Directional Laser Generation and Detection of Ultrasound with Arrays of Optical Fibers

  • Yves H. Berthelot
  • Jacek Jarzynski
Part of the Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation book series


The generation and detection of ultrasound with laser beams has become a viable technique in nondestructive testing of materials [1,2]. The main advantage of the technique is its intrinsic non-contact nature. Its main limitation seems to be its fairly low efficiency as compared with that of other standard NDE techniques. An interesting recent development [3–5] consists in using optical fibers to guide the laser light and illuminate the sample under investigation in virtually any desired source configuration. Another inherent advantage of the use of optical fibers is that the optical bench is completely decoupled from the sample under investigation, thus rendering the technique practical for in-situ measurements. The objective of the present study is (1) to present some preliminary experimental results complementary of those of Vogel [4] on the generation of ultrasound with an array of optical fibers; (2) to discuss the possibility of generating directional surface waves in a very narrow frequency band, thus increasing the signal-to-noise ratio; and (3), to discuss the feasibility of the directional detection of ultrasound by using an array of optical fibers as a receiver, also with the goal of increasing the signal-to-noise ratio.


Optical Fiber Directional Detection Laser Generation Tone Burst Optical Bench 
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.


Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.

Unable to display preview. Download preview PDF.


  1. 1.
    G. Birnbaum and G. S. White, “Laser techniques in NDE,” in Research Techniques in NDT, Vol. VII, Chapt. 8, 259–365, (1984).Google Scholar
  2. 2.
    D. A. Hutchins and A. C. Tam, IEEE Trans. UFFC, UFFC-33, 429–449, (1986).Google Scholar
  3. 3.
    E. Primbsch and W. Bickel, U.S. Patent 4,379, 409 (1983).Google Scholar
  4. 4.
    J. A. Vogel, A. J. A. Bruinsma, and A. J. Berkhout, Proceedings of Ultrasonics International ‘87, (Butterworth, 1987 ), pp 141–152.CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. 5.
    J. Jarzynskì and Y. H. Berthelot, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85 (1), 158–162 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. 6.
    Addison, Graham, Linebarger, Tittman, QNDE 7, 575.Google Scholar
  7. 7.
    Y. H. Berthelot, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85 (3), 1173–1181 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. 8.
    A. D. W. Mckie, J. W. Wagner, J. B. Spicer, and C. M. Penney, to be published in Ultrasonics, (1989).Google Scholar
  9. 9.
    C. M. Scala and P. A. Doyle, J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 85 (4), 1569–1576 (1989).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. 10.
    J.-P. Monchalin, Rev. Sci. Instrum. 56 (4), 543–546 (1985).CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. 11.
    L. E. Drain, The Laser Doppler Technique, ( John Wiley and Sons, New York, 1980 ).Google Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Science+Business Media New York 1990

Authors and Affiliations

  • Yves H. Berthelot
    • 1
  • Jacek Jarzynski
    • 1
  1. 1.School of Mechanical EngineeringGeorgia Institute of TechnologyAtlantaUSA

Personalised recommendations