1 / 53

Air Coupled Ultrasonic Imaging For Non-Destructive Inspection

GTL Ultrasonics David Lavery Mario Malav é Andrew Ray Final Design Report April 23, 2009. Air Coupled Ultrasonic Imaging For Non-Destructive Inspection. Problem Overview Design Alternatives Chosen Design Detail Market Analysis Transducer Performance Circuitry Performance

taber
Télécharger la présentation

Air Coupled Ultrasonic Imaging For Non-Destructive Inspection

An Image/Link below is provided (as is) to download presentation Download Policy: Content on the Website is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use and may not be sold / licensed / shared on other websites without getting consent from its author. Content is provided to you AS IS for your information and personal use only. Download presentation by click this link. While downloading, if for some reason you are not able to download a presentation, the publisher may have deleted the file from their server. During download, if you can't get a presentation, the file might be deleted by the publisher.

E N D

Presentation Transcript

  1. GTL Ultrasonics David Lavery Mario Malavé Andrew Ray Final Design Report April 23, 2009 Air Coupled Ultrasonic ImagingFor Non-Destructive Inspection

  2. Problem Overview • Design Alternatives • Chosen Design Detail • Market Analysis • Transducer Performance • Circuitry Performance • Software Performance • Final Design Specifications • Unresolved Problems • Probable Solutions • Team Performance Review

  3. Air-Coupled Ultrasonics • Device for non-destructive inspection of materials • Using novel polymer foam transducer • Incorporate new transducer material into device to improve performance

  4. Objectives • Develop a working ACU-NDI system using a novel transducer material • Complete • Reduce Cost • Complete • Increase Efficiency • Partially Complete • Mobile System • Incomplete

  5. Unforeseen Obstacles • Electromagnetic Interference • Overcome using circuit timing • Poorly Conductive Transducer Surface • Overcome using compression contacts • Highly Directional Signal • Overcome at cost of mobility • High Impedance Between Air and Imaged Objects • Through Transmission Abandoned • Pulse-Echo Setup Used

  6. Design AlternativesCylindrical Housing • Portability • Limited Circuitry Space • Poor Electrical Connections

  7. Design AlternativesPlate Mounted • Portability • Electrical Connection Issue Resolved • Poor Stability • Highly Variable Performance

  8. Chosen Design • Best Performance • Marginal Portability • Expandable Circuitry

  9. Design Tradeoffs • Excess Wire Length versus Expandability • Potential for unwanted interference • Ease of circuitry redesign/expansion • Portability versus Stability • Highly directional signal • Difficult to obtain useful data in handheld operation

  10. 7.5mm Plexiglas CopperTape BNC Fitting Transducer Foam

  11. Parts List

  12. Transducer Performance • High Quasi-Static Piezoactive coefficient • 25-700pC/N • Low Acoustic Impedance • 0.028MRayl

  13. Transducer Performance • 200V 300kHz 100pulse/sec • Maximum Unimpeded Transmission Distance 356.3mm • Peak-Peak Voltage Received 20mV • Minimal Signal Distortion

  14. Silver Surface Etching • Photolithography Produces Exact Shapes • Proof of Concept • Not Used for Transducers

  15. Circuitry Alternatives • Amplifier and Band Pass Filter • Eliminates Background Noise • High Gain • More Complex Circuitry

  16. Circuitry Alternatives • Amplifier(s) Without Filters • High Gain • Less Complex Circuitry • Noise Amplified With Signal

  17. Performance Comparison Amplifier Filter - Amplifier

  18. Chosen Circuitry • Single Amplifier • 35dB Gain • Less Complex - Fewer Failures • Fewer Points to Introduce Interference

  19. Amplifier Parts List

  20. Connection Alternatives • Single Adhesive Tape Contact • Simple to Construct • Prone to Poor Connection • Impossible to Verify Contact

  21. Connection Alternatives • Double Adhesive Tape Contacts • Simple to Construct • Prone to Poor Connection • Possible to Verify Connection

  22. Connection Alternatives • Double Mechanical Contact • Complex to Construct • Unlikely to Lose Connection • Possible to Verify Contact

  23. Connection Alternatives • Single Mechanical Contact • Less Complex to Construct • Unlikely to Lose Connection • Impossible to Verify Contact

  24. Mechanical Connection

  25. Mechanical Connection

  26. Connection Resistance • Mechanical Connections • 6.3 Ω, 5.8 Ω, 4.5 Ω, 4.9 Ω • Adhesive Connections • 368K Ω, 630 Ω, ∞ Ω, ∞ Ω

  27. Chosen Connection Design • Double Mechanical Contact • Ability to Check Connection • Low Connection Resistance • Higher Performance • Greater Reliability

  28. Wavelet Transform vs. Fourier Transform Advantages of the Wavelet Transform Ultrasonic Applications Analyzing Received Signal Software Performance

  29. Wavelet Transform vs. Fourier Transform • Fourier Transform • Cross products of changing complex exponentials (varying sinusoids) Continuous Wavelet Transform Cross products of a scaled and shifted wavelet

  30. Predefined Wavelets

  31. Scaled Wavelet

  32. Generated Output • Fourier Transform (Spectrum) Wavelet Transform (Scalogram)

  33. Advantages of the Wavelet Transform • Detect transients in a signal • Analyze non-stationary signals • All order statistics of the signal are changing with time • Detect changing statistics even in the presents of noise • If the noise remains constant throughout the process (stationary noise) • Scalogram not depended on a windowing • Short-Time Fourier Transform (STFT) uses window to generate a spectrogram

  34. STFT Example (T=25ms)

  35. STFT Example (T=1000ms)

  36. Wavelet Transform Example 1

  37. Wavelet Transform Example 2

  38. Ultrasonic Applications • Pass through transducers • Received signal will contain frequency components that change with time • Transient region detection • This can be used to characterize different materials • Due to different impedances of the materials

  39. Analyzing Received Signal • LabVIEW Analysis of reflected data • Data extracted from the oscilloscope via Ethernet port • Analyzed with the “Mexican Hat” wavelet (reflection configuration)

  40. Analyzing Received Signal 1

  41. Analyzing Received Signal 2

  42. Results • Emitting on different surfaces using reflection • Wavelet Analysis showed slight statistical changes • Amplitude changes are present in the ultrasonic signal • Wavelet transform results can be improved if a pass through transducer is used

  43. Damping Detection • LabVIEW Analysis of reflected data • Detect amplitude changes with configurable thresholds

  44. Analyzing Received Signal

  45. Final Specifications • Refer to Specs Handout • Key Specifications • 356.3mm transmissible distance • 7mm flaw detected 10 out of 10 times • 2mm flaw detected 2 out of 10 times

  46. Unresolved Issues • Pass-through capability • Leads to software issues • Compact mobile system • As a result of meeting other performance specifications

  47. Probable Solutions • Pass-through • Increase power to transducer • Identify better material • Circuitry design • Mobile System • Add internal storage capacity • Create pass-through capability

  48. Market Analysis • Frequently used couplants used for transmission • Oil, glycerin, and water • Success with air can open a new market of devices • Possible Device Users • Aviation/Aerospace companies; Boeing, Lockheed Martin, NASA • NASA Space Shuttle • Currently uses Laser Dynamic Range Imager (LDRI) • Only provides superficial data • Air Coupled Ultrasonics (ACU) provides information deeper than the surface

  49. Updated Parts Cost Table

  50. Cost Analysis • 60 Engineering hour for each group member • $50/hr give a cost of $9000 in labor • 21.7% profit at a sales price of 2,500 ($541 per unit sold)

More Related