Skip to main content
SpringerLink
Log in

A Comparative Study of Ultrasonic Contact and Immersion Method for Dimensional Measurements

  • Original Paper
  • Published:
MAPAN Aims and scope Submit manuscript

Abstract

Ultrasonic testing (UT) is one of the most widely used techniques for non-destructive testing. This is an effective method to provide information of the test material like dimension, geometry, and shape. The precise thickness measurement is necessary for many industries to observe the deterioration, destruction and damages in metals, composite structures, pipes, soldering, and welding. In UT, the pulse-echo (PE) method is the conventional ultrasonic method used for testing and acquiring information about the specimen. In PE method, the ultrasonic wave is transmitted by the single transducer and the reflected signal from the specimen is received back by the same transducer. The duration between transmitted and received signal, e.g., time of flight is then measured. In this article, a comparative study of the dimensional measurements (thickness measurements) of an ASTM (American Society for Testing and Materials) reference block is carried out using ultrasonic contact and immersion methods. Longitudinal ultrasound was generated in the reference block by a piezoelectric broadband transducer. The responses of the ultrasonic echoes were recorded using an ultrasonic flaw detector. For the ultrasonic testing, the uncertainty associated with thickness measurement of a standard ASTM reference block is found as ± 0.035 mm while using immersion method. However, the estimated uncertainty is higher as ± 0.088 mm in case of contact method. The study clearly shows that the immersion testing system is capable to precisely measure the thickness with relatively lower uncertainty than the contact approach.

This is a preview of subscription content, log in via an institution to check access.

Access this article

Log in via an institution

Price excludes VAT (USA)
Tax calculation will be finalised during checkout.

Instant access to the full article PDF.

Institutional subscriptions

Fig. 1
Fig. 2
Fig. 3

Similar content being viewed by others

References

  1. S. Gholizadeh, A Review of Non-destructive Testing Methods of Composite Materials. Proc. Struct. Integr., 1 (2016) 50–57. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2016.02.008.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  2. J.M. Ongpeng, A.W. Oreta and S. Hirose, Contact and Noncontact Ultrasonic Nondestructive Test in Reinforced Concrete Beam. Adv. Civ. Eng. (2018). https://doi.org/10.1155/2018/5783175.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  3. V.N. Kozlov, A.A. Samokrutov and V.G. Shevaldykin, Thickness Measurements and Flaw Detection in Concrete Using Ultrasonic Echo Method. Nondestruct. Test. Evaluat., 13 (1997) 73–84. https://doi.org/10.1080/02780899708953020.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  4. F. Lam and J. Szilard, Pulse Compression Techniques in Ultrasonic Non-destructive Testing. Ultrasonics, 14 (1976) 111–114. https://doi.org/10.1016/0041-624X(76)90083-4.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  5. M. Kalms, F. Oliver and C.V. Kopylow, Applications of Laser Ultrasound NDT Methods on Composite Structures in Aerospace Industry, Ninth International Symposium on Laser Metrology, Vol. 7155, International Society for Optics and Photonics, (2008), https://doi.org/10.1117/12.814512.

  6. A. Bernieri, L. Ferrigno, M. Laracca, A. Rasile and M. Ricci, Ultrasonic NDT on Aluminum Bars: An Experimental Performance Comparison of Excitation and Processing Techniques. Measurement, 128 (2018) 393–402. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2017.10.040.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  7. D. Pandey and S. Pandey, Ultrasonics: A Technique of Material Characterization. Acoustic Waves (2010). https://doi.org/10.5772/10153.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  8. J. Wollbold and J. Neisecke, Ultrasonic-Impulse-Echo-Technique, Advantages of an Online-Imaging Technique for the Inspection of Concrete, Proceedings of the International Symposium NDT in Civil Engineering, Berlin, Vol. 26, No. 28, (1995).

  9. H. Towsyfyan, A. Biguri, R. Boardman and T. Bluemensath, Successes and Challenges in Non-destructive Testing of Aircraft Composite Structures. Chin. J. Aeronaut., 33 (2020) 771–791. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.cja.2019.09.017.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  10. C. Yuan, C. Xie, L. Li, F. Zhang and S.M. Gubanski, Ultrasonic Phased Array Detection of Internal Defects in Composite Insulators. IEEE Transactions on Dielectrics and Electrical Insulation, 23 (2016) 525–31. https://doi.org/10.1109/TDEI.2015.005225.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  11. S.A. Titov, R.G. Maev and A.N. Bogachenkov, Pulse-Echo NDT of Adhesively Bonded Joints in Automotive Assemblies. Ultrasonics, 48 (2008) 537–546. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultras.2008.07.001.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  12. K. Sorn-ard, A. Prateepasen and M. Noipitak, The Influence of Grain Size of Dissimilar Welding between Carbon Steel and Stainless Steel on Ultrasonic Testing, 2015 International Conference on Test, Measurement and Computational Methods, Atlantis Press, pp. 35–39, (2015), https://doi.org/10.2991/tmcm-15.2015.10.

  13. J. Cheng and L.J. Bond, Assessment of Ultrasonic NDT Methods for High Speed Rail Inspection, AIP Conference Proceedings, Vol. 1650, No. 1, American Institute of Physics, (2015), pp. 605–614. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.4914660.

  14. L.J. Bond and M. Punjani, Review of Some Recent Advances in Quantitative Ultrasonic NDT, IEE Proceedings A (Physical Science, Measurement and Instrumentation, Management and Education, Reviews), 131 (1984) 265–274. https://doi.org/10.1049/ip-a-1.1984.0039.

  15. X. Luo, H. Gong, Z. He, P. Zhang and L. He, Recent Advances in Applications of Power Ultrasound for Petroleum Industry. Ultrason. Sonochem., 70 (2021) 105337. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ultsonch.2020.105337.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  16. H. Zhang, C. Zhang, C. Wang and F. Xie, A Survey of Non-destructive Techniques Used for Inspection of Bearing Steel Balls. Measurement, 159 (2020) 107773. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2020.107773.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  17. M. Janků, P. Cikrle, J. Grošek, O. Anton and J. Stryk, Comparison of Infrared Thermography, Ground-Penetrating Radar and Ultrasonic Pulse Echo for Detecting Delaminations in Concrete Bridges. Constr. Build. Mater., 225 (2019) 1098–111. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.conbuildmat.2019.07.320.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  18. Y.A. Glazkov, Evaluation of Material Quality for Liquid-Penetrant Inspection Based on the Visibility of the Indicator Patterns of Flaws, Russ. J. Nondestruct. Test., 48 (2012) 208–217. https://doi.org/10.1134/S1061830912040067.

  19. A. Zolfaghari, Reliability and Sensitivity of Visible Liquid Penetrant NDT for Inspection of Welded Components, Prod. Orient. Test./Nondestruct. Test, 59 (2017) 290–294. https://doi.org/10.3139/120.111000.

  20. M. Mihaljević, D. Markučič, B. Runje and Z. Keran, Measurement Uncertainty Evaluation of Ultrasonic Wall Thickness Measurement, Measurement 137 (2019) 179–188.

  21. S. Bhowmick, Ultrasonic Inspection for Wall Thickness Measurement at Thermal Power Stations. Int. J. Eng. Res. Technol., 4 (2011) 89–107.

    Google Scholar 

  22. Y.-H. Kim, S.-J. Song, S.-S. Lee, J.-K. Lee, S.-S. Hong and H.-S. Eom, A Study of the Couplant Effects on Contact Ultrasonic Testing, J. Korean Soc. Nondestruct. Test., 22 (2002) 621–626.

  23. V.N. Bindal, Water-Based Couplants for General Purpose Use for Ultrasonic NDT Applications. (2000).

  24. P.K. Dubey, S. Rajagopalan, V.R. Vyaghra, V.M. Pendsey and S.J. Sharma, High Resolution Ultrasonic Attenuation Measurement in Pulse-Echo Setup. MAPAN-J. Metrol. Soc. India, 23 (2008) 245–52.

    Google Scholar 

  25. S. Rajagopalan, S.J. Sharma and P.K. Dubey, Measurement of Ultrasonic Velocity with Improved Accuracy in Pulse Echo Setup. Rev. Sci. Instrum., 78 (2007) 085104. https://doi.org/10.1063/1.2766820.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  26. G.M. Revel, G. Pandarese and A. Cavuto, Advanced Ultrasonic Non-destructive Testing for Damage Detection on Thick and Curved Composite Elements for Constructions, J. Sandwich Struct. Mater. 15 (2013) 5–24. https://doi.org/10.1177/1099636212456861.

  27. B. Runje, Z. Keran and D. Markuc, Measurement Uncertainty Evaluation of Ultrasonic wall Thickness Measurement. Measurement, 137 (2019) 179–188. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2019.01.027.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  28. S.K. Verma, S.S. Bhadauria and S. Akhtar, Review of Nondestructive Testing Methods for Condition Monitoring of Concrete Structures, J. Constr. Eng. 2008 (2013) 1–11. https://doi.org/10.1155/2013/834572.

  29. G.L. Lu, S.H. Li, M.J. Chu and B.X. Wang, The Effect of Pressure on Ultrasonic Testing Sensitivity of Hot Steel Blooms by Pressure Contact Method. IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Ferroelectr. Freq. Control, 37 (1990) 587–9. https://doi.org/10.1109/58.63117.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  30. Y.H. Kim, S.J. Song, S.S. Lee, J.K. Lee, S.S. Hong and H.S. Eom, A Study of the Couplant Effects on Contact Ultrasonic Testing. J. Korean Soc. Nondestruct. Test., 22 (2002) 621–6.

    Google Scholar 

  31. R.C. Mayworm, A.V. Alvarenga and R.P.B. Costa-Felix, A Metrological Approach to the Time of Flight Diffraction Method (ToFD). Measurement, 167 (2021) 108298. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.measurement.2020.108298.

    Article  Google Scholar 

  32. C. Rungrueng and A. Prateepasen, Comparison of Detection and Height Sizing Ability of Planar Defect in Thick Wall Weld Steel between PAUT and TOFD. Techniques, 04 (2019) 21–38.

    Google Scholar 

  33. National Physical Laboratory, Kaye and Laby Tables of Physical and Chemical Constants (2005).

  34. K. Nowacki and W. Kasprzyk, The Sound Velocity in an Alloy Steel at High-Temperature Conditions. Int. J. Thermophys., 31 (2010) 103–112.

    Article  ADS  Google Scholar 

  35. For UFD datasheet, Please see https://www.olympus-ims.com/en/ut-flaw/epoch1000/#!cms[focus]=cmsContent10454.

Download references

Acknowledgements

The authors would like to thank Director, CSIR-National Physical Laboratory, New Delhi, for providing the facilities. One of the authors (Kalpana Yadav) would like to thank the Department of Science and Technology for the fellowship (DST Inspire). This work has been supported in part by the Council of Scientific and Industrial Research (CSIR) and the Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR) Ghaziabad.

Author information

Authors and Affiliations

  1. CSIR-National Physical Laboratory, Dr. K. S. Krishnan Marg, New Delhi, 110012, India

    Kalpana Yadav, Sanjay Yadav & P. K. Dubey

  2. Academy of Scientific and Innovative Research (AcSIR), Ghaziabad, 201002, India

    Kalpana Yadav, Sanjay Yadav & P. K. Dubey

Authors
  1. Kalpana Yadav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  2. Sanjay Yadav
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

  3. P. K. Dubey
    View author publications

    You can also search for this author in PubMed Google Scholar

Corresponding author

Correspondence to Kalpana Yadav.

Additional information

Publisher's Note

Springer Nature remains neutral with regard to jurisdictional claims in published maps and institutional affiliations.

Rights and permissions

Reprints and permissions

About this article

Check for updates. Verify currency and authenticity via CrossMark

Cite this article

Yadav, K., Yadav, S. & Dubey, P.K. A Comparative Study of Ultrasonic Contact and Immersion Method for Dimensional Measurements. MAPAN 36, 319–324 (2021). https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-021-00452-2

Download citation

  • Received:

  • Accepted:

  • Published:

  • Issue Date:

  • DOI: https://doi.org/10.1007/s12647-021-00452-2

Keywords

Search

Navigation