See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/243748474

Ultrasonic Measurement of Closed Stress Corrosion Crack Depth Using

Subharmonic Phased Array

Article  in  Japanese Journal of Applied Physics · July 2009

DOI: 10.1143/JJAP.48.07GD01

CITATIONS READS

40 248

4 authors, including:

Yoshikazu Ohara
Tohoku University
68 PUBLICATIONS   658 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

All content following this page was uploaded by Yoshikazu Ohara on 16 August 2014.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

Japanese Journal of Applied Physics 48 (2009) 07GD01 REGULAR PAPER

Ultrasonic Measurement of Closed Stress Corrosion Crack Depth

Using Subharmonic Phased Array
Yoshikazu Ohara, Hiroaki Endo, Tsuyoshi Mihara1 , and Kazushi Yamanaka
Department of Materials Processing, Tohoku University, Sendai 980-8579, Japan
1
Department of Science and Engineering, University of Toyama, Toyama 930-8555, Japan
Received November 26, 2008; accepted January 15, 2009; published online July 21, 2009

We formed a stress corrosion crack (SCC) more than 10 mm deep to simulate those generated in atomic power plants. We precisely
imaged the formed SCC by a novel imaging method, namely, the subharmonic phased array for crack evaluation (SPACE), and found that
it had complex branches. Subsequently, we cut the specimen for the optical observation of the cross sections, and discussed the origin of
the SCC extension on the basis of the optical microscopic observation of the cross sections. To examine the open and closed parts of crack
in the optical images, we superposed the crack extracted from the optical images onto the SPACE images. We compared the optically and
SPACE-measured crack depths, and demonstrated that SPACE is useful in reducing the underestimation of closed-crack depths.
# 2009 The Japan Society of Applied Physics
DOI: 10.1143/JJAP.48.07GD01

1. Introduction
Nondestructive crack depth measurement is necessary Mother Clock A/D Converter
Burst Signal
for the evaluation of material strength in infrastructure Generator Storage
Filter
and industrial materials. Specifically, the measurement LiNbO3 Array Coefficient
Filter(f and f/2) Filtering
Single Sensor
of stress corrosion crack (SCC) depth is critically impor- Crystal
Delay Time
Phase Shift
tant in atomic power plants, thermal power plants and … Extraction FPGA Summation
chemical plants. Crack depths can be measured by ultra- Time
RMS RMS
sound if they are open,1,2) since the ultrasound is strongly f f, f/2 PC
Extraction

scattered by the crack tip. However, ultrasonic inspec-

tion can sometimes underestimate and overlook cracks f(Fundamental Image) f/2(Subharmonic Image)

because of crack closure. It is known that some cracks Closed

are closed because of residual stress3) or the presence Open
Crack
Crack

of oxide film4) generated in crack faces in corrosive

environments. Ultrasound is transmitted through crack
faces that are firmly pressed together. Underestimating
and overlooking cracks could result in catastrophic acci-
dents because the closed cracks may be extended by large
external stresses.
To solve this problem, nonlinear ultrasound has the
potential to become a primary means of evaluating closed
cracks. Nonlinear ultrasound is based on the detection
of nonlinear components, e.g., superharmonic waves (2 f ;
3 f ; . . .)5–16) or subharmonic waves ( f =2; f =3; . . .),8,17–27)
generated by the interaction of large-amplitude ultrasound
with closed cracks, where f is the input-wave frequency.
This phenomenon has been referred to as contact acoustic
nonlinearity (CAN),7) and a related measurement is often
called nonlinear elastic wave spectroscopy (NEWS).28,29)
Among nonlinear components, subharmonic waves are
specifically useful because of their excellent selectivity for
closed cracks and high temporal resolution.21–27) Thus far,
we have developed a novel imaging method, namely, the
subharmonic phased array for crack evaluation (SPACE),
on the basis of subharmonic waves and a phased array
algorithm. We demonstrated its performance in closed
fatigue cracks and SCCs.27)
However, although complexly branched SCCs have been
generated in atomic power plants, the measurement accuracy
of SPACE in such SCCs has yet to be examined. Here, we
precisely image a closed, complexly branched SCC with
SPACE, and demonstrate the usefulness of SPACE in
reducing the underestimation of crack depths.
07GD01-1
Fig. 1. Experimental configuration of SPACE.
2. SPACE
The experimental configuration of SPACE is shown in
Fig. 1. A LiNbO3 single-crystal transmitter with a polyimide
wedge is used to genertate intense ultrasound, and a
phased array sensor is used as a receiver for focusing on
reception.30) By inputting intense ultrasound, the scattering
of fundamental and subharmonic waves occurs at the open
and closed parts of cracks, respectively. The scattered waves
received by the array sensor are analog-to-digital-converted.
Subsequently, they are digitally filtered at fundamental
and subharmonic frequencies. After their phase shift
following the delay law,27) they are summed. Finally, the
root-mean-square (rms) value is calculated as intensity at a
focal point. This process is repeated over a scan area with a
step to create images. The fundamental and subharmonic
images obtained can indicate the open and closed parts
of cracks, respectively.26,27) The schematic illustrations in
Fig. 1 are examples of fundamental and subharmonic images
of a crack with a closed tip, e.g., in atomic power plants.
The fundamental image indicates only the open parts.
Hence, the crack depth will be underestimated. On the other
hand, the subharmonic image indicates accurate locations of
the crack tips.
# 2009 The Japan Society of Applied Physics
Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 48 (2009) 07GD01 Y. Ohara et al.

Load LiNbO3 Element Pitch

MgCl2 Solution Single Crystal LE
Polyimide Number of Elements N
30 wt %, 90°C

Lw
(Velocity VW ) 10 PZT

18°
Velocity VL

38
(Xt, 0) (0, 0)

160

3
85

38
(mm)
t19

19
3

170
(mm)

Position A
Fig. 2. Apparatus to form deep SCCs.

Position B

3. Experimental Methods and Results

Position C
3.1 Formation of a deep SCC
In actual plants, e.g., atomic power plants, thermal power
plants, and chemical plants, SCCs more than 10 mm deep Fig. 3. Experimental configuration with parameters listed in Table I
have been generated. However, it is difficult to form deep for imaging the SCC.
SCCs in the laboratory owing to their low growth rate.
Hence, we used the following method to form such a deep
Table I. Parameters and coordinates used to image SCC.
SCC.27) First, we formed a fatigue crack with a depth of
approximately 10 mm in a sensitized austenitic stainless Xt VL VW LW LE
N
steel specimen (SUS304 sensitized at 600
C for 4 h) by a (mm) (m/s) (m/s) (mm) (mm)
three-point bending fatigue test. The fatigue conditions
pffiffiffiffi were
44:5 5800 2700 5.5 0.5 64
a maximum stress intensity factor Kmax ¼ 28 MPa pffiffiffiffi m and a
minimum stress intensity factor Kmin ¼ 0:6 MPa m. Sub-
sequently, we extended the SCC from the tip of the fatigue (a) A [f] (b) A [f/2]
crack using an SCC apparatus, as shown in Fig. 2. This
apparatus was designed to immerse the entire fatigue-crack
specimen in a cell with a corrosive environment under a 15.7 17.3
static bending load with a maximum of 100 kN. The 100
temperature of the corrosive environment and the load are
controlled with a thermostat and a hydraulic pump, (c) B [f] (d) B [f/2]
respectively. The extension of SCC on the specimen surface
can be monitored in situ through an optical window in the
15.3 16.6
cell. In this study, the corrosive environment was a solution
of 30 wt % MgCl2 at 90
C, and a nominal bending stress of 13
124 MPa was applied to the crack for 650 h.31)
(e) C [f] (f) C [f/2] 0
3.2 Imaging of the SCC with SPACE 5
To image the extended SCC precisely, we applied SPACE to 18.8
the SCC specimen at three positions A, B, and C, as shown 15.9 5
in Fig. 3, with the parameters listed in Table I. For the (mm)
ultrasonic imaging of a crack, the selection of the number of
cycles is important for optimizing the frequency filtering Fig. 4. Comparison of the fundamental and subharmonic images of
characteristics and axial resolution. Owing to the trade off, the SCC specimen: (a) fundamental and (b) subharmonic images at
measurement position A. (c) Fundamental and (d) subharmonic
we selected three cycles as an input wave. The input signal
images at measurement position B. (e) Fundamental and (f) sub-
was a three-cycle burst of a 7 MHz sinusoidal wave with a harmonic images at measurement position C.
10.3 nmp{p amplitude, where the displacement amplitude
was measured at crack positions in another specimen cut
from the same material by laser interferometry.22) We extract the fundamental and subharmonic components from
used 64 elements in an array sensor with a center fre- the received waves.
quency of 5 MHz to receive both fundamental (7 MHz) and The fundamental and subharmonic images at A, B, and C
subharmonic (3.5 MHz) waves. Furthermore, we selected a are shown in Fig. 4. Here, the values of red areas, which
configuration to receive both forward- and back-scattered correspond to the maximum values, were adjusted so that the
waves from cracks, and focused on reception with 0.1 mm background noise becomes the same level in the images.
steps. A fast Fourier transform (FFT) filter was used to Consequently, we succeeded in visualizing various crack
07GD01-2 # 2009 The Japan Society of Applied Physics
Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 48 (2009) 07GD01
(a) H1
H2
100
(b)
90
80
Crack
70
Response
Intensity (%)
60
50 Background
Noise
40 Crack Tip
30 Threshold
(13%)
20
10
0
H1
Position in vertical direction of (a)
Fig. 5. Intensity distribution for threshold of crack depth measure-
ment: (a) enlarged crack image of (f) of Fig. 4 and (b) one-dimensional
intensity distribution of H2 to H1 in (a).
images at each position. The distribution of the crack
response in the images was not only in the vertical direction
but also in the horizontal direction. This result shows that the
SCC did not linearly extend but was complexly branched
and had open and closed parts. We measured the crack
depths in the fundamental and subharmonic images. For the
quantitative measurement of crack depths, it is necessary to
distinguish the crack response from the background noise,
e.g., linear scattering at the grain boundary and electrical
noise. First, we examined the intensity of the background
noise in the obtained images, and adjusted the maximum
value (100%: red color in the color bar in the right part of
Fig. 4) so as to obtain a noise level of less than 10%, where
the blue color is 0. Subsequently, we determined that the
intensity at the crack is more than 13%. To explain the
detailed procedure for crack depth measurement, an example
of the intensity distribution around the crack tip is shown in
Fig. 5. Figure 5(b) shows the one-dimensional intensity
distribution of H2 to H1 in Fig. 5(a). The background noise
was less than 10%. The shaded area shows the crack
response, which was more than 13%. We measured the
deepest part of the shaded area as the crack depth. Note that
the crack tips were deeper in the subharmonic images than in
the fundamental images at all positions. This suggests that
the tips of the SCC were closed.
3.3 Comparison with optical observation of the sliced
SCC specimen
To optically examine the depths and distributions of the SCC
Y. Ohara et al.
(a) 25
25
(mm)
7
(b) C 65 Side b
B 4
A 23 Side a
1
(c)
Fig. 6. Schematic illustration of the specimen showing slice region
and the photograph of sliced SCC specimen: (a) front view, (b) top
view, and (c) photograph of the sliced specimen.
and to compare them with the SPACE images shown in
Fig. 4, the specimen was sliced in seven thin plates with a
25 mm2 area around the crack, as shown in Fig. 6. The thin
plates were numbered from ‘‘side a’’ to ‘‘side b’’, as shown
H2 in Fig. 6(b), to distinguish the observed sides. The measure-
ment positions A, B, and C correspond to thin plates 1– 4,
2 – 6, and 4 – 7, respectively. The cross sections were
polished, and etched in 10 wt % oxalic acid for 30 s. The
optical images of the cross sections are shown in Fig. 7. The
SCC was complexly branched from the tip of the fatigue
crack.
To examine the crack depths, the images taken with an
optical microscope are arrayed in Fig. 8. The depths of the
fatigue crack and SCC are plotted against their position from
side a to side b in Fig. 9. We selected the optically observed
crack depths for comparison with the SPACE images to be
the maximum one in each measurement area shown in
Fig. 6(b). They were 16.9, 16.9, and 16.7 mm for measure-
ment positions A, B, and C, respectively.
Interestingly, the SCC extension directions were primarily
oblique to the fatigue crack extension directions. This result
can be explained by assuming that the SCC generation
originates in the dissolution of a path activated by a slip band
in the high shear stress area around the crack tip (Fig. 10).32)
Although SCC extension is generally considered to be
parallel to the direction of the plane of maximum tensile
stress,33,34) this direction does not agree with the present
observation. Thus, the present finding is consistent with the
idea35) that SCC is not a mechanical fracture phenomenon
directly defined by stress states but a dissolution phenom-
enon defined by the texture of materials (such as slip band)
and the environment.
Furthermore, the tendency of crack extension length
also differed between the fatigue crack and the SCC. The
distribution of the fatigue crack depths had a maximum
in the central part (Fig. 9). This is reasonable since the
central and edge parts are under plane strain and plane
stress conditions, respectively. In contrast, the SCC exten-
sion lengths were slightly larger in the edge parts than in the
central part. This also suggests that the SCC extension was
07GD01-3 # 2009 The Japan Society of Applied Physics
Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 48 (2009) 07GD01 Y. Ohara et al.

1b 2b 5b 6b

2a 3b 6a 7a

1 mm

Fig. 7. Optical images of cross sections of the SCC specimen.

SCC
1.8 mm

Fatigue crack
14.9 mm

Fig. 10. Schematic illustration of shear stress field around crack tip.

Fig. 8. Measurement of crack depth in arrayed optical images. 3.4 Discussion of open and closed parts, and
measurement accuracy
To precisely compare the SPACE images with the optically
20
observed crack, we superposed the crack extracted from the
Optically measured crack depth (mm)

optical images (Fig. 7) onto the fundamental and subhar-

monic images (Fig. 4) for positions A and C, in Fig. 11.
Here, the optically observed crack selected were deepest for
each position.
At position A, the optically observed crack tip was deeper
than that in the fundamental image (a). This causes the
10
underestimation of crack depth. In contrast, the crack tip in
the subharmonic image (b) was almost the same as that in
the optically observed one. On the other hand, at position C,
the optically observed crack tip was deeper than that in the
: Tip of SCC fundamental image (c), which causes the underestimation of
: Tip of fatigue crack crack depth. In contrast, the subharmonic image reduced
the underestimation. Here, we examined the measurement
0 accuracy of SPACE quantitatively. The relationship between
0 10
Position (mm) optically and SPACE-measured crack depths is shown in
Fig. 12. The crack depths in the fundamental images were
Fig. 9. Distribution of optically measured fatigue crack and SCC
depths. underestimated for all positions. The underestimation was
1.6 mm at the maximum. On the other hand, the subhar-
monic images reduced the underestimation to less than
concerned with the shear stress field around the crack tip, 1 mm.
since the shear stress is higher in the edge parts than in the Concerning the mechanism of SPACE-image formation, it
central part. has been verified that subharmonic generation accompanies
07GD01-4 # 2009 The Japan Society of Applied Physics
Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 48 (2009) 07GD01
Crack Tip in
(a) Optically Observed (b)
Crack Tip Subharmonic Image
Crack Tip in
Fundamental
Image
1mm
(c) Optically Observed (d)
Crack Tip
Crack Tip in
Fundamental Crack Tip in
Image Subharmonic
Image
Fig. 11. Superposition of the crack extracted from the optical
images on the SPACE images to examine the open and closed parts
in the optical image: (a) superposition of the crack extracted from
the cross sections of 3b on the fundamental image [Fig. 4(a)] for
position A. (b) Superposition of the crack extracted from the cross
sections of 3b on the subharmonic image [Fig. 4(b)] for position A.
(c) Superposition of the crack extracted from the cross sections of 5a
on the fundamental image [Fig. 4(e)] for position C. (d) Superposition
of the crack extracted from the cross sections of 5a on the
subharmonic image [Fig. 4(f)] for position C.
a resonance phenomenon.19,21,23,25) This has been referred to
as subharmonic resonance (SR)24,27) in an entire crack and
localized subharmonic resonance (LSR)27) in a localized part
of a crack, in which the resonance is understood as Rayleigh-
mode resonance36,37) of a closed crack. Then, there may be
concern that the precise tuning of the input-wave frequency
to the subharmonic resonance frequency is required to excite
the SR or LSR. However, fortunately, the Q value of the
resonance is not so high, as shown in Fig. 13 of ref. 27
(or Fig. 2 of ref. 24), because the shape of the crack faces
is generally irregular, and because the crack faces have
microscopic and nanoscopic asperities. Hence, the precise
selection of input-wave frequency is not required to achieve
the aforementioned measurement accuracy. Thus, SPACE is
very useful in reducing the underestimation of crack depths.
In addition, it is surprising that some crack tips in
the subharmonic images were deeper than the optically
observed ones for positions A and C [Figs. 11(d) and 12].
This suggests that subharmonic images can visualize an
optically unobservable closed crack. The reason for this can
be interpreted as follows.
(1) In this study, the cross sections of the SCC specimen
were polished and etched to clearly observe the closed
parts. However, this is not always possible, for
example, when the crack closure stress is too large.
(2) To examine the distribution of the SCC precisely, the
specimen was sliced in seven thin plates with thick-
nesses from 1 to 2 mm, as shown in Fig. 9. However,
the regions between the observed cross sections may
07GD01-5
Y. Ohara et al.
20
SPACE-measured crack depth (mm)
f f/2
A
B
18 C
16
14
14 16 18 20
Optically measured crack depth (mm)
Fig. 12. Relationship between the SPACE-measured crack depth
and optically measured depths of closed stress corrosion crack.
contain optically unobservable crack, which were
visualized in the subharmonic images. This possibility
could be elucidated by realizing a three-dimensional,
closed-crack imaging with SPACE using a two-dimen-
sional array sensor as a receiver.
4. Conclusions
We formed an SCC more than 10 mm deep to simulate those
generated in atomic power plants, and precisely imaged the
complexly branched SCC at three measurement positions
using SPACE. Subsequently, we cut the specimen for the
optical observation of the cross sections, and pointed out the
possibility that the origin of the SCC extension was related
to the shear stress field around the crack tip. We superposed
the crack extracted from the optical images onto the SPACE
images. The results suggest that subharmonic imaging can
visualize an optically unobservable closed crack. Finally, we
examined the relationship between optically and SPACE-
measured crack depths, and demonstrated that SPACE is
extremely useful in reducing the underestimation of crack
depths.
Acknowledgments
This work was supported by Grants-in-Aid for Science
Research (Nos. 16206071 and 174727) from the Ministry of
Education, Culture, Sports, Science, and Technology of
Japan, and by the Japan Nuclear Energy Safety Organiza-
tion.
1) L. W. Schmerr: Fundamentals of Ultrasonic Nondestructive Evalua-
tion (Plenum, New York, 1998) p. 305.
2) J. D. Achenbach: Int. J. Solids Struct. 37 (2000) 13.
3) E. Wolf: Eng. Fract. Mech. 2 (1970) 37.
4) N. Yusa, S. Perrin, K. Mizuno, Z. Chen, and K. Miya: Meas. Sci.
Technol. 18 (2007) 3403.
5) O. Buck, W. L. Morris, and J. M. Richardson: Appl. Phys. Lett. 33
(1978) 371.
6) Y. Zheng, R. G. Maev, and I. Y. Solodov: Can. J. Phys. 77 (1999) 927.
7) I. Y. Solodov, A. F. Assainov, and K. S. Len: Ultrasonics 31 (1993)
91.
8) I. Solodov and C. A. Vu: Acoust. Phys. 39 (1993) 476.
# 2009 The Japan Society of Applied Physics
Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 48 (2009) 07GD01
9) J. Okada, T. Ito, K. Kawashima, and N. Nishimura: Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.
40 (2001) 3579.
10) Y. Ohara and K. Kawashima: Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 43 (2004) 3119.
11) S. Biwa, S. Nakajima, and N. Ohno: J. Appl. Mech. 71 (2004) 508.
12) S. Biwa, S. Hiraiwa, and E. Matsumoto: Ultrasonics 44 (2006) e1319.
13) M. Yoshioka, S. Sato, T. Kikuchi, and Y. Matsuda: Jpn. J. Appl. Phys.
45 (2006) 4547.
14) M. Fukuda, M. Nishihira, and K. Imano: Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 45 (2006)
4556.
15) M. Fukuda, M. Nishihira, and K. Imano: Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 46 (2007)
4529.
16) T. Ohtani, K. Kawashima, M. Drew, and P. Guagliard: Jpn. J. Appl.
Phys. 46 (2007) 4577.
17) I. Y. Solodov, N. Krohn, and G. Busse: Ultrasonics 40 (2002) 621.
18) A. Moussatov, V. Gusev, and B. Castagnede: Phys. Rev. Lett. 90
(2003) 124301.
19) I. Y. Solodov, J. Wackerl, K. Pfleiderer, and G. Busse: Appl. Phys.
Lett. 84 (2004) 5386.
20) M. Fukuda, M. Nishihira, and K. Imano: Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 47 (2008)
3899.
21) K. Yamanaka, T. Mihara, and T. Tsuji: Jpn. J. Appl. Phys. 43 (2004)
3082.
22) M. Akino, T. Mihara, and K. Yamanaka: AIP Conf. Proc. 700 (2004)
1256.
23) R. Sasaki, T. Ogata, Y. Ohara, T. Mihara, and K. Yamanaka: Jpn. J.
07GD01-6
View publication stats
Y. Ohara et al.
Appl. Phys. 44 (2005) 4389.
24) K. Yamanaka, R. Sasaki, T. Ogata, Y. Ohara, and T. Mihara: AIP
Conf. Proc. 820 (2006) 283.
25) Y. Ohara, T. Mihara, and K. Yamanaka: Ultrasonics 44 (2006) 194.
26) Y. Ohara, T. Mihara, R. Sasaki, T. Ogata, S. Yamamoto, Y.
Kishimoto, and K. Yamanaka: Appl. Phys. Lett. 90 (2007) 011902.
27) Y. Ohara, S. Yamamoto, T. Mihara, and K. Yamanaka: Jpn. J. Appl.
Phys. 47 (2008) 3908.
28) K. E.-A. V. D. Abeele, P. A. Johnson, and A. Sutin: Res. Nondestr.
Eval. 12 (2000) 17.
29) K. E.-A. V. D. Abeele, J. Carmeliet, J. A. Tencate, and P. A. Johnson:
Res. Nondestr. Eval. 12 (2000) 31.
30) T. L. Szabo: Diagnostic Ultrasound Imaging: Inside Out (Academic,
New York, 2004) p. 171.
31) A. Yonezu, H. Cho, T. Ogawa, and M. Takemoto: Proc. Adv.
Nondestr. Eval. 11 (2005) 61.
32) T. J. Smith and R. W. Staehle: Corrosion 23 (1967) 117.
33) J. G. Hines and T. P. Hoar: J. Iron Steel Inst. 184 (1956) 166.
34) T. P. Hoar: Corrosion 19 (1963) 331t.
35) M. Takemoto: Genba Gijutsusha notameno Oryoku Hushokuware
(Stress Corrosion Cracking for Engineers) (Nihon Yosha Kogaku
Kenkyujo, Osaka, 2007) p. 1 [in Japanese].
36) V. V. Krylov, P. S. Landa, and V. A. Robsman: Acoust. Phys. 39
(1993) 55.
37) D. E. Budreck and J. D. Achenbach: J. Appl. Mech. 55 (1988) 405.
# 2009 The Japan Society of Applied Physics