Efficient finite element modelling of guided wave scattering from a defect in three dimensions
Source abstract
Abstract
The scattering matrix (S-matrix) encodes the elastodynamic scattering behaviour of a defect. For the case of guided waves in the low-frequency regime, we explore how to minimise the number of incident/scattered directions used to accurately simulate the S-matrix of an arbitrary defect. The general approach is to use three-dimensional finite element (FE) analysis, implemented in a commercial FE package, to simulate the wave-defect interactions. The scattered wave field is measured at monitoring nodes on a circle that surrounds the defect. These scattered waves are decomposed into the multi-modal far-field scattering amplitudes. The angular order of the scattering is found and used to minimise the number of incident and scattered directions that must be computed. The method is then used to simulate the S-matrices of surface-breaking semi-elliptical cracks and circular through-holes with arbitrary sizes. It is found that the required number of incident/scattered directions varies with the scattered mode, and this is due to the differing scattering orders of these scattered fields. These results demonstrate how to achieve more efficient modelling of guided wave scattering, and also contribute to an understanding of experimental defect characterisation.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Geophysical Methods and Applications
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
University of Bristol, University Walk
Funding
Engineering and Physical Sciences Research Council
References (46)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2006.03.00610.1016/j.ndteint.2006.03.006 ↗
2. 10.1109/TUFFC.2006.162150510.1109/TUFFC.2006.1621505 ↗
3. 10.1109/TUFFC.2005.142804810.1109/TUFFC.2005.1428048 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.ymssp.2020.10678810.1016/j.ymssp.2020.106788 ↗
5. 10.1016/S0041-624X(97)00038-310.1016/S0041-624X(97)00038-3 ↗
6. Mu J, Zhang L, Rose JL. Defect circumferential sizing by using long range ultrasonic guided wave focusing techniques in pipe. Case Stud NondestrTest Eval. 2007;22(4):239–253.
7. 10.1784/insi.2009.51.7.37310.1784/insi.2009.51.7.373 ↗
8. 10.3390/s1812447010.3390/s18124470 ↗
9. 10.3390/s1711254210.3390/s17112542 ↗
10. Mudge PJ. Field application of the teletest; long-range ultrasonic testing technique. INSIGHT. 2001;43(2):74–77.
11. Raiˇsutis R, Jasi ̄unien ̇e E, ˇzukauskas E. Ultrasonic NDT of wind turbine blades using guided waves. Ultragarsas/Ultrasound. 2008;63(1):7–11.
12. 10.1109/TUFFC.2011.206610.1109/TUFFC.2011.2066 ↗
13. 10.1109/58.58518910.1109/58.585189 ↗
14. 10.1109/TUFFC.92410.1109/TUFFC.924 ↗
15. 10.1016/j.ultras.2019.10596410.1016/j.ultras.2019.105964 ↗
16. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2011.09.00310.1016/j.ndteint.2011.09.003 ↗
17. 10.1121/1.346777510.1121/1.3467775 ↗
18. 10.1121/1.327039010.1121/1.3270390 ↗
19. 10.1016/j.ultras.2015.09.01910.1016/j.ultras.2015.09.019 ↗
20. 10.1016/j.finel.2015.02.00810.1016/j.finel.2015.02.008 ↗
21. Shi W, Chen W, Lu C, et al. Interaction of circumferential sh0 guided wave with circumferential cracks in pipelines. Case Stud NondestrTest Eval. 2021;36(5):571–596.
22. Soleimanpour R, Mohamad Soleimani SM. Scattering analysis of linear and non-linear symmetric lamb wave at cracks in plates. Case Stud NondestrTest Eval. 2022;37(4):1–25.
23. 10.1121/1.340944610.1121/1.3409446 ↗
24. Fromme P. Directionality of the scattering of the A0 Lamb wave mode at cracks. In AIP Conference Proceedings; 2010;1211:129–136.
25. 10.1016/j.ultras.2006.05.15210.1016/j.ultras.2006.05.152 ↗
26. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2009.03.00210.1016/j.ndteint.2009.03.002 ↗
27. 10.1016/0963-8695(92)90003-Y10.1016/0963-8695(92)90003-Y ↗
28. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2009.10.00110.1016/j.ndteint.2009.10.001 ↗
29. 10.1007/s10921-010-0080-610.1007/s10921-010-0080-6 ↗
30. 10.1063/1.271708610.1063/1.2717086 ↗
31. 10.1016/j.measurement.2018.08.02110.1016/j.measurement.2018.08.021 ↗
32. 10.1115/1.278910510.1115/1.2789105 ↗
33. 10.1121/1.311744110.1121/1.3117441 ↗
34. 10.1016/j.matdes.2010.01.02910.1016/j.matdes.2010.01.029 ↗
35. 10.1088/1361-6501/ac784b10.1088/1361-6501/ac784b ↗
36. 10.1007/s10921-020-00690-510.1007/s10921-020-00690-5 ↗
37. 10.1098/rspa.2021.076210.1098/rspa.2021.0762 ↗
38. 10.1109/TUFFC.2003.120955710.1109/TUFFC.2003.1209557 ↗
39. 10.1088/0964-1726/25/4/04502410.1088/0964-1726/25/4/045024 ↗
40. 10.1016/j.ultras.2016.10.01110.1016/j.ultras.2016.10.011 ↗
41. 10.1016/j.ultras.2021.10635510.1016/j.ultras.2021.106355 ↗
42. 10.1016/j.ultras.2021.10650710.1016/j.ultras.2021.106507 ↗
43. Duan W, Niu X, Gan T-H, et al. A numerical study on the excitation of guided waves in rectangular plates using multiple point sources. Met. 2017;7(12):552.
44. 10.14419/ijet.v7i3.35.2914110.14419/ijet.v7i3.35.29141 ↗
45. Tolstov GP. Fourier series. Courier Corporation; 2012.
46. 10.1109/TUFFC.2010.164610.1109/TUFFC.2010.1646 ↗