PART-1

Ultrasonic examination uses the same principles as the sonar used for the detection of submarines a
sound wave is emitted from a transmitter, bounces off any objects in its path and is reflected back to a
receiver, somewhat similar to shining the beam of a torch at a mirror. Knowing the speed of sound in the
material enables the distance of an object to be determined by measuring the time that elapses between the
transmission of the sound pulse and detection of the echo. In welded components the examination is
generally performed by moving a small probe containing both a transmitter and receiver over the item and
displaying the echo on an oscilloscope screen. This is shown in Fig. 1 which illustrates a simple pulse-echo
angle probe examination.

The oscillator sends pulses of electricity to a piezo-electric crystal, the pulse generator, embedded in the
ultrasonic probe which causes it to vibrate at a very high (ultrasonic) frequency, well above any audible
frequency and typically between 1Mega Hertz(MHz) and 15MHz. Ultrasonic probes used for weld
examination have frequencies generally between 2MHz and 5Mhz, the lower frequency probes being used
for the examination of coarse grained material or on rough surfaces, the higher frequency probes for the
detection of fine defects such as cracks or lack of fusion. The ultrasonic vibrations are transmitted into the
material to be tested using a couplant such as grease, paste or water which helps transmission of the
vibrations. The better the surface finish then the better is the coupling and the more searching the
examination hence there is sometimes a requirement to grind smooth the weld cap and remove the root
penetration bead on welded joints.

Once in the material the vibrations travel in a predictable path as a beam of sound pulses until they
encounter an obstruction or interface such as a line of slag, porosity or a crack when most of the sound will
be reflected - remember the analogy of the torch and mirror. Depending on the angle at which the beam
strikes the obstruction some or all of the sound beam will be reflected back to the receiver in the probe. Here
it vibrates a piezo-electric crystal; the electric signal that is generated is amplified, rectified and displayed on
an oscilloscope screen.

The sound beam when it enters the object being scanned has a cross section approximately that of the
transmitter but, like the beam of a torch, will diverge as shown in Fig. 1. As the beam travels through the
material it also loses energy it becomes attenuated. These effects need to be taken into account when the
position and size of a defect is to be accurately determined.

Fig 1. Schematic of Angle Probe Ultrasonic examination.

The oscilloscope screen in Fig. 1 shows on the vertical axis the signal height or amplitude and on the
horizontal axis the time taken for the signal to return to the receiver and therefore distance from the
transmitter. This method of examination is known as an A scan and is the most common method in use in
industry for the examination of welded joints. In Fig 1 three signal peaks can be seen on the oscilloscope
screen one where the signal enters the sample, one reflected from the back face of the sample - the back
wall echo - and, between the two, a reflection from some feature a reflector such as a welding defect.
The distance of this signal on the screen from the transmission pulse will give the distance of the reflector
from the probe so a little simple geometry can be used to calculate the position and depth of the reflector
within the block of material. Comparing the height of the signal with the signal from a known size of
reflector enables the size of the feature to be determined.

There are two main types or modes of sound waves longitudinal or compression waves which alternately
compress and decompress the material in the direction of propagation and shear waves which vibrate the
material at right angles to the direction of propagation. Which mode is produced depends upon the angle at
which the sound beam enters the material. Probes that project the beam into the test piece at an angle normal
(90degs) to the plate surface are known as compression probes and are ideally suited to the detection of
defects such as plate laminations or for the measurement of plate/pipe thickness as shown in Fig 2.

Fig. 2. Compression Wave Probe

To obtain the strongest reflected signal the beam should ideally strike the feature at 90O flaws that lie
parallel to the beam may be missed. This means that to examine a weld that may contain flaws laying in any
number of orientations within the weld a range of different angle probes and scanning patterns must be used.
To do this both compression and shear wave probes may be used, shear wave probes projecting the beam
into the test piece at an angle, as shown in Fig. 1. Probes with angles of 30 o, 45o, 60o and 70o are
commercially available. Examples of standard probes are illustrated in Fig. 3.The angle of the probe is often
selected to give the strongest signal from the defect of interest and for very high integrity welds all five
probe angles may be used.

Fig 3. A 2.5MHz 70 degrees shear wave probe and a compression wave probe.
As shown in Fig. 4 the sound beam can be made to scan the full depth of a weld by moving the probe back
and forth. At the half skip distance the beam would readily detect lack of side wall fusion along the left hand
fusion line but may miss lack of side wall on the right hand fusion line. Moving the probe to the full skip
distance so that the beam reflects off the back face enables the right hand fusion line to be scanned with the
beam at the optimum angle to detect lack of side wall fusion.

Fig 4. Schematic of skip distances

To examine completely the weld there needs to be a number of such scanning patterns longitudinal and
transverse to the weld, from both sides of the weld, from both plate surfaces and from half to full skip
distance. If all of these scans are carried out using all five probe types and two frequencies then it becomes
a very lengthy and costly exercise! Such detailed examinations tend to be confined to items such as primary
circuit nuclear components and highly critical offshore applications.
Whilst many ultrasonic examinations are carried out with a manual operative moving the probe, viewing the
results on the oscilloscope screen and manually recording the results the process can be mechanized with the
probes mounted on a carriage and the results recorded electronically. This has become more prevalent as
computing power has increased since the carriage may carry several probes and provides information on the
carriage position and orientation. This data is then analyzed and compared with an acceptance standard,
enabling a weld to be sentenced automatically .

There are a number of advantages to ultrasonic testing:-

1. It is very good and better than radiography - for the detection of planar defects such a lack of
fusion and cracks

2. It can determine both the depth and position of defects.

3. It is readily portable and easy to use on site and in areas of restricted access.

4. Access is required to one side only.

5. There are none of the health and safety problems associated with radiography.

6. The result is immediately available.

But, as with any industrial process there are some disadvantages:-

1. Very skilled and conscientious operatives are required.

2. The manual examination process is slow, laborious and tiring for the operative.

3. Surface breaking defects are difficult to detect.

4. Accurate sizing of small (<3mm) defects is difficult if not impossible.

5. The root region in a single sided full penetration weld is difficult to interpret.

6. The geometry of the joint can restrict the scanning pattern and impede accurate interpretation.

7. Interpretation is subjective and depends upon the operatives skill and experience.

8. With manual scanning no permanent and objective record is produced.

The A-scan mentioned above is one method for reporting the results of the scan there are in fact four
methods identified as A-, B-, C- and D-scan. The A-scan method is the conventional way of presenting the
results signal amplitude vs distance; B-scan is a view looking along the length of the weld; C-scan is a
plan view and D-scan a view from the side of the weld. These are illustrated in Fig.5

Fig 5 Schematic of A-, B-, C- and D- scan results

PART-2

The previous article (127) explained the basic principles of ultrasonic examination. As to determine
accurately the size and position of a feature it is necessary, with any measuring equipment, to calibrate the
ultrasonic examination system.

The type of calibration blocks (there are varying shapes and sizes to be used), depend on the application and
the form and shape of the subject being tested. The calibration block should be made the same as the
material being inspected and the artificially-induced flaw should closely resemble the actual flaw of
concern. The best calibration block for calibrating ultrasonic testing equipment is one in the same grade of
material and heat treatment condition as the production items and with a weld containing genuine flaws such
as slag entrapment, porosity, lack of fusion, cracks etc. Techniques developed enable flaws of known sizes to
be introduced into a welded joint. Such calibration blocks can be produced to validate the ultrasonic test
method but are expensive and tend to be used only in applications such as nuclear vessel manufacture and
critical offshore/process plant fabrication.

A number of standard calibration blocks are available with the shape and dimensions being specified in
international standards such as ISO 2400, ISO 7963, ASME V and ASTM E164. Calibration of a
compression wave probe used to measure thickness is simple and carried out using a stepped wedge
calibration block. These calibration blocks have smooth, machined features and are not therefore truly
representative of flaws in a welded component.

For calibrating equipment to be used to interrogate welded joints the calibration block needs to be more
complex than a simple step wedge, with probably the two most common types illustrated in Fig. 1, the ISO
2400 Number 1 block and the ISO 7963 Number 2 block. These are machined from steel to very closely
controlled tolerances and contain a number of features that can be used to calibrate the ultrasonic equipment.
The standard Number 1 block is 300mm long and 25 or 50mm thickness with a 100mm radius machined on
one end. The test block also contains two drilled holes, 50 and 1.5mm in diameter and a flat bottomed
machined notch.

Fig 1: Number 1 and Number 2 calibration blocks

Smaller lighter blocks are useful for site use, and may be used to calibrate both compression and shear-wave
probes for beam angle, time base, resolution and sensitivity. Sensitivity and resolution are terms frequently
used sensitivity is the ability to detect small flaws within the weld, resolution the ability to locate and
separate individual flaws.

Weld discontinuity acceptance criteria are initially based on the height of the signal displayed on the
oscilloscope screen. This is not as simple as it may appear since the ultrasonic beam is influenced by the
microstructure of the metal through which it is propagating, becoming scattered and diffused - similar to car
headlights in fog! As a general rule the larger the grain size the greater the scattering effect, the reflected
beam becomes attenuated or decreased in strength the further away the reflector is from the ultrasonic probe.
This must be taken into account when accepting or rejecting flaws within the weld a 4MHz signal would
lose some 0.020.03db per mm in steel. Fig 2 illustrates this decrease in amplitude or signal height with
distance.

Before calibrating the operator must select the frequency of the transducer as this determines the wavelength
of the sound. The frequency has a significant effect on the ability to detect a flaw a rule of thumb is that a
flaw must be larger than one half the wavelength to be readily detectable.

The ultrasonic operator will select a calibration block with some feature of known dimensions, often a 3mm
diameter flat bottomed hole and the appropriate ultrasonic probe, these generally being specified in the
relevant application code or standard. The height of the reflection at known distances from the probe would
be determined and from this data would be drawn a distance amplitude correction (DAC) curve by joining
the tips of the signals that can be seen in Fig 2. This provides a means of establishing a reference level
sensitivity as a function of distance from the ultrasonic probe and allows the signals from similar reflectors
to be evaluated.

The characteristics of an ultrasonic probe vary according to the size of the piezo-electric transducer and its
frequency. It is therefore essential that each probe to be used to examine a welded component is individually
calibrated and a DAC curve established for each different situation.

The contract specification, application code or acceptance standard specifies the relevant ultrasonic
acceptance standard of height, length, position etc of the reflector. It is unwise to refer to a visual or
radiographic acceptance standard in the absence of a relevant ultrasonic acceptance standard. An ultrasonic
acceptance standard will state which reflectors are acceptable or unacceptable based on the amplitude of the
signal compared with a DAC curve or other ultrasonic specific acceptance criteria. One such specification
that refers to the DAC curve is ISO 11666 NDT of welds Ultrasonic testing Acceptance levels which
defines four levels:

the reference level ie the amplitude of the DAC curve at the relevant distance
the evaluation level ie the amplitude at which the reflector must be examined more closely to
determine through thickness height and length of the discontinuity
the recording level ie amplitude at which the size and position of the discontinuity must be recorded
the acceptance level above which the discontinuity must be rejected this may be above or below
the DAC curve. Any reflector with a signal below the evaluation level would be ignored
Fig. 2 The reduction in amplitude with distance
If, as the ultrasonic testing (U/T) probe is scanned across the surface of the component, and the amplitude of
the signal exceeds the specified evaluation level, the U/T operator would need to investigate the reflector in
detail to determine its size, orientation and position within the component. If the probe is moved transverse
and parallel to the weld and rotated slightly, a skilled and experienced operator can often identify the flaw
type crack, lack of fusion, etc by observing the changes in the shape of the pulse-echo on the
oscilloscope screen.

To enable the operator to identify the position of a flaw it must be possible for the path and width of the
beam to be visualised. Accurately dimensioned diagrams of the weld-cross section superimposed on what
would be the beam path are required. This may be unnecessary in many situations but provides additional
confidence in critical applications and may be a mandatory part of a written U/T procedure.

The size of a reflector is generally determined by the 6db drop method, as illustrated in Fig. 3.
The operator moves the probe backwards and forwards at right angles to the axis of the reflector until the
maximum amplitude response is found. This point is noted and the scanning continued until the amplitude of
the signal has dropped by 6dB, this point also being recorded. From this the length or height of the reflector
can be determined (Fig 3). If above the recording level this would be recorded on the U/T report before
being compared with the acceptance standard for either acceptance or rejection.

It is impossible to measure accurately the size of a reflector using a manual scanning technique for a number
of reasons. The speed of the sound within the component may vary due to changes in the microstructure and
the cleanliness of the parent metal; the probe will be made to within dimensional tolerances, as will the
calibration block and these will affect the accuracy of calibration; the beam width may vary; the couplant
and surface condition of the component will affect the coupling and hence sound transmission; the surface of
flaws within the weld are generally not flat, smooth reflective surfaces oriented at 90 degrees to the beam;
the probe movement is measured manually with a rule or tape measure. The most important factors in
achieving accurate, consistent and reproducible results are the skill, competence and integrity of the
operator.

The accuracy of conventional manually-scanned pulse-echo ultrasonic examination carefully performed by a

competent operator is around 2mm. Such inaccuracy can be important when carrying out a fitness for
service analysis, where the through thickness of a flaw is of critical importance. Some methods of achieving
greater accuracy will be dealt with in the next article.

PART-3
The previous article dealt with the manual scanning method of ultrasonic examination stating that accurate
determination of weld flaw size and position - to within 2mm - was difficult, if not impossible, in most
circumstances. Methods developed now enable flaw sizes to be determined with accuracy better than 1mm. This
article will look at two of these techniques; time of flight diffraction (TOFD) and phased array ultrasonic testing
(PAUT).

Conventional manually scanned ultrasonic testing normally uses a single fixed angle and frequency probe; the
position and size of a flaw being determined by the amplitude of the signal reflected from the flaw and presented
on an oscilloscope screen (Fig 3 in Job Knowledge 128). This is a somewhat unreliable method as the amplitude of
the signal and therefore an estimate of its size depends on the orientation of the flaw. TOFD uses two angled
compression wave probes mounted on a frame so that they are a fixed distance apart; one a transmitter, the
other a receiver. The probes are positioned either side of a weld as shown in Fig 1. In a flaw-free weld two sound
waves will be detected by the receiver one that travels along the surface of the weld, the lateral wave, and one
reflected from the back wall. When a flaw is present (for example a crack as shown in Fig 1) the pulse emitted by
the transmitter is diffracted or scattered from the tip of a flaw and this diffracted signal is picked up by the
receiver. The time of flight of the signal is measured and compared with that of the lateral wave, a simple
calculation enables the position of the tip of the flaw to be determined. Moving the probes in a predetermined
scanning pattern enables the other end of the flaw to be detected so the flaw size can be established in both the
trough thickness and longitudinal directions. The calculations are performed automatically by the software
program within the equipment and the flaws displayed as a black and white A scan image.

Figure 1: TOFD

Various scanning patterns may be used so that the results can be presented as A-scan, B-scan, looking along the
weld length or D-scan, a side view. (For a description of A, B, C and D scans see Job Knowledge No. 127).

TOFD is regarded as the best method for the detection and sizing of planar, through-thickness flaws. One
limitation is the detection of small surface breaking flaws on the scanning surface as these tend to be lost in the
lateral wave response, although this may be not too significant as most surface breaking defects can be readily
detected using MPI or liquid penetrant methods.

The rapid progress of electronics and computing power has enabled complex methods of scanning and data
processing to be developed. This has culminated in phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) which, as the name
suggests, uses an array of small transducers unlike the conventional manual A-scan probe with only one
transducer. A single PAUT probe may contain between several tens and several hundreds of transducers. These
small transducers are computer controlled and can be pulsed independently in a set sequence or phase; the pulses
of sound interfering with each other to produce a sound beam of a certain angle, see Fig. 2. By varying the time
and pattern of the pulses, the angle and shape of the beam can be varied so that the beam can be steered
electronically, sectorial scanning or S-scan.
Figure 2: Illustration of the sector scan composed of many A-scans from the beams being steered through a range of angles.
Note that, in addition to steering the beam, the focal law may also be focusing the sound field to improve defect detection and
resolution

The benefits of this technology compared with conventional single transducer scanning are that the beam can be
steered and focused with a single probe. Beam steering enables the beam to be swept through an object without
moving the probe, the reflected data being processed to provide a visual image of a cone shaped slice through the
object. Moving the probe enables a large number of slices to be assembled to provide a three dimensional image
a good example is the use in medical diagnostics to examine the functioning of the heart in real time.

For the non-destructive examination of welds this ability to inspect a weld with multiple angle beams from a single
probe means that the probability of detecting flaws is greatly increased. It is also possible to focus the beam
electronically at multiple depths to improve the ability to accurately determine the size and position of weld flaws.

Figure 3: Phased array results showing A-scan, B-scan and S-scan of a nozzle to shell weld

The small probe size and the ability to manipulate the beam without moving the probe enables inspections in
limited access or of components of a complex shape. Cost is also a factor although the probes and the
processing/display units are more expensive than the single transducer equipment, the time to perform a scan can
be substantially reduced. Work carried out by TWI suggests that a phased array scan can take 20% of the time for
a conventional scan with better coverage although the off-line interpretation of the results may take longer.

The results may be presented as S-, A-, B- or C-scans, enabling better interpretation. The results of a phased
array examination of a single sided nozzle to shell weld is given in Fig. 3. The weld shape is given by the red lines
superimposed on the S-scan display. This is a single sided weld, the lower half of the image being a mirror of the
weld. Whilst the scanning operation may be performed automatically by mechanized manipulating equipment and
the accuracy may be better than 1mm, the interpretation must be carried out by experienced and skilled
personnel trained specifically in the interpretation of phased array scanning results. An investigation by TWI
showed that the skill of the individual carrying out the interpretation was by far the most important factor in
producing reproducible and accurate results.

Scanning can be performed manually or with the probe attached to a carriage. A typical application is the
examination of pipe butt welds using orbiting crawler tractors

Such dedicated and robust mechanised equipment is readily available for site use, replacing radiography and
giving benefits in terms of cost, flaw detection and health and safety issues.

An excellent example of the capabilities of PAUT is given in the article Measuring the crack growth rate (da/dt) of
a fatigue crack using phased array ultrasonics by Channa Nageswaran, Principal Project Leader at TWI.