Wideband Nonuniformly Excited Focused Transducers — Theory and Experiments

  • Alain Lhémery
  • Daniel De Vadder
  • Nicolas Gengembre
Chapter

Abstract

In an earlier study [1], we discussed the interest of wideband nonuniform transducers in nondestructive testing (NDT). Only flat transducers were studied. Since that, we have developed a new technique that combines in a single probe three different modes: a conventional uniform mode, a mode favoring the plane wave component leading to a diffractionless beam and a mode favoring the edge diffracted wave leading to a focusing effect. This original technique is fully described in [2]. Here, we study the influence of nonuniform source profile on the characteristics of the field radiated by wideband focused transducers, as compared to conventional focused transducers with uniform profile. Classically, the transient field radiated by a conventional spherically focused transducer is described as the superposition of a geometric wave (a spherical wave converging to the focal point then diverging) and of diffracted edge wave [3]. Two nonuniform profiles are studied, both theoretically and experimentally which favor either one or the other contribution.

Keywords

Acoustic Emission Impulse Response Michelson Interferometer Focal Zone Edge Wave 
These keywords were added by machine and not by the authors. This process is experimental and the keywords may be updated as the learning algorithm improves.
This is a preview of subscription content, log in to check access.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    A. Lhémery, D. De Vadder and S. Dimitriu, in Review of Progress in QNDE, Vol. 13, eds. D.O. Thompson and D.E. Chimenti (Plenum, New-York, 1994), p. 1039.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. De Vadder, A. Lhémery and N. Gengembre, in Review of Progress in QNDE, Vol. 15, op. cit. (1996).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    A. Penttinen and M. Luukkala, J. Phys. D: Appl. Phys. 9, 1547 (1976).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    P. R. Stepanishen, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 49, 1629 (1971).Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    H. Djelouah, J.-C. Baboux and M. Perdrix, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 87, 76 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    W. A. Verhoef, M.J.T.M. Cloostermans and J. M. Thyssen, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 75, 1716(1984).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    P. Calmon, A. Lhémery and J. Nadal, in Review of Progress in QNDE, Vol. 15, op. cit. (1996).Google Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. Lhémery, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 90, 2799 (1991).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1996

Authors and Affiliations

  • Alain Lhémery
    • 1
  • Daniel De Vadder
    • 1
  • Nicolas Gengembre
    • 1
  1. 1.École Centrale Paris, Laboratoire de MécaniqueURA 850 C.N.R.S.Châtenay-Malabry cedexFrance

Personalised recommendations