NDT and E International 104 (2019) 69–76

Contents lists available at ScienceDirect

NDT and E International

journal homepage: www.elsevier.com/locate/ndteint

Determination of acoustoelastic/acoustoplastic constants to measure stress T

in elastic/plastic limits by using LCR wave
Mohammad Mohammadia,b, Javad Jafari Fesharakia,b,∗
a
Department of Mechanical Engineering, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran
b
Modern Manufacturing Technologies Research Center, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran

A R T I C LE I N FO A B S T R A C T

Keywords: This experimental study aims to investigate the ability of the ultrasonic method (UM) by using critically re-
Stress measurement fracted longitudinal (LCR) wave for measuring stress in both elastic and plastic limits. In so doing, nine tensile
Ultrasonic method test specimens are used. In order to send and receive the LCR wave into the specimens, the investigation led to
LCR wave design two different types of ultrasonic fixtures (constant fixture and variable fixture). The constant fixture, used
Acoustoelastic constant
to evaluate and compare the results of variable fixture. Three initial distances (0, 30, 50 mm) employed for
Acoustoplastic constant
Time of flight
variable fixture to detect the accurate results and compare with the constant fixture. To determine acoustoelastic
and acoustoplastic constants different amounts of stress are applied to the specimens using uniaxial tensile
testing machine. Measurement of longitudinal applied stress by UM is done by using 2 MHz probes based on
Acoustoelasticity. The results of the study indicated that there is a significant relation between stress and time of
flight wave in both elastic and plastic limits. For the first time, this study shows that entering the plastic limit
takes tremendous sensitivity. By using variable fixture (without initial distance) enable the process to evaluate
stress in the plastic limit accurately. The outcome of the study provides three acoustoplastic and three acous-
toelastic constants. All of these constants, by increasing the initial distance between two parts of the variable
fixture will reduce. In other words, the comparison between different initial distance tests indicates that in-
creasing initial distance caused to less accuracy of measuring stress.

1. Introduction automated and semi-automated, stationary and mobile x-ray systems in

Stresses are created by many manufacturing processes like non-
uniform plastic deformation, surface modification, material phase and/
or density changes. In addition, stresses can also increase during the
real service conditions and leads to effect on fatigue life, deformation
and other engineering properties. Therefore, stresses analysis is a ne-
cessary step in the optimum design of components and inspect the
structures. However, the various stress measurement procedures are
now almost mature, but unfortunately, there is no trustworthy non-
destructive procedure that gives complete consent about the stress data.
Accordingly, the development of these non-destructive procedures like
ultrasonic methods is inevitable. There are systems like Stress Mike,
Bolt Mike and Ultrafast in industrial applications using the longitudinal
wave to evaluate the longitudinal stress state of bolts and screws.
Hundreds of ultrasonic thickness gauges are used e.g. in the automotive
industry to optimize the stress in screws using calibrations performed in
tensile test measurements. UER system evaluates the stress state of rims
of railroad wheels, about 50 systems are in use worldwide. There are
use to evaluate the two dimensional stress states of parts and compo-
nents. All ultrasonic systems are as precise as the acoustoelastic data of
the particular steel and Al alloy are known and comparisons with the
results of established destructive and nondestructive techniques show
agreements within an error bar of about 20 till 50 MPa.
Among the non-destructive methods only by using critically re-
fracted longitudinal waves (LCR) of the ultrasonic method and de-
pending on the type of selected probes and the ultrasonic wave fre-
quency, can be used to measure the stress in the certain depth from the
specimen surface. LCR wave is a longitudinal wave with the same
properties and behavior like a longitudinal wave propagating the bulk
or thickness of a component. It is not a guided wave. The evaluation of
the depth of penetration into the surface of a component depends on the
wave field characteristics and the ultrasonic path length. The presence
of stress within a specimen causes a change in the velocity of ultrasonic
waves or change in time-of-flight (ToF) within the specimen, which is
known as the acoustoelastic effect. Thus, the correct measurement of
ToF can be used as a criterion for the assessment of the stresses present.

∗
Corresponding author. Department of Mechanical Engineering, Najafabad Branch, Islamic Azad University, Najafabad, Iran.
E-mail address: jafari@pmc.iaun.ac.ir (J.J. Fesharaki).

https://doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2019.04.003
Received 23 November 2018; Received in revised form 2 April 2019; Accepted 3 April 2019
Available online 08 April 2019
0963-8695/ © 2019 Published by Elsevier Ltd.
M. Mohammadi and J.J. Fesharaki NDT and E International 104 (2019) 69–76

The relative change of velocity can be replaced by the relative change

of the time-of-flight only if the ultrasonic path length during the cali-
bration experiments is identical with the path length during the stress
analysis on a component.
Measuring stress with the ultrasonic method has received much
attention in recent years. Among the first publications on the issue,
Noronha et al. analyzed and measured residual stress by using the ul-
trasonic method [1]. Clotfelter and Risch used the ultrasonic techniques
to assess the stress in welded rail and railroad wheels [2]. Schramm
et al. used the ultrasonic techniques to assess the stress in railroad
wheels [3]. Egle and Bray calculated the third-order elastic constants
from the data of acoustoelastic which obtained by the measurements of
changes in speed of the ultrasonic wave in steel railroad specimen [4]. Fig. 1. Schematic of the LCR wave propagation.
Egle and Bray carried out the investigation to find out a non-destructive
system for stress measurement by using the LCR wave [5]. The residual
stresses in ductile iron are measured by Srinivasan et al. using the ul-
trasonic method [6]. Fukuoka and Pao reported the progress of
acoustoelasticity based on the results reported at the meetings of the
working group for acoustoelasticity that was organized in the Japanese
NDT inspection society [7,8]. Bray and Junghans mention that the LCR
wave times of flight are able to evaluate the stress of post-weld un-
derneath the steel plate surface [9]. Tanala et al. demonstrated that Fig. 2. Schematic of tension testing specimen [29].
ultrasonic wave velocities are able to determine weld stress for stainless
steel pipe and aluminium alloy plate near the surface [10]. Leon-Sala- Table 1
manca and Bray studied the effect of stress induced by welding process Tension Testing Specimens Dimensions [29].
on the hot-rolled and cold-rolled plates by using LCR wave [11].
Part A B W C T R
Schneider analyzed residual stress by non-destructive method using
ultrasonic techniques [12,13]. Santos and Bray have presented the Small specimens dimensions (mm) 120 75 20 25 12 25
workable techniques to evaluate residual stress in railroad wheels by Large specimens dimensions (mm) 160 75 20 25 12 25
using LCR wave [14]. Bray constructed a pressure vessel and measured
different amounts of applied stress by LCR wave and mention that more
than specific stress value, there is a linear relation between times of
flight and stress [15]. Belahcene and Lu determined residual stress by
ultrasonic techniques and compared this non-destructive experimental
results with the hole-drilling method which is considered as a semi-
destructive method [16]. Rose presented a vision of the potential of the
ultrasonic wave in the field of inspection [17]. Santos et al. studied the
effect of rolling direction of API 5 L X70 steel pipeline on acoustoelastic
constant [18]. Qozam et al. analyzed the effect of microstructure on
P265 steels welded plates and evaluated the acoustoelastic constant
[19]. Ya et al. found that 6056 aluminum alloy acoustoelastic constant
by measure the non-uniform residual stress in a laser welded specimen
and announced that there was good agreement between ultrasonic
method and moiré interferometry incremental hole-drilling method
[20]. Bray et al. investigated the effects of temperature on the ultra-
sonic method and provided Polyethylene acoustoelastic constant [21]. Fig. 3. Specimens cutted by waterjet process.
Flore et al. worked on the behavior of very high cycle fatigue of plastics
reinforced by continues fiber by ultrasonic testing [22]. Lan et al. found introduce acoustoplastic constant for measuring the real stress in the
out the texture of cubic polycrystals by using ultrasonic wave speed and plastic limit of the specific metal specimen.
demonstrated that how to use the function of single crystal wave ve-
locity to give the function of polycrystal wave velocity and announced
that their theorem is capable of applying for all crystal systems [23]. 2. Theoretical background of LCR
Egerton et al. investigated that attenuation in the signal of ultrasonic
wave velocity in high-density polyethylene sample [24]. De Luca et al. The LCR wave is typically propagated just beneath the surface of the
developed two numerical procedures based on the finite element sample. The principles of creating LCR wave are such that when a
method in order to simulate ultrasonic wave propagation and detect the longitudinal wave reach to interface between two materials with dif-
damage characterization of carbon fiber reinforced polymer under low- ferent acoustic impedance, a part of it is reflected which is known as the
velocity impact [25]. reflection process, and the other part enters to the second material with
The research to date has focused only on the relation between the specific angle, which is known as the refraction process. The first
stresses in the elastic limit. This could be detected in two ways, in- critical angle is where the angle of refraction for the longitudinal wave
cluding measurements of change in ToF or the velocity of ultrasonic is exactly 90 (Fig. 1). It is calculated from Eq. (1) which is come from
waves (in this study ToF has been used). Previous works provide an the Snell's law.
almost complete standard for elastic limit include an acoustoelastic θcr 1 = sin−1 (V1/ V2) = sin−1 (2774/5863) = 28.24 (1)
constant for different materials. The aim of this paper was to evaluate a
relationship between the real stress in plastic limit and change in ToF Where θcr 1is the first critical angle, V1 is longitudinal wave velocity in
by using LCR waves for the first time. This experimental study led to first material (Ultrasonic Fixture) which here is made of Poly methyl

70
M. Mohammadi and J.J. Fesharaki NDT and E International 104 (2019) 69–76

Fig. 4. Uniaxial tensile test result.

Table 2
Chemical constituent elements- quantometer analysis results.
Fe 98.6 Ni 0.0057

C 0.0948 Nb < 0.0020

P 0.0296 Ti < 0.0020
S 0.0193 V < 0.0020
Si 0.160 W < 0.0150
Mn 0.559 Zr 0.0023
Cr 0.078 Pb < 0.0250
Mo 0.0073 Sn 0.0060
Al 0.0345 As 0.0078
Co 0.004 Bi > 0.210
Cu 0.0061 Ca > 0.001

Fig. 6. The penetration depth evaluation.

Fig. 5. The measuring unit.

Table 4
Table 3 Data of penetration depth.
Material property.
Depth of Machining (mm) 0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5
E Yield Point U.T.S K n
Amplitude (%) 51 46 35 21 13 Noise
110 GPa 244 MPa 390 MPa 218 MPa 0.173

Nevertheless, since the distance between the transmitter and receiver

methacrylate (PMMA) and V2 is longitudinal wave velocity in the free
based on the reception of longitudinal waves has been determined,
stress state of specimen.
therefore, on the screen of the UT device, the corresponding signal is
As shown in Fig. 1, a shear wave also is excited in the sample. This is
determined. Given the fact that the experiment is done continuous, with
no concern since firstly it is propagating at θs and as shown θs ≠ θCR1,
increasing distance between two probes, the focus is on the longitudinal
secondly it is travelling at a speed slower than the longitudinal wave
wave signal.
and thirdly it also reflects across the material surfaces [26].
Hughes and Kelly expressed the relation between strain and velocity

71
M. Mohammadi and J.J. Fesharaki
Fig. 7. The acoustoelastic/acoustoplastic constants evaluation.
Fig. 8. Constant ultrasonic fixture and variable ultrasonic fixture with different
initial distance.
Fig. 9. Evaluation of the tΔ in variable fixture.
of the LCR wave for uniaxial stress by the following equation [27]:
2l
2
ρ0 V11 = λ + 2μ ⎡4(2μ + λ ) + 2(μ + 2m) + νμ ⎛1 + ⎞ ⎤ ε
⎢
⎣ ⎝ λ ⎠⎥
⎦ (2)
Where the initial density is ρ0 , the LCR wave velocity is defined V11,
where the first subscript is the direction of wave propagation and ap-
plied stress. Egle and Bray mentioned that sensitivity of this wave to the
stress or strain is maximum among the other sorts of ultrasonic waves
[4]. λ , μ are Lame's constants (second order elastic constants), l and m
72
NDT and E International 104 (2019) 69–76
are Murnaghan's constants (third order elastic constants), the Poisson's
ratio is ν and the strain is ε .
Using these values, acoustoelastic constant for the LCR wave which
obtained from the uniaxial tensile test can be calculated by the fol-
lowing equation:
0
dV11/ V11
=2+
μ + 2m + μ × ν 1 + ( 2l
λ ) =L
11
dε λ + 2μ (3)
Egle and Bray derived the relation between stress in elastic limit and
change in ToF or change in velocity of the LCR wave by the following
equation:
0
E (dV11/ V11) E (dt / t0)
dσ = =−
L11 L11 (4)
The acoustoelastic constant is a dimensionless parameter which
links the stress and change in ToF or change in wave velocity. The ToF
curves are increases because of tensile stress and decreases in com-
pressive stress field.
The relation between stress in plastic limit and change in ToF of the
LCR wave can be calculated by the following proposed equation with
the aim of Ludwik's equation in plasticity theory [28]:
K (dt / t0)n
dσ =
φ11 (5)
In the proposed equation, φ11 define as an acoustoplastic constant
and by having K and n (strength index and strain hardening exponent
respectively) from the material property and measuring ToF, real stress
(real stress ≠ residual stress) in plastic limit can be calculated.
3. Experimental procedures
3.1. Specimen description
For this study, nine pieces with 12 mm thickness were prepared
using the waterjet procedure according to the instructions given in
ASTM E8/E8M standard (Fig. 2), with the dimensions mentioned in
Table .1. The waterjet procedure was one of the cutting methods that
could be used to prevent the generation of new thermal stress during
the cutting process Fig. 3.
3.2. Material property
It should be considered that the acoustoelastic and acoustoplastic
constants obtained were unique to each material, it was necessary to
determine the chemical constituent elements. In order to check the
chemical composition of the specimens through an analysis of the
spectrum emitted from the material excited with a spark, quantometer
analysis testing was complete, as it shown in Fig. 4. This test gives the
results about the presence of about 20 chemical elements, with the
specifications mentioned in Table .2 and Table 3.
3.3. Measurement system
The measurement system includes a portable ultrasonic testing de-
vice and two different types of measuring unit.
The portable ultrasonic testing device (Starmans DIO-1000), com-
bines the powerful advantages of digital design with the detailed dy-
namic echo information to bring back the “analog look and perfor-
mance”, the ultrasonic testing device used a sampling rate of 200 MHz.
The clock of the device works with 0.005 μs resolution which lets ac-
curate ToF measurement.
The measuring unit, shown in Fig. 5, includes two normal probes,
two springs and ultrasonic fixture that is made of a sheet of Perspex
material or poly (methyl methacrylate) known as PMMA which was cut
to create the ultrasonic fixture. A two-probe configuration with nominal
M. Mohammadi and J.J. Fesharaki
Fig. 10. Evaluation of the acoustoelastic constant by fixed distance fixture (constant fixture).
Fig. 11. Evaluation of the Acoustoelastic Constant by Variable Fixture (0 mm initial distance).
probe membrane size 10 mm and the same nominal frequency as-
sembled on the ultrasonic fixture while one of them is as a transmitter
and the other one is as a receiver. In order to keep the thickness of
couplant film between probe and ultrasonic fixture which effect on ToF,
the spring was employed. The spring provides the stable pressure on the
probes to eliminate the error of couplant's thickness changing and the
bar clamp provides the stable pressure on the ultrasonic fixture to keep
the couplant's thickness between wedge and the tensile specimen
(shown in Figs. 7 and 8).
The stress within a specimen is measured by two different types of
ultrasonic fixtures, a constant ultrasonic fixture (fixed distance) and
variable ultrasonic fixture (free distance).
3.4. Depth of penetration
By using the LCR technique to the limited wall thickness specimen,
the LCR wave's depth of penetration is working as a function of fre-
quency. Since there isn't any definite relation between penetration
depth of LCR and frequency, that should be detected experimentally. In
so doing eight grooves with different depth (0.5, 1, 1.5, 2, 2.5, 3, 3.5
73
NDT and E International 104 (2019) 69–76
and 4 mm) have been created by milling tool in a plate (with the same
thickness and material of the specimen), to produce an obstacle and
prevent reaching the LCR wave by the 2 MHz receiver transducer
(shown in Fig. 6). For each groove depth the amplitude of the LCR wave
is measured (Table 4). Where the wave's amplitude becomes to the
noise, the groove depth represents the depth of penetration of the LCR
wave for 2 MHz frequency.
3.5. Acoustoelastic and acoustoplastic constant evaluation
To achieve stress values in elastic limit according to Eq. (4), and the
values of stress in plastic limit according to Eq. (5), the t0 value directly
measured from the free stress specimen and the acoustoelastic/acous-
toplastic constants are measured experimentally using uniaxial tensile
test machine and an ultrasonic device. To this end, the stress value of
specimen which shown in Fig. 3 is increased step by step using the
uniaxial tensile test machine while the ultrasonic device measured ToF
by ultrasonic unite which was assembled on the specimen Fig. 7.
Finally, to calculate the acoustoelastic/acoustoplastic constants, all
the above-mentioned steps were repeated about three times for
M. Mohammadi and J.J. Fesharaki NDT and E International 104 (2019) 69–76

Fig. 12. Evaluation of the Acoustoplastic Constant by Variable Fixture (0 mm initial distance).

Fig. 13. Evaluation of the Acoustoelastic Constant by Variable Fixture (30 mm initial distance).

Table 5 4. Results and discussion

Effect of initial distance on acoustoelastic and acoustoplastic constants.
Initial Distance Acoustoelastic Constants L11 Acoustoplastic Constants φ11
The ToF of LCR wave is affected by the stress. It means that the
ultrasonic method is able to measure the stresses in both elastic and
0 mm 2.2521 0.2333 plastic limits. Since the maximum displacement is in the plastic limit,
30 mm 1.679 0.2292 the investigated by constant ultrasonic fixture cannot be inspected.
50 mm 1.369 0.2231
Therefore, a variable ultrasonic fixture is employed to measure the
acoustoplastic constant for the first time. The constant ultrasonic fix-
ture, which is validated by other researchers, is just employed to verify
different initial distances (0 mm, 30 mm and 50 mm) in both elastic and
the elastic result that comes from the variable ultrasonic fixture. For
plastic limit (Fig. 8).
this purpose, the ToF is measure two times for each point and the
In all of the previous study, at first the specimen entered the plastic
average data is calculated to achieve the acoustoelastic constant. The
limit and then unloaded, therefore the presence residual stress
results of the ultrasonic test are shown in Figs. 10 and 11 corresponding
Influenced by entering the plastic limit, but the amount of that residual
to the fixed distance fixture and variable fixture respectively, where the
stress falls under the plastic zone. In this study effort to evaluate the
slopes of ‘Linear AVG’ lines represent L11 or acoustoelastic constants for
amounts of real stresses in the plastic limit by measuring ToF using
each fixture.
variable fixture as shown in Fig. 8. In first part of Fig. 9 L and t0 are
To compare the results of constant ultrasonic fixture and variable
initial distance between variable fixtures and ToF of free stress state
fixture (0 mm initial distance in Fig. 11), the average of the slope is
respectively and in second part of Fig. 9 tσ is the time which caused by
calculated in each figure. The acoustoelastic constant which calculates
the presence of stress, tΔ is the time which caused by the change of
by the constant ultrasonic fixture is then compared with that obtained
initial distance and V0 is the velocity of free stress state.

74
M. Mohammadi and J.J. Fesharaki
Fig. 14. Evaluation of the Acoustoplastic Constant by Variable Fixture (30 mm initial distance).
Fig. 15. Evaluation of the Acoustoelastic Constant by Variable Fixture (50 mm initial distance).
from the variable ultrasonic fixture while a decent agreement is de-
tected. The difference between constant ultrasonic fixture results slope
2.3335, and variable fixture results slope (0 mm initial distance) 2.2521
is only 0.08 and this small deviation is negligible. Therefore, the results
obtained from variable fixture are reliable and this type of fixture is
able to use for the plastic limit.
To assess the effect of initial distance between transmitter and re-
ceiver in the variable fixture, three initial distances 0, 30 and 50 will
compare to each other. Finally, the result of the most accurate one
compared to the results of the constant ultrasonic fixture will introduce.
The slope of ‘Linear AVG’ line in Fig. 12 provides the acoustoplastic
constant (0.2333) when the variable ultrasonic fixture is employed and
two parts of the fixture are 0 mm apart.
The relation between stress in plastic limit and change in ToF of the
LCR wave can be calculated by proposed equation in last section (Eq.
(5)). Where K and n come from material property and just by measuring
ToF, the stress in plastic limit is measurable by using LCR wave for the
first time. According to Fig. 12 and Eq. (5) the acoustoplastic constant is
a dimensionless parameter which links the stress in plastic limit and
change in ToF.
75
NDT and E International 104 (2019) 69–76
The slope of ‘Linear AVG’ lines in Figs. 13–16 provides the acous-
toelastic constants and acoustoplastic constants when the variable ul-
trasonic fixture is utilized and there are 30 mm and 50 mm initial dis-
tance between two parts of the variable fixture.
The results obtained from the ultrasonic tests presented in Table .5,
indicate that the maximum of slope calculated by 0 mm distance,
30 mm, and 50 mm respectively.
The relative change as function of stress changes more significant
and as higher the stress the change tends to become more nonlinear.
This behavior is very much material dependent. According to this fact,
the graphs shown in Figs. 12, 14 and 16 are naturally nonlinear because
of the power term (n≠1) in the vertical axis of Figs. 12, 14 and 16.
5. Conclusion
The aims of this experimental study were to evaluate real stress in
both elastic and plastic limits. The results of this study indicated that
the ultrasonic test by using critically refracted longitudinal wave is able
to measure the stress in both elastic and plastic limit. The constant
ultrasonic fixture and variable fixture (without initial distance) which
M. Mohammadi and J.J. Fesharaki
Fig. 16. Evaluation of the Acoustoplastic Constant by Variable Fixture (50 mm initial distance).
employed for the first time in this study present about the same
acoustoelastic constant and a decent agreement is observed. To com-
pare the acoustoelastic constant (2.3335) which is obtained from the
constant fixture, with acoustoelastic constants (2.2521, 1.679 and
1.369) which are obtained from the variable fixture with 0, 30 and
50 mm initial distance respectively, it is found that the acoustoelastic
2.2521 which is obtained from the variable fixture with 0 mm initial
distance is the closest result to 2.3335 which is obtained from the
constant fixture. The variable fixture showed that has the ability to
measure the ToF in the ultrasonic method. The slope of the graph of
stress and K ((t-t0)/t0)n is represented the acoustoplastic constant. The
variable fixture is employed to evaluate the effect of different initial
distance on acoustoelastic and acoustoplastic constants. Comparison
between different initial distance test shows that less initial distance
works more accurately when zero distance fixture is employed. It shows
the error of variable fixture results by 50 mm is higher than the error by
30 mm and the minimum occurs at 0 mm. Lower deviation for lower
initial distance can be justified by the fact that the less distance between
transducers produces more powerful and sharp echo in the receiver
probe and it is because by increasing the initial distance, various factors
such as the stress field, texture and grain size are affected on mea-
surement. According to the fact that the ultrasonic method is one of the
non-destructive methods using variable fixture to evaluate the stress in
plastic limit is the most cost-effective method and indeed a wise choice.
Appendix A. Supplementary data
Supplementary data to this article can be found online at https://
doi.org/10.1016/j.ndteint.2019.04.003.
References
[1] Noronha P, Chapman J, Wert J. Residual stress measurement and analysis using
ultrasonic techniques. 1973.
[2] Clotfelter W, Risch E. Ultrasonic measurement of stress in railroad wheels and in
long lengths of welded rail. 1974.
[3] Schramm RE, Clark AV, Mitrakovic DV, Schaps SR. Ultrasonic measurements of
residual stress in railroad wheels. NDT E Int 1995;28:114–5.
[4] Egle DM, Bray DE. Measurement of acoustoelastic and third‐order elastic constants
for rail steel. J Acoust Soc Am 1976;60:741–4.
[5] Egle D, Bray D. Ultrasonic measurement of longitudinal rail stresses. Mater Eval
1979;378:41–6.
[6] Srinivasan M, Chundu S, Bray D, Alagarsamy A. Ultrasonic technique for residual
stress measurement in ductile iron continuous cast round bars. 1992.
76
NDT and E International 104 (2019) 69–76
[7] Fukuoka H. Development of acoustoelasticity in Japan. Nondestr Test Eval
1992;7:181–92.
[8] Pao YH. Acoustoelasticity and ultrasonic measurement of residual stress. Phys
Acoust 1984:61–143.
[9] Bray DE, Junghans P. Application of the LCR ultrasonic technique for evaluation of
post-weld heat treatment in steel plates. NDT E Int 1995;28:235–42.
[10] Tanala E, Bourse G, Fremiot M, De Belleval JF. Determination of near surface re-
sidual stresses on welded joints using ultrasonic methods. NDT E Int 1995;28:83–8.
[11] Leon-Salamanca T, Bray DF. Residual stress measurement in steel plates and welds
using critically refracted longitudinal (LCR) waves. Res Nondestr Eval
1996;7:169–84.
[12] Schneider E. Untersuchung der materialspezifischen Einflüsse und verfahren-
stechnische Entwicklungen der Ultraschallverfahren zur Spannungsanalyse an
Bauteilen. Fraunhofer-IRB-Verlag; 1999.
[13] Hauk V. Structural and residual stress analysis by nondestructive methods: eva-
luation-Application-Assessment. Elsevier; 1997.
[14] Santos A, Bray DE. Application of longitudinal critically refracted waves to evaluate
stresses in railroad wheels. Topics on Nondestructive Testing 2000;5.
[15] Bray DE. Ultrasonic stress measurement and material characterization in pressure
vessels, piping, and welds. J Press Vessel Technol 2002;124:326–35.
[16] Belahcene F, Lu J. Determination of residual stress using critically refracted long-
itudinal waves and immersion mode. J Strain Anal Eng Des 2002;37:13–20.
[17] Rose JL. A baseline and vision of ultrasonic guided wave inspection potential. J
Press Vessel Technol 2002;124:273–82.
[18] Santos AA, Bray DE, Caetano SF, Andrino MH, Trevisan RE. Evaluation of the
rolling direction effect in the acoustoelastic properties for API 5L X70 steel used in
pipelines. 2004. p. 85–90.
[19] Qozam H, Hoblos J, Bourse G, Robin C, Walaszek H, Bouteille P, et al. Ultrasonic
stress measurement in welded component by using Lcr waves: analysis of the mi-
crostructure effect. Materials science forum: Trans Tech Publ; 2006. p. 453–8.
[20] Ya M, Marquette P, Belahcene F, Lu J. Residual stresses in laser welded aluminium
plate by use of ultrasonic and optical methods. Mater Sci Eng, A 2004;382:257–64.
[21] Bray DE, Vela J, Al-Zubi RS. Stress and temperature effects on ultrasonic properties
in cross-linked and high density polyethylene. J Press Vessel Technol
2005;127:220–5.
[22] Flore D, Wegener K, Mayer H, Karr U, Oetting CC. Investigation of the high and very
high cycle fatigue behaviour of continuous fibre reinforced plastics by conventional
and ultrasonic fatigue testing. Compos Sci Technol 2017;141:130–6.
[23] Lan B, Lowe MJ, Dunne FP. A generalized spherical harmonic deconvolution to
obtain texture of cubic materials from ultrasonic wave speed. J Mech Phys Solids
2015;83:221–42.
[24] Egerton J, Lowe M, Huthwaite P, Halai H. Ultrasonic attenuation and phase velocity
of high-density polyethylene pipe material. J Acoust Soc Am 2017;141:1535–45.
[25] De Luca A, Caputo F, Khodaei ZS, Aliabadi M. Damage characterization of com-
posite plates under low velocity impact using ultrasonic guided waves. Compos B
Eng 2018;138:168–80.
[26] Schajer GS. Practical residual stress measurement methods. John Wiley & Sons;
2013.
[27] Hughes DS, Kelly JL. Second-order elastic deformation of solids. Phys Rev
1953;92:1145–9.
[28] Johnson W, Mellor PB. Engineering plasticity. John Wiley & Sons; 1983.
[29] Standard A, E8/E8M. Standard test methods for tension testing of metallic mate-
rials. West Conshohocken PA: ASTM international; 2009. 2009.