Advertisement

Identifying the ultrasonic inspecting fields that most strongly interact with adhesive bonding defects

  • Ricardo Leiderman
  • Bernardo F. Junqueira
  • Daniel A. Castello
  • Arthur M. B. Braga
Technical Paper
  • 60 Downloads

Abstract

We propose a systematic modelling procedure to identify the harmonic ultrasonic incident fields that most strongly interact with adhesive bonding defects in submerged multilayer plates. In principle, these are also the optimal choices for the interrogating fields in inverse methods for interfacial stiffness estimation. We model the adhesive bonding with the aid of the spring boundary conditions and model the bonding defects by a reduction in the spring constants. As part of the proposed procedure, we use the invariant embedding technique to compute the reflection coefficient at the top of the immersed laminates. The main advantage of this technique is its unconditional numerical stability even for evanescent waves at high frequencies. The developed algorithm is equally well suited to treating isotropic as well as anisotropic layers. We illustrate the application of the proposed procedure simulating the inspection of a three-layer isotropic plate and a 16-ply anisotropic composite laminate used in the aeronautical industry. In the simulations, we identify the frequencies and angles of incidence that will most strongly interact with bonding defects.

Keywords

Adhesive bonding Adhesion defect Kissing bond Interfacial stiffness Interface integrity Laminates 

Notes

Acknowledgements

The authors acknowledge the support of the Brazilian research agencies CNPq and CAPES.

References

  1. 1.
    Moysan J, Galy J, Siryabe E, Gauthier C, N’djomo LF, el Kettani MEC, Potel C, Bruneau M, Renier M, Meziane A, Leduc D, el Mahi A, Castaings M, Izbicki JL, Massacret N (2016) Innovating for structural adhesive bonding evaluation and analysis with ultrasounds: a summary. In: 19th world conference on non-destructive testing, Jun 2016, Münich, Germany. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/305352924
  2. 2.
    Castaings M, Siryabe E, Renier M, Meziane A (2015) Ultrasonic characterization of cohesive and adhesive properties of adhesive bonds. J Acoust Soc Am 138:1766. https://www.researchgate.net/publication/283660907
  3. 3.
    Leiderman R, Castello D (2016) Detecting and classifying interfacial defects by inverse ultrasound scattering analysis. Wave Motion 65:119–129MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Baik JM, Thompson RB (1984) Ultrasonic scattering from imperfect interfaces: a quasi-static model. J Nondestruct Eval 14:177–196CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    Angel YC, Achenbach JD (1985) Reflection and transmission of elastic waves by a periodic array of cracks. J Appl Mech 52:33–41CrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Karpur P, Kundu T, Ditri JJ (1999) Adhesive joint evaluation using Lamb wave modes with appropriate displacement, stress and energy distribution profiles. Rev Prog Quant Nondestruct Eval 18:1533–1542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    Drinkwater BW, Dwyer-Joice RS, Robinson AM (1999) The use of ultrasound to investigate rough surface contact phenomena. Rev Prog Quant Nondestruct Eval 18:1455–1462CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Li B, Hefetz M, Rokhlin SI (1992) Ultrasonic evaluation of environmentally degraded adhesive joints. Rev Prog Quant Nondestruct Eval 11:1221–1228Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    Pialucha T, Cawley P (1992) The detection of a weak adhesive/adherend interface in bonded joints by ultrasonic reflection measurements. Rev Prog Quant Nondestruct Eval 11:1261–1266Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    Pilarski A, Rose JL, Balasubramaniam K (1990) The angular and frequency characteristics of reflectivity from a solid layer embedded between two solids with imperfect boundary conditions. J Acoust Soc Am 87(2):532–542CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    Thomas R, Drinkwater BW, Liaptsis D (2005) The reflection of ultrasound from partially contacting rough surfaces. J Acoust Soc Am 117(2):638–645CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Rajabi M, Hasheminejad SM (2009) Acoustic resonance scattering from multilayered cylindrical shell with imperfect bonding. Ultrasonics 49:682–695CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. 13.
    Golub MV (2010) Propagation of elastic waves in layered composites with microdefect concentration zones and their simulation with spring boundary conditions. Acoust Phys 56(6):848–855CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. 14.
    Golub MV, Boström A (2011) Interface damage modeled by spring boundary conditions for in-plane elastic waves. Wave Motion 48:105–115MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  15. 15.
    Hudson JA, Liu E, Crampin S (1997) The mean transmission properties of a fault with imperfect facial contact. Geophys J Int 129(3):720–726CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. 16.
    Nakagawa S, Nihei KT, Myer LR (2004) Plane wave solution for elastic wave scattering by a heterogeneous fracture. J Acoust Soc Am 115:2761–2772CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. 17.
    Leiderman R, Barbone PE, Braga AMB (2005) Scattering of ultrasonic waves by defective adhesion interfaces in submerged laminated plates. J Acoust Soc Am 118:2154–2166CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. 18.
    Leiderman R, Barbone PE, Braga AMB (2007) Reconstructing the adhesion stiffness distribution in a laminated elastic plate: exact and approximate inverse scattering solutions. J Acoust Soc Am 122:1906–1916CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. 19.
    Leiderman R, Castello D (2014) Scattering of ultrasonic waves by heterogeneous interfaces: formulating the direct scattering problem as a least-squares problem. J Acoust Soc Am 135:5–16CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. 20.
    Leiderman R, Figueroa JC, Braga AMB, Rochinha FA (2016) Scattering of ultrasonic guided waves by heterogeneous interfaces in elastic multi-layered structures. Wave Motion 63:68–82MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. 21.
    Leiderman R, Braga AMB (2017) Scattering of guided waves by defective adhesive bonds in multilayer anisotropic plates. Wave Motion 74:93–104MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. 22.
    Bellman R, Kalaba R (1959) Functional equations, wave propagation, and invariant imbedding. J Math Mech 8:683MathSciNetzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  23. 23.
    Kennett LN (1983) Seismic wave propagation in stratified media. Cambridge University Press, LondonzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  24. 24.
    Braga AMB (1990) Wave propagation in anisotropic layered composites. Ph.D. thesis, Stanford University, Stanford, California, pp 1–141Google Scholar
  25. 25.
    Braga AMB, Herrmann G (1988) Plane waves in anisotropic layered composites. In: Mal AK, Ting TCT (eds) Wave propagation in structural composites, vol 90. ASME-AMD, New York, pp 81–98Google Scholar
  26. 26.
    Honein B, Braga AMB, Barbone PE, Herrmann G (1992) Active suppression of sound reflected from a piezoelectric plate. J Intell Mater Syst Struct 3:209–223CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. 27.
    Braga AMB, Barbone PE, Herrmann G (1990) Wave propagation in fluid-loaded laminated cylindrical shells. Appl Mech Rev 43:359–365CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. 28.
    Rokhlin SI, Huang W (1992) Ultrasonic wave interaction with a thin layer between two anisotropic solids. J Acoust Soc Am 92:1729–1742CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. 29.
    Zakharov DD (2006) High order approximate low frequency theory of elastic anisotropic lining and coating. J Acoust Soc Am 119:1961–1970CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. 30.
    An Z, Wang X, Deng M, Mao J, Li M (2013) A nonlinear spring model for an interface between two solids. Wave Motion 50:295–309MathSciNetCrossRefzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  31. 31.
    Wu T-T, Liu Y-H (1999) Inverse determinations of thickness and elastic properties of a bonding layer using laser-generated surface waves. Ultrasonics 37:23–30CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. 32.
    Baltazar A, Wang L, Xie B, Rokhlin SI (2003) Inverse ultrasonic determination of imperfect interfaces and bulk properties of a layer between two solids. J Acoust Soc Am 114:1424–1434CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  33. 33.
    Gauthier C, Ech Cherif El Kettani M, Galy J, Leduc D, Predoi M, Izbicki J-L (2016) Discrimination of different levels of adhesion in a bi layer aluminum/epoxy structure using lamb waves. WCNDT 2016, Münich, 13–17 June 2016Google Scholar
  34. 34.
    Auld BA (1990) Acoustic fields and waves in solids, vol I, 2nd edn. Krieger Publishing Company, MalabarGoogle Scholar
  35. 35.
    Williams JH, Nayeb-Hashemi H, Lee SS (1980) Ultrasonic attenuation and velocity in AS/3501-6 graphite fiber composite. J Nondestruct Eval 1(2):137–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© The Brazilian Society of Mechanical Sciences and Engineering 2018

Authors and Affiliations

  1. 1.Computer Science DepartmentFluminense Federal University (UFF)NiteróiBrazil
  2. 2.Department of Mechanical Engineering, Poli/COPPEFederal University of Rio de Janeiro (UFRJ)Rio de JaneiroBrazil
  3. 3.Department of Mechanical EngineeringPontifical Catholic University of Rio de Janeiro (PUC-Rio)Rio de JaneiroBrazil

Personalised recommendations