Couplant-induced stress evaluation errors in ultrasonic measurement: multivariable quantification and differential wedge mitigation
Source abstract
Abstract
Longitudinal critically refracted (LCR) waves can offer efficient near-surface stress assessment, but suffering from couplant-induced inaccuracies, which undermine its reliability. This study quantitatively evaluates the effects of couplant type, dosage, and pressure on time-of-flight (TOF) stability, and the stress error propagation through synchronised TOF-digital image correlation (DIC) measurements. It shows that only 20 µm reduction in honey couplant thickness under a 2–3 kg preload shifts the TOF by 7.8 ns, which illustrates an equivalent 170 MPa error in stress estimation. Highviscosity couplants display nonlinear TOF-pressure hysteresis, while under cyclic loading oil and gel couplants producing TOF variability, fundamentally undermining reproducibility. To mitigate artefacts, a dual-receiver differential wedge is developed, suppressing common-mode TOF shifts by 90% for viscous couplants under dynamic loading. However, errors persist due to irreducible dose-pressure asymmetries, constraining practical accuracy to 50 MPa. Consequently, the strict couplant state invariance (±0.05 ml dosage; ±0.2 kg pressure) between calibration and measurement can hardly achievable. Our findings establish operational protocols for industrial applications tolerating ± 50 MPa uncertainty while advocating couplant-free technologies for precision-critical scenarios.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Flow Measurement and Analysis
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Beijing University of Technology
China Special Equipment Inspection & Research Institute
AVIC Research Institute for Special Structures of Aeronautical Composites
Funding
National Natural Science Foundation of China
References (22)
Show source-provided references
1. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2015.12.00310.1016/j.ndteint.2015.12.003 ↗
2. 10.1109/TIM.2020.301641110.1109/TIM.2020.3016411 ↗
3. 10.1590/1517-7076-rmat-2022-014610.1590/1517-7076-rmat-2022-0146 ↗
4. 10.1016/j.ndteint.2024.10316910.1016/j.ndteint.2024.103169 ↗
5. 10.1103/PhysRev.92.114510.1103/PhysRev.92.1145 ↗
6. 10.1016/0963-8695(95)00020-X10.1016/0963-8695(95)00020-X ↗
7. 10.1080/09349847.2013.82213410.1080/09349847.2013.822134 ↗
8. 10.1179/1432891715Z.000000000136010.1179/1432891715Z.0000000001360 ↗
9. 10.1007/s40430-013-0049-310.1007/s40430-013-0049-3 ↗
10. 10.1016/j.ultras.2006.05.19010.1016/j.ultras.2006.05.190 ↗
11. 10.1002/mawe.20170005010.1002/mawe.201700050 ↗
12. Zhu QM. Research on correction methods and mechanisms of longitudinal critical wave refraction (LCR) stress measuring technology [master thesis]. China: Southwest Jiaotong University; 2017.
13. 10.1016/j.apacoust.2018.07.01710.1016/j.apacoust.2018.07.017 ↗
14. 10.1016/0041-624X(63)90003-910.1016/0041-624X(63)90003-9 ↗
15. 10.3390/ma904022310.3390/ma9040223 ↗
16. Song W, Pan Q, Xu C, et al. Residual stress nondestructive testing for pipe component based on ultrasonic method. In: 2014 IEEE Far East Forum on Nondestructive Evaluation/Testing; Chengdu china. (NY). IEEE; 2014. p. 163–167.10.1109/FENDT.2014.6928254 ↗
17. 10.1121/1.190957910.1121/1.1909579 ↗
18. 10.1016/j.ultras.2005.11.00210.1016/j.ultras.2005.11.002 ↗
19. Xiao F, Yu WQ, Gui XL. Effect of probe pressure on defect size assessment during ultrasound detection. Nondestr Test. 2015:74–76.
20. 10.1088/1757-899X/740/1/01200510.1088/1757-899X/740/1/012005 ↗
21. 10.1784/insi.2022.64.4.19210.1784/insi.2022.64.4.192 ↗
22. 10.1016/j.measurement.2021.10958310.1016/j.measurement.2021.109583 ↗