, Nicola |
| |
Kononenko, Denys |
| |
Petrov, R. H. | Madrid |
|
Alshaaer, Mazen | Brussels |
|
Bih, L. |
| |
Casati, R. |
| |
Muller, Hermance |
| |
Kočí, Jan | Prague |
|
Šuljagić, Marija |
| |
Kalteremidou, Kalliopi-Artemi | Brussels |
|
Azam, Siraj |
| |
Ospanova, Alyiya |
| |
Blanpain, Bart |
| |
Ali, M. A. |
| |
Popa, V. |
| |
Rančić, M. |
| |
Ollier, Nadège |
| |
Azevedo, Nuno Monteiro |
| |
Landes, Michael |
| |
Rignanese, Gian-Marco |
|
Thomsen, Erik Vilain
Technical University of Denmark
in Cooperation with on an Cooperation-Score of 37%
Topics
Publications (28/28 displayed)
- 2023Contrast-enhanced ultrasound imaging using capacitive micromachined ultrasonic transducerscitations
- 2022A Hand-Held 190+190 Row–Column Addressed CMUT Probe for Volumetric Imagingcitations
- 2021Polysilicon on Quartz Substrate for Silicide Based Row-Column CMUTs
- 2021Analytical Deflection Profiles and Pull-In Voltage Calculations of Prestressed Electrostatic Actuated MEMS Structurescitations
- 20213D printed calibration micro-phantoms for super-resolution ultrasound imaging validationcitations
- 2020Pull-in Analysis of CMUT Elementscitations
- 2020Large Scale High Voltage 192+192 Row-Column Addressed CMUTs Made with Anodic Bondingcitations
- 2020Electrical Insulation of CMUT Elements Using DREM and Lappingcitations
- 2020Electrical Insulation of CMUT Elements Using DREM and Lappingcitations
- 2019Imaging Performance for Two Row–Column Arrayscitations
- 2019188+188 Row–Column Addressed CMUT Transducer for Super Resolution Imagingcitations
- 2019CMUT Electrode Resistance Design: Modelling and Experimental Verification by a Row-Column Arraycitations
- 20193D Printed Calibration Micro-phantoms for Validation of Super-Resolution Ultrasound Imagingcitations
- 2018Probe development of CMUT and PZT row-column-addressed 2-D arrayscitations
- 2018Increasing the field-of-view of row–column-addressed ultrasound transducers: implementation of a diverging compound lenscitations
- 2018Design of a novel zig-zag 192+192 Row Column Addressed Array Transducer: A simulation study.citations
- 2017Combined Colorimetric and Gravimetric CMUT Sensor for Detection of Phenylacetonecitations
- 2017Transmitting Performance Evaluation of ASICs for CMUT-Based Portable Ultrasound Scanners
- 2017Output Pressure and Pulse-Echo Characteristics of CMUTs as Function of Plate Dimensionscitations
- 20163-D Vector Flow Using a Row-Column Addressed CMUT Arraycitations
- 20153-D Imaging Using Row–Column-Addressed Arrays With Integrated Apodization. Part I: Apodization Design and Line Element Beamformingcitations
- 20153-D Imaging Using Row–Column-Addressed Arrays With Integrated Apodization. Part I: Apodization Design and Line Element Beamformingcitations
- 20153-D Imaging Using Row-Column-Addressed Arrays With Integrated Apodization:Part II: Transducer Fabrication and Experimental Resultscitations
- 20153-D Imaging Using Row-Column-Addressed Arrays With Integrated Apodizationcitations
- 2011Fusion bonding of silicon nitride surfacescitations
- 2010Touch mode micromachined capacitive pressure sensor with signal conditioning electronics
- 2009Highly sensitive micromachined capacitive pressure sensor with reduced hysteresis and low parasitic capacitancecitations
- 2008Giant Geometrically Amplified Piezoresistance in Metal-Semiconductor Hybrid Resistorscitations
Places of action
Organizations | Location | People |
---|
document
Pull-in Analysis of CMUT Elements
Abstract
This paper presents a novel characterization method for the pull-in voltage of a Capacitive Micromachined Ultrasonic Transducer (CMUT) element. The presented method allows pull-in estimation of all CMUT cells contained in an element, which is in contrast to conventional methods that only allows for a pull-in average across an element. The methodology has been conducted on four different CMUT elements with a varying distance between the element separation and the CMUT cells closest to the edge. This distance was designed to be 3 µm, 5 µm, 10 µm, and 20 µm for the four CMUT elements, and the pull-in voltage of all the individual CMUT cells was determined using the presented methodology. The pull-in voltage of the CMUT cells at the edge of the element is observed to be significantly influenced as the distance to the element separation is lowered. The relative difference in the pull-in voltage between CMUT cells at the edge and the center are observed to be 14.8% and 2.8% for the designs with an edge distance of 3 µm and 5 µm, respectively. This edge effect is not observable for the two other designs where the relative difference is less than 0.5 %. Hence, this work demonstrates how the configuration CMUT cells can influence the pull-in voltage.