The Inverse Problem in Materials Characterization through Ultrasonic Attenuation and Velocity Measurements
The inverse problem in materials characterization is most often skipped over in favor of a correlation because the inverse problem is so difficult and the correlation is only tedious, not hard. In this talk the basic difficulty in the inverse problem field will be illustrated by two examples: finding grain size in metals when ultrasonic attenuation is measured, and finding graphite shape in cast iron when ultrasonic velocity is measured.
The basic difficulty arises because the measured quantity, attenuation or velocity, is a function of several variables. Thus, any single variable among the latter cannot be written as a single-valued function of the measured quantity.
For instance, attenuation α, caused by grain scattering, is a function of frequency f, grain diameter D, grain substructure μ, grain size distribution “GSD”, and the ratio of the grain diameter to the ultrasonic wavelength D/λ. The total attenuation “ATT” is also a function of geometrical beam spreading “BS” (which depends on sample anisotropy) as well as on physical absorption mechanisms “ABS” which in turn are functions of frequency and other parameters.
The talk will present further clarifications of these challenging research opportunities using ultrasonic attenuation and velocity.
KeywordsInverse Problem Grain Size Distribution Physical Acoustics Ultrasonic Velocity Ductile Iron
Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.
- 1.ARPA/AFML Program on Quantitative NDE: Various reports issued by WADC/WPAFB, Ohio, 1969 — date.Google Scholar
- 2.Papadakis, E. P., “Ultrasonic Attenuation Caused by Scattering in Polycrystalline Media,” in Physical Acoustics; Principles and Methods, Vol. IV Part B, W. P. Mason, editor, Academic Press, New York, 1968, pp. 269–328.Google Scholar
- 3.Papadakis, E. P., “Scattering in Polycrystalline Media,” in Methods of Experimental Physics — Ultrasonics, P. D. Edmonds, editor, Academic Press, New York, 1981, pp. 237–298.Google Scholar
- 4.Papadakis, E. P. “Physical Acoustics and the Microstructure of Iron Alloys,” Internat. Metals Rev. (to be published).Google Scholar
- 7.Mansour, T. M., “Evaluation of Ultrasonic Transducers by Cross-Sectional Mapping of the Near Field Using A Point Reflector,” Mater. Eval. 37 (7), 50–54 (June 1979).Google Scholar
- 8.Zener, C., Elasticity and Anelasticity of Metals, U. of Chicago Press, Chicago, Ill., 1948.Google Scholar
- 11.Mason, W. P., Physical Acoustics and the Properties of Solids, Van Nostrand, Princeton, 1959, pp. 209–224.Google Scholar
- 12.Lifshitz, E. M. and Parkhomovskii, G. D., Zh. Eksperim. i Teoret., Fiz. 20, 175–182 (1950).Google Scholar
- 15.Merkulov, L. G., “Investigation of Ultrasonic Scattering in Metals,” Sov. Phys. — Tech. Phys. 1 (1), 59–69 (Oct. 1956), from J. Tech. Phys. (USSR) 26, 64–73 (1956).Google Scholar
- 19.Kamigaki, K., “Ultrasonic Attenuation in Steel and Cast Iron,” Sci. Rep. RITU Tohoku Univ., Sendai, Japan, A-9, 48–77 (1957).Google Scholar
- 21.Papadakis, E. P., “Ultrasonic Attenuation and Velocity in S.A.E. 52100 Steel Quenched from Various Temperatures,” Met. Trans. 1, 1053–1057 (1970).Google Scholar
- 24.Morse, P. M., Vibration and Sound, 2nd Edition, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1948, pp. 347–352.Google Scholar
- 25.Morse, P. M. and Ingard, K. U., Theoretical Acoustics, McGraw-Hill, New York, 1968, pp. 401–407.Google Scholar
- 26.Lord Rayleigh, Theory of Sound, Macmillan Co., New York, 1929, Vol. II, p. 152.Google Scholar
- 31.Papadakis, E. P., “Ultrasonic Study of Simulated Crystal Symmetries in Polycrystalline Aggregates,” IEEE Trans. SU-11, 9–29 (1964).Google Scholar
- 32.Plenard, E. “The Elastic Behavior of Cast Iron,” National Metal Congress, Cleveland, 1964.Google Scholar
- 33.Fuller, A. G., Emerson, P. J. and Sergeant, G. F., “A Report on the Effect Upon Mechanical Properties of Variations in Graphite Form in Irons Having Varying Amounts of Ferrite and Pear lite in the Matrix Structure....,” AFS Trans. 88, 21–50 1980).Google Scholar
- 34.Sergeant, G. F. and Fuller, A. G., “The Effect Upon Mechanical Properties of Variation in Graphite Form in Irons Having Varying Amounts of Carbide in the Matrix Structure....,” AFS Trans. 88, 545–574 (1980).Google Scholar
- 35.Patterson, B. R. and Bates, C. E., “Nondestructive Property Prediction in Grey Cast Iron Using Ultrasonic Techniques,” AFS Trans. 89, 369–378 (1981).Google Scholar
- 36.Henderson, H. E., “Ultrasonic Velocity Technique for Quality Assurance of Ductile Iron Castings,” The Iron Worker 37 (3), Summer 1973.Google Scholar
- 37.Kovacs, B. V. and Cole, G. “On the Interaction of Acoustic Waves With S. G. Iron Castings,” Trans. AFS 83, 497–510 (1977).Google Scholar
- 38.Henderson, H. E., “The Effect of Heat Treatment on Ultrasonic Velocity of Ductile Iron Castings,” The Iron Worker 40 (3), Summer 1976.Google Scholar
- 39.Papadakis, E. P., “Morphological Severity Factor for Graphite Shape in Cast Iron and Its Relation to Ultrasonic Velocity and Tensile Properties,” AFS Trans. (to be published).Google Scholar
- 40.Papadakis, E. P., “Ultrasonic Velocity and Attenuation: Measurement Methods With Scientific and Industrial Applications,” in Physical Acoustics: Principles and Methods, Vol. XII, W. P. Mason and R. N. Thurston, editors, Academic Press, New York, 1976, pp. 343–348.Google Scholar
- 41.Lysaght, V. E., Indentation Hardness Testing, Reinhold, N.Y., 1949, pp. 134–135 and 150–153.Google Scholar
- 42.Giza, P. and Papadakis, E. P., “Eddy Current Tests for Hardness Certification of Gray Iron Castings,” Mater. Eval. 37(8), 45–50, 55 (July 1979).Google Scholar