Precision Ultrasonic Thickness Measurements of Thin Steel Disks

  • G. V. Blessing
  • D. G. Eitzen
  • J. F. Henning
  • A. V. ClarkJr.
  • R. E. Schramm

Abstract

The accurate in-situ measurement of part dimensions during fabrication is of much interest to the manufacturing industry, especially for untended manufacturing. The goal of this work is to apply non-contacting ultrasonic techniques to the precise thickness measurement, during machining, of metal parts of rotation having a nominal wall thickness of 1.5 mm. The desired accuracy is ±.0025 mm at all points on the approximately 200 mm diameter steel shells, where part access is restricted to one side at a time for the measurement. In a feasibility study, dimensional information using eddy current techniques was overwhelmed by conductivity variations in the 304-stainless steel samples [1]. The approach here is to precisely measure ultrasonic echo transit times, and calulate part dimensions, knowing the material sound speed. To that end, feasibility results on flat disk specimens possessing a wide range of grain sizes representative of the shell’s variable metallurgy are reported here. Factors affecting ultrasonic dimensional precision including grain size, texture, sample temperature and surface roughness are discussed, with an emphasis on precision limitations due to finite grain sizes in thin parts. Both longitudinal (10 to 30 MHz) and shear (3 MHz) wave measurements were made, the latter using electromagnetic acoustic transducers (EMATS).

Keywords

Anisotropy Boulder Acoustics EMAT 

Preview

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

References

  1. 1.
    J.C. Moulder, (private communication) National Bureau of Standards, Boulder, CO. Present address: Center for NDE, Iowa State University, Ames, IA.Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    E.P. Papadakis, in Physical Acoustics, eds. W.P. Mason and R.N. Thurston (Academic Press, NY, 1976) Vol. XII, Chap. 5, pp. 279–298.Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    CM. Sayers, J. Phys. D (Appl. Phys.) 15 (1982) pp. 2157–2167.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. 4.
    Anon, in 1986 Annual Book of ASTM Standards (ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1986) Recommended Practices E112 and A262 respectively in Vols. 3.01 and 3.02.Google Scholar
  5. 5.
    T.D. Doiron, (private communication) Precision Eng. Div., National Bureau of Standards, Gaithersburg, MD.Google Scholar
  6. 6.
    Anon. ASME/ANSI B46.1–1985, Surface Texture Waviness and Lay (ASME, NY, 1985).Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    W.P. Mason and H.J. McSkimin, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 19, No. 3 (1947) pp. 464–473.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    F.E. Stanke, in Unified Theory and Measurements of Elastic Waves in Polycrystalline Materials. Ph.D dissertation, Stanford University (1983).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    M.J. Fisher and G.C. Johnson, in Review of Progress in Quantitative NDE, edited by D.O. Thompson and D.E. Chimenti (Plenum Press, NY, 1984) pp. 1119–1128.Google Scholar
  10. 10.
    R. Truell, C. Elbaum, B. Chick, Ultrasonic Methods in Solid State Physics, (Academic Press, NY, 1969) Chap. 2, p. 123.Google Scholar
  11. 11.
    H.M. Ledbetter, Physica 128B (1985) pp. 1–4.Google Scholar
  12. 12.
    R. Truell, C. Elbaum, B. Chick, Ultrasonic Methods in Solid State Physics, (Academic Press, NY, 1969) Chap. 2, p. 107.Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Plenum Press, New York 1988

Authors and Affiliations

  • G. V. Blessing
    • 1
  • D. G. Eitzen
    • 1
  • J. F. Henning
    • 1
  • A. V. ClarkJr.
    • 2
  • R. E. Schramm
    • 2
  1. 1.National Bureau of StandardsGaitherbergUSA
  2. 2.National Bureau of StandardsBoulderUSA

Personalised recommendations