ULTRASONICDETECTIONOFSIMULATEDCORROSIONIN1INCH

DIAMETERSTEELTIEBACKRODS

By

KARLR.OLSEN

Adissertationsubmittedinpartialfulfillmentof
therequirementsforthedegreeof

DOCTOROFPHILOSOPHY

WASHINGTONSTATEUNIVERSITY
DepartmentofCivilandEnvironmentalEngineering

August2009

TotheFacultyofWashingtonStateUniversity:

ThemembersoftheCommitteeappointedtoexaminethedissertationofKARLR.OLSENfindit
satisfactoryandrecommendthatitbeaccepted.

David Pollock, Ph.D.(Chair)

David McLean, Ph.D.

Donald Bender, Ph.D.

William Cofer, Ph.D.

ii

Acknowledgements
"Forbyhimallthingswerecreated:thingsinheavenandonearth,visibleandinvisible,
whetherthronesorpowersorrulersorauthorities;allthingswerecreatedbyhimandforhim."

Colossians1:16

FirstandforemostIwouldliketothankmyparents.Dad,withoutyourencouragementtosee
beyondmytrialsIwouldhavegivenuplongago.Iconsideritanhonortohaveyouasafather,
amentorandafriend.Mom,thankyouyourunwaveringlove,regardlessofmy
accomplishmentsorfailures.Iamproudtobeyoursonandthankfulforeverysmileandhug
thatawaitsmeeverytimeIseeyou.
Dr.Pollock,IhavelearnedasmuchfromwatchingyouasIhavefromlisteningtoyour
feedback.Yourcareforyourstudentsaboveyourselfisevident,andaninspiration.Toall
thosethathelpedkeepmesanethroughoutthisprocessandremindmethatthereismoreto
lifethanadissertation:Alan,Neil,Mike,Chuck,Jacob,Rebekah,Jessie,Laura,andKristinayour
friendshipmeansmorethanyouknow.
Also,thisdissertationwouldnothavebeenpossiblewithoutfundingforthisproject,whichwas
providedbytheU.S.DepartmentofTransportation(USDOT),TransportationNorthwest
(TransNow)RegionalResearchCenterthroughcontractnumber430820.Thecommercialall
threadtiebackrodswereprovidedbyWilliamsFormEngineeringCorporation.

iii

ULTRASONICDETECTIONOFSIMULATEDCORROSIONIN1INCHDIAMETERSTEELTIEBACKRODS

Abstract
ByKarlR.Olsen
WashingtonStateUniversity
August2009

Chair: DavidG.Pollock

Theresearchpresentedinvestigatestheuseofpulseechoultrasonictechniquestoidentify
simulatedcorrosioninsteelrods.Theprimaryobjectivewastoquantifylossofcrosssection
duetocorrosionofsteeltiebackrodsinearthretentionsystems.Currenttechniquesrequire
excavationofrodsforinspection;howeverthisproposednondestructivemethodutilizesthe
endoftherodprotrudingfromtheembankmentinconjunctionwithanultrasonicpulseecho
systemtoestimatethereductioninloadcapacityoftherod.Anultrasonicwavewasinitiated
withapiezoelectrictransducercoupledtotheendoftherod.Thesametransducerconverted
thereturningwaveintoanultrasonicsignalwhichwasusedtodeterminethephysical
geometryofsimulatedcorrosion.Theultrasonicsignalcouldidentifythelocationofsimulated
corrosionontherodusingthetimebetweenthemainbangandthefirstflawecho.The
diameterofsimulatedcorrosioncouldbedeterminedfromthetimebetweenthebackecho
andthefirsttrailingecho.Thelengthofthecorrodedregionwascorrelatedwiththeratioof
thefirsttrailingechoandthebackecho.Flawechoesfromsimulatedcorrosioncouldbe
detectedforalltransitionanglesdownto5o.Adecreaseinthetransitionangleresultedina
timedelayinthearrivaloftheflawechoupto23.8sforthe5transition,whichcorresponds

iv

to5.5in.insteelrods.Williamsallthreadcommercialtiebackrodsweretested.Ultrasonic
signalsgeneratedinWilliamsrodsembeddedinvarioussoilsshowednegligibleattenuationof
signalamplitude.Simulatedcorrosiongeometry,includinglocation,diameter,andlengthwere
inspectablein1.0in.diameterWilliamstiebackrods.Testingshowedthatultrasonictesting
couldbeuseddetectedinrodlengthsupto40feet.

Contents
1

IntroductionandObjectives....................................................................................................1
1.1

TiebackRods.....................................................................................................................1

1.2

ProblemStatement..........................................................................................................2

1.3

ResearchObjectives.........................................................................................................3

1.3.1

DetectPhysicalGeometryofSimulatedCorrosioninSteelRods.............................3

1.3.2

EvaluateThreadedWilliamsTiebackRods...............................................................4

1.4
2

OutlineofDissertationContents.....................................................................................4

BackgroundandLiteratureReview.........................................................................................6
2.1

PressureWaveProperties................................................................................................6

2.2

TwomethodsforSolvingtheWaveEquation..................................................................8

2.3

BackgroundinUltrasonicWavesinRods.......................................................................13

2.3.1
2.4

UltrasonicApplications..................................................................................................17

2.4.1
3

UltrasonicWave......................................................................................................14
PreviousUltrasonicResearch.................................................................................17

ExperimentalSetupandTesting............................................................................................22
3.1

ExperimentalSetup........................................................................................................22

3.2

LabviewProgram............................................................................................................23

3.3

TransducerCharacterizationandSelection...................................................................23

3.4

WavelengthinSteelRod................................................................................................26

3.5

EndPreparationandTransducerCoupling....................................................................27

3.6

SteelRodsUsedinTesting.............................................................................................28

3.7

VelocityCalculationforSteelRods................................................................................29

DetectingPhysicalGeometryofSimulatedCorrosion..........................................................33
4.1

LocationofLeadingEdgeofSimulatedCorrosion.........................................................33

4.2

DiameterCharacterization.............................................................................................36

4.3

LengthofSimulatedCorrosionCharacterization...........................................................45

4.3.1

ChangeinFrequencyContentofBackEchoforLengthofSimulatedCorrosion...46

vi

4.3.2
4.4

TransitionCharacterization............................................................................................57

4.4.1
5

LinearTransitionswithNotches.............................................................................62

WilliamsCommercialTiebackRodTesting............................................................................69
5.1

TypesofTiebackRodsUsedinGeotechnicalApplications............................................69

5.2

ProjectedLengthofRodtobeInspected.......................................................................72

5.3

SignalAttenuationforWilliamsRodsinSoil..................................................................74

5.3.1

SoilCharacterization...............................................................................................75

5.3.2

SoilPreparation.......................................................................................................77

5.3.3

SignalAttenuationforTiebackRodsinSoil............................................................78

5.4

ChangeinBackEchoAmplitudewithLengthofSimulatedCorrosion...................53

ActualTiebackRodswithFlaws.....................................................................................83

5.4.1

LocationofSimulatedCorrosion............................................................................83

5.4.2

DiameterofSimulatedCorrosion...........................................................................85

5.4.3

LengthofSimulatedCorrosion...............................................................................87

5.4.4

TransitionofSimulatedCorrosion..........................................................................89

InspectionProcedures...........................................................................................................93
6.1

InspectionofSimulatedCorrosion.................................................................................93

6.2

EndpreparationandTransducerCoupling....................................................................97

6.3

CommercialTiebackRodTesting...................................................................................98

6.3.1

NewConstruction...................................................................................................99

6.3.2

ExistingConstruction............................................................................................102

SummaryandConclusions..................................................................................................106

vii

ListofFigures

Figure1.Sheetpileearthretentionwalls(USArmyCorpsofEngineers,1994)...........................1
Figure2.Mathematicalwavecharacterization.............................................................................6
Figure3.DiagramofSnell'sLaw....................................................................................................7
Figure4.Dispersiondiagramfora0.79in.diametersteelrodinavacuum(Beard,Lowe,&
Cawley,2001)................................................................................................................................11
Figure5.Rayapproachforsolutionofwaveequation................................................................13
Figure6.Standardultrasonicsignalfrom1.0ft.long1.0in.diametercircularrod...................14
Figure7.UltrasonicSignalfor3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodwitha2.0in.lengthof0.5in.
reduceddiameterstartingat17.0in.fromthetransducer.........................................................15
Figure8.Spacingoftrailingechoesfor3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodwitha2.0in.lengthof
0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosion............................................................................................15
Figure9.Trailingechoesreflectiondiagram...............................................................................16
Figure10.Endangleeffectonsignalstrength(Beard,Lowe,&Cawley,2001)...........................19
Figure12.Shiftinsignalcentroidduetoangulardeformationofrod(Pollock,1997)...............20
Figure11.Deformationoftherod(Pollock,1997)......................................................................20
Figure13.Timetracesfora1.2mstraightrodandasimilarrodwithconstantcurvature
correspondingto30mmofcenterdeflection.(Beard,Lowe,&Cawley,2001)..........................21
Figure14.Ultrasonicpulseechotestsetup................................................................................22
Figure15.Transduceramplitudecomparisononarodwithnosimulatedcorrosion................24
Figure16.Flawechoandbackechoofrodwitha0.25in.reductionindiameter.....................26
Figure17.Minimumdetectableflawdimensioninsteelformultipleultrasonicpulse
frequencies...................................................................................................................................27
Figure18.Williamscommercialtiebackrodand12L14rodstockusedintesting.....................28
Figure19.Fullultrasonicsignalfor1.0ft.long1.0in.diameter12L14steelrodforcalculating
wavespeed...................................................................................................................................30
Figure20.Mainbangandfirstandsecondbackechoesfor1.0ft.long1.0in.diametersteelrod
.......................................................................................................................................................31
Figure21.Actualcorrosionofasteelrod...................................................................................33

viii

Figure22.Simulatedcorrosionofasteelrod.............................................................................33
Figure23.3ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswith2.0in.lengthof0.5in.diametersimulated
corrosionusedfordetectionofsimulatedcorrosionlocation.....................................................34
Figure24.Ultrasonicsignalsforsimulatedcorrosionlocatedat8.94in.,16.06in.,and23.03in.
fromtheendoftherod................................................................................................................35
Figure25.3ft.longrodswith0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.diameters...........................................37
Figure26.Trailingechoesfor0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.diameterrods......................................37
Figure27.Correlationbetweenroddiameterandtimebetweentrailingechoes.....................38
Figure28.1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.simulatedcorrosiondiametercomparedwith0.5in.
diameterand1.0in.diameterrods.............................................................................................39
Figure29.Comparisonofultrasonicsignalsfor1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.diameter
simulatedcorrosionversus0.5in.and1in.diameterrods.........................................................40
Figure30.3ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswith2.0in.lengthof0.25in.,0.50in.,or0.75in.
diametersimulatedcorrosion......................................................................................................42
Figure31.Ultrasonicsignalsforsimulatedcorrosiondiameters0.50in.,and0.75in................43
Figure32.Percentreductionoforiginalloadcapacityforsimulatedcorrosionina1in.diameter
rod.................................................................................................................................................44
Figure33.Signalwaveformandfrequencycontentfor5MHzM1041OlympusNDTtransducer
.......................................................................................................................................................46
Figure34.Backechoof1.0ft.longrodwitha0.5in.simulatedcorrosiondiameterwithand
withoutzeros................................................................................................................................47
Figure35.FFTfor3.0ft.longrodswith0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.diameters............................48
Figure36.FFTforbackechoof1.0in.diameterrodswith1.0ft.,3.0ft.,and10.0ft.lengths..48
Figure37.1.0in.diameter1.0ft.longrodswithdifferentlengthsofsimulatedcorrosion.......49
Figure38.Frequencyanalysisoffirstbackechoformultiplelengthsofsimulatedcorrosionina
1.0in.diameter1.0ft.longsteelrod...........................................................................................50
Figure39.3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswith2.0in.,6.0in.,and8.0in.lengthsofsimulated
corrosionstartingat9in.alongtherod.......................................................................................51
Figure40.Peakfrequencyofthebackechofor3.0ft.longrodswith2.0in.,6.0in.,and10.0in.
lengthsofsimulatedcorrosion.....................................................................................................52
Figure41.Backechoandfirsttrailingechofor1.0ft.longrodswithmultiplelengthsof
simulatedcorrosion......................................................................................................................54

ix

Figure42.Ratiooftrailingechopeakamplitudeandbackechopeakamplitudefor1.0in.rods
.......................................................................................................................................................55
Figure43.Comparisonofreflectionfromthesimulatedcorrosionsurface...............................56
Figure44.Ratiooftrailingechoandbackechofor2.0in.,6.0in.and10.0in.longsimulated
corrosionin3.0ft.long12L14rods..............................................................................................57
Figure45.1.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswithmultipletransitionanglesusedfordetection
ofsimulatedcorrosion..................................................................................................................58
Figure46.Ultrasonicsignalfor90,45,30,15,10and5transitionangles.........................59
Figure47.Delayindetectableflawechoversustransitionangle...............................................60
Figure48.6.0in.long1.0in.diameterrodswith0.125in.deep0.25in.widenotcheslocated
0.5in.,1.0in.,and2.0in.fromtheendoftherod......................................................................61
Figure49.Notchechocomparisonfornotcheslocated0.5in.,1.0in.,and2.0in.fromtheend
oftherod......................................................................................................................................62
Figure50.1.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswithmultipletransitionangles..............................63
Figure51.Normalizedmaximumamplitudeofflawechoversustransitionangle.....................64
Figure52.Longitudinalwavereflectionfromtransitionsurface................................................65
Figure53.Shearwavereflectionfromtransitionsurface...........................................................67
Figure54.Upsetthreadandallthreadrods...............................................................................69
Figure55.Comparisonof10ft.longWilliamsthreadedrodand12L14smoothsteelrod........70
Figure56.Trailingechocomparisonfor12L14smoothrodandWilliamsthreadedrod...........71
Figure57.Rectifiedtimedomainsignalsfor1ft.,3ft.and6ft.longWilliamsrods..................72
Figure58.Signalattenuationfor1.0ft.,3.0ft.,and6.0ft.longWilliamsrods..........................73
Figure59.Boxesconstructedforsignalattenuationtestsinsoils..............................................75
Figure60.Grainsizedistributionforsandandsoilsamples.......................................................76
Figure61.AtterberglimittestofPalousesoil.............................................................................77
Figure62.Exponentialdecayofbackechopeaksin3.0ft.longWilliamsrod............................79
Figure63.Transmittanceforsteelwithwaterandconcretesurroundingmedia......................82
Figure64.3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamstiebackrodswith2.0in.lengthof0.5in.
simulatedcorrosiondiameterat9.28in.,15.97in.,and22.84in.alongtherod........................83

Figure65.Ultrasonicsignalsfrom3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamstiebackrodswith2.0in.
lengthof0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosionat9.28in.,15.97in.,and22.84in.alongtherod.
.......................................................................................................................................................84
Figure66.3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamsrodswith2.0in.lengthsof0.5in.and0.75in.
diametersimulatedcorrosion......................................................................................................85
Figure67.ComparisonofWilliamsrodswith0.5in.and0.75in.diameterofsimulatedcorrosion
.......................................................................................................................................................86
Figure68.3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamstiebackrodswith2.0in.and10.0in.lengthsof
0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosion............................................................................................87
Figure69.FrequencyofultrasonicsignalofWilliamsrodswith2.0inand8.0in.lengthsof
simulatedcorrosion......................................................................................................................88
Figure70.Ratiooftrailingechoandbackechofor2.0in.and10.0in.longsimulatedcorrosion
in3.0ft.longWilliamsrods..........................................................................................................88
Figure72.Fullultrasonicsignalfor2in.lengthof0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosionwith45
transitionangleforWilliamstiebackrod.....................................................................................89
Figure71.Rodusedforsimulatedcorrosiondetectionwitha45transitionangle...................89
Figure73.Firstbackechoandsuccessivetrailingechoesfor2in.simulatedcorrosionwith45
transition.......................................................................................................................................90
Figure74.Frequencyofbackechoof2in.long0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosionwith45
transitioninWilliamsrod..............................................................................................................91
Figure75.Ratiooftrailingechoandbackechofor2.0in.simulatedcorrosionlengthwith45
transitionin3.0ft.longWilliamsrods.........................................................................................92
Figure76Ultrasonicpulseechosignalfor12L14smoothsteelrodandWilliamssteelallthread
tiebackrodbothwithsimulatedcorrosion..................................................................................93
Figure77.Locationoftheleadingedgeforthemainbangandflawecho.................................94
Figure78.Firstbackechoandsubsequenttrailingechoesforinspectionofsimulatedcorrosion
diameterinspectionin1.0in.diameter12L14steelrodand1.0in.diameterWilliamsrod......95
Figure79.Minimumdetectableflawdimensioninsteel............................................................97

xi

ListofTables
Table1.Commercialtransducersusedinselectionprocess.......................................................25
Table2.Propertiesfor12L14steelandWilliamsgrade75tiebackrod.......................................29
Table3.Arrivaltimeofultrasonicsignalcomponents.................................................................32
Table4.Wavespeedof12L14steeland75ksiWilliamssteelrods............................................32
Table5.Comparisonofmeasuredandcalculatedsimulatedcorrosionlocations......................36
Table6.Comparisonofmeasuredversuscalculatedtimebetweentrailingechoesusingtherod
diameter........................................................................................................................................38
Table7.Calculateddiameterfor1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosion,
0.5in.diameterrod,and1.0in.diameterrod.............................................................................41
Table8.Calculateddiameterfor1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.and0.75in.diameter
simulatedcorrosion......................................................................................................................44
Table9.Maximumamplitudesofbackechoandfirsttrailingecho...........................................55
Table10.Angleoflongitudinalwavereflectionfromtransitionsurface....................................66
Table11.Angleofshearwavereflectionfromtransitionsurface..............................................68
Table12.Soilcharacterization.....................................................................................................76
Table13.ResultsofAtterberglimittestforPalousesoil............................................................77
Table14.Watercontentforeachsoiltest..................................................................................78
Table15.AttenuationcoefficientsoftheultrasonicsignalforWilliamstiebackrodsinsoils....80
Table16.NormalizedattenuationcoefficientsoftheultrasonicsignalforWilliamstiebackrods
insoils............................................................................................................................................81
Table17.Comparisonofmeasuredandcalculatedlocationofsimulatedcorrosion.................85
Table18.Timebetweentrailingechoesfor0.5in.and0.75in.simulatedcorrosiondiameter 86
Table19.CalculatedsimulatedcorrosionlocationforWilliamsrodwith45transitionangle..90
Table20.ComparisonofmeasuredandcalculateddiameterofsimulatedcorrosionforWilliams
rodwith45transitionangle........................................................................................................91

xii

1 IntroductionandObjectives
In2002,justeastofdowntownCleveland,Ohio,severaltiebackrodsinasheetpileearth
retainingwallfailed(Esser&Dingeldein,2007).Thefailurewasduetocorrosionandcauseda
nearcollapseofthewall.Corrosioninstructuralsteeltiebackrodscausesadecreaseincross
sectionalarea,limitingtensileloadcapacity.Tiebackrodsaretypicallyburiedinsoil,
eliminatingtheoptionofvisualinspectionwithoutexcavation.Theresearchinthisstudy
evaluatedultrasonictestingasamethodofdetectingsimulatedcorrosioninsteelrods.

1.1 TiebackRods
Tieback rods are a vital component of sheet pile retainingwalls. Therods connect the outer
supportstructuretoanchors(ordeadman)buriedinthesoil(Figure1.)Thefirsttiebackrods

Wale

TieRod

Concrete
Deadman

SheetPiling

a.Tierodsanddeadman
Wale

TieRod

SheetPiling

SheetPiling
Anchor

b.Tierodsandanchorwall

Figure1.Sheetpileearthretentionwalls(USArmyCorpsofEngineers,1994)

usedincommercialconstructionconsistedofA36(36ksiyieldstrength)roundstockwithupset
threadsateachend.Themajorityofrodsusedincurrentconstructionpractices,includingthe
WilliamsFormCorporationtiebackrodsusedinthisresearch,areanallthreadrodwithayield
stressof75ksi.Developmentsincorrosiontechnologyhaveintroducedseveralimprovements
totiebackrods.Numerousmethodsforcorrosionresistancehavebeendeveloped(Williams
FormEngineeringCorp,2008):

Epoxy coating
Pre-grouted rods
Hot dip galvanizing
Extruded polyethylene coating
Coal tar epoxy
Corrosion inhibiting wax or sheath with grease
Heat shrink tubing

Theselectionofrodsandcorrosionresistancetechniquesistypicallydeterminedbya
geotechnicalengineerdependinguponsiteconditions(USArmyCorpsofEngineers,1994).

1.2 ProblemStatement
Oldertiebackrodsaresusceptibletocorrosion,whichmaycompromisethestructuralintegrity
ofconfinedearthembankmentsystemssupportingtransportationstructuresandfacilities.
Corrosioninburiedmetaltiebackrodsisdifficulttodetect,andthemagnitudeofassociated
crosssectionlossisparticularlydifficulttoquantify.Sincetheexposedheadsoftiebackrods
(atthesheetpilingface)aretypicallyaccessible,anultrasonicpulseechoinspectiontechnique
haspotentialfordetectingandquantifyingcrosssectionlossduetocorrosion.Previous
ultrasonicpulseechoresearchofsteelrodshasinvestigatedseveralgeometricproperties.This

ultrasoniccharacterizationmustbeexpandedtoaddressamorecomprehensive
characterizationoftherodtoaccuratelyassessthereductioninloadcapacityofacommercial
tiebackrods.

1.3 ResearchObjectives
Theobjectivesforthisresearchweredividedintotwocategories.First,useultrasonic
inspectiontoassessthephysicalgeometryofsimulatedcorrosioninsteelrods.Second,
evaluateWilliamsallthreadtiebackrods.

1.3.1 DetectPhysicalGeometryofSimulatedCorrosioninSteelRods
Thefirstsetofobjectivesinvolvedtheuseofultrasonicsignalstodetectthecriticalphysical
geometriesofasteelrodwithsimulatedcorrosion.Inpreviousresearch,severalphysical
geometrieshavebeendetected,includinglocationofflaws,curvatureoftherod,diameterof
theflaw,andtheeffectofangledcutsattheendoftherod.Thefollowingresearchobjectives
wereinvestigatedtoconfirmpreviousresearchanddevelopnewtechniquestodetectother
physicalgeometries.
1.
2.
3.
4.

Detectthelocationofsimulatedcorrosion.
Detectthediameterofsimulatedcorrosion.
Detectthelengthofsimulatedcorrosion.
Investigatetheeffectofsimulatedcorrosiontransitionsontheflawechoinultrasonic
signals.
5. Developanormalizedamplitudemethodforassessingattenuationinthetransitionof
simulatedcorrosion.

1.3.2 EvaluateThreadedWilliamsTiebackRods
ThesecondsetofobjectivesinvolvedevaluatingWilliamstiebackrods.Theallthreadsurface
andthesurroundingsoilaffecttheultrasonicwaveasittravelsthroughtherod.Thefollowing
researchobjectiveswereinvestigatedtocharacterizetheultrasonicsignalinWilliamstieback
rods.
1. Determineifultrasonicresponsesignalcanbeidentifiedincommercialthreadedtiebackrods.
2. Determinetheeffectofvarioussoilsonattenuationofultrasonicsignalsincommercialthreaded
tiebackrods.
3. Identifysimulatedcorrosioninthreadedtiebackrods.

1.4 OutlineofDissertationContents
Thisdissertationconsistsofsevenchapters.Somebackgroundregardingultrasonicwavesis
providedinthesecondchapter.Startingwiththefundamentalsofwavepropagation,the
theoryisdevelopedandpresented,withapplicationstonondestructivetesting.Previous
researchregardingultrasonicwavesinrodsisalsosummarizedinChaptertwo.Thethird
chapterdescribestheexperimentalsetupusedintheresearchpresentedinthedissertation.
TransducercouplingandbasicwavevelocitytestsareincludedinChapterthree.Chapterfour
examinesthephysicalgeometriesofsimulatedcorrosiondetectablewithultrasonicpulseecho
methods.Thisincludeslocation,length,diameter,andtransitioncharacterization.Chapterfive
investigatestheuseofultrasonicwavesinthreadedWilliamstiebackrods.Signalattenuation
insoils,maximumdetectablerodlength,andsimulatedcorrosioninWilliamsrodsare

evaluated.Chaptersixaddressesguidelinesfordevelopinganultrasonicinspectionstrategy
forusebyastateDepartmentofTransportation(DOT).Finally,conclusionsarepresentedin
theseventhchapter.

BackgroundandLiteratureReview

Thischapterpresentsabackgroundofultrasonicwaves.Anoverviewoffundamentalwave
propagationprovidesthebasisforunderstandingultrasonicwaves.Theuseofultrasonic
wavesinnondestructivetesting(NDT)ispresented,includingpreviousresearchpertaining
specificallytosteelrods.

2.1 PressureWaveProperties
Awaveisadisturbancethatpropagatesthroughtimeandspace.Energyistransferredfrom
onepointtoanotherviawaves.Asinglefrequencybulkwaveischaracterizedmathematically
bythewavelength()andamplitude(A)ofthesignal(Figure2).Thewavelengthisthedistance
betweentwoadjacentpeaksinthewavecycleandtheamplitudeisthemaximumdisplacement
ofthedisturbancefromtheundisturbedposition.Thefrequency(f)ofthewaveisdefinedas

Figure2.Mathematicalwavecharacterization

thenumberofoscillationsthatoccurinonesecondandtheperiod(T)isthetimetocomplete
oneoscillation.
PhaseVelocity
Thespeedatwhichthebulkwavetravelsthoughamediumiscalledthephasevelocity(p)and
iscalculatedwiththefollowingequation(Main,1988).

Equation1
Thephasevelocityisdependentuponthetypeofwavetravelinginthemedium.Longitudinal
andshearwaveswillbeconsideredinthisresearch.Longitudinalwavesexhibitparticlemotion
inthedirectionofwavepropagation.Shearwavesexhibitparticlemotionorthogonaltothe
directionofwavepropagation.
Snell'sLaw
Whenalongitudinalwaveencountersaboundarysurface,longitudinalandshearwavesare
reflectedbackintothemediumatanglesdeterminedbySnell'sLaw(Figure3).Theresulting
longitudinalwavereflectsatanangleequaltotheincidentangle.Thereflectedshearwavehas

1
2

Figure3.DiagramofSnell'sLaw

areflectedangle(2)thatisdependentupontheincidentangle(1),theincominglongitudinal
wavespeed(c1),andthereflectedshearwavespeed(c2).
Attenuation
Asawavepropagatesthroughamedium,thewavedisplacementdecreaseswithdistancedue
toscatteringandabsorption.Scatteringisthereflectionofthewaveindirectionsotherthanits
originaldirectionofpropagation.Absorptionistheconversionofthewaveenergytoother
formsofenergy.Attenuationisthedecayrateofthewaveasitpropagatesthroughmaterial
duetoscatteringandabsorption.Theattenuationofdisplacementinawaveasittravels
throughamediumischaracterizedbyEquation2,wherewoistheinitialdisplacement,isthe
coefficientofattenuation,andxisthedistancealongtherod(Kolsky,1963).

Equation2

2.2 TwomethodsforSolvingtheWaveEquation
Inaboundedmedium,suchasthesteelrodsusedinthisresearch,wavesarereflectedfrom
theboundaries.Solutionscanbefoundbysolvingthewaveequationwithcylindrical
boundaries.Thewaveequation,incylindricalcoordinates,inanunboundedmediumisdefined
asfollows:

Equation3

Equation4

Equation5

wherezistheaxisofthewaveguide,isthedensityofthemedium,ur,u,uz,arethelocal
displacementsofthemediumalongeachaxis,ristheradius,tistime,andareLame's
constants.Thedilatation()andelementsoftherotationtensor(r,,z)aregivenby:

Equation6

Equation7

Equation8

Equation9

Thestressintherodisusedasaboundarycondition.Atthesurfaceoftherod,thethreestress
components(rr,r,rz)mustequalzero.Thestressdeformationrelationsareasfollows:

Equation10

Equation11

Equation12

Generalsolutionstothewaveequationsareconsideredforharmonicwaveswithexponential
propagationinthezdirectionalongarod.Forthegeneralcaseofvibration,theequationsfor
displacementsareasfollows:

Equation13

Equation14

Equation15

Forlongitudinalwavesthedisplacementisafunctionofzandr,thereforethederivativewith
respecttoiszero.Thedisplacementuisalsozeroduetosymmetry.Therefore,Equation3,
Equation4andEquation5reduceto:

Equation16
Equation17

where:

Equation18

Equation19

Wherethefrequencyofthewavesisp/2andthephasevelocityisgivenbyp/Sinceh'and'
areconstants,settingr'=h'randr''='rconvertsEquation16andEquation17intozeroorder
andfirstorderformsoftheBesselequation,respectively.

10

Equation20

Equation21

Atthispointtwoseparatemethodsareavailableforsolvingthewaveequation.Theseinclude
themodeandtherayapproach.Eachofthemethodsaredescribedbelow.
ModeApproach(DispersionDiagrams)
ThesolutiontothewaveequationusingtheBesselfunctionsubjecttoappropriateboundary
conditionsresultsinanumberofsolutionsthatformcontinuouspropagatingmodesof
vibration.Thevelocityfrequencyrelationshipoftheindividualmodescanbedisplayedasaset
dispersioncurves(Figure4).Eachlineinthediagramrepresentsadifferentmodeofvibration.

Figure4.Dispersiondiagramfora0.79in.diametersteelrodinavacuum(Beard,Lowe,&Cawley,2001)

11

Flexuralmodesarenotedby"F",longitudinalmodesarenotedby"L",andthetorsionalmodeis
notedby"T".Thisfacilitatesdeterminationofthefrequencytogenerateinordertoinitiate
specificmodes.Thefrequencyoftheultrasonicsignalgeneratedinthefollowingresearchisin
therangethatwillinitiatehundredsofmodesofvibration.

RayApproach
Thesecondapproachforsolvingthewaveequationistherayapproach.Thismethodinvolvesa
simplificationofEquation20usingadifferentiationbypartsidentity.

Equation22

Assumethatvariesrapidlycomparedtochangesinr'.Thenr'canbepulledoutsidethe
derivative.Thesimplificationisbasedontheassumptionthatthewavelengthoftheultrasonic
signalissignificantlysmallerthanthediameteroftherod.

Equation23

Thesolutionforthisequationisgivenas:

Equation24

Thissolutionapproximatesthewaveasabulkwave.Also,sincethewavelengthisassumedto
besignificantlysmallerthanthediameteroftherod,thesurfaceoftherodcanbe
approximatedasaflatplate.Assumingapointsourceforthegenerationofthewave,Figure5

12

Source

Figure5.Rayapproachforsolutionofwaveequation

representsfourofthepathswiththeshortesttraveldistancethewavecantakefromthe
sourcetoacommonpointattheendoftherodforlongitudinalwavepropagation.This
depictionallowsinsightintohowthewavepropagatesthroughtherod.
Theresearchpresentedusestherayapproachasopposedtothemodeapproachfortwo
reasons.First,thepulseechomethodgeneratesapulseinthesteelrodratherthana
continuousvibration.Second,thediameterofthesteelrodsinspected(1.0in.)is
approximately20timesgreaterthanwavelengthgeneratedbythe5MHzultrasonictransducer
insteel.Thisallowsfortheassumptionusedintherayapproach.

2.3 BackgroundinUltrasonicWavesinRods
Ultrasonicwavesaredefinedascyclicpressurewaveswithafrequencygreaterthanthe
thresholdofhumanhearing.Althoughhumanhearingvariesfrompersontoperson,the
ultrasonicrangeisconsideredtoincludeallpressurewavesabove20kHz.Thefollowing
sectionpresentssomefundamentalconceptsandterminologyfrompreviousliterature.This

13

willestablishthetheoreticalfoundationthatwillbebuiltupontocompileamorecomplete
understandingofultrasonicwavesinrods.

2.3.1 UltrasonicWave
Ultrasonicwavescanbeinitiatedinsteelrodsusingapiezoelectrictransducer.Anelectric
signalwassenttothetransducerconvertingelectricalenergytomechanicalenergyintheform
ofapressurewave.Whencoupledtotheendofasteelrodthewaveisgeneratedinthesteel
rodandproceedstotravelthelengthoftherod.Atthispointareceivingtransducercandetect
thesignalattheotherendoftherod,oriftheendoftherodisnotaccessible,thewave
reflectsfromtheendsurfaceoftherodandtravelsbacktothetransducer.Asthewave
returnstothefrontend,thetransducerconvertsthemechanicalenergyintoelectricalenergy,
andtheelectricalsignalisrecordedbythecomputer.Theultrasonicsignalforastraightrod
withoutanyflawsisshownbelow(Figure6).Themainbangrepresentsthegenerationofthe
ultrasonicwave.Thesmallsignalfollowingthemainbangisaringingoutofthepiezoelectric
transducer.Thenextsignalthatappearsisthefirstbackecho,whichrepresentsthefrontof

Figure6.Standardultrasonicsignalfrom1.0ft.long1.0in.diametercircularrod

14

thepressurewavethatreflectedfromtheendoftherodandreturnedtothetransducer.
Severaltrailingechoesfollowthefirstbackecho,andthesewillbediscussedlaterinmore
depth.Forarodwithaflaw,anearlyechowillappearinthesignaldependentuponthe
locationoftheflawalongtherod.Aportionoftheultrasonicwavewillreflectfromtheflaw
andreturntothetransducerbeforethebackecho(Figure7).Furtherinspectionofthe
ultrasonicsignalrevealsaconsistentspacingbetweenthetrailingechoesafterthebackecho
(Figure8).Researchhasshown(Light&Joshi,1987)thatthespacingisduetomode

Figure7.UltrasonicSignalfor3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodwitha2.0in.lengthof0.5in.reduceddiameter
startingat17.0in.fromthetransducer

Figure8.Spacingoftrailingechoesfor3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodwitha2.0in.lengthof0.5in.diameter
simulatedcorrosion

15

conversionwhenthewavereflectsfromthecylindricalsurfaceoftherod.Eachtimeawaveis
reflectedataboundary,thereflectedenergyproducesatransversewaveaswellasa
longitudinalwave(Figure9).Sincethetransversewavetravelsatapproximatelyhalfthespeed
ofthelongitudinalwaveandreflectsatasteeperangle,theresultisadelayinthesignalafter
thefirstecho.Thetimedelayisdependentuponthediameterof

Equation25

therodaswellastheratioofwavespeeds.LightandJoshireportedEquation25correlating
thediameteroftherod(D)tothetimebetweenechoes(t),baseduponthespeedof
longitudinalwavepropagation(C1)andthespeedoftransversewavepropagation(C2).This
delayrepeatsitself,asthereflectedtransversewavemodeconvertsintoalongitudinalwaveon
theoppositeside.

Reflectionof
transversewave

Secondtrailingechoto
arrive(twodiagonalpaths)
Firstechotoarrive
fromfirstreflection
(nomodeconversion)

Firstmodeconversionto
transversewavefromfirst
reflection
Firsttrailingechotoarrive
(onediagonalpath)

Figure9.Trailingechoesreflectiondiagram

16

2.4 UltrasonicApplications
Ultrasonicwaveshavedifferentapplicationsinthenaturalworldandareutilizedinanarrayof
currenttechnologies.Ultrasoundisusedbymanyanimals,includingbatsanddolphins.
Humanshaveharnessedtheuseofultrasonicsignalsforabroadrangeoftechnologies.These
includemedicalultrasound,cleaningtechniques,coolmisthumidifiers,realtimelocating
systems(RTLS),aswellasnondestructivetestingtechniques.

2.4.1 PreviousUltrasonicResearch
Wavepropagationinafreerodwasfirststudiedquantitativelyinthelate19thcenturyby
Pochhammer(Pochhammer,1876).Thestudyoffundamentallongitudinalandflexuralmodes
insolidcircularcylinderswasstudiedinthe1940'sbyHudson(Hudson,1943)andDavies
(Davies,1948).Furtherresearchhasfocusedonspecificaspectsofultrasonicwavesinsteel
rods.Thisincludeslocationofflawsandcracks,sectionlossduetocorrosion,attenuationdue
totheendconditionoftherod,andcurvatureoftherod.
LocationofFlaws
Pulseechotechniquesareoftenimplementedtodetectthelengthofarodbygeneratinga
wavewithanultrasonictransducerandrecordingthetimerequiredforthepulsetoreflect
fromthebacksurfaceandreturntothetransducer.Thewavevelocityisthenusedtoconvert
thetimetothelengthofthematerial.Similarlywhenanultrasonicpulseisreflectedfroman
internalflaw,thestresswavereturnstothetransducerinlesstimethantheechofromtheback

17

surface.Thistimetotheflaworcrackcanbeusedtodeterminethelengthfromthetransducer
totheflawlocation(Bray&Stanley,1989).
SectionLoss
TheBaltimoreGasandElectricCompanydevelopedatechniqueforevaluatingtheintegrityof
anchorbolts(Niles,1996).Thismethodusedultrasonicnondestructiveevaluationtomonitor
sectionlossofanchorsusedtoguysteeltransmissionpoles.Specifically,thecylindrically
guidedwavetechnique(CGWT),developedbyLightandJoshi(Light&Joshi,1987),wasused.
Thistechniquecorrelatesthespacingoftrailingechoesintheultrasonicsignalwiththe
diameteroftheregionwithreducedcrosssection.Thismethodisdescribedinmoredetailin
Chapter4.
EndConditionofRods.
AresearchgroupattheUniversityofLondonusedaguidedultrasonicinspectiontechniqueto
monitorseveralgeometriccharacteristicsofsteelposttensionedcables,androckboltsin
mines(Beard,Lowe,&Cawley,2001).Oneofthegeometriesinvestigatedwasthecutangleat
theendoftherodandtheresultinglossinamplitudeoftheultrasonicsignal.Theendangle
wascutwithacircularbenchsawandwithavariationintheanglefrom0to55omeasured
fromtheaxisnormaltothelongitudinalaxisofthecableorbolt.Thesignal(Figure10)
experiencedanearlinearlossinsignalstrengthfrom0oto10o.At10themaximumlossof40
dBwasreached.Aftertheinitialloss,thesignalmaintainedconsistentsignalstrengthforangle

18

cutsbetween10oand55o.Thisshowsthatthesignalwasdetectableregardlessofend
conditionangleupto55o.

1.11MHzin.

1.42MHzin.
1.72MHzin.

Figure10.Endangleeffectonsignalstrength(Beard,Lowe,&Cawley,2001)

CurvatureinSteelRods
Thecurvatureofarodhasaneffectontheultrasonicsignal.Theeffectofdeformationinbolts
wasinvestigatedinrelationtotheshiftinoverallsignalcentroid(Pollock,1997).Astherodwas
deformedtheareaofdirectlineofsighttotheendoftherodwasdecreased(Figure11),thus
shiftingtheenergyintothetrailingechoes(Figure12.)Therelativeamplitudesoftheback
echoandtrailingechoesweredependentuponthedeformationoftherod.Thisshowsthatan
ultrasonicwaveechoisstilldetectablefordeformationsthateliminateadirectlineofsight

19

Figure11.Deformationoftherod(Pollock,1997)

Figure12.Shiftinsignalcentroidduetoangulardeformationofrod(Pollock,1997)

20

betweenthetransducerandthereflectionofinterest.FurtherresearchattheUniversityof
Londonprovidedresultsthatshowadecreaseinamplitudeofthebackechoforarodwith
uniformcurvature(Figure13).Astraightrod1.2minlengthwascomparedwitha1.2mrodof
uniformcurvaturewith30mmofcenterdeflection.Thisshowsthatthecurvatureinarod
decreasestheultrasonicsignalamplitude,butdoesnotcompletelyeliminatethesignal,
allowingdetectionofreflectionsincurvedrods.

Figure13.Timetracesfora1.2mstraightrodandasimilarrodwithconstantcurvaturecorrespondingto30mm
ofcenterdeflection.(Beard,Lowe,&Cawley,2001)

21

ExperimentalSetupandTesting

Thischapterdescribestheultrasonictestsystemthatwasusedinthisresearch.Thisparticular
testsetupusedcommercialultrasonictransducersforconvertinganelectricpulseintoa
mechanicalwaveandthenconvertingthereflectedwavebackintoanelectricsignal.A
LabVIEWprogramwasdevelopedfordataacquisitionusingadesktopcomputer.Also,a
transducerselectioncriterionwasdevelopedfortiebackrods.

3.1 ExperimentalSetup
Ultrasonictestingisacommonnondestructivetechnique.Thetestsetupusedtoconductall
testingisshowninFigure14.AnultrasonicpulsewascreatedusingaPanametrics5058PR
PulserReceiverinconjunctionwithaParametricsM1042piezoelectrictransducer.Several
transducerswereavailable,withvariousdiameters(0.125in.,0.25in.and0.5in.)and
frequencies(2.25MHz,5MHz,and10MHz).The5MHz,0.5in.diameterM1042magnetic

PulserReceiver

1.
Electrical
Pulse

3.SignalSent
toComputer

2.ResponseSignal
Ultrasonic
Transducer

Figure14.Ultrasonicpulseechotestsetup

22

transducerwasusedforalltestsunlessotherwisespecified.Thepulsegeneratedbythe
transducertraveledthroughthespecimen,reflectingfromvarioussurfaces,andreturnedtothe
transducer.Theresponsesignalvarieddependentuponthephysicalgeometryandmaterial
propertiesofthespecimen.AtypicalultrasonicsignalisshowninFigure7,identifyingthe
majorcomponentsofthesignalincludingthemainbang,flawecho,backecho,andthetrailing
echoes.Thesesignalswereanalyzedtocharacterizetheflawsinaspecimen.

3.2 LabviewProgram
ALabVIEWVIprogramwasdesignedforthedataacquisitionoftheresearch.Theprogram
operatedonlyasdataacquisitionanddidnotinvolveanyoutputintothepulser/receiver.The
LabVIEWcardwasanNIPCI5152digitizer.Thecardreadonebillionsamplespersecond(1
GS/s)perchannelat8bitresolution.Thisallowedtheprogramtoeffectivelyreadat1GHz,
whichiscapableofreadinga500MHzsignalwithoutanyaliasing,inordertosatisfytheupper
boundoftheNyquistcriterion.

3.3 TransducerCharacterizationandSelection
Theselectionofthetransducerisvitalwhendesigninganultrasonictestmethod.
Transducersareavailablecommercially,orcanbedesignedandfabricatedforspecific
situations.Speciallydesignedtransducerscanbefabricatedtoachieveaverynarrow
bandwidthsignal,whichcanbeusefulinisolatingspecificfrequenciesduringsignalgeneration.
Forthisresearchcommercialtransducerswereusedtolimittheproductioncostforfield

23

inspections.Themainvariablesincommercialtransducersarethediameterofthetransducer
andthefrequencyoftheultrasonicsignalgenerated.Thefollowingisalistoftransducers
availablefortestingofthesteelrodsinthisresearch(Table1.)Usinga1.0in.diameterrod
threefeetlongwithnoflaws,themaximumamplitudeofthebackechoforeachtransducer
wasrecorded(Figure15.)Thedatashowsthatthe5MHztransducerswith0.5in.diameter
providedthelargestamplitude.Transducerswhichproducelargeechoamplitudeswill

Figure15.Transduceramplitudecomparisononarodwithnosimulatedcorrosion

increasethemaximumdetectablelengthofrod.Thetransducerswerealsotestedtomake
suretheycandetectareductionindiameterfrom1.0in.to0.75inlocated2in.alonga6in.
longrodwitha1in.diameter.Thesignalresponsewasmeasuredtofindthemaximum
amplitudeoftheflawechoandbackecho(Figure16).The0.5in.diameter5MHz
transducersprovidedthemaximumflawechoandbackechoamplitudesata40dBgainsetting

24

Table1.Commercialtransducersusedinselectionprocess

Manufacturer
(Model #)

Frequency

Diameter

Magnetic

Xactex
(CM-HR 1/42.25)
Olympus NDT
(M1057)

Xactex
(CM-HR 1/2-5)

Olympus NDT

2.25 MHz

5 MHz

(CM-HR 1/4-10)

Olympus NDT
(M1054)

Xactex
(CM-HR 1/2-10)

Xactex
(CM-HR 1/8-20)

No

Yes

No
0.50 in.

5 MHz

Yes
0.50 in.

10 MHz

10 MHz

0.25 in.

0.25 in.

10 MHz

No

Yes

No
0.50 in.

20 MHz

25

0.25 in.

5 MHz

(M1042)

Xactex

0.25 in.

0.125 in.

No


Figure16.Flawechoandbackechoofrodwitha0.25in.reductionindiameter

onthepulserreceiver.The5MHz0.5in.diametermagnetictransducer(OlympusNDTM1042)
wasselectedtoinspecttherods.Thistransducerprovidedthelargestechoamplitudes
resultinginincreasedrangeofinspectionforrodlength,andthemagneticsurfaceprovideda
consistentcouplingforce.

3.4 WavelengthinSteelRod
Thisresearchinvestigatedtheuseofultrasonicwavestodetectflawsinsteelrods.Toensure
bulkwavepropagation,thewavelengthoftheultrasonicpulseshouldbeatleastoneorderof
magnitudelessthanthediameteroftherod(Bray&Stanley,1989).Thewavelength()is
calculatedbaseduponthefrequency()ofthetransducerandthewavespeed(C)inthe
specificmedium.

Equation26.

26

Thus,toensureabulkwaveina1.0in.diameterrod,thewavelengthmustbelessthan0.1in.,
whichcorrespondswithatransducerfrequencygreaterthan2.28MHzinasteelrod.The
wavelengthoftheultrasonicsignalwilldeterminetheminimumflawdetectableinthe
specimen.Ageneralrulestatesthattheminimumdetectableflawdimensionisapproximately
thewavelengthoftheultrasonicpulsefrequencyintroducedintothemedium(Figure17).In
thisresearchpulseechotestingwasevaluatedasamethodtodetecta0.125in.minimum
dimension.

Figure17.Minimumdetectableflawdimensioninsteelformultipleultrasonicpulsefrequencies

3.5 EndPreparationandTransducerCoupling
Theendofeachrodtestedwasmachinedata90degreeanglerelativetothelongitudinalaxis
oftherod.Asignificantvariationintheamplitudeofthesignalcanoccurduetocouplingofthe
transducertotherod.Contaminantslocatedbetweenthetransducerandtheendoftherod
mayresultinpoorcoupling.Therefore,theendofeachrodwascleaned,andacouplantgel

27

wasappliedbeforethetransducerwascoupledtotheendoftherod.Withoutthegel,the
transducercouldnoteffectivelycoupletheultrasonicsignalintotherod,resultinginan
extremelypoorultrasonicwave,ifanyatall.Amagnetictransducerwasusedinmostteststo
provideaconsistentadheringforcebetweenthetransducerandtheendoftherod.

3.6 SteelRodsUsedinTesting
Twotypesofsteelrodswereusedinthisresearch(Figure18).12L14steelrodswereusedfor
fabricatingandtestingvariousgeometriesofsimulatedcorrosion.Williams75ksiallthread
tiebackrodswereusedtoconfirmdetectionofultrasonicwavesinactualtiebackrods.The
propertiesofthe12L14steelandWilliamsgrade75steelareshowninTable2.

Williams tieback rod

12L14 cold drawn rod stock

Figure18.Williamscommercialtiebackrodand12L14rodstockusedintesting

12L14Steel
Thesimulatedcorrosiongeometriesweremachinedfrom1in.diametercoldrolled12L14steel.
12L14isaleadbasedsteelwithasmoothsurfacethatisidealformachining.Thesteeliscold
drawnandfabricatedaccordingtoASTMA108(ASTMStandardA108,2007)orASTMA29
(ASTMStandardA29,2005).

28

WilliamsGrade75AllThreadTiebackRods
Williams1in.diametertiebackrodswereusedtoevaluatethedetectionofultrasonicwavesin
commercialrods.Thegrade75allthreadrodswereacontinuouslythreadedrodspecially
designedtobeusedasconcreteformingtierodsandanchors.Allthreadtiebackrodsare
availableinlengthsupto50feet.Therodsaremanufacturedwithaspecialthreaddesignedto
meettherequirementsofASTMA615(ASTMStandardA615,2008).
Table2.Propertiesfor12L14steelandWilliamsgrade75tiebackrod

Property

12L14

Williams tieback rod

Density (lbs/ft3)

481 - 501

481 - 501

Poisson's Ratio

0.27 - 0.30

0.27 - 0.30

Elastic Modulus (ksi)

27,560 - 30,460

27,560 - 30,460

Tensile Strength (ksi)

78

100

Yield Strength (ksi)

60

75

3.7 VelocityCalculationforSteelRods
Determiningthewavespeedinthesteelspecimenswasnecessaryforcalculatingspecific
geometriesofthesteel.Ultrasonicsignalswererecordedfor1.0ft.longsectionsof12L14steel
andgrade75Williamstiebackrods.Itwasnecessarytodeterminethewavespeedusingthe

29

firstandsecondbackecho.Apotentialdelayinthesignalcanoccuratthemainbang,because
thesignalismeasuredastheelectricalimpulseentersthetransducer,butthebackechoesare
measuredwhentheultrasonicwaveimpactsthetransducer.Afullsignal,containingtwoback

Figure19.Fullultrasonicsignalfor1.0ft.long1.0in.diameter12L14steelrodforcalculatingwavespeed

echoeswasrecorded(Figure19).Todeterminethearrivaltimeofthebackecho,itwas
necessarytodeterminewhenthebackechosignalfirstrisesabovethenoise.Thegraphsofthe
firstandsecondbackechoesareshownbelowtodeterminethestarttimeofeachbackecho
(Figure20.)Tofindthestarttime,itwasfirstnecessarytoinspectthemainbangsignal.The
directionthatthesignalamplitudefirsttravelsaboveorbelowthehorizontaltimeaxis
determinesthedirectionofthearrivalofthebackechoes.Inthecaseshown,themainbang
travelsinthenegativedirectionfirst;thusthearrivalofthefirstandsecondbackechoeswill
occurinthenegativedirection.Individualpointswereplottedinthegraphstovisualizethe
departureoftheechoesfromthesignalnoise.Thearrivaltimesofthemainbangandfirstand

30

Figure20.Mainbangandfirstandsecondbackechoesfor1.0ft.long1.0in.diametersteelrod

secondbackechoeswererecorded(Table3).Then,thetimebetweenthefirstandsecondback
echoeswasdividedbytwotofindthewavespeedperfootofrod.Twolengthsarenecessary
toaccountforthewavetravelingdowntherodandthenreturningtothetransducer.Thebulk
longitudinalwavespeedsforthesteelusedinthefollowingresearchareshownbelow(Table
4.)The12L14SteelusedforthesimulatedcorrosionrodsandtheWilliamstiebackrods

31

Table3.Arrivaltimeofultrasonicsignalcomponents.

Signal Component
Main Bang
1st Back Echo
2nd Back Echo

Overall Time
0.00 s
104.02 s
208.05 s

Table4.Wavespeedof12L14steeland75ksiWilliamssteelrods

Steel Specification

Longitudinal Wave Speed (c1)

12L14 Steel
75 ksi Williams

19,220 ft/s
19,190 ft/s

exhibitednearlyidenticalwavespeeds.Thepotentialdelayoftheultrasonicsignalenteringthe
rodwasthencalculated.Anaccuratewavespeedwascalculatedbetweenthefirstandsecond
backechoes,thistimewassubtractedfromthetimebetweenthemainbangandfirstechoto
calculatethetimedelay.Thedelaywascalculatedtobe0.01s.Anegativedelayisphysically
impossible,butsincethetimebetweendatapointsis0.018s,theerrorisduetouncertainty
inthemeasurement.Thus,thedelaybetweenthestartofthemainbangandthesignal

enteringtherodisconsiderednegligible.

32

DetectingPhysicalGeometryofSimulatedCorrosion

Corrosionisaprimarydangerthatwillcompromisethestrengthofsteeltiebackrodsthrougha
reductionincrosssection.Toinvestigatehowthephysicalgeometryoftherodaffectsthe
ultrasonicsignal,corrosionwassimulatedbymachiningreduceddiameterregionsintosteel
rods(Figure21andFigure22).Thesimulatedcorrosionischaracterizedbyasmoothsurfaceas
opposedtotheirregularsurfaceinactualcorrosion.Thisapproximationofthecorrosion
surfacereducesthedispersionoftheultrasonicwaveinthecorrodedregion,simplifyingthe
investigationofthefundamentalprinciplesaffectingtheultrasonicsignal.

Figure21.Actualcorrosionofasteelrod

Figure22.Simulatedcorrosionofasteelrod

4.1 LocationofLeadingEdgeofSimulatedCorrosion
Three12L14steelrods,3ft.longand1in.indiameter,weremachinedwithsimulated
corrosionatshort,middle,andlongdistancesfromthetransducer(Figure23).Thesectionsof
simulatedcorrosion,0.5in.diameterand2.0in.long,weremachinedat8.94in.,16.06in.,and
23.03in.alongthelengthsofthesteelrods.Theultrasonicsignalsfromtheserodswereused
toidentifythelocationsofsimulatedcorrosion.Thelocationofsimulatedcorrosionwas

33

0.500in.

8.94in.

2.0in.

1.00 in.

3ft.

ShortDistanceRod
0.500 in.

16.06in.in.

1.00 in.

2.0 in.

3ft.

MiddleDistanceRod
0.500 in.

23.03in.

3ft.

1.00in.

2.0 in.

LongDistanceRod
90
*Transducerwasmounted
ontheleftendoftherod.
*Alltransitionsindiameter
were90asshownatright

Figure23.3ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswith2.0in.lengthof0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosionusedfor
detectionofsimulatedcorrosionlocation

detectablebasedonthetimebetweenthemainbangandtheleadingedgeoftheflawecho
(Figure24).Adistinctsecondflawechoappearsintheshortandmiddledistancerods.
Dependinguponthelocationofthesimulatedcorrosion,thesecondflawechoandsuccessive
trailingechoesmayarriveatthesametimeasthefirstbackecho.Whenthisoverlapoccurs,
locatingthearrivaltimeofthebackechoisdifficult.

34

Figure24.Ultrasonicsignalsforsimulatedcorrosionlocatedat8.94in.,16.06in.,and23.03in.fromtheendof
therod.

Thelength,L,fromthetransducertotheleadingedgeofsimulatedcorrosioncanbecalculated
usingthefollowingformula:

Equation27

whereC1isthebulklongitudinalwavespeedofthematerial,andtisthetimebetweenthe
mainbangandtheleadingedgeoftheflawecho.Thetimewasdividedbytwobecausethe
ultrasonicpulsepassesdownthelengthoftherodtotheflawandthenreturnsbacktothe

35

ultrasonictransducer.Theformulaforlengthwasusedtodeterminethelocationoftheflaw
(Table5)forthethreerodsinFigure24.Alongitudinalwavespeed,basedonexperimental
data,ofC1=19,220ft/sforthe12L14steelrodswasused.Theresultsindicatethatthelocation
ofsimulatedcorrosionwitha90transitioncanbeaccuratelydeterminedfromtheultrasonic
signal.Eachsectionofsimulatedcorrosionwaslocatedtowithin0.13%ofthemeasured
locationusingtheultrasonicsignal.
Table5.Comparisonofmeasuredandcalculatedsimulatedcorrosionlocations

MeasuredSimulated
CorrosionLocation(in.) FlawEchoTime(s)
8.94
77.71
16.06
139.62
23.03

199.73

CalculatedSimulated
CorrosionLocation(in.)
8.95
16.08

%Difference
0.12%
0.13%

23.00

0.11%

4.2 DiameterCharacterization
Threesetsofspecimensweretestedtoinvestigatetheeffectofthediameterofsimulated
corrosiononthereceivedultrasonicsignal.Thefirstsetofrodswere3.0ft.longwith0.5in.,
1.0in.,and1.5in.diameterswithoutsimulatedcorrosion(Figure25).Theserodswereusedto
investigatetheeffectofroddiameterontheultrasonicsignal.Thebackechoandsubsequent
trailingechoesfromthe0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.diameterrodswererecordedinFigure26.
Thetimebetweentrailingechoes(t)wasmeasuredforeachofthethreerodsandcompared
withthecalculatedtimeestablishedbyLight&Joshi(Equation25)forsteelrodswithC1=

36

0.50in.

3ft.
1.00in.

3ft.
1.50in.

3ft.

Figure25.3ft.longrodswith0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.diameters

Figure26.Trailingechoesfor0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.diameterrods

37

19,220ft/sandC2=10,597ft/s.C1wasmeasuredinthelabandC2wasapublishedvalue(Bray
&Stanley,1989).TheresultsconfirmedtheaccuracyoftheLight&Joshiequationfor
multipleroddiameters(Table6).
Table6.Comparisonofmeasuredversuscalculatedtimebetweentrailingechoesusingtheroddiameter

RodDiameter
(in.)
0.5
1.0
1.5

MeasuredTime
CalculatedTime
betweenTrailingEchoes BetweenTrailingEchoes
%
(s)
(s)
Difference
3.27
3.28
0.2%
6.61
6.56
0.9%
10.07
9.84
2.3%

Thetimebetweenechoesandthediameterofeachrodwasplottedandcomparedwiththe
equationfromLightandJoshi(Figure27).Thelineartrendlinefortheexperimentaldatahad
aslopeof0.1498in/scomparedto0.1525in/sfortheLight&Joshiequationwhichresultedin
a1.8%difference.Theseresultsshowsastrongcorrelationbetweendiameterofarodwithout
simulatedcorrosionandthetimebetweentrailingechoesintheultrasonicsignal.

Figure27.Correlationbetweenroddiameterandtimebetweentrailingechoes

38

Thesecondsetofrodsincludeda3ft.long1.0in.diameterrodwitha2.0in.lengthof0.5in.
diametersimulatedcorrosion,a3ft.long0.5in.diameterrodwithoutsimulatedcorrosionand
a3ft.long1.0in.diameterrodwithoutsimulatedcorrosion(Figure28).A45transitionwas
includedateachendofthesimulatedcorrosiontoaddresstheconcernthatcorrodedregions
donottypicallyexhibitanabrupttransition.The45transitionalsoreducedtheamplitudeof
thesecondflawechothatoccuredcoincidentwiththebackechointheultrasonicsignal.These
rodswereusedtoinvestigatetheeffectof0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosiononthe
ultrasonicsignal.Thebackechoandsuccessivetrailingechoeswererecordedforeachrod
(Figure29).Thetimebetweenthetrailingechoes(t)foreachofthethreerodswasrecorded

0.50 in.

3ft.

0.500 in.

16.0625in.

1.00 in.

2.0 in.

3ft.

1.00in.

36in.
*Transducerwasmounted
onleftendoftherod.

45

*Thetransitionin
diameterwas45asshown
atright
Figure28.1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.simulatedcorrosiondiametercomparedwith0.5in.diameterand
1.0in.diameterrods

39

0.5in.rod

1.0in.rodwithsimulatedcorrosion

1.0in.rod

Figure29.Comparisonofultrasonicsignalsfor1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosion
versus0.5in.and1in.diameterrods

inTable7.Therodwithsimulatedcorrosionhadatimebetweentrailingechoesof3.50s
whichwasmuchclosertothe3.27sinthe0.5in.diameterrodthanthe6.61sinthe1.0in
diameterrod.UsingEquation25,thediameterofeachrodwascalculatedbasedonthetime
betweentrailingechoes.Thetimebetweentrailingechoesfortherodwithsimulatedcorrosion
correlatestoa0.53in.minimumroddiameter.Thisvaluecomparedwiththemeasured0.50

40


Table7.Calculateddiameterfor1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosion,0.5in.diameter
rod,and1.0in.diameterrod.

Specimen

Smallest
Measuredt
Diameter(in.)
(s)

Calculated
Diameter(in)

%
Difference

0.5in.Rod

0.5

3.27

0.50

0.2%

1.0in.Rodwith0.5in.Simulated
CorrosionDiameter

0.5

3.50

0.53

6.6%

1.0in.Rod

1.0

6.61

1.01

0.9%

in.diameterhasa6.6%difference.Theseresultsshowedthatthetimebetweentrailing
echoeswasprimarilydependentupontheminimumdiameterofsimulatedcorrosioninthe
rod.Thethirdsetofrodsincludedthree12L14steelrods,3ft.longand1in.indiameter
machinedwitha2.0in.lengthofsimulatedcorrosionwith0.25in.,0.50in.and0.75in.
diameters(Figure30).Theserodswereusedtoinvestigatetrailingechospacingformultiple
diametersofsimulatedcorrosion.Theultrasonicsignalforthe0.25in.diametersimulated
corrosiondidnotexhibitadistinctbackechooranytrailingechoes.Thisisbecausea5MHz
frequencybulkwaveisnotabletopropagatethrougha0.25in.diameter.Abulkwavewillonly
propagatewhenthediameteroftheboundedregionisapproximatelytentimesgreaterthan
thewavelengthoftheultrasonicsignal(Bray&Stanley,1989).Forthe5MHzprobeusedto
generatetheultrasonicsignal,theminimumdiameterisapproximately0.46in.insteel.Thus,a
bulkwavewasnotabletotravelthroughthesimulatedcorrosionregionwithadiameterof
0.25in.

41

0.25in.

16.0in.

1.0in.

2.0 in.

3ft.

0.25in.SimulatedCorrosion
0.50in.

16.0in.

1.0in.

2.0 in.

3ft.

0.5in.SimulatedCorrosion
0.75in.

16.0in.

1.0in.

2.0 in.

3ft.

0.75in.SimulatedCorrosion

90
*Transducerwasmounted
ontheleftendoftherod.
*Alltransitionsindiameter
were90asshownatright

Figure30.3ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswith2.0in.lengthof0.25in.,0.50in.,or0.75in.diametersimulated
corrosion

42


Figure31.Ultrasonicsignalsforsimulatedcorrosiondiameters0.50in.,and0.75in.

Thebackechoandsubsequenttrailingechoesforthe0.5in.and0.75in.diametersof
simulatedcorrosionwererecorded(Figure31).Therodwith0.75in.simulatedcorrosion
diameterexhibitedapatternofsuperimposedtrailingechoes.Trailingechoeswereintroduced
frommodeconversionsinthe0.75in.diameterregionandthe1.0in.diameterregionThe
firsttrailingechorepresentedthemodeconversioninthe0.75in.diameterregion,andthe
secondtrailingechorepresentedthemodeconversioninthe1.0in.diameterregion.Thetime
betweenthebackechoandthefirsttrailingechowasmeasuredandthecorresponding
simulatedcorrosiondiameterwascalculatedas0.73in.Therodwith0.5in.diameter
simulatedcorrosionexhibiteddistincttrailingechoes.(Table8).Therodwith0.5in.diameter
ofsimulatedcorrosionalsoexhibitssuperimposedtrailingechoes.However,sincethe1.0in.

43

outerdiameterisamultipleofthesimulatedcorrosiondiameterthesuperimposedtrailing
echoesarriveatthesametimeappearingasasingletrailingechoes.Thetimebetweentrailing

Table8.Calculateddiameterfor1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.and0.75in.diametersimulatedcorrosion

Specimen

Smallest
Diameter(in.)

Measured
Calculated
%
t(s)
Diameter(in) Difference

0.5in.Simulated
CorrosionDiameter

0.5

3.50

0.53

6.6%

0.75in.Simulated
CorrosionDiameter

0.75

4.76

0.73

3.2%

echoeswasmeasuredandthecorrespondingsimulatedcorrosiondiameterwascalculatedas
0.53in.Theseresultsshowedthat0.5in.diameterand0.75in.diametersimulatedcorrosion
canbecalculatedin1.0in.diameterrodsusingEquation25.Thetimebetweentrailingechoes
mustbemeasuredfromthebackechotothefirsttrailingechotodetectthesmallestreduced

Figure32.Percentreductionoforiginalloadcapacityforsimulatedcorrosionina1in.diameterrod

44

diameter.Thereductionindiameterofasteelrodcorrelatesdirectlywithareductionofload
capacity.Thetensileloadcapacityofasteelrodisdependentuponthesmallestcrosssectional
areaoftherodperpendiculartothelongitudinalaxis.Thereductioncanbecalculatedin
percentoforiginalloadcapacitybasedupontheoriginaldiameter(do)andthecorroded
diameter(dc).Thepercentreductioninloadcapacityfora1in.diameterrodwithreduced
crosssectionisplottedinFigure32.The0.75in.diametersimulatedcorrosionrepresentsa
43.75%reductioninloadcapacityandthe0.5in.diameterrepresentsa75%reductioninload
capacity.

Equation28

4.3 LengthofSimulatedCorrosionCharacterization
Inordertoinvestigatetheeffectoflengthofsimulatedcorrosionontheultrasonicsignalthe
backechoandfirsttrailingechowereexamined.Thefrequencycontentofthebackechowas
inspectedforashiftofthepeakfrequencywithachangeinthelengthofsimulatedcorrosion.
Also,theratioofmaximumamplitudesofthetrailingandbackechoeswereexaminedfora
changewiththelengthofsimulatedcorrosion.Allultrasonicsignalspresentedinthissection
weregeneratedwiththeM1042OlympusNDT5MHztransducer.Thesignalwaveformand
frequencycontentareshowninFigure33.

45

Figure33.Signalwaveformandfrequencycontentfor5MHzM1041OlympusNDTtransducer

4.3.1 ChangeinFrequencyContentofBackEchoforLengthofSimulatedCorrosion
Thefrequencycontentofthebackechowasinvestigatedtoidentifyanytrendsassociatedwith
thelengthofsimulatedcorrosion.Thebackechoesofseveralrodswithvariouslengthof
simulatedcorrosionwereevaluatedusingaFastFourierTransform(FFT).TheFFTanalysisof
thebackechoshowsthefrequencycontentofthetimedomainsignal.AnFFTrequiresthe
numberofdatapointsbe2NwhereNisaninteger.Todecreasetheeffectofnoiseonthe
signalonlytheoscillationswhichcrossthexaxiswereconsideredintheanalysis,andthe
remainderofthesignalwasreplacedwithzeros(Figure34.)Beforethefrequencyofthesignal
wasanalyzedforsimulatedcorrosion,twotestswereperformedtoinvestigatetheeffectof
lengthanddiameteroftherodonthefrequencyoftheultrasonicsignal.Thefirsttestincluded

46


Figure34.Backechoof1.0ft.longrodwitha0.5in.simulatedcorrosiondiameterwithandwithoutzeros

threerods3.0ft.inlengthwithdiametersof0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.AnFFTwascalculated
forthebackechoineachrod.Thepeakfrequenciesforthe0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.diameter
rodswere6.10MHz,3.91MHz,and4.39MHzrespectively(Figure35).Thesecondtest
includedthreerods1.0in.indiameterwithlengthsof1.0ft.,3.0ft.,and10.0ft.AnFFTwas
calculatedforthebackechoineachrod.Theresultsshowedthatthepeakfrequenciesforthe
1.0ft.,3.0ft.,and10.0ft.longrodswere4.39MHz,3.66MHz,and4.64MHz(Figure36.)
Figure35andFigure36showthatthepeakfrequencyofthebackechocanvarywithbothrod
diameterandrodlength.However,adefiniterelationshipbetweenpeakfrequency,rod
diameterandrodlengthwasnotestablishedinthisstudy.

47


Figure35.FFTfor3.0ft.longrodswith0.5in.,1.0in.,and1.5in.diameters

Figure36.FFTforbackechoof1.0in.diameterrodswith1.0ft.,3.0ft.,and10.0ft.lengths

48

Twosetsofrods1.0in.indiameterand1.0ft.and3.0ft.inlengthweretestedtoidentifyany
correlationforeachspecificlengthanddiameterofrods.Thefirstsetofrodsincludedfive1.0
ft.longsteelrodswith0.5in.simulatedcorrosiondiameterforlengthsof0.5in.,1in.,2in.,4
in.,and8in.(Figure37).A90transition,fromtheoriginalroddiametertothesimulated
corrosiondiameter,wasusedoneachrod.Thelocationofthesimulatedcorrosionwas2.0in.
fromtheendofeachrod.TheFFTforthebackechowascomparedforeachofthefiverods

12in.
0.500
1.00
9.5in.
0.5in.
12in.
0.500
1.00
9in.

1.0
12in.
0.500
1.00

8in.

2.0in.
12in.
0.500
1.00
4.0

6.0in.
12in.

0.500
1.00
8.0in.

2in.

Figure37.1.0in.diameter1.0ft.longrodswithdifferentlengthsofsimulatedcorrosion

49

Figure38.Frequencyanalysisoffirstbackechoformultiplelengthsofsimulatedcorrosionina1.0in.diameter
1.0ft.longsteelrod

(Figure38).Thepeakfrequencyofthebackechoforeachrodwasplottedwithrespecttothe
simulatedcorrosionlengthexpressedasapercentageoftotalrodlength.Theresultsshowan
increaseinpeakfrequencywithanincreaseinpercentlengthofsimulatedcorrosion.
Thesecondsetofrodsconsistedof3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswith2in.,6in.,and10in.
lengthsofsimulatedcorrosionstartingat9in.fromthetransducer(Figure39).Theserods
wereusedtoinvestigatearelationshipbetweenthelengthofsimulatedcorrosionandthepeak
frequencyofthebackechoin3.0ft.longrodswith1.0in.diameters.Thepeakfrequencyof
eachbackechowasplottedwithrespecttothelengthofsimulatedcorrosionexpressedasa

50

9.0in.

0.500in.

1.00 in.

2.0in.

36in.

0.500 in.

9.0in.

1.00 in.

6.0in.
36in.

0.500 in.

9.0in.

1.00in.

10.0 in.
36in.

90
*Transducerwasmounted
onleftendoftherod.
*Alltransitionswere90
asshownatright

Figure39.3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswith2.0in.,6.0in.,and8.0in.lengthsofsimulatedcorrosion
startingat9in.alongtherod

51

Figure40.Peakfrequencyofthebackechofor3.0ft.longrodswith2.0in.,6.0in.,and10.0in.lengthsof
simulatedcorrosion.

percentageoftotalrodlength(Figure40).Theresultsshowanincreaseinpeakfrequencywith
anincreaseinpercentsimulatedcorrosion.The0.5in.and1.0in.diameterrodswithout
simulatedcorrosioncreatetheupperandlowerboundofthefrequencyshift.The1.0in.
diameterrodrepresentsarodwithoutanysimulatedcorrosionandformsthelowerboundof
thepeakfrequency.The0.5in.diameterrodrepresentsarodwithfull0.5in.diameter
simulatedcorrosionandformstheupperboundofthepeakfrequency.Theshiftinpeak
frequencyshowsthattheincreaseinsimulatedcorrosionlengthactsasafilterforcertain
frequenciesintheultrasonicsignal.

52

Overall,theresultsindicatethatanincreaseinpeakfrequencyofthebackechooccurswithan
increaseinthelengthofsimulatedcorrosionfor1.0ft.and3.0ft.longrodswitha1.0in.
diameter.The3.0ft.longrodsexhibitedastrongercorrelationthanthe1.0ft.longrods,but
thenumberofdatapointsforeachrodlengthwaslimited.

4.3.2 ChangeinBackEchoAmplitudewithLengthofSimulatedCorrosion
Themaximumamplitudesofthebackechoandthefirsttrailingechowereinvestigatedto
identifyarelationshipwiththelengthofsimulatedcorrosion.Thebackechorepresentsan
ultrasonicpulseundergoingdirectreflectionfromtheendoftherod,whilethefirsttrailing
echoincludesonemodeconversionwithshearwavepropagationacrosstheminimum
diameteroftherod.
Thesetof1.0ft.(Figure37)longrodswereusedfortesting.Thebackechoandfirsttrailing
echowererecordedforeachrod(Figure41).Themaximumamplitudesofthebackechoand
thefirsttrailingechowererecordedinTable9.Theratiooftheamplitudeofthefirsttrailing
echotothebackechoincreaseswiththelengthofsimulatedcorrosion.Theamplituderatiofor
eachlengthofsimulatedcorrosionwasplottedinFigure42.Theresultsshownastrong
correlationbetweenthepercentlengthofsimulatedcorrosionandtheratioofpeaktrailing
echotothebackecho.Theincreaseinamplitudeofthetrailingechorelativetotheamplitude
ofthebackechowasduetotheincreasedlengthofsimulatedcorrosion.Assumingapoint
sourceforatransducer,Figure43showsacrosssectionoftheultrasonicwavethatreflects
fromthesimulatedcorrosionregionfora0.5in.and8in.lengthofsimulatedcorrosion.

53

Figure41.Backechoandfirsttrailingechofor1.0ft.longrodswithmultiplelengthsofsimulatedcorrosion

54

Table9.Maximumamplitudesofbackechoandfirsttrailingecho

BackEcho
1stTrailingEcho
AmplitudeRatio

8in.Region
0.0316
0.0637
2.011

4in.Region
0.0443
0.0568
1.280

2in.Region
0.0456
0.0517
1.135

1in.Region
0.0488
0.0464
0.951

0.5in.Region
0.0423
0.0186
0.439

Figure42.Ratiooftrailingechopeakamplitudeandbackechopeakamplitudefor1.0in.rods

Thelinesthatbordertheshadedregiontravelthroughthepointsdefinedbythebeginningand
endofthesimulatedcorrosion.Theshadedregionrepresentstheportionofthewavethatwill
reflectfromthesimulatedcorrosionsurface.Thereflectionsinthisregionincludeshearwaves
duetomodeconversion.Alongerlengthofsimulatedcorrosioncorrespondswithalarger
surfaceareaforshearwavereflections,whichinturnincreasestheamplitudeofthefirst
trailingechorelativetotheamplitudeofthebackecho.

55

0.5in.lengthofsimulatedcorrosion

Portionofwavethat
reflectsfromthesimulated
corrosionsurface

8.0in.lengthofsimulatedcorrosion

Figure43.Comparisonofreflectionfromthesimulatedcorrosionsurface

56

Theamplitudeofthebackechoandfirsttrailingechowerealsorecordedforthesetof3.0ft.
longrods(Figure39).Theratioofthefirsttrailingechotothebackechowascalculatedand
plotted(Figure44).Theratioforthe2.0in.,6.0in.,and10.0in.longsimulatedcorrosionwas
0.972,1.113,and2.307respectively.Similartothe1.0ft.longrods,theresultsshowthatthe
ratiooftrailingechoamplitudetobackechoamplitudeincreaseswiththelengthofsimulated
corrosion.

Figure44.Ratiooftrailingechoandbackechofor2.0in.,6.0in.and10.0in.longsimulatedcorrosionin3.0ft.
long12L14rods

4.4 TransitionCharacterization
Theeffectofthetransitionfromtheoriginalroddiametertothesimulatedcorrosiondiameter
wasalsoexamined.Thetransitiongeometryofthesimulatedcorrosionregionaffectsthe
amountofenergythatreturnstothetransducerafterreflectingfromthetransition

57

surface.Sixrods1ft.longand1in.indiameter,weremachinedwitha2in.lengthof0.5in.
diametersimulatedcorrosionatmidlength.Atransitionwasmachinedineachrodatanglesof
90,45,30,15,10,and5(Figure45).Theresultingultrasonicsignalforeachrodwas
plotted(Figure46).Twolineswerealsoplottedoneachgraphtoshow(1)the"frontofthe
flaw"wherethetransitiontosimulatedcorrosionbeginsand(2)theendoftherod.Two
observationsweremadefromtheultrasonicsignals.First,adecreaseintransitionanglecaused
anincreaseinarrivaltimeoftheflawechointheultrasonicsignal.Thisshiftintimewas
plottedversusthetransitionangle(Figure47).Theresultsshowanincreasingdelayintheflaw
echodependentuponthetransitionangle.Thesecondobservationwasthattheamplitudeof

0.500 in.

5in.

2.0 in.

12in.

*Transducerwasmounted
onleftendoftherod.

1.00 in.

*Therodsweremachined
withtransitionsof90,45,
30,15,10,and5
Figure45.1.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswithmultipletransitionanglesusedfordetectionofsimulated
corrosion

58


Figure46.Ultrasonicsignalfor90,45,30,15,10and5transitionangles

59


Figure47.Delayindetectableflawechoversustransitionangle

theflawechodoesnotdecreaseconsistentlywiththetransitionangle.Thisphenomenonwas
investigatedmorethoroughlybymachiningrodswithamorecompleterangeoftransition
angles.Tocompareamplitudesbetweenvariousrods,thedatawasnormalizedusingnotches
tocomparetwoamplitudeswithinasingleultrasonicsignal.Multiplevariablesaffect
consistenttransducercoupling.Theseinclude:forceappliedtothetransducer(couplingforce),
surfaceconditionoftherodend,amountofcouplinggel,andthepresenceofparticles
betweenthetransducerandthesurfaceofthespecimen.Thesevariablesaredifficultto
controlconsistently.Tomaintainaconsistentcomparison,anotchwasaddedtoeachrodto
createarepeatablebaselineechoineveryultrasonicsignal.Thesignalechoassociatedwith
thereflectionfromthisnotchwascomparedtotheamplitudesofanyechoesofinterestin
ordertonormalizethedata.Threenotchlocationswereevaluatedtoselectanappropriate
baselinenotchlocation.Eachnotchwascutintoa1in.diameter,6in.longrod.Thenotchwas

60

made0.125in.deeparoundthecircumferenceoftherodandwas0.25in.wide(Figure48).
Thenotcheswerecutatthreedifferentdistancesfromtheleadingedgeoftherod:0.5in.,1.0
in.,and1.5in.Therodsweretestedwiththe5MHzmagnetictransducer,andtheultrasonic
signalwasrecorded(Figure49).Thenotchlocated1in.awayfromtheultrasonictransducer
wasselectedbecauseitprovidedanechothatcouldbemeasuredinthesameorderof
magnitudeastheflawechoesfoundinFigure46,anddidnotaddextranoisetotheultrasonic
signal.Incontrast,thenotchlocated2in.fromthetransducerprovidedincreasednoise
followingthebackecho,whilethenotchlocated0.5in.fromthetransducerprovidedapulse
withanegligibleamplitude.

6in.

0.5in.

1.00in.

0.75in.

0.25in.
6in.

Ultrasonic
Transducer

1.0in.

0.75in.

1.00in.

0.25in.
6in.

0.75in.

0.5in.

1.00in.

0.25in.

Figure48.6.0in.long1.0in.diameterrodswith0.125in.deep0.25in.widenotches
located0.5in.,1.0in.,and2.0in.fromtheendoftherod

61


Figure49.Notchechocomparisonfornotcheslocated0.5in.,1.0in.,and2.0in.fromtheendoftherod

4.4.1 LinearTransitionswithNotches
Twentytwo1.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswith5incrementsoftransitionangleswere
machined(Figure50).Anotch0.125in.deeparoundthecircumferenceand0.25in.widewas
machinedat1in.fromtheendoftherod.Theamplitudeoftheflawechowasdividedbythe

62

amplitudeoftheechofromthenotchtonormalizethedata.Themaximumamplitudeofthe
flawechofromthesimulatedcorrosionforeachrodwasnormalizedandplotted(Figure51).
Themaximumamplitudeoftheflawechowasdividedbythemaximumamplitudeofthenotch

0.500 in.

5in.

2.0 in.

12in.

*Therodsweremachined
withtransitionanglesof
90,85,80,75,70,65,
60,55,50,47.5,45,
42.5,40,35,32.5,30,
27.5,25,20,15,10,5

1.00 in.

Figure50.1.0ft.long1.0in.diameterrodswithmultipletransitionangles

63


Figure51.Normalizedmaximumamplitudeofflawechoversustransitionangle

echo.Thenormalizedamplitudedecreasedsharplyfromatransitionangleof90to75.
However,insteadofcontinuingtodecline,thenormalizedamplitudeleveledoffandthen
showedseveralsmallpeaksalongwithasignificantpeakatatransitionangleof30anda
smallerpeakatatransitionangleofapproximately43.Thepeakswereinvestigatedusingthe
raymethod,assumingapointsourceattheendoftherod.Twopossiblescenarioswere
considered.
Thefirstscenarioconsideredwasthedirectlongitudinalwavereflectionfromthetransition
surface.AccordingtoSnell'slaw(Figure3),alongitudinalwavereflectsattheangleof
incidenceofthelongitudinalwavearrivalatthesurface,becausethewavespeedsarethesame
(Figure52).Table10documentstheangleoftravelofthereflectedlongitudinalwavewith

64

tansitio
initi

Figure52.Longitudinalwavereflectionfromtransitionsurface

respecttotheaxisoftherod.Whenthelongitudinalwavereflectsfromthetransitionsurface
ata90angletothelongitudinalaxisofthebar,thewavewillreflectfromtheopposite
transitionsurfaceonemoretimeandreturntothepointsource,duetosymmetry.This90
reflectionoccursata42.5transitionangle.Thisrepresentsthesmallpeakatapproximately
43inFigure51.Thevaluewasapproximatebecausethetransducerwasapproximatedasa
pointsource.

65

Table10.Angleoflongitudinalwavereflectionfromtransitionsurface

TransitionAngle

InitialWaveAngle

IncidentAngle

ReflectedWaveRelativetoRodAxis

transition
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
42.5
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90

initial
4.76
4.76
4.75
4.73
4.71
4.69
4.67
4.64
4.62
4.61
4.58
4.55
4.51
4.48
4.44
4.40
4.36
4.33
4.29

1
80.24
75.24
70.25
65.27
60.29
55.31
50.33
45.36
42.87
40.39
35.42
30.45
25.49
20.52
15.56
10.60
5.64
0.67
4.29

axis
165.24
155.24
145.25
135.27
125.29
115.31
105.33
95.36
90.00
85.39
75.42
65.45
55.49
45.52
35.56
25.60
15.64
5.67
4.29

Thesecondscenarioconsideredwasthedirectshearwavemodeconversionfromthetransition
surface.Theinitiallongitudinalwavemodeconvertsatthetransitionsurfaceproducingashear
wavereflection.AccordingtoSnell'slaw,theshearwavereflectsatanincidentanglethatis
dependentuponthearrivalincidentangleandthespeedsofthelongitudinalwave(C1)and
shearwave(C2)(Figure53).Table11documentstheangleoftravelofthereflectedshearwave
withrespecttotheaxisoftherod.Whentheshearwavereflectsfromthetransitionsurface

66

tansition
initial

Figure53.Shearwavereflectionfromtransitionsurface

ata90angletothelongitudinalaxisoftherod,thewavereflectsfromtheoppositetransition
surfaceonemoretimeandreturntothepointsource,duetosymmetry.This90reflection
occursata27.8transitionangle.Thisrepresentsthelargepeakatapproximately28in
Figure51.Thevaluewasapproximatebecausethetransducerwasapproximatedasapoint
source.

67

Table11.Angleofshearwavereflectionfromtransitionsurface

Transition
Angle
transition
5
10
15
20
25
27.8
30
35
40
45
50
55
60
65
70
75
80
85
90

InitialWave
Angle
initial
4.76
4.76
4.75
4.73
4.71
4.70
4.69
4.67
4.64
4.61
4.58
4.55
4.51
4.48
4.44
4.40
4.36
4.33
4.29

Incident
Long.Angle
1
80.24
75.24
70.25
65.27
60.29
57.50
55.31
50.33
45.36
40.39
35.42
30.45
25.49
20.52
15.56
10.60
5.64
0.67
4.29

Incident
ShearAngle
2
32.95
32.26
31.30
30.09
28.64
27.71
26.99
25.14
23.12
20.95
18.66
16.24
13.74
11.16
8.51
5.83
3.11
0.37
2.37

ReflectedWave
RelativetoRodAxis
axis
117.95
112.26
106.30
100.09
93.64
90.00
86.99
80.14
73.12
65.95
58.66
51.24
43.74
36.16
28.51
20.83
13.11
5.37
2.37

Overall,theresultsprovideevidencetosupporttwoconclusions.First,exceptforthe27.5
transitionangle,theflawechoexperiencedasignificantdecreaseinamplitudebelow80but
wasstilldetectable.Theflawechowasdetectableforgradualtransitionsaslowas5.
Second,transitionscauseadelayintheultrasonicsignalbetweenthemainbangandtheflaw
echo.Themoregradualthetransition,thelongerthedelay.Thelargestdelaywas23.8sfor
the5transitionwhichcorrespondstoa5.5in.insteelrods.Thus,thelocationofsimulated
corrosionmustbeadjustedbaseduponthetransitionangleofthesimulatedcorrosion.

68

5 WilliamsCommercialTiebackRodTesting
Therodstestedtoevaluatethephysicalgeometryofsimulatedcorrosionweremachinedfrom
12L14smoothrodstock.Commerciallyavailabletiebackrodsaretypicallyfabricatedwithan
allthreadsurface.Williamscommercialtiebackrodswereselectedfortestingtoevaluate
differencesintheultrasonicsignalduetothethreadedsurface.

5.1 TypesofTiebackRodsUsedinGeotechnicalApplications
Variousstylesoftiebackrodshavebeenusedinconstructionofsheetpilesystems.Thetwo
mostcommonstylesareshownbelow(Figure54).Theupsetthreadstylewascommonin
previousconstruction.Upsetthreadsarerolledintothesteelrod,ratherthancut,toensure
theminordiameterofthethreadsisgreaterthantheouterdiameteroftherod.These
tiebackrodsweretypicallyfabricatedfromsmoothA36steelrod.Themajorityofcurrent
geotechnicalpracticesuseallthreadtiebackrods.Thesetiebackrodsarefabricatedfroma
highgradesteelwiththreadsformedalongtheentirelengthoftherod.

Rods used in old construction

(Upset Threads)

Rods used in new construction

(All-Thread)

Figure54.Upsetthreadandallthreadrods

69

Theultrasonicsignalsfor12L14smoothrodstockandWilliamsallthreadrodswerecompared.
Therodstestedwere10feetlongwitha1.0in.majordiameter.Thefullultrasonicsignalfor
eachtypeofrod,includingmultiplebackechoes,isprovidedinFigure55.Adistinctdifference

Figure55.Comparisonof10ft.longWilliamsthreadedrodand12L14smoothsteelrod

isevidentintheportionofthesignalfollowingeachbackechoforthetworods.Figure56
providesacloserlookatthebackechoandsubsequenttrailingechoesofeachrod.The
ultrasonicsignalforthe12L14steelrodshowsseveraldistincttrailingechoesaftertheback
echo.TheWilliamstiebackrodshowsadistinctbackechowithonlyonedistinguishabletrailing

70

echo.Thetimebetweenthebackechoandthetrailingechowasdifficulttomeasureinthe
Williamsthreadedrodduetoincreasednoiseintheultrasonicsignal.ThreadsintheWilliams
rodcausedispersionoftheultrasonicwaveduetospuriousreflectionsfromthethreaded
surfaces.Sincetrailingechoesinvolveatleastonereflectionfromthesurfaceoftherod,
detectingtrailingechoesfromathreadedsurfaceprovestobedifficult.Thisimpliesthat
calculatingtheexactouterdiameterofathreadedrodmaynotbepossibleusingthetime
betweentrailingechoes(t).Anapproximationofthediametermaybecalculatedusingthet
betweenthepeaks,insteadoftheleadingedge,ofbackechoandthefirsttrailingecho.

Figure56.Trailingechocomparisonfor12L14smoothrodandWilliamsthreadedrod

71

5.2 ProjectedLengthofRodtobeInspected
Themaximumspecimenlengthavailableforthestudywas10ft.long.Thus,aprocesswas
establishedtodeterminethemaximumdetectablerodlengthusingthepulseechomethod
withtheavailablecommercialultrasonictransducers.Threerods,1.0ft.,3.0ft.,and6.0ft.in
length,werecutfromthesameWilliams1.0in.diametertiebackrod.Eachrodwastested
withthepulseechomethodusingtheOlympusNDTM10425MHzmagnetictransducer
coupledtotheendoftherod.Theattenuationoftheultrasonicsignalwasdeterminedby

Figure57.Rectifiedtimedomainsignalsfor1ft.,3ft.and6ft.longWilliamsrods

72

evaluatingthepeakvaluesofsuccessivebackechoesineachrod.ArectifiedAscan,which
acquirestheabsolutevalueoftheultrasonicsignalamplitude,includingalldetectableback
echoes,wasrecorded(Figure57).Theattenuationofthewaveamplitudealongtherodwas
definedbyEquation29(Kolsky,1963)

Equation29

whereaoistheinitialamplitude,isthecoefficientofattenuation,andxisthedistancealong
therod.TheunitsofthecoefficientofattenuationareNepers(Np)perlength,whereaNeper
isadimensionlessquantity.Thepeakamplitudeofeachbackechowasplottedwithrespectto
thedistancetraveled(Figure58.)Thebestfittrendlinewascalculatedanddisplayedwiththe

Figure58.Signalattenuationfor1.0ft.,3.0ft.,and6.0ft.longWilliamsrods.

73

equationandR2value.Theattenuationcoefficients()forthe1ft.,3ft.,and6ft.rodswere
0.177Np/ft.,0.120Np/ft.,and0.096Np/ft.respectively.Thedifferencesinmagnitudeof
wereduetoscatteringwhichoccurredeachtimetheultrasonicwavereflectedfromanendof
therod.Whentheultrasonicwavetraveledanequivalent12feetalongthe1ft.longrod,the
wavereflectedfromanendsurface11times.Forthe3ft.and6ft.longrods,thesame12ft.
equivalentlengthincluded3and1endreflectionsrespectively.Theresultsshowadecreasein
attenuationcoefficientwithadecreaseinthenumberofendsurfacereflections.Longerrods
havefewerreflectionsresultinginasmallerattenuationcoefficient.
Figure55showsthata10ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamstiebackrodexhibits4distinctback
echoesintheultrasonicsignal.Thisshowsthatthepulseechomethodusinga5MHzprobe
couldbeusedtodetectabackechoina1.0in.diameter40ft.longWilliamstiebackrod.This
wasaconservativeestimatesinceanactual40ft.rodwouldnotincludetheattenuationfrom
themultipleendreflectionsinthe10ft.rod.

5.3 SignalAttenuationforWilliamsRodsinSoil
TheeffectofultrasonicsignalattenuationinsoilwasimportantfortestingWilliamscommercial
tiebackrods.Theamountofenergytransmittedintothesurroundingmediumduringultrasonic
inspectionofatiebackrodisdependentuponthepropertiesofthatmedium.Williamstieback
rodswithvarioussurroundingmediaweretestedtoinvestigatetheeffectonsignal
attenuation.Threesectionsof3ft.longWilliamstiebackrodswereplacedinplywoodboxes
withapproximately5.5in.ofcoverineachdirection.Anultrasonictransducerwascoupledto

74

oneendofthetiebackrodwhichprotrudedthroughtheendofthebox(Figure59).Eachbox
wasfilledwithoneofthreesoils:sand,loosesoil,andcompactedsoil.

Figure59.Boxesconstructedforsignalattenuationtestsinsoils

5.3.1 SoilCharacterization
Twosoils,sandandPalousesoil,wereusedinthetests.Thesandwascollectedfromaquarry
runbyAtlasConcretecompanyinLewiston,Idaho.ThePalousesoilwascollectedfromtopsoil
inthePalouseregionofWashingtonState.Thesoilswerecharacterizedaccordingtothe
protocoldevelopedbytheArmyCorpsofEngineersforearthretentionssystems,including
grainsizedistributionandAtterberglimittests(USArmyCorpsofEngineers,1994).
AgrainsizedistributiontestwasperformedaccordingtoASTMD422(ASTMStandardD422,
2007).TheresultswereplottedforeachsoilinFigure60andthecoefficientofuniformity(Cu)
andcoefficientofcurvature(Cc)werecalculatedforeachsoil.Theresultswererecordedin
Table12.

75


Figure60.Grainsizedistributionforsandandsoilsamples

Table12.Soilcharacterization

Type

CoefficientofUniformity
(Cu)

CoefficientofCurvature
(Cc)

Sand

4.65

0.66

PalouseSoil

13.08

0.41

AtterberglimitstestswereperformedaccordingtoASTMD4318(ASTMStandardD4318,2005).
TheAtterberglimitsareascalingsystemusedtocharacterizetherelationshipbetweenthe
watercontentofasoilanditsphysicalbehavior.Theliquidlimit(LL),plasticlimit(PL),plasticity
index(PI),andtheflowindexforthePalousesoilweredetermined.Figure61showsthe

76


Figure61.AtterberglimittestofPalousesoil

experimentaldatausedtodeterminetheliquidlimit(LL).Theplasticlimit(PL)wasmeasured
experimentallyandtheplasticityindex(PI)andtheflowindexwerecalculatedusingLLandPL.
TheresultswereprovidedinTable13.
Table13.ResultsofAtterberglimittestforPalousesoil
PL
LL
PI
Flow Index

23.4
35.3
11.9
-1.33

Usingthesoilpropertiesmeasured,theUSCSsoilclassificationwasdeterminedforsandand
Palousesoil.Thesandusedwasapoorlygradedsand(SP)andthePalousesoilwasasiltysand
(SM).

5.3.2 SoilPreparation
ThesandandloosesoilwereplacedintheboxescompletelysurroundingtheWilliamstieback
rods.Forthesandandloosesoilnocompactionwasused.Forthecompactedsoila25lb.

77

tamperwitha5in.by7in.baseplatewasusedtocompactthesoil.Thesoilwascompactedin
3in.layers.Approximately5in.ofsoilwasplacedintheboxwithoutthetiebackrodand
compactedwithapproximately15blowspersquarefoot.Afterthesecondlayerwas
compacted,theWilliamstiebackrodwaspositionedinthebox.Twomorelayersofsoilwere
compactedontopofthetiebackrodusingthesamecompactiontechnique.
Eachsoilwastestedwithtwowatercontents.Thefirsttestwasperformedusingtheoriginal
watercontentasitarrivedonsite,establishingthe"baseline"watercontent.Aftertestswere
performedwiththe"baseline"watercontent,waterwasaddedatasteadyrateof0.2gallons
perminutefor1hourtosaturatethesoil.Thesoilwasallowedtodrainfor24hoursbeforethe
secondsetoftestswasperformed.Thiswasconsideredthe"wet"condition.Table14records
thecalculatedwatercontentforeachsoilconditionaccordingtoASTMD2216(ASTMStandard
D2216,2005).
Table14.Watercontentforeachsoiltest

Sand

Loose Soil

Compacted Soil

Baseline

5.28%

12.18%

12.18%

Wet

7.74%

28.21%

25.90%

5.3.3 SignalAttenuationforTiebackRodsinSoil
Attenuationtestsof3.0ft.sectionsofthreadedWilliamstiebackrodswereperformedforthe
"baseline"and"wet"conditionforeachsoil.Controltestswithoutanysurroundingsoilwere
alsoperformedoneachofthethreerods.Theultrasonicsignalwasrecordedtodeterminethe
maximumnumberofdetectablebackechoes.Themaximumamplitudeofeachdetectable

78

backechowasplotted,andanexponentialdecaytrendlinewithR2valuewasadded(Figure
62).Theexponentvaluerepresentsthecoefficientofattenuationforthesignalwithrespectto

Figure62.Exponentialdecayofbackechopeaksin3.0ft.longWilliamsrod

distancetraveled.Inordertoevaluaterepeatability,10signalswererecordedforeachsoil,and
thetransducerwasremovedandreappliedaftereachmeasurement.Thecoefficientof
attenuationforeachconditionwasaveraged,andrecordedinTable15.Theresultsshowthat
therewasnomajorchangeinattenuationduetothesurroundingmedium.Thecontrolrods
forsand,loosesoil,andcompactsoilhadanaveragecoefficientofattenuationof0.0803Np/ft.,
0.0705Np/ft.,and0.0883Np/ft.respectively.Thediscrepancybetweeneachofthecontrol
rodswasduetovariationsinthesurfaceattheendofeachrod.Anincreaseinsurface
roughnessincreasesscatteringduringwavereflection.Forsand,thecoefficientsofattenuation
were0.0803Np/ft.,0.0793Np/ft.,and0.0817Np/ft.forthecontrol,"baseline",and"wet"
samples.Therewasnosignificantincreaseinattenuationfromthecontroltothe"baseline"or
"wet"condition.The"baseline"conditionevenhadacoefficientlowerthanthecontrol.For

79

Table15.AttenuationcoefficientsoftheultrasonicsignalforWilliamstiebackrodsinsoils

Sand
Control
0.081
0.074
0.084
0.079
0.079
0.083
0.08
0.079
0.083
0.081
Average
0.0803
Std.Dev.
0.0029
CoV
0.0361

Baseline
0.075
0.084
0.083
0.082
0.08
0.08
0.083
0.073
0.079
0.067
Average
0.0793
Std.Dev.
0.004
CoV
0.0504
zTest
0.640

LooseSoil
Wet
0.078
0.08
0.087
0.085
0.079
0.078
0.081
0.081
0.086
0.082
Average
0.0817
Std.Dev.
0.0033
CoV
0.0404
zTest
1.008

CompactedSoil

Control Baseline
Wet
Control Baseline
0.072
0.069
0.065
0.095
0.076
0.068
0.069
0.074
0.094
0.076
0.066
0.073
0.073
0.083
0.079
0.065
0.072
0.07
0.083
0.076
0.064
0.076
0.075
0.093
0.095
0.077
0.075
0.067
0.081
0.09
0.073
0.075
0.061
0.088
0.08
0.073
0.073
0.073
0.089
0.081
0.075
0.086
0.076
0.093
0.075
0.072
0.086
0.067
0.084
0.075
Average Average Average Average Average
0.0705
0.0754
0.0701
0.0883
0.0803
Std.Dev. Std.Dev. Std.Dev. Std.Dev. Std.Dev.
0.0045
0.0061
0.0049
0.0053
0.0069
CoV
CoV
CoV
CoV
CoV
0.0638
0.0809
0.0699
0.0600
0.0859

zTest
zTest

zTest

2.044
0.190

2.908

Wet
0.083
0.082
0.071
0.07
0.089
0.089
0.083
0.083
0.09
0.091
Average
0.0831
Std.Dev.
0.0074
CoV
0.0890
zTest
1.807

theloosesoilthecoefficientsofattenuationswere0.0705Np/ft.,0.0754Np/ft.,and0.0701
Np/ft.forthecontrol,"baseline",and"wet"samples.Again,therewasnosignificantincrease
inattenuationfromthecontroltothe"baseline"or"wet"condition.Forthecompactsoilthe
coefficientsofattenuationwere0.0883Np/ft.,0.0803Np/ft.,and0.0831Np/ft.forthecontrol,
"baseline",and"wet"samples.Inthiscasetheattenuationcoefficientsforthe"baseline"and
the"wet"conditionwereslightlylessthanthecoefficientofattenuationforthecontrol.Thez
Testforeach"baseline"and"wet"testcomparedwiththecontrolshowedthatalltests,except
the"baseline"forthecompactedsoil,werewithina99%confidenceinterval(2.58 z 2.58).
NormalizeddataisalsoshowninTable16whichiscalculatedbydividingeachofthe"baseline"

80

and"wet"conditiontestsbytheaveragecontrolvalueforeachrod.Forexample,theaverage
"baseline"valueforsandof0.979showsthattheattenuationcoefficientwas97.9%ofthe
averagecontrolvalue.Theseresultsshowthattheattenuationcoefficientforthe"baseline"
and"wet"conditionoftheultrasonicsignalforsand,loosePalousesoil,andcompactPalouse
soilwaswithinplusorminus9.1%forpercentwatercontentsupto7.74%,28.21%,and29.50%
respectivelyforWilliamstiebackrods.
Table16.NormalizedattenuationcoefficientsoftheultrasonicsignalforWilliamstiebackrodsinsoils

Sand
Baseline
Wet
0.934
0.971
1.046
0.996
1.034
1.083
1.021
1.059
0.996
0.984
0.996
0.971
1.034
1.009
0.909
1.009
0.984
1.071
0.834
1.021
Average Average
0.979
1.017
Std.Dev. Std.Dev.
0.067
0.041
CoV
CoV
0.069
0.040

LooseSoil
Baseline
Wet
0.979
0.922
0.979
1.050
1.035
1.035
1.021
0.993
1.078
1.064
1.064
0.950
1.064
0.865
1.035
1.035
1.220
1.078
1.220
0.950
Average Average
1.070
0.994
Std.Dev. Std.Dev.
0.086
0.070
CoV
CoV
0.080
0.070

CompactedSoil
Baseline
Wet
0.861
0.940
0.861
0.929
0.895
0.804
0.861
0.793
1.076
1.008
1.019
1.008
0.906
0.940
0.917
0.940
0.849
1.019
0.849
1.031
Average Average
0.909
0.941
Std.Dev. Std.Dev.
0.078
0.084
CoV
CoV
0.085
0.090

Thepercentoftheincidentwavethatistransmittedtothesurroundingmediaduringa
reflectionisdependentupontheimpedanceofthetwomaterialsincontact(Krautkramer&
Krautkramer,1990).Ifthetwomaterialshavethesameimpedanceandareinperfectcontact,

81

thenalltheenergywilltransferthroughtheboundary.Thetransmittancepercentfortwo
dissimilarimpedancesisgivenby

Equation30

whereZ1istheimpedanceofthesteel(Z=46.0MRayls)andZ2istheimpedanceofthe
surroundingmedia,forthematerialsinthisstudy.Figure63showsthetransmittanceofasteel
rodembeddedinseveralsurroundingmediaincludingwater(Z=1.48MRayls)andconcrete(Z
=8.0MRayls).Foratiebackrodinsoil,partofthesurroundingmediaisair(Z=0.000429
MRayls),whichdrasticallydecreasesthetransmittanceoftheincidentwavetothesurrounding
media.Consideringthataportionofthesurroundingmediaisairandthefirstbackechoonly
hasonereflection,thetransmittanceisnegligible.Thus,theinspectablelengthsoftiebackrods
willnotvarywhentherodsareembeddedinsoils.

Figure63.Transmittanceforsteelwithwaterandconcretesurroundingmedia

82

5.4 ActualTiebackRodswithFlaws
Simulatedcorrosionwasmachinedin3ft.Williamstiebackrodsectionstodetermineifspecific
geometriescouldbedetectedincommercialtiebackrods.Theseincludedlocationof
simulatedcorrosion,diameterofsimulatedcorrosion,lengthofsimulatedcorrosion,andthe
transitionofsimulatedcorrosion.

5.4.1 LocationofSimulatedCorrosion
ThreeWilliamssteelrods,3ft.longand1in.indiameter,weremachinedwithsimulated
corrosionatvariouslocationstovalidatethepulseechomethodforlocationtheleadingedge
ofsimulatedcorrosioninaWilliamstiebackrod.Simulatedcorrosionwitha0.5in.diameter
0.500in.

9.28in.

2.0in.

1.00 in.

36in.
0.500 in.

15.97in.

1.00 in.

2.0 in.

36in.

0.500 in.

22.84in.

36in.

1.00in.

2.0 in.

90
*Transducerwasmounted
onleftendoftherod.
*Alltransitionswere90
asshownatright
Figure64.3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamstiebackrodswith2.0in.lengthof0.5in.simulatedcorrosion
diameterat9.28in.,15.97in.,and22.84in.alongtherod

83

and2.0in.lengthwasmachinedat9.28in.,15.97in.,and22.84in.alongthelengthofthe
steelrods(Figure64).Thelocationofsimulatedcorrosionwaseasilydetectablebasedonthe
timebetweenthemainbangandtheleadingedgeoftheflawecho.Thefollowingsignals
(Figure65)showaflawechoappearingintheultrasonicsignalthatcorrelatesdirectlywiththe
locationoftheflaw.Theformulaforlength(Equation27)wasusedtodeterminethelocation
oftheflaw(Table17)foreachofthethreerodsinFigure65.Thethreerodsshoweda
maximumpercentdifferenceof1.59%betweenmeasuredandcalculatedflawlocation.The

Figure65.Ultrasonicsignalsfrom3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamstiebackrodswith2.0in.lengthof0.5in.
diametersimulatedcorrosionat9.28in.,15.97in.,and22.84in.alongtherod.

84

resultsshowthattheabilitytolocatetheflawpositionwasnotaffectedbythethreadsofthe
Williamsrods.
Table17.Comparisonofmeasuredandcalculatedlocationofsimulatedcorrosion

MeasuredFlawLocation
(in.)
FlawTime(s)
9.28
79.3
15.97
138.3
22.84
197.4

CalculatedFlawLocation(in)
9.13
15.93
22.73

%Difference
1.59%
0.27%
0.47%

5.4.2 DiameterofSimulatedCorrosion
ToverifythedetectionofsimulatedcorrosiondiameteronWilliamstiebackrods,two3ft.long
rodsweremachinedwith0.5in.diameterand0.75in.diametersimulatedcorrosionregions
0.500 in.

16.0in.

2.0 in.

36in.

0.750 in.

16.0in.

1.00 in.

1.00 in.

2.0 in.

36in.

90
*Transducerismounted
onleftsideofrod.
*Alltransitionsare90as
shownatright

Figure66.3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamsrodswith2.0in.lengthsof0.5in.and0.75in.diameter
simulatedcorrosion

85


Figure67.ComparisonofWilliamsrodswith0.5in.and0.75in.diameterofsimulatedcorrosion

(Figure66).Thefirstbackechowitheachdistinguishabletrailingechoeswasprovidedin
Figure67.Thetimebetweenthetrailingechoeswasmeasured(Table18.)UsingEquation25
thediameterwascalculatedfromthespacingofthetrailingechoes.The0.5in.simulated
corrosiondiameterrodhadacalculateddiameterof0.51in.resultingina1.9%difference.The
0.75in.simulatedcorrosiondiameterrodhadacalculateddiameterof0.73resultingina2.6%
difference.Thisprovidesaverystrongcorrelationbetweentheminimumdiameter(or
simulatedcorrosiondiameter)andthetimebetweentrailingechoesfortheWilliamsrod.
Table18.Timebetweentrailingechoesfor0.5in.and0.75in.simulatedcorrosiondiameter

Rod

Smallest
Diameter(in.)

0.5in.SimulatedCorrosion

0.50

3.34

0.51

1.9%

0.75in.SimulatedCorrosion

0.75

4.79

0.73

2.6%

86

Measured
Calculated
%Difference
Time(s) Diameter(in.)

5.4.3 LengthofSimulatedCorrosion
Tworodsweremachinedwith2in.and8in.lengthsofsimulatedcorrosiontoinvestigatethe
lengthofsimulatedcorrosioninWilliamsrods.The0.5in.simulatedcorrosiondiameterwas
machinedin3ft.lengthsof1in.diameterWilliamsrodsstartingat9.0in.fromtheend

9.0in.

0.500in.

2.0in.

1.00 in.

36in.
0.500 in.

9.0in.

1.00in.

10.0 in.
36in.

90
*Transducerismounted
onleftsideofrod.
*Alltransitionsare90as
shownatright
Figure68.3.0ft.long1.0in.diameterWilliamstiebackrodswith2.0in.and10.0in.lengthsof0.5in.diameter
simulatedcorrosion

(Figure68).AnFFTwastakenofthebackechoforeachrod.Theresults(Figure69)showthat
thepeakfrequencyforthe2in.and10in.lengthofsimulatedcorrosionliesbetweenthe0.5in.
diameterand1.0in.diameter3.0ft.longrodof12L14steel.Thisshowsthatthethreadedrod
doesnotaffectthefrequencycontentofthebackecho.Theamplitudeofthebackechoand
firsttrailingechowerealsorecordedforeachrod.Theratioofthefirsttrailingechotothe
backechowascalculatedandplottedwiththedataforthe12L14rodswithsimulatedcorrosion
(Figure70).Theratioforthe2.0in.and10.0in.longsimulatedcorrosionwas1.147and2.050,

87

respectively.Thiswascomparabletothe0.972and2.307valuesforthe12L14rodwith2.0in.
and10.0in.simulatedcorrosionrespectively.

Figure69.FrequencyofultrasonicsignalofWilliamsrodswith2.0inand8.0in.lengthsofsimulatedcorrosion.

Figure70.Ratiooftrailingechoandbackechofor2.0in.and10.0in.longsimulatedcorrosionin3.0ft.long
Williamsrods

88

5.4.4 TransitionofSimulatedCorrosion
Finally,a3ft.longWilliamsrodwasmachinedwitha0.5in.simulatedcorrosiondiameteranda
45transitionangle(Figure71).Thisrodwasusedtoinvestigatetheabilitytodetectthe
location,diameter,andlengthofsimulatedcorrosionforarodwitha45transitionangleina
Williamsrod.ThefullultrasonicsignalfromthepulseechotestwasrecordedfortheWilliams
rodwitha45transition(Figure72).Thesignalshowsadistinctflawandbackecho.Theflaw
andbackechowereeachfollowedbyfourdistincttrailingechoes.

0.500 in.

15.75in.

1.00 in.

2.0 in.
36in.

45o
*Transducerismounted
onleftsideofrod.

Figure71.Rodusedforsimulatedcorrosiondetectionwitha45transitionangle

Figure72.Fullultrasonicsignalfor2in.lengthof0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosionwith45transitionangle
forWilliamstiebackrod

89


Thearrivaltimeoftheflawechowas138.7s.Usingthelongitudinalwavespeedofthe75ksi
steel,theflawlocationwascalculatedtobe15.97in,whichhasa1.41%differencefromthe
measured15.75in.tothebeginningofthetransitionoftheflaw(Table19).Thisshowsthatthe
methodusedinthepreviouschapterforlocatingthepositionofsimulatedcorrosioncanbe
usedinWilliamsrodswitha45transitionangle.
Table19.CalculatedsimulatedcorrosionlocationforWilliamsrodwith45transitionangle

MeasuredFlawLocation
(in.)
FlawTime(s) CalculatedFlawLocation(in)
15.75
138.7
15.97

%Difference
1.41%

ThebackechoandsubsequenttrailingechoeswererecordedfortheWilliamsrodwitha45
transitionangle.Thebackechoandfourtrailingechoeswerevisible(Figure73.)Thearrival
timeofthefirstbackechoandtwotrailingechoeswereusedtocalculatethetimebetween
echoes.Thistimebetweentrailingechoeswasusedtocalculatethediameterofthesimulated

Figure73.Firstbackechoandsuccessivetrailingechoesfor2in.simulatedcorrosionwith45transition

90

corrosionaccordingtoEquation25(Table20).Thecalculateddiameterwas0.502in.whichhad
a0.4%differencefromthemeasuredvalueof0.500in.Thisshowsthatthemethodfor
detectingthediameterofsimulatedcorrosioncanbeusedforWilliamsrodswitha45
transitionangle.
Table20.ComparisonofmeasuredandcalculateddiameterofsimulatedcorrosionforWilliamsrodwith45
transitionangle

Rod
0.5in.simulatedcorrosion

Smallest
MeasuredTime Calculated
Diameter(in.)
(s)
Diameter(in.)
0.500

3.27

0.502

%Difference
0.4%

TheFFTofthefirstbackechowasrecordedfortheWilliamsrodwitha2in.lengthofsimulated
corrosionanda45transitionangle.TheresultwasplottedwiththeFFTsignalsfroma0.5in.
diameterand1.0in.diameter3.0ft.longrodsof12L14steel.Theresultsshowthatthe

Figure74.Frequencyofbackechoof2in.long0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosionwith45
transitioninWilliamsrod

91

frequencydomainfortheWilliamsrodwitha45transitionliesbetweenthefrequencydomain
forthe0.5in.and1.0in.rod.ThefrequencydomainoftheultrasonicsignalfortheWilliams
rodwithsimulatedcorrosionhastwomajorpeaksascomparedtothesinglepeaksfortherods
withoutanycorrosion.
Theamplitudeofthebackechoandfirsttrailingechowerealsorecorded.Theratioofthefirst
trailingechotothebackechowascalculatedandplottedwiththedataforthe12L14rodswith
simulatedcorrosion(Figure75).Theratioforthe2.0in.longsimulatedcorrosionwitha45
transitionwas0.865.Therewasan11%differencefromthe0.972valueforthe12L14rod.

Figure75.Ratiooftrailingechoandbackechofor2.0in.simulatedcorrosionlengthwith45transitionin3.0ft.
longWilliamsrods

92

6 InspectionProcedures
Thischapteroutlinestherecommendedproceduresforinspectingsteeltiebackrodsfor
corrosioninthefield.Thetestsperformedintheprevioussectionsinvolvedsimulated
corrosionofsteeltiebackrods.Inspectionofrodsinthefieldwouldinvolverodswithactual
corrosion.Actualcorrosionincorporatesaroughsurfaceinthecorrodedregionasopposedto
thesmoothsurfacesofsimulatedcorrosion.Thefollowingguidelinesconsiderthese
differencesindevelopinginspectionproceduresforfieldtesting.

6.1 InspectionofSimulatedCorrosion
TheresearchperformedatWashingtonStateUniversityidentifiedmethodstodeterminethe
locationanddiameterofsimulatedcorrosionon1.0in.diameter12L14steelrodsand1.0in.
diameterWilliamssteelallthreadtiebackrods.Figure76depictsthefullultrasonicsignalfora

12L14SteelRod

WilliamsTiebackRod

Figure76Ultrasonicpulseechosignalfor12L14smoothsteelrodandWilliamssteelallthreadtiebackrodboth
withsimulatedcorrosion

93

3.0ft.long1.0inchdiameter12L14smoothsurfacerodandaWilliamscommercialtiebackrod
bothwitha2.0in.longsectionof0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosionstarting9.0in.fromthe
leftend.OlderconstructionpracticesincludedsmoothA36steelrodswithupsetthreadsat
eitherend,andcurrentpracticesuseWilliams,DWYIDAG,SASorConTecallthreadrods.The
locationofthesimulatedcorrosioncanbeidentifiedfromtheultrasonicsignal.Ifthelengthis
known,anyechothatappearsbeforethebackechoisevidenceofcorrosion,cracking,orsome
otherflaw.Thelocationofaflawiscalculatedbasedonthetimebetweenthe"mainbang"and
the"flawecho".Thelength,L,fromthetransducertotheleadingedgeofsimulatedcorrosion
canbecalculatedusingEquation30whereC1isthebulklongitudinalwavespeedofthe

Equation31

materialandtisthetimebetweenthemainbangandtheleadingedgeoftheflawecho.The
typicalvalueforthelongitudinalwavespeedinsteelisC1=19,190ft/s.Thetime,t,is

Figure77.Locationoftheleadingedgeforthemainbangandflawecho

94

measuredfromtheleadingedgeofthemainbangtotheleadingedgeoftheflawecho.The
leadingedgeforeachechoisdefinedasthefirstpointthatappearsoutsidetheboundsofthe
signalnoise.Figure77plotseachpointoftheultrasonicsignalintherangeofthemainbang
andtheflawechotoidentifytheleadingedge.Forrodswithatransitionfromtheoriginal
diametertotheflawdiameter,themeasuredtimemayincludeadelayfromtheactualflaw
location.Themaximumdelayfora5transitionangleina1.0in.diameterrodwith0.5in.
diametersimulatedcorrosionwas23.8s,whichcorrespondstoanerrorof0.44in.for
determiningthelocationoftheflaw.
Figure78depictsthebackechoandtrailingechoesfora3.0ft.long1.0inchdiameter12L14
smoothsurfacerodandaWilliamscommercialtiebackrod,bothwitha2.0in.longsectionof
0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosionstarting17.0in.fromtheleftendoftherod.Thetime
betweenthetrailingechoesfollowingthefirstbackechocanbedirectlyrelatedtothediameter

12L14SteelRod

WilliamsTiebackRod

Figure78.Firstbackechoandsubsequenttrailingechoesforinspectionofsimulatedcorrosiondiameter
inspectionin1.0in.diameter12L14steelrodand1.0in.diameterWilliamsrod

95

ofsimulatedcorrosion.Equation31correlatesthediameteroftherod(d)tothetimebetween
echoes(t),baseduponthespeedoflongitudinalwavepropagation(C1)andthespeedof
transversewavepropagation(C2).Thetimebetweentrailingechoesismeasuredinthesame

Equation32

mannerasthetimebetweenthemainbangandtheflawecho.Theindividualpointsofeach
echoareplottedtoidentifytheleadingedgewhichisthefirstpointtoraiseaboveorbelowthe
noiseofthesignal.TypicalvaluesforthelongitudinalandshearwavespeedinsteelareC1=
19,190ft/sandC2=10,597ft/s.Thediameterofsimulatedcorrosioncanbeusedin
conjunctionwiththeoriginaldiametertodeterminethereductioninloadcapacity.Equation
32depictsthepercentloadcapacityforarodwithsimulatedcorrosion.

Equation33

Theloadcapacityisdependentuponthediameterofthecorrodedregion,dc,andtheoriginal
roddiameter,do.Theabilitytoidentifythelocationanddiameterofcorrosionprovidesan
inspectorwiththeabilitytoapproximatethestructuralintegrityofatiebackrod.
Theselectionoftheultrasonictransduceriscriticalwheninspectingatiebackrod.Themain
variablestoconsiderincommercialtransducersarethediameterofthetransducerandthe
frequencyoftheultrasonicsignalgenerated.Thetransducerdiametershouldbeaslargeas
possiblewithoutexceedingthediameteroftherod.Anincreaseinthediameterofthe

96

transducerresultsinanincreaseintheenergygeneratedintheultrasonicwavewhichinturn
increasestherangeofinspection.Thetransducerwavelengthisdependentuponthediameter
ofthetiebackrodandthesmallestexpectedflawdimension.Toensurebulkwavepropagation
thetransducerwavelengthshouldbeatleastoneorderofmagnitudelessthanthediameterof
therod.Thewavelengthoftheultrasonicsignalwilldeterminetheminimumflawdetectablein
thespecimen.Theminimumdetectableflawdimensionisapproximatelythewavelengthofthe
ultrasonicpulsefrequencyintroducedintothemedium(Figure17).Thesetwocriteriawill
determinethetransducerfrequencyselection.

Figure79.Minimumdetectableflawdimensioninsteel

6.2 EndpreparationandTransducerCoupling
Asignificantvariationintheamplitudeofthesignalcanoccurduetotheconditionoftherod
end.Ifthesurfaceisnotplanar,thewavewillexperiencedispersionfromareflectionfromthe

97

endoftherod.Anothersourceofamplitudelosscanoccurinthecouplingofthetransducerto
therod.Itisimperativetohaveasmoothplanarsurfacetoattachthetransducer.Thus,itmay
benecessarytocutanewsurfaceattheendoftherod.Also,contaminantslocatedbetween
thetransducerandtheendoftherodmayresultinpoortransferofenergytotherod.
Therefore,theendofeachrodmustbecleaned,andacouplantgelappliedbeforethe
transduceriscoupledtotheendoftherod.Withoutthegel,thetransducerwillnoteffectively
coupletheultrasonicsignalintotherod,resultinginanextremelypoorultrasonicwave,ifany
atall.Amagnetictransducerisalsorecommendedtoprovideaconsistentadheringforce
betweenthetransducerandtheendoftherod.

6.3 CommercialTiebackRodTesting
Thefollowingguidelinesarepresentedtoassistindevelopinganinspectionprocedurefor
tiebackrodsinthefield.Transitioningfromtestingsmooth12L14samplestoinsitutestingof
commercialtiebackrodsintroducesseveralpotentiallimitations.First,turnbucklesareoften
usedwhenadesigncallsforrodslongerthan50ft.Anultrasonicsignalisnotabletopropagate
throughtheturnbuckle,thusonlythefirstsectionofrodisinspectable.Second,actual
corrosionwillnothaveasmoothsurface,orasinglediameter.Theirregularsurfaceofactual
corrosionwillincreasescatteringoftheultrasonicwaveduringreflection.Third,curvaturein
thetiebackrodmayeliminatethedetectionofthebackecho.Ifadirectlineofsightthrough
therodfromthefronttothebackoftherodiseliminatedthendetectionofadirectbackecho
isnotpossible.Thesefactorsmaylimittheeffectivenessofultrasonicinspectioninsome
scenarios.Thefollowingchartsprovideguidelinesfortheuseoftheultrasonicpulseecho

98

methodforinspectingtiebackrods.Theguidelinesaredividedintotwosections.Thefirst
sectioncoversinspectionsofnewconstruction.Theseguidelinesassumethatinitialultrasonic
pulseechomeasurementswillbeperformedaftertheplacementoftherodsandpriortothe
facadeconstruction,whichcoverstheendsofthetiebackrods.Thesecondsectioncovers
inspectionofexistingconstruction.Thissectionisdividedintotwosections.Thefirstsub
sectionincludestiebackrodlengthsthatarerecordedinthedesignplans.Thesecondsection
isforinspectionoftiebackrodswithunknownlength.

6.3.1 NewConstruction

Thissectionintroducesinspectionguidelinesfortiebackrodsinnewconstruction.Performing
severalmeasurementsduringtheconstructioncansignificantlyincreasetheabilitytomonitor
corrosioninsteeltiebackrods.Anultrasonicpulseechomeasurementperformedafterthe
placementoftherods,andpriortothefaadeconstructiongeneratesa"controlsignal"to
comparewithsubsequentmeasurementsduringthelifeoftherod.Thecontrolsignalshould
includetwoseparateinspections.First,afullsignalshowingalldetectablebackechoes,and
secondthefirstbackechowithalldetectabletrailingechoes.Thefullsignalcanbeusedto
calculatetheactuallongitudinalwavespeedofeachrod,usingthetimebetweenthemain
bangandthefirstbackecho.Apublishedvaluefortheshearwavespeed,C2=10,597ft/swill
beused.Thefollowingisaseriesofstepstoaidinfutureinspections:

99

Step#1:Calculatethelongitudinalwavespeedfromthe"controlsignal"
Determinethetimebetweenthemainbangandthefirstbackechofromthecontrolsignal.
UsingtherodlengthandEquation30calculatethelongitudinalwavespeed.
Step#2:Performapulseechoinspectiononthetiebackrod
Recordthreedifferentsectionsoftheultrasonicsignal.First,recordthefullsignal,extendingto
thefirstbackwithalldetectabletrailingechoes.Second,recordthebackechowithall
detectabletrailingechoes.Third,recordanyflawechoandalldetectabletrailingechoesthat
appearbeforethebackecho.
Step#3:Comparethe"controlsignal"withthefullultrasonicsignalfromtheinspection
Noteanydifferencesbetweenthe"controlsignal"andtheinspectionsignalrecordedinStep
#1.Anyechothatappearsbeforethebackechorepresentsaflawintherod.Also,any
variationintheamplitudeofthebackechoorsubsequenttrailingechoescanrepresentthe
growthofaflaw,orbendingofthetiebackrod.
Step#4:Verifythelengthofthetiebackrod
Measurethetimebetweenthemainbangandthebackecho.Usethismeasurementto
calculatethelengthoftherod,usingthelongitudinalwavespeedfromStep#1withEquation
30.Comparethecalculatedrodlengthwiththeoriginalrodlengthtoensurethatthereareno
completebreaksintherod.

100

Step#5:Verifytheouterdiameterofthetiebackrod
Ifaflawechodoesnotexist,calculatethetimebetweentrailingechoesafterthebackecho.If
aflawechoexists,calculatethetimebetweentrailingechoesaftertheflawecho.Usingthe
appropriatetimebetweentrailingechoes,thelongitudinalwavespeedfromStep#1,ashear
wavespeedof10,597ft/sandEquation31tocalculatethediameteroftherod.Theoriginal
diameteroftherodshouldbevisiblefromtheexposedendofthetiebackrod.Thecalculated
diameterandtheoriginaldiametershouldbeapproximatelythesame.Measuringthetime
betweentrailingechoesmaybedifficultforthreadedrods,becausethethreadscause
dispersionoftheultrasonicwavewhenitmodeconvertsandreflectsfromtheouterdiameter
tocreatethetrailingechoes.
Step#6:Calculatethelocationoftheflaw(ifaflawechoexists)
Measurethetimebetweenthemainbangandthefirstflawecho.Usethismeasurementto
calculatethedistancetotheflaw,usingthelongitudinalwavespeedfromStep#1with
Equation30.Repeatthisstepforeachdistinctflawecho.Becarefulnottomistakeasecond
flawechoasanadditional.Anechothatappearsattwicethedistanceofthefirstflawismost
likelyasecondflawechoandnotanadditionalflaw.
Step#7Determinetheminimumdiameterofthetiebackrod(ifaflawexists)
Measurethetimebetweenthebackechoandthefirsttrailingecho.Usethismeasurementto
calculatetheminimumdiameteroftherod,usingthelongitudinalwavespeedcalculatedin
Step#1,andashearwavespeedof10,597ft/swithEquation30.

101

6.3.2 ExistingConstruction
Interpretationofinspectionofexistingconstructionismoredifficultthannewconstruction.
Sincethereisnotacontrolsignalgeneratedduringtheconstructionprocess,theseguidelines
mustbedividedintotwosubcategories.Thefirstapproachassumesthattheoriginalplansare
availablewhichidentifytheoriginalrodlength.Thesecondapproachisforinspectionofrods
ofunknownlength.

6.3.2.1 Originalrodlengthisknown
Rodswithaknownlengthprovidedimensionstoidentifythebackechointheultrasonicsignal.
Thefollowingisseriesofstepstoaidininspectionoftiebackrodsofknownlength:
Step#1:Calculatethetimebetweenthemainbangandthebackecho
UsingthelengthoftherodandalongitudinalwavespeedofC1=19,190ft/scalculatethe
expectedtimebetweenthemainbangandthebackechousingEquation30.
Step#2:Performapulseechoinspectiononthetiebackrod
Recordthreedifferentsectionsoftheultrasonicsignal.First,recordthefullsignal,extendingto
thefirstbackwithalldetectabletrailingechoes.Usetheexpectedtimefromthemainbangto
thetrailingechofromStep#1toapproximatethetimewindownecessarytocapturetheentire
signal.Second,recordthebackechowithalldetectabletrailingechoes.Third,recordanyflaw
echothatappearsbeforethebackechoandalldetectabletrailingechoes.

102

Step#3:Verifythelengthofthetiebackrod
Measurethetimebetweenthemainbangandthebackechointheultrasonicsignal.Usethis
measurementtocalculatethelengthoftherod,usingalongitudinalwavespeedofC1=19,190
ft/swithEquation30.Comparethecalculatedrodlengthwiththeoriginalrodlengthtoensure
thattherearenocompletebreaksintherod.
Step#4:Verifytheouterdiameterofthetiebackrod
Ifaflawechodoesnotexist,calculatethetimebetweentrailingechoesafterthebackecho.If
aflawechoexists,calculatethetimebetweentrailingechoesaftertheflawecho.Usingthe
appropriatetimebetweentrailingechoesandEquation31,calculatethediameteroftherod.
Measuringthetimebetweentrailingechoesmaybedifficultforthreadedrods,becausethe
threadscausedispersionoftheultrasonicwavewhenitreflectsandmodeconvertsfromthe
outerdiametertocreatethetrailingechoes.
Step#5:Calculatethelocationoftheflaw(ifaflawechoexists)
Measurethetimebetweenthemainbangandthefirstflawecho.Usethismeasurementto
calculatethedistancetotheflaw,usingalongitudinalwavespeedofC1=19,190ft/swith
Equation30.Repeatthisstepforeachdistinctflawecho.Becarefulnottomistakeasecond
flawechoassecondflaw.Anechothatappearsattwicethedistanceofthefirstflawismost
likelyasecondflawechoandnotasecondflaw.

103

Step#6Determinetheminimumdiameterofthetiebackrod(ifaflawexists)
Measurethetimebetweenthebackechoandthefirsttrailingecho.Usethismeasurementto
calculatetheminimumdiameteroftherod,usingthelongitudinalwavespeedofC1=19,190
ft/s,andashearwavespeedofC2=10,597ft/swithEquation30.
6.3.2.2 Unknownlengthofrod
Arodwithunknownlengthrequiresacloseinspectionofthetrailingechoestoidentifypossible
flawsintherod.Thefollowingisseriesofstepstoaidininspectionoftiebackrodsofunknown
length:
Step#1:Performapulseechoinspectiononthetiebackrod
Recordthreedifferentsectionsoftheultrasonicsignal.First,recordthefullsignal,includingall
detectableechoes.Second,recordthefurthestechowithalldetectabletrailingechoes.Third,
recordanyotherechothatappearsinthesignalwithalldetectabletrailingechoes.
Step#2:Determineifnodetectableflawsarepresent
Measurethetimebetweentrailingechoesforeachechorecorded.Usingthetimebetween
trailingechoes,alongitudinalwavespeedofC1=19,190ft/s,ashearwavespeedof10,597ft/s
andEquation31calculateadiameterforeachsetoftrailingechoes.Ifthecorresponding
diameterforthefirsttwosetsoftrailingechoesisapproximatelyequaltotheoriginaldiameter
oftherod,thentheechoesrepresentthefirstandsecondbackechoes.Sincenoflawechoes

104

appearbetweenthemainbangandthefirstbackecho,therearenodetectableflawsinthe
rod.
Step#3:Identifytheminimumdiameterinthetiebackrod
IfanyofthediameterscalculatedinStep#2arelessthantheoriginaldiameter,thenthereisa
flawpresentintherod.Theminimumdiametercalculatedmaynotbetheactualminimum
diameteroftherod,becausethesignalmayhavereflectedfromacrackintherod,ortheflaw
thatrepresentsasmallerdiameterintherod.Withoutknowingthelengthoftherod,
determiningtheabsoluteminimumdiameterisimpossible.
Step#4:Calculatethepartiallengthofrodinspectedforminimumdiameter
Thepartiallengthinspectedforsimulatedcorrosioncanbecalculatedusingthesecondtolast
echodetected.Thesecondtolastechorepresentsthelastreduceddiameterthatthe
ultrasonicwavetraveledthroughbeforereturningtothetransducer.Recordthetimebetween
themainbangandthesecondtolastecho.Usethismeasurementtocalculatetheinspected
lengthofrodusingalongitudinalwavespeedofC1=19,190ft/swithEquation30.

105

7 SummaryandConclusions
Thisdissertationconcentratedonthedetectionofsimulatedcorrosioninsteeltiebackrods.
Ultrasonicsignalswereusedtodeterminethephysicalgeometryof0.25in.,0.50in.,and0.75
in.diametersimulatedcorrosionin1.0in.diametersteelrods.Researchwasalsoperformedto
investigatetheuseofultrasonicwavesinWilliamscommercialtiebackrods.Guidelineswere
developedforinspectingtiebackrodswithactualcorrosioninfieldapplications.
Thelocation,diameter,length,andtransitionofconcentricsimulatedcorrosionwere
investigatedforstraightsteelrods.Fora90transitionangle,thelocationofsimulated
corrosionwasdetectablebaseduponthetimebetweenthemainbangandtheflawechointhe
ultrasonicsignalandthelongitudinalwavespeedofthesteel.Adecreaseinthetransition
angleresultsinadelayinthearrivaltimeoftheflawecho.Thelargestdelaywas23.8sfor
the5transitionwhichrepresentsapotentialerrorof5.5in.whenestimatingthelocation.
Theminimumdiameterofconcentricsimulatedcorrosioninastraightrodwasdetectable
baseduponthedistancebetweenthebackechoandthefirsttrailingecho,andthelongitudinal
andshearwavespeedsofthesteelinaccordancewithpreviousresearchbyLight&Joshi(Light
&Joshi,1987).Thetimebetweenthebackechoandfirsttrailingechoisexclusivelydependent
upontheminimumdiameteroftherod,andisnotdependentuponthetransitionangleofthe
simulatedcorrosion.
Thelengthofconcentricsimulatedcorrosioninastraightrodwasdetectablebasedontwo
differenttechniques.First,anincreaseinthepeakfrequencyofthebackechocorrelatedwith

106

anincreaseinthelengthofsimulatedcorrosion.Second,theratiooftheamplitudeofthefirst
trailingechoandthebackechocorrelatedwithanincreaseinthelengthofsimulated
corrosion.
Theinvestigationofthetransitionofthesimulatedcorrosionconcludedthattheflawechois
detectableforabrupttransitionsof90downtoassmallas5.Theflawechoexperienceda
decreaseinamplitudebelowa80transitionanglebutwasstilldetectable.Twopeakswere
evidentattransitionanglesof27.5and45.Thesepeakscorrelatetoashearandlongitudinal
wavereflectiondirectlyacrosstherodfromthetransitionsurface.
Williamsallthreadtiebackrodswereinvestigatedincludingprojecteddetectablerodlength,
signalattenuationduetosurroundingmedia,andsimulatedcorrosionintiebackrods.The
signalsintiebackrodsshowedadistinctbackecho,withlowsignalamplitudefollowing,dueto
thedispersionofthewavefromthethreads.Sincethebackechodidnotreflectfromthe
threads,theamplitudewasnotaffected.Thesignalattenuationtestsrevealedthattherewas
nosignificantamplitudelossinthebackechoforsand,loosesoil,orcompactsoil.Aprojected
detectablerodlengthwasfoundtobe40feetwiththepulseechomethod.Finally,simulated
corrosioninWilliamstiebackrodsshowedthatlocationanddiameterofsimulatedcorrosion
weredetectableinthreadedrodswitha90anda45transitionangle.
Theworkpresentedinthisdissertationformsoriginalresearchthatcontributestothefollowing
fields:
1. SafetyofstructureswithinthefieldofCivilEngineering
2. AddingtothecurrentliteratureofNDTtesting

107

Thesecontributionsinclude:
1.
2.
3.
4.

Effectoftransitionsontheultrasonicsignal
Effectoflengthofcorrosionontheultrasonicsignal
Effectofsoilontiebackrodsignalattenuation
DetectionofsimulatedcorrosioninWilliamstiebackrods

Basedontheresearchpresented,thefollowingrecommendationsweremadeforfuture
research.

1. Investigatetheminimumdetectablecrosssectionlossin1.0in.diametertiebackrods.
Forexample,machinerodswith0.8125in.,0.875in,0.9375in.diameterofsimulated
corrosionandidentifythesmallestsimulatedcorrosionthatexhibitsaflawecho.
2. Investigatethedetectabilityofsimulatedcorrosioninlargerdiametertiebackrods.For
example,machinesimulatedcorrosionin2.0in.and3.0in.diameterWilliamsrods,and
identifythedetectablegeometries.
3. Investigatethedetectabilityofadditionalgeometriccharacteristicsofsimulated
corrosionontheultrasonicsignalforthepulseechomethod.Forexample:

machinesimulatedcorrosionwithavariationindiameterinthecorrodedregion,
insteadofuniformreduceddiameter.

machinenonconcentriclossofcrosssectioninsteelrods.

4. Investigatethedetectionofultrasonicsignalsinrodswithcurvaturetomimicrodsthat
havebentduringsettlement.Bendmultiplecommercialtiebackrodstovariousradii
andmonitortheultrasonicsignal.

108

5. Investigatetheeffectofvariousthreadcharacteristicsontheultrasonicsignalusing
commercialtiebackrodsfromavarietyofmanufacturers.Includeallthreadrodsfrom
DWYIDAG,SASandConTec.
6. Investigateinsitutestingtoestablishcontrolsignalsfortiebackrodsinneworexisting
construction,followedbyperiodicmonitoringtoassesschangesintheultrasonicsignal
thatoccurduetofieldconditionsovertime.
7. Investigatemultiplesimulatedcorrosionregionsinthesamerod.Forexample,
machinerodswithmultiplelengthsof0.5in.diametersimulatedcorrosioninthesame
rod,ormultiplelengthsof0.5in.and0.75in.diameters.
8. Investigatethedetectabilityofactualcorrosioninsteelrodsontheultrasonicsignal.
Useacceleratedcorrosioninsaltspraychamberstoinducecorrosion.

109

ReferencesCited:
ASTMStandardA108.(2007).StandardSpecificationforSteelBar,CarbonandAlloy,Cold
Finished,DOI:10.1520/A010807.WestConshohocken,PA:ASTMInternational.
ASTMStandardA29.(2005).StandardSpecificationforSteelBars,CarbonandAlloy,Hot
Wrought,GeneralRequirementsfor,DOI:10.1520/A0029_A0029M05.WestConshohocken,
PA:ASTMInternational.
ASTMStandardA615.(2008).StandardSpecificationforDeformedandPlainCarbonSteelBars
forConcreteReinforcement,DOI:10.1520/A0615_A0615M08B.WestConshohocken,PA:
ASTMInternational.
ASTMStandardD2216.(2005).StandardTestMethodsforLaboratoryDeterminationofWater
(Moisture)ContentofSoilandRockbyMass,DOI:10.1520/D221605.WestConshohocken,
PA:ASTMInternational.
ASTMStandardD422.(2007).StandardTestMethodforParticleSizeAnalysisofSoils,DOI:
10.1520/D042263R07.WestConshohocken,PA:ASTMInternational.
ASTMStandardD4318.(2005).StandardTestMethodsforLiquidLimit,PlasticLimit,and
PlasticityIndexofSoils,DOI:10.1520/D431805.WestConshohocken,PA:ASTMInternational.
Beard,M.,Lowe,M.,&Cawley,P.(2001).InspectionofRockboltsusingGuidedUltrasonic
Waves.ReviewofProgressinQuantitativeNondestructiveEvaluation,11561163.
Bray,D.E.,&Stanley,R.K.(1989).NondestructiveEvaluation.NewYork:CRCPress.
Davies,R.(1948).ACriticalStudyoftheHopkinsonPressureBar.Phil.Transactions,375457.
Esser,A.J.,&Dingeldein,J.E.(2007).FailureofTiebackWallAnchorsDuetoCorrosion.Geo
Denver2007,(pp.110).Denver.
Hudson,G.(1943).DispersionofElasticWavesinSolidCircularCylinders.PhysicsReview,46
51.
Kolsky,B.(1963).StressWavesinSolids.NewYork:DoverPublicationsInc.
Krautkramer,J.,&Krautkramer,H.(1990).UltrasonicTestingofMaterials.Berlin:Springer
Verlag.
Light,G.M.,&Joshi,N.R.(1987).UltrasonicWaveguideTechniqueforDetectionofSimulated
CorrosionWastages.NondestructiveTestingCommunications,1327.
Main,L.G.(1988).VibrationsandWavesinPhysics.NewYork:CambridgeUniversityPress.
Niles,G.B.(1996).InSituMethodforInspectingAnchorRodsforSectionLossUsingthe
CylindricallyGuidedWaveTechnique.IEEETransactionsofPowerDelivery,16011605.

110

Pochhammer,J.(1876).Aboutthereproductionspeedsofsmallvibrationsinaninfinite
isotropiccircularcylinder.JournalofPureandAppliedMath,324336.
Pollock,D.G.(1997).ReliabilityAssessmentofTimberConnectionsThroughUltrasonic
InspectionofBolts.TexasA&MUniversity.
USArmyCorpsofEngineers.(1994,March31).RetrievedJanuary18,2009,fromDesignof
SheetPileWalls:http://140.194.76.129/publications/engmanuals/em111022504/
WilliamsFormEngineeringCorp.(2008).RetrievedApril2,2009,fromTieRodInformation:
http://www.williamsform.com/

111