Ultrasonic Inspection 2

Training For Nondestructive Testing Variables Affecting Test Results

TABLE OF CONTENTS
Introduction
Instrument Performance
Transducer Performance
Material Variations
Surface Roughness
Surface Coatings
Couplant Condition
Part Size and Geometry
Internal Structure
Defect Variation
Defect Size and Geometry
Location with Respect to Adjacent Surfaces
Orientation of Major Axis
Type of Discontinuity and Conditions of Reflection

Ed Ginzel
Email: eginzel@mri.on.ca
Homepage: http://www.mri.on.ca
Home study correspondence courses (UT, ECT, LPI and MPI) including
NDT Problem Solver Software (solving standard equations in UT, RT and
ECT)

Introduction
Ultrasonic tests can provide information about several aspects of a material such as:
thickness, attenuation, shape, presence of defects, size and their orientation. These rely on
two main measurements: amplitude of signal and time of the signal arrival. To a lesser
extent the frequency content of the signal can also provide useful information but its
application is not so common.
We make certain assumptions about the test conditions and presume that changes in time
or amplitude are caused by variation in the parameter of interest. The assumptions made
are based on all parameters being constant except the one we are interested in measuring
changes in. For example, when performing a thickness measurement we assume the
acoustic velocity of the test piece we are measuring is the same as the acoustic velocity in
the calibration piece. We further assume that the temperature at which tests and

calibrations are made are not important. Yet either or both of the parameters assumed
fixed (materials velocity and temperature) can affect our test results. Variables affecting
the test results will be divided into 4 groups:
1.
2.
3.
4.

instrument performance
transducer performance
material variations
defect variations

Another factor relating to the results of an inspection is the Human Factor, this is a
widely debated subject. The subject is not discussed in this chapter nor is the related
subject of Probability of Detection. For more information on POD please refer to earlier
publications on NDTnet

Instrument Performance
In Chapter 7, performance verification of instrumentation was discussed. Scope (display)
and pulser/receiver variations can affect time, amplitude and frequency content of
ultrasonic signals.
Scope - The primary variable in the scope is the linearity of the time base. Verification
methods will usually require a tolerance in accuracy to a percentage of the total screen
range (typically +/- 2%). This ensures no distance measured will be in error by more than
2%, e.g. for a 250mm range it may be possible to have an error of +/-5mm maximum in
steel.
Pulser-Receiver - Amplitude uncertainties will result from variations in the linearity of
the vertical deflection of the scope or due to inaccuracies in the amplitude control. Scope
vertical linearity ensures that the relationship between two signals of different amplitudes
is maintained over the entire range of the screen height. This is done by comparing the
relative height of two echoes at different screen heights. e.g. setting two echoes 6 dB
apart starting with one at 80% FSH, the other at 40% FSH adjustments are made to first
increase the 80% FSH signal to 90% and 100%. The lower signal should be 45% and
50% respectively. Reducing the higher signal in 10% FSH increments, the lower should
continue to be half its height. Tolerance for this parameter is +/-5% of the screen height.
This ensures that the signal ratio of two different amplitudes truly indicates the size or
distance effects. This would be most important for DGS type comparisons.
The other aspect of vertical linearity variability is the amplitude gain control. This applies
to the calibrated gain control usually found in dB increments on a flaw detector. Since the
dB is derived from (dB = 20 log A2/A1 changing the dB gain by a fixed amount should
change the ratio of the signals. This allows us to expect a signal at 50% FSH to increase
to 100% FSH when 6dB is added to the receiver gain. ASME code requires scanning of a
weld to be done using 14dB over reference. This means a signal that was 20% of the
reference amplitude at reference gain would then come up to the reference level denoted
by the DAC. If the receiver gain is not linear the smallest recordable indication may be

greater or less than the intended level. This will be another source of incorrectly sizing a
defect with respect to a reference.
The effect of bandpass filters on displayed signal amplitude has been discussed in
Chapter 6. The effect on amplitude is to reduce signal height if the centre frequency of
the received signal is beyond (greater or less than) the bandpass region of maximum
response. This can be a factor when it is known that the reflected or re-transmitted signal
off a defect has a frequency spectrum determined by the characteristics of the defect (this
is the basis of acoustic spectrum analysis or frequency analysis).

Transducer Performance
As with the pulser/receiver, transducer performance is checked and monitored for
change. Codes and standards such as those discussed in Chapter 7 cover the details for
verifying instrument, transducer and system performance. But in addition to ensuring
these aspects are within tolerances allowed initially, they must all be monitored on a
regular basis to ensure no significant changes occur.
BS 4331 Part 3*, recommends the following probe/system performance checks;
ITEM
probe index

MONITORING FREQUENCY
daily on rough surfaces, such as castings, twice daily

beam angle
beam skew
(squint)
beam profile

monthly and when large changes in probe angle or index are

observed

dominant
frequency

monthly and whenever repairs have been made to either probe or

instrument and if one instrument is replaced with another

pulse length
dead zone
near field
signal-tonoise ratio
overall
system gain

daily and after repairs or replacement as above

resolving
power

monthly and after repairs or replacement as above

* BS 4331 Part 3 will be replaced by EN 12668 -2, Non-destructive testing - Characterization and
verification of ultrasonic examination equipment- Part 2: Probes.

The above monitoring items apply to contact testing probes. The wear experienced by
movement on metal surfaces tends to accelerate changes in performance. Some of the
changes introduced by wear can alter test results significantly. As an example, consider
beam angle change. If at the start of the day a nominal 60 probe was found to have an
actual angle of 62, an indication is found with a soundpath of 150mm in a 100mm thick
plate butt weld. A quick calculation made by the operator allows plotting to position the
defect 132.4 mm along the surface from the exit point and then 70.4 mm below the test
surface. After several hours of heavy scanning the operator has unwittingly worn the
probe down on the nose and the actual angle changes to 58 (both 62 and 58 are within
acceptable tolerances for a nominal 60 probe). When the same indication is investigated
again the operator finds an indication in that same area but it does not seem to be the
same. The soundpath is only 133mm for the "new" indication. The operator, believing the
refracted angle is 62 now plots a defect 62mm below the surface. This situation is
illustrated in Figure 8-1.

Figure 8-1

Similar errors in lateral positional plotting

can result from skewing of the beam. When
plotting an indication with an angle beam we
assume the beam extends directly ahead inline with the probe housing but wear on one
side or the other of the wedge will steer the
beam away from the centre-line. If we use
the previous example with the 62 probe
finding an indication at 150mm soundpath,
Figure 8-2
the plan view plot would indicate it to be
about 132mm directly in front of the probe
from the exit point. If a 5 skew existed that was not accounted for, the error in locating
this indication would be about 11.5mm (see Figure 8-2).
Index point or beam exit point for an angle beam probe is easily established on the 11W
block. This is used to establish the actual refracted angle so its accuracy within +/-1.5mm
is essential. For longer soundpaths (>25mm the effect on positioning a flaw forward or
backward would not be too critical. e.g. If the flaw plotted in Figure 8-1 was 1mm
forward or backward due to the exit point being off 1mm from its scribed position it
would have little bearing on the evaluation of the defect. If, however, the weld tested was

on a 6mm thick pipe with a TIG root the root width might be about 2mm. An error in exit
point placement could plot the defect on the wrong side of the weld.
In the chart of items checked as per BS 4331, the first three items are unique to contact
probes, but the remaining items could be considered by any transducer evaluation,
including immersion probes. Handling and aging can cause changes to the element's
backing, degree of polarization, lensing material shape, lens material bond to the element
or degree of loading (for the thin gold face on PVDF elements). These changes result in
changes in both amplitude and frequency. The effect on performance is multi-stepped.
For example: if aging has resulted in a slight disbonding of the element from the high
density backing of a standard ceramic element, its damping will be reduced. This will
lead to an increased ringing. More ringing reduces resolution and increases the extent of
dead zone due to the rattle. Decreased damping due to the disbondment, however, allows
vibrations to be larger so sensitivity is increased. The reduction in backing load tends to
change the centre-frequency to a higher value but the increased sensitivity, afforded by
more and larger vibration displacements, reduces the bandwidth. The higher frequency
increases the near zone as it is a function of wavelength. The angle of divergence is also
changed (decreased ) as it too is a function of wavelength.
Operating probes in warm water (>50C) or high radiation fields (several MegaRads) can
cause blistering or disbonding of the epoxy material used for lensing. This could have
similar effects to those noted for backing disbondment as well as distorting and
redirecting the beam centre-line.
In addition to aging and environmental causes of alterations to the transducer
performance, handling can also cause changes to occur. A sharp jolt from dropping a
probe may result in similar disbond problems. With the availability of different pulse
shapes it may be possible to deteriorate polarization in an element. A negative going
pulse voltage is normally applied to probes but polymer elements tend to perform better
with a positive going pulse. Polymer probes will show no deterioration if pulsed with
negative going spikes but ceramic elements may experience depolarization over extended
periods of time. Depolarization will reduce sensitivity and the increased gain required
will manifest itself in a lower s/n ratio.
Sources of variation in transducer performance are many. Establishing a baseline with
tolerances and then monitoring for changes in any of the parameters checked will help to
ensure reliability of test results.

Material Variations
When considering the variables of the test material that affect test results we can group
them into three areas of concern:
1. entry surface
2. part size and geometry

3. internal structure.
Entry surface variables include:
4. surface roughness
5. surface coatings
6. couplant condition.
Surface Roughness
Surface roughness will have several possible effects on the inspection of a test piece. In
contact testing roughness on a gross scale results from: weld spatter, plate scale, dirt
(sand) and rough cast surfaces from sand casting. These irregularities will cause some
points of contact to push away the couplant and force it into the lower areas around the
probe. If the couplant is not sufficiently viscous it will drain away quickly and fail to
couple the probe to the test piece. See Figure 8-3.

Figure 8-3

In addition to reduced coupling, which will reduce signal amplitudes, the rough surface
increases the rate of wear on the probe. On an otherwise smooth surface isolated
protrusions such as weld spatter can hinder or stop probe motion or in the case of
mechanized systems there may be sufficient force to move the probe past the obstruction
but this could result in damaging the probe by either tearing it from its mounting or
severely scoring the plastic wedge. When the dirt on the test piece is very fine (similar to
a flour texture) coupling can be prevented due to surface tension preventing the liquid
couplant penetrating to the metal. Unless a transfer value has been established between
test piece and calibration piece, this could go undetected.
In addition to affecting coupling, surface roughness tends to reduce signal amplitude by
scattering and focusing the beam. This applies to both contact and immersion testing.
Whether uniform or irregular, a rough surface has the potential to present a scattering
effect at an interface where a beam impinges. The degree of scattering is based on the
ratio of roughness to wavelength. When roughness is less than about 1/10 a wavelength,
scatter will be negligible. To reduce signal losses due to scattering an operator can select
a lower frequency probe. With a wavelength of 0.37mm in water for a 4MHz probe,
signal loss due to scatter can occur for irregularities as small as about 0.04mm. In

addition to signal reduction another effect of surface irregularities is to redirect and mode
convert some energy which when returned to the probe can be the source of spurious
signals. In contact testing false indications from standing waves resulting from scatter on
rough surfaces will normally have short soundpaths. They can be eliminated as true flaws
by failing to locate any trace of indication from the full skip or from the opposite side.
Unless done properly, removal of surface roughness by mechanical means can result in
further scattering problems. Small curved gouges left by a grinding wheel used to remove
spatter or machining grooves can form small lenses. The affect of grinding can be
unpredictable. Some of the lensing may concentrate the beam thereby increasing signal
amplitude, or, the lens effect may be a de-focusing of the beam, again resulting in lower
than expected signal amplitudes. Uniform surface preparation by sand or shot blasting
usually provides a good surface for ultrasonic testing. Removal of excess metal by a hand
held grinding wheel is commonly used on weld caps and roots. When a pipe weld has had
its root ground flush and inspection can only be performed from the outside diameter,
quality of grinding can result in unnecessary repair calls if grinding has been along the
weld axis. The small grooves made by the grinding wheel run parallel to the root edge
and are easily confused with lack of fusion, missed edge or undercut defects.
Surface Coatings
Surface coatings are added to protect a surface from corrosion or to enhance its
appearance. Thin films, such as oxide layers, anodizing layers or electroplated finishes,
and the slightly thicker coatings of paint or lacquer are usually well bonded to the
surface. Quality of bond may be compared to the uncoated reference block by a simple
transfer value. Even a slight loss due to the coating may be preferable to removing the
coating and trying to inspect on the rough surface it hides.
When thickness testing is done on a painted surface the paint thickness can add error to
the reading. For example:
A nominal 25mm steel plate has a cellulose paint coating of 0.5mm. Vsteel =
5980m/s, V paint = 2600m/s. If a digital thickness meter is calibrated on a 25mm
thick piece of the steel plate without the paint coating and then placed on the
painted surface an error will occur. The coating is sufficiently thin that its
interface with the metal will occur in the dead zone but the duration of time spent
in the paint is added to the travel time to the opposite wall of the plate. If the true
plate thickness at the point of measurement is 25.16mm and the paint coating is
0.5mm thick, the time in the paint is 0.5 ( 2.6 x 106 = 0.19s. 0.19 microseconds is
equivalent to 1.15mm in steel. The reading on the digital meter would combine
the two thickness as though all travel was in steel. This results in 25.16 + 1.15 =
26.31mm as the indicated thickness. This problem can be overcome by using an
A-scan display and measuring the interval between the first and second echo
instead of the main bang and first echo. This is shown in Figure 8-4.

Figure 8-4

Couplant Condition
Both contact and immersion methods utilize intervening media to transfer sound from the
probe into the test piece and back to the receiver. With immersion methods it is
accomplished by a single fluid medium. In contact testing there are nearly always at least
two intervening media; the delayline or protective face and the thin film of coupling fluid
or grease. Attenuation and acoustic velocity are the two main properties that dictate the
performance of a couplant. Attenuation affects amplitude of the signal and velocity will
determine both transit time and refracted angles.
But attenuation and velocity of couplants are not independent properties. Each is a
function of other parameters. Unless these parameters are controlled or in some way
compensated for, gross variations from the reference value or calibration conditions can
result.
Attenuation of couplants varies with material composition as would be expected.
Published attenuation values are available for many materials as indicated in the table
below. Attenuation coefficients are often quoted in nepers which allow for frequency
dependence. 1 Np = 8.686 x f2 = dB/cm. Table 8-1 indicates attenuation of some common
liquids.
Table 8-1
Material

Attenuation (Np x 10-15)

water

25.3

silicon oil

6200

castor oil

10100

mercury

5.8

ethylene glycol

128

methanol

30.2

In more practical terms, for water, this would mean an attenuation of about 5 dB per
metre. Since such long water path lengths are not normally used the 0.005 dB/mm
attenuation is considered negligible. But for the heavier oils attenuations 200 to 500 times
greater can have significant effects on signal amplitude and frequency content. For the
fixed delaylines or wedge materials used in contact testing attenuation variations can be
far more pronounced and variation between manufacturers can cause considerable
response differences. For example the plastics listed in table 8-2 are typical wedge
materials selected by manufacturers and based on velocity for refraction purposes, but
attenuation differences would result in noticeable amplitude response variation and
frequency content of transmitted waveforms. Since the operator rarely knows what wedge
material a manufacturer has used, little can be done to correct for potential variations in
periodic inspections where results of tests taken with one or more years separation are
compared.
Table 8-2
Material

Attenuation dB/cm Acoustic

@ 5 MHz
Velocity

Plexiglas
(acrylic)

6.4 to 12.4

2.75 to 2.61

lexan (poly
carbonate)

32.2

2.30

polystyrene

1.8 to 3.6

2.32 to 2.48

nylon

2.8 to 16

2.6 to 2.77

Attenuation is not a material constant. Under changes in conditions it can change. For
example attenuation in water is inversely proportional to both temperature and pressure.
At standard pressure and temperature (1 atmosphere and 20C) attenuation in water is
25.3 x 10-15 Np. When temperature is 0C and water still liquid attenuation is 56.9 x 10-15
Np and at 40 it is 14.6 x 10-15 Np. At 1000 atmospheres attenuation drops to 12.7 x 10-15
Np and increases to 18.5 x 10-15 Np in a vacuum (zero atmospheres) when the
temperature is held at 30C.

Attenuation of couplants need rarely be considered when calibration and test conditions
are the same couplant material, temperature and pressure. However, mechanical actions
can add to variations in attenuation under some conditions e.g. liquid soap is often used
in contact testing. Under static conditions it provides reasonable coupling, ease of probe
movement and clean hands. When a part is inspected with more rapid probe motion than
may be used for static calibration it is possible to lather the soap. As bubble density
builds in the couplant attenuation will increase.
Far more pronounced on test results are the affects of velocity changes. As with
attenuation of couplants, velocity is normally considered fixed for a given material.
Providing all parameters affecting velocity are controlled the assumption is valid but
subtle changes in parameters can have significant results.
Just as plastic compositions change in velocity so too does water. Pure water at 20C and
1 atmosphere pressure has a velocity of 1480m/s. But water is not normally pure. As
salinity increases as in sea water, acoustic velocity increases. At 20C in sea water with a
3% salinity the acoustic velocity increases to about 1515m/s. For work done on off-shore
structures, where immersion work would occur using the surrounding sea water, any
calibrations done on-board ship must use water of the same salinity as will occur at the
depth of test or probe placement and refracted angle will be mis-calculated. As well,
acoustic velocity increases with pressure in water so with increasing water depth velocity
also rises. This is relatively insignificant but may be corrected for by the equation.
Vd = Vo + (d x 0.018)
where Vd = acoustic velocity at depth d
d = depth in meters
Vo = acoustic velocity at the surface.
For our example of a 3% salinity the correction for work at 50m would be 1515 + (50 x
0.018) or 1515.9 m/s.
Temperature is undoubtedly the most significant parameter affecting acoustic velocity.
As such, its control or knowledge of its change is essential to ensure inspection accuracy.
Change in acoustic velocity with change in material temperature is termed acoustic
temperature dependence. Strangely, temperature dependence is not always the same sign,
i.e. increasing material temperature will increase acoustic velocity in some materials and
decrease it in others.
Table 8-3 illustrates some of the variations in temperature dependence ( V/ t) for some
materials.
Table 8-3
Material
caster oil

Acoustic Velocity @25C

1470

(V / t (m/s C)
-3.6

ethylene glycol

1658

-2.1

kerosene

1324

-3.6

methanol

1103

-3.2

water (pure)

1498

+2.4

water (sea)

1531

+2.4

polystyrene

2400

-4.4

polymethyl methacrylate

2690

-2.0

polyvinyl chloride (hard)

2380

-8.0

By comparison most metals have a temperature dependence of between -0.5 to -5.0

m/s/C depending on mode and axis of
propagation.
Table 8 - 3a:
When dimension verification is
Velocity change with Temperature
accomplished by determining travel time in
Temperature Velocity Delta
a coupling liquid, as in Figure 5-20,
C
m/s
m/sC
variation in temperature could easily affect
5
1440
3,14
accuracy. Even more challenging is
15
472
2,65
correcting for change over a period of time.
25
1498
2,15
e.g. temperature at the start of the test is
35
1520
1,67
20C, but over a half hour period it
45
1536
1,18
increased to 35C. For water this increases
55
1548
0,68
the acoustic velocity to 1520 m/s, it does not
65
1555
0,20
change linearly with temperature (see Table
8 - 3a).
75
1557
When applied to angle beam testing the
problems become more obvious. Snell's Law allows us to predict refracted angles in a
material based on knowing the acoustic velocities involved and the incident angle. The
ratio of the velocities determines the degree of refraction. When a standard contact testing
wedge is purchased it is marked with the nominal refracted angle it will produce in a steel
with shear velocity assumed to be 3250 m/s. A plastic wedge having an acoustic velocity
of 2600 m/s is machined at 43.9 to produce a nominal 70 refracted beam in steel. This
assumes 20C operating temperature. If a test piece is inspected that is warm to the touch
(~40C) the velocity of both steel and plastic will be less than assumed. If the plastic
changes by -4.0 m/s /C, and steel by about -2 m/s C the velocities to use would be 2312
for the plastic and 3210 for the steel. The actual refracted angle would be closer to 74.
Figure 8-5 illustrates the effect of temperature on refracted angles in steel for three
common fixed wedge angles.

Figure 8-5

Incident angles indicated in the legend in Figure 8-5 are those to produce nominal 45,
60 and 70 refracted angles under standard conditions. The plastic calculated for is UVA
II with an acoustic velocity of 2760 m/s. The affect on angulated longitudinal waves is
even more pronounced, this due to the greater ratio difference in velocities between the
plastic and steel in compressional mode.
Part Size and Geometry
Test results may vary if the test piece differs from the calibration or reference piece. In
this way both shape and size will contribute to potential variation in test results.
Particular interest in this variable exists for contact testing on curved surfaces. When a
flat probe is used on a convex curved surface only a portion of the probe makes contact.
This will reduce the amount of sound that can be transferred to and from the test piece.
As a result sensitivity compared to coupling to a flat piece is reduced. The proportion of
sound reduction compared to a flat piece is a function of the curvature of the part, the
crystal diameter and the coupling ability of the couplant via its viscosity.
Some sources also consider the relative hardness of the probe face with a greater coupling
or contouring available from softer material such as plastics and virtually no contouring
available.
To avoid machining calibration blocks for every possible radius and surface condition
compensation is made by adding gain to the receiver. The amount of compensating gain
can be determined by a simple transfer value or it can be calculated using formulae and

charts. Examples of the charts used for convex curvature compensation are found in
Figures 8-6 and 8-7. These are from Australian Standard 2207 - Methods For The
Ultrasonic Testing of Fusion Welded Joints in Steel. Two conditions are considered. In
the first figure a nomogram is used to correct for losses when the probe contact is made
on the curved surface. The test part radius is located on the left-hand scale and a line
made through the appropriate probes diameter on the middle scale. The point on the
right-hand scale this line intersects is the amount of gain to add as a correction factor.
In the second figure the probe makes contact on a flat surface but the beam reflects off a
convex curve thereby redirecting portions of the beam away and reducing the maximum
possible reflected energy. The graph used does not consider probe diameter, instead, ratio
of surface curvature to metal path thickness is used. moving vertically up from the ratio
axis (horizontal axis) at the appropriate ratio for your work piece, the point on the vertical
axis where the curve is intersected gives the necessary correction factor.

Figure 8-7

Figure 8-6

Other codes and specifications may use different equations or graphs but the intent is the
same.
Attempts to compensate by simply adding gain may not be adequate. Improvement is had
by contouring the plastic wedge to the test piece. However, since the probe can no longer
be calibrated on a flat reference piece this makes machining of a reference piece of the
exact same geometry a necessity. For very small parts even this may prove unsatisfactory
due to the production of surface waves and other spurious signals associated with large
time differences of the beam in the wedge or delayline. If contouring probes proves too
noisy then immersion methods or even another NDT method may have to be considered.
Geometry is not only a consideration as a potential source of signal variation but also of
feasibility. Consideration must be given to beam shape when interaction with a boundary
occurs. Formation of unwanted surface waves and mode converted waves will result due

to finite extents of a beam. The single ray drawn from the probe exit point at the refracted
angle is merely a convenient presentation of the principle of the test. In reality portions of
the beam will impinge at greater and lesser angles due to divergence or side lobes (in the
near zone).
A beam impinging on a curved surface
intended to generate a high refracted
angle in the test piece is most prone to
surface wave generation. See Figure 88.
Figure 8-8

This occurs more often for curved

surfaces than for flat surfaces because not only does the beam divergence increase the
incident angle but the point of incidence on a curved surface is always receding so further
increase in incident angle results.
Curved surfaces make plotting more difficult than the simple trigonometry for flat
surfaces. Compare similar conditions for a 45 beam in flat and curved plate. Using a
thickness of 20mm the signal obtained at 35mm for an inspection of a 100mm radius pipe
occurs 19.2 mm from the OD test surface and 31.7mm along the test surface from the exit
point to the point over the indication. On a flat piece this would indicate an indication
15.2mm down and 24.8mm from the exit point. See Figure 8-9.

Figure 8-9

Geometry can also limit inspections. Again, concentric geometries are a common
problem in this regard. A critical ID/OD ratio exists that will not allow an angle beam
from the OD to intersect with the ID. This is shown in Figure 8-10.

Figure 8-10

This critical angle occurs when the ray representing the centre of beam is tangential to the
inside surface of the pipe. Two situations may exist; either the angle is fixed (as in
contact testing) and the critical ratio is to be determined or the ratio of wall thickness to
the OD is known and the maximum angle that can be used is sought.
The equation relating wall thickness t, pipe outside diameter D and refracted angle can
be written
D(1-Sin )
t=------------------2
t is the maximum thickness for which the beam centre will still glance off the ID.
The other parameter being sought, maximum angle, would use the following equation:
2t
Sin = 1 ----D
Figure 8-11 plots the t/D ratio that satisfies the above equation. When the thickness
increases to one half the diameter this is the same as a solid cylinder and no ID exists to
bounce off.

Figure 8-11

Although the equations and graph indicate that high angles of refraction may be used to
ensure both ID and OD are seen, the actual size of the pipe will limit the practical
maximum angle due to beam width and the resultant surface waves that occur. For
tubular products where wall thickness approaches the wavelength the wall is flooded with
sound and plate waves discussed in Chapter 5 result.
Some authors have indicated that contact pipe inspection in the circumferential direction
can be accomplished by simply moving the probe over the pipe surface by a distance
equal to one full skip. The principle involved is shown in Figure 8-12.

Figure 8-12

This draws well for the centre of beam ray but when applied to real conditions this can
supply little more than a go/no-go inspection. Beam spread, mode conversions and
attenuation will not permit accurate locating of any defects occurring several skips away.

In fact attenuation will probably limit detectability of defects by this method to pipes
under 10-20cm diameter. Such a technique may be useful when access is limited to only
half of the circumference. The presence (but not necessarily the location) of a flaw may
be detected by first scanning in one direction to the obstruction then the other, as in
Figure 8-13.

Figure 8-13

Internal Structure
The final aspect of material variations affecting test results is the structure of material
under test. Material parameters are a function of makeup and environmental conditions.
Makeup is determined by design and processing. Whether the material under test is steel,
aluminium or fibre-composite, variations can occur by design. Proportion of resin to fibre
will vary in composites and metals may have many alloying variations. In addition, metal
grain structure can be varied by alloy, heat treatment and working. All these factors will
provide differences in the results of ultrasonic tests manifested as variations in velocity or
attenuation. Also, just as temperature and pressures were noted to change velocity and
attenuation in couplants so too will the material under test be similarly affected by these
externally controlled conditions.
In cooling molten metals, solidification begins at many sites throughout the melt. At each
site the growth pattern is determined by the surrounding liquid material and the
surrounding temperature gradients. Crystals form as growth progresses. Eventually the
crystals' growth is halted when another crystal is encountered and all the liquid has been
consumed. Although we generally consider the metal to be homogeneous, on a
microscopic scale the boundaries formed by the edges of the grains make it inhomogenous. For an ultrasonic wave each crystal presents a different acoustic impedance
depending on orientation and degree of inter grain bonding. As well, there may be pores,
gaps and non-metallic inclusions. All these factors will cause scattering.
Just as with surface roughness, scatter will be a function of wavelength. Krautkramer
points out that for grain sizes up to about 1/100th of a wavelength scatter can be
considered negligible. However, as grain size increases beyond that, it can become a

significant factor adding to decreasing signal amplitudes. As grain sizes increase to

greater than 1/10th the wavelength, inspection may not be possible by ultrasonics.
Austenitic stainless steels are typical of metals with large grain structures. In the
production of austenitic steels manufacturers often attempt to control or limit grain size.
This is done by :
a) introducing small amounts of grain refining elements
b) limiting the temperature the steel is heated to
c) by hot working the steel to break up the austenite grains.
In spite of these effects the stainless steel product is not always consistent in its grain
structure. When testing stainless steel forgings, it is possible to have areas of higher
attenuation than others. In cases such as this it will require observant operators to
recognize the increase in grass level.
Velocity changes with material and condition as well. Contact angle wedges are normally
made for steel so the refracted angle indicated on the wedge assumes it will be used on a
steel with a longitudinal velocity of about 5900m/s and a shear wave velocity of about
3250m/s. When the same wedge is used on aluminium plate with longitudinal velocity
6320 m/s and shear at 3100 m/s the 'nominal' refracted angle indicated will not indicate
the true angle.
But one need not move to a completely different metal to illustrate velocity changes.
Rolled plate for pipeline construction shows variations of 8-10% in shear wave velocities.
This is attributed to rolling and heat treat differences and the resulting differences in grain
elongation and orientation. Even alloys of steel show marked variation in acoustic
velocity; 4340 steel has a shear velocity of 3240 m/s while in 4150 steel it is 2770 m/s, a
difference of nearly 17%.
These variations point out the importance of material specific calibration pieces.
Finally, as with couplants, acoustic velocity of a test material varies with temperature.
Most published values will indicate velocities determined at 20C. For work at much
higher or lower temperatures corrections will need to be made. This will require the
temperature dependence for the material to be established and this will have to be in
addition to similar corrections made for couplant changes.

Defect Variation
The fourth major factor affecting test results is the defect or reflecting surface of interest.
In evaluating a signal an operator will use three items; soundpath, probe position and
amplitude. The change in relationship of these three aspects is called "echo dynamics".
Therefore, investigating the echo dynamics of a flaw allows the operator to build up an
image (mental in manual scanning and possibly visual if automated) of the shape of the
flaw. Four factors are significant in the response obtained from a defect;

1. size and geometry 2. location with respect to adjacent surfaces 3. orientation of the
major axis 4. type of discontinuity and conditions of reflection.
Defect Size and Geometry
Both defect size and defect shape have a significant affect on signal amplitude. Principles
of the AVG system showed how signal amplitude is a function of the ratio of reflector
area to element area. Generally small defects provide smaller amplitude signals than
larger flaws. However, an irregular flaw shape may mean not all of the flaw reflects the
sound back to the receiver. Irregular facets of a crack or close proximity of pores in
clusters of porosity can result in sufficient losses due to scatter that very small signals are
received in spite of the fact that a large volume of metal is missing; i.e. signal amplitude
is no guarantee of defect size. Defect sizing using the AVG method can result in errors of
3:1 to 6:1. With the SAFT method sizing accuracy can be almost 100% (published by
IZFP).
Location with Respect to Adjacent Surfaces
Defect position with respect to adjacent surfaces presents several causes of variable
results. Simple attenuation accounts for reduced signal amplitude by increasing the
soundpath (in the far zone) to the flaw. If the flaw is close to another reflecting surface
confusing signals may result or signals may be lost. Figure 8-14 shows how a mode
converted signal may arise due to a reflection off a planar flaw near a flat surface.

Mode converted wave off defect at 65 strikes radius providing

large amplitude signal that when plotted gives a virtual location of
a defect different from its actual position
Figure 8-14

If the adjacent surface in 8-14 had been flat the reflected shear and mode converted
signals would both have been undetected. Such signals produced by mode conversion can
be differentiated from flaws by using a couplant wetted finger to rub the test surface. The
compressional mode is noticeably damped.

Mode converted longitudinal and re-directed shear waves can be seen when drawing
distance amplitude correction curves on some calibration blocks. The typical ASME
calibration block uses a side drilled hole at quarter thickness (1/4t). The convex radius of
the hole allows both situations to occur (see Figure 8-15).

Figure 8-15

Orientation of Major Axis

When the major axis of a defect is not exactly perpendicular to the beam reflection causes
the returned signal to be directed away from the simple return path back to the
transmitter. For small angles this will not cause a total loss of signal as beam dimensions
are sufficient that the off-centre portions can still be detected by the probe. Even small
angles off normal(e.g. +/-5) can result in significant signal reductions. When expected
flaws are planar and no convenient pulse-echo angle can be arranged to ensure the beam
will strike the flaw at right-angles tandem probe arrangements are preferred.
Type of Discontinuity and Conditions of Reflection
To some extent this has been addressed by the other aspects. Defect size and geometry is
usually determined by its type; e.g. porosity is usually small and spherical, slag is
irregular in shape and size, and non-fusion is usually planar. However, reflectivity of
defects is not a simple matter of incident angle. For very fine porosity there may be no
noticeable back reflected signal but the scatter such a dispersive defect would cause
would reduce the transmitted energy.
Maximum reflection occurs off a free boundary. This is effectively the situation for nonfusion and cracks where the void is air. However, when a dissimilar material fills the
void, as would be the case in a slag inclusion or tungsten inclusions in a TIG weld or
carbide inclusions in castings or forgings, part of the sound incident on the boundary is
transmitted. This will reduce the reflected signal. Added to the loss due to transmission
into the next medium is the associated losses due to the reflection at any angle other than

0. Reflection and transmission coefficients discussed earlier show how quickly

amplitudes can change due to boundary material differences and incident angles.
Finally, ambient conditions of pressure can have profound effects on a signal amplitude.
Studies have shown a signal from a surface breaking crack to be reduced by 20dB when
the cracked sample was placed in compression. This effectively "closed the gap".
|Top|

NDT.net