Investigation of the Anisotropic Nature of Laser Generated Ultrasound in HCP Crystals and Unidirectional Carbon Epoxy Composites

  • David H. Hurley
  • James B. Spicer
  • James W. Wagner
  • Todd W. Murray
Part of the Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation book series (RPQN, volume 16)

Abstract

Laser generated ultrasound has been used to determine material properties and to characterize material defects [1–3]. To a large extent, the success of laser ultrasonics has been the researcher’s ability to correctly predict the temporal evolution of the displacement waveform resulting from pulsed laser irradiation. Theories that assume isotropic elastic properties work well for crystalline materials that have grain sizes that are small compared to the wavelength of the interrogating ultrasonic wave [4–5]. For single crystal samples or carbon epoxies, the elastic anisotropic nature must be taken into account. Royer and Dieulesaint [6] have shown, using a plane wave analysis, that the behavior of single crystal materials in the presence of an ultrasonic disturbance differ markedly from their isotropic counterparts. In particular for cubic and tetragonal systems, Royer and Dieulesaint [6] demonstrated that the decay rate of the Rayleigh wave disturbance varies strongly as a function of the anisotropy factor.

Keywords

Line Source Transverse Isotropy Single Crystal Material Isotropic Half Space Slowness Curve 
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.

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    C.B. Scruby, R.J. Dewhurst, D.A. Hutchins, and S.B. Palmer, Research Techniques in Nondestructive Testing, (Academic, New York, 1982), 5, p 281.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    C.B. Scruby, R.L. Smith, and B.C. Moss, NDT Int., 19, 307 (1986).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. 3.
    K. Telschow, Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, (Plenum, New York, 1988), Vol. 7b, p. 1211.Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    L.R.F. Rose, J. Accoust. Soc. Am., 73, 723, (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    K.L. Telschow and R.J. Conant, J. Acoust. Soc. Am., 88, 1494 (1990).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    D. Royer and E. Dieulesaint, J. Appl. Phys., 56, 2507 (1984)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. 7.
    H. Lamb, Phil. Trans. Roy. Soc. A 203, 1 (1904)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    Kraut, E.A., Rev. Geophys., 1, 401 (1963)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. 9.
    Burridge, R., Q. J. Mech. Appl. Math. 24, 81, (1971)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    Willis, J.R., ‘Modern Problems in Elastic Wave Propagation,’ New York, John Wiley & Sons (1978)Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    Musgrave M.J.P. and Payton R.G., Q.J1. Mech. Appl. Math. 35, 173 (1982)CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. 12.
    Payton R.G., ‘Elastic Wave Propagation in Transversely Isotropic Media,’ The Hague, Martinus Nijhoff (1983)Google Scholar
  13. 13.
    Cagniard, L., ‘Reflection and Refraction of Prog. Seismic Waves,’ New York, McGraw-Hill (1962)Google Scholar
  14. 14.
    Pekeris, C.L., Proc. Natn. Acad. Sci., 41, 629 (1955)CrossRefGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1997

Authors and Affiliations

  • David H. Hurley
    • 1
  • James B. Spicer
    • 1
  • James W. Wagner
    • 1
  • Todd W. Murray
    • 1
  1. 1.Department of Materials Science and EngineeringThe Johns Hopkins UniversityBaltimoreUSA

Personalised recommendations