Designation: E 1495 – 02

Standard Guide for

Acousto-Ultrasonic Assessment of Composites, Laminates,
and Bonded Joints1
This standard is issued under the fixed designation E 1495; the number immediately following the designation indicates the year of
original adoption or, in the case of revision, the year of last revision. A number in parentheses indicates the year of last reapproval. A
superscript epsilon (e) indicates an editorial change since the last revision or reapproval.

1. Scope 2. Referenced Documents

1.1 This guide explains the rationale and basic technology 2.1 ASTM Standards:
for the acousto-ultrasonic (AU) method. Guidelines are given E 543 Practice for Agencies Performing Nondestructive
for nondestructive evaluation (NDE) of flaws and physical Testing2
characteristics that influence the mechanical properties and E 1316 Terminology for Nondestructive Examinations2
relative strength of composite structures (for example, 2.2 ASNT Standard3:
filament-wound pressure vessels), adhesive bonds (for ex- ANSI/ASNT-CP-189 Standard for Qualification and Certi-
ample, joints between metal plates), and interlaminar and fication of Nondestructive Testing Personnel
fiber/matrix bonds in man-made composites and natural com- Recommended Practice SNT-TC-1A Personnel Qualifica-
posites (for example, wood products). tions and Certification in Nondestructive Testing
1.2 This guide covers technical details and rules that must 2.3 AIA Document:
be observed to ensure reliable and reproducible quantitative NAS-410 Certification and Qualification of Nondestructive
AU assessments of laminates, composites, and bonded struc- Testing Personnel4
tures. The underlying principles, prototype apparatus, instru-
mentation, standardization, examination methods, and data 3. Terminology
analysis for such assessments are covered. Limitations of the 3.1 Definitions:
AU method and guidelines for taking advantage of its capa- 3.1.1 acousto-ultrasonics (AU)—a nondestructive examina-
bilities are cited. tion method that uses induced stress waves to detect and assess
1.3 The objective of AU is to assess subtle flaws and the diffuse defect states, damage conditions, and variations of
associated strength variations in composite structures and mechanical properties of an examination structure. The AU
bonded joints. Discontinuities such as large voids, disbonds, or method combines aspects of acoustic emission (AE) signal
extended lack of contact at interfaces can be assessed by other analysis with ultrasonic materials characterization methods
NDE methods such as conventional ultrasonics. (Terminology E 1316).
1.4 Additional information may be found in the publications 3.1.2 Additional related definitions may be found in Termi-
cited in the list of references at the end of this guide. The nology E 1316.
referenced works provide background on research, applica- 3.2 Definitions of Terms Specific to This Standard:
tions, and various aspects of signal acquisition, processing, and 3.2.1 stress wave factor (SWF)—a generic measure of the
interpretation. relative energy loss (attenuation) or propagation efficiency of
1.5 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the stress waves generated by the AU method. There are many
standard. The values given in parentheses are for information ways to define and calculate the SWF. Several of these are
only. described in Section 11 of this guide.
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the
safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the 4. Summary of Guide
responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appro- 4.1 General—Two probes are attached to a sample in a
priate safety and health practices and determine the applica- send-receive configuration. One (a pulsed sending probe) is
bility of regulatory limitations prior to use. optimized for wave generation, while the other (a receiving

1 2
This guide is under the jurisdiction of ASTM Committee E07 on Nondestruc- Annual Book of ASTM Standards, Vol 03.03.
3
tive Testing and is the direct responsibility of Subcommittee E07.04 on Acoustic Available from American Society for Nondestructive Testing, 1711 Arlingate
Emission Method. Plaza, P.O. Box 28518, Columbus, OH 43228-0518.
4
Current edition approved July 10, 2002. Published September 2002. Originally Available from Aerospace Industries Association of America, Inc., 1250 Eye
published as E 1495 – 92. Last previous edition E 1495 – 97. St., NW, Washington, DC 20005.

Copyright © ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959, United States.

1
 E 1495 – 02
probe) is optimized for signal sensing. The probes are attached in composites. Thereafter, AU should be considered for com-
to the sample surface at normal incidence. The usual, and often posites that are proved to be free of major flaws or disconti-
most practical, configuration has piezoelectric probes, a sender nuities. The AU method is intended almost exclusively for
and receiver, on the same side of the examination part (1).5 assessing the collective effects of dispersed defects and sub-
Measurements are performed by allowing ultrasonic stress critical flaw populations. These are material aberrations that
waves to interact with a volume of material between the influence AU measurements and also underlie mechanical
probes. The waves are modified by the material microstructure property variations, dynamic load response, and impact and
and morphology (2). fracture resistance.
4.2 Principle—The AU method measures the relative effi- 5.2 Specific Advantages—The AU method can be used to
ciency of stress wave propagation in a material. The dominant evaluate composite laminate and bond quality using access to
attribute measured is stress wave attenuation. Lower attenua- only one surface as, for example, the exterior surface of
tion, a high SWF value, means better stress wave energy pressure vessels. It is unnecessary to utilize angle beam fixtures
transmission for many composites and, therefore, better trans- because the method can always be applied with probes at
mission and redistribution of dynamic strain energy. More normal incidence. The method can be applied using dry
efficient strain energy transfer and strain redistribution during coupling with elastomer pads attached to the probes, and there
loading or impact corresponds to increased strength and is no need to immerse the examination object in water.
fracture resistance in composite structures and adhesive bonds. 5.3 General Applications—The AU method was devised to
A lower SWF usually indicates regions in which strain energy assess diffuse discontinuity populations and any associated
is likely to concentrate and result in crack growth and fracture changes of the mechanical properties of composites and
(3). composite-like materials. The AU method has been used to
4.3 Structure Configuration Effects—In monolithic plates evaluate fiber-reinforced composites (6), composite laminates
and homogeneous composite slabs, the SWF will exhibit signal (7), filament-wound pressure vessels (8), adhesive bonds (9),
attenuation effects due to variations in microstructure, mor- paper and wood products (10), and cable and rope (11). The
phology, porosity, cure state, microcrack populations, etc. (4). method has been shown to be particularly practical for assess-
A lower SWF typically corresponds to regions of higher ing the strength of adhesively bonded joints. It has also been
attenuation. In laminated structures or bonded joints, however, shown to be useful for assessing microporosity (12), micro-
interfaces and bondlines can produce either lower or higher cracking (13), hydrothermal aging (14), and damage produced
SWF values, depending on the bond quality (5). Delaminated by impacts (15) and fatigue (16).
regions can produce higher SWF values because more energy
is reflected or channeled to the receiving probe. 6. Basis of Application
4.4 In-Plane Measurements—Offsetting probes enables the
6.1 Personnel Qualification
collection of stress wave reverberations that have traveled
in-plane from sender to receiver. It is therefore possible to 6.1.1 If specified in the contractual agreement, personnel
measure in-plane, mechanical property variations in principal performing examinations to this standard shall be qualified in
load directions in fiber-reinforced laminates or adhesively accordance with a nationally recognized NDT personnel quali-
bonded joints (that is, properties such as interlaminar shear fication practice or standard such as ANSI/ASNT-CP-189,
strength and adhesive bond strength). SNT-TC-1A, NAS-410, or a similar document and certified by
4.5 Signal Collection Criterion—With the AU method, the employer or certifying agency, as applicable. The practice
instead of singling out specific echoes, all of the multiple or standard used and its applicable revision shall be identified
reverberations, including signals from internal reflectors and in the contractual agreement between the using parties.
scatterers, are collected and analyzed together. Even with 6.2 Qualification of Nondestructive Agencies
pulse-echo or through-transmission configurations, all stress 6.2.1 If specified in the contractual agreement, NDT agen-
wave reflections and reverberations in a local volume of cies shall be qualified and evaluated as described in Practice
material are collected and evaluated, as in backscatter, E 543. The applicable edition of Practice E 543 shall be
forward-scatter, and diffuse field analysis. specified in the contractual agreement.
4.6 Wavelength Criterion—In composite panels or bonded 6.3 Proper application of the AU method requires the
plates, the sender should produce wavelengths that are com- involvement of an NDE specialist to plan and guide the
parable to or less than the panel or plate thickness. Suitable examination procedure. Knowledge of the principles of ultra-
wavelengths are those passed by the examination piece at sonic examination is required. Personnel applying AU should
frequencies equal to or greater than the sending probe center be experienced practitioners of conventional ultrasonic and
frequencies. acoustic emission examination and associated methods for
signal acquisition, processing, and interpretation.
5. Significance and Use 6.4 Particular emphasis should be placed on personnel
5.1 General—Conventional ultrasonics should be consid- having proficiency in computer signal processing and the use
ered first for the detection of overt flaws such as delaminations of digital methods for time and frequency domain signal
analysis. Familiarity with ultrasonic spectrum analysis using
digital Fourier transforms is mandatory. Spectral distribution,
5
The boldface numbers in parentheses refer to the list of references at the end of multiple regression, and pattern recognition analyses and
this guide. adaptive learning procedures are important.

2
 E 1495 – 02
6.5 Application of the AU method also requires proficiency some standard value, for example, the maximum value found
in developing and designing reference standards. The develop- for the optimum condition of a representative material sample
ment of reference standards is needed for each type of material or structure. This is appropriate where many nominally iden-
and configuration to be examined. Because AU measurements tical articles will be examined.
are relative and comparative, experimental examinations con- 8.3 Reference Standards—Normalization of the SWF is the
firmed by destructive testing are needed to avoid ambiguities in first step toward establishing a reference standard. The second
the interpretation of results. step is to fabricate a set of samples exhibiting the full range of
expected material conditions and flaw states. One of these
7. Limitations samples should represent the optimum condition of the mate-
7.1 General—The AU method possesses the limitations rial. This procedure should be followed by the development of
common to all ultrasonic methods that attempt to measure benchmark structures that can be used as comparative stan-
either absolute or relative attenuation. When instrument set- dards.
tings and probe configurations are optimized for AU, they are
unsuitable for conventional ultrasonic flaw detection. 9. System Configuration
7.2 Signal Reproducibility Factors—The AU results may be 9.1 Standard Configuration—Four possible AU probe con-
affected adversely by the following factors: (1) improper figurations are shown in Fig. 1. With the probes on the same
selection of type and amount of couplant, (2) couplant thick- side of a panel, examination proceeds by holding the probes in
ness variations and bubbles, (3) specimen surface roughness a fixture and moving them as a unit to cover the examined area.
and texture, (4) probe misalignment and insufficient pressure, For zero offset between probes, the configuration reduces to
(5) probe resonances and insufficient damping, and (6) insuf- either the pulse-echo or through-transmission mode, as shown
ficient instrument bandwidth. in Fig. 1 (b) and (d) respectively. The prototype apparatus
depicted in Fig. 2 illustrates the essential features of a standard
8. Standardization configuration.
8.1 Self-Standardization—The sender and receiver probes 9.2 Probes—Two classes of piezoelectric probes are appro-
can be used to verify each other. Deficiencies in the instrumen- priate: (1) resonant and non-resonant AE sensors, and (2)
tation and probe response become evident by comparing the damped broadband ultrasonic probes. Resonant AE sensors
results with the standard waveforms established previously for have more sensitivity, but the signals transmitted by the test
a reference item. Commercial ultrasonic probes and AE sensors piece may be of sufficient strength such that sensitivity is not a
respond to deformation (stress) waves in a complex fashion problem. One reason for avoiding resonant sensors is that they
that involves both normal and in-plane displacements of the have ringdown characteristics that may be difficult to separate
examination sample surface. Although it is possible to stan- from the multiple reflections transmitted by the examination
dardize such probes in an absolute sense, even sensors of the sample.
same design and specification should be treated as unique and 9.2.1 Probe Bandwidth—Non-resonant AE sensors have a
definitely noninterchangeable. flatter frequency response curve than resonant sensors. This
8.2 Stress Wave Factor Normalization—Regardless of how response characteristic should be exploited in AU because it
the SWF is defined, it is practical to normalize it relative to would render a truer signal over a wider bandwidth. Another

FIG. 1 Four Possible AU Probe Configurations

3
 E 1495 – 02
maintained. The fixture is designed to avert crosstalk between
probes. It must be rigid enough to assure that the probes can be
pressed firmly, as a unit, against the examination piece to
optimize coupling pressure.
9.2.6 Probe Spacing—Probe spacing is determined by the
following factors: (1) wave attenuation within the examination
sample, (2) probe bandwidth and sensitivity, (3) sample thick-
ness and shape, (4) diameter of the probes, and (5) spatial
resolution required in the scan images. Because the objective
of AU is not the generation of high-resolution images of minute
flaws, probe spacing may be quite large, typically several
centimetres from probe centerline to centerline. The objective
should be to interrogate a representative volume of material for
a given probe spacing.
9.2.7 Probe Alignment—The AU method should be accom-
plished with probes at normal incidence because the method is
particularly sensitive to probe alignment and associated cou-
pling variations. There is no need for oblique angle probes. In
conventional ultrasonics, the chief reason for oblique incidence
is to produce shear waves. Shear waves will arise naturally
FIG. 2 Diagram of Apparatus and Instrumentation Used for with the AU approach due to beam spread and mode conver-
Laboratory Application of AU
sions of reflected waves.
9.3 Coupling Methods—When a fluid medium is used for
approach is to use the bandwidth response of damped broad- coupling probes to a surface, a gel type is preferred. A fluid
band ultrasonic probes. Good results can be obtained with couplant should (1) provide good acoustic coupling over the
broadband ultrasonic probes working as both senders and desired frequency range, (2) be chemically inert, (3) be easy to
receivers. For many fiber-reinforced composites, broadband remove, (4) be consistent from batch to batch, and (5) maintain
probe pairs with center frequencies ranging from 0.5 to 5 MHz consistent properties during the period and at the temperatures
prove useful, for example, send-receive pairs of 2.25 MHz used.
damped probes. Broadband commercial piezoelectric probes 9.3.1 Couplant Application—Particular attention should be
will produce satisfactory AU results for many composite paid to the application of fluid couplant to probes. Control
structures. should be exercised over the following factors: (1) amount of
9.2.2 Probe Combinations—Combinations of damped couplant applied, (2) avoidance of air bubbles, (3) assurance of
broadband ultrasonic and AE sensors can be used. The choice a thin and uniform film, and (4) avoidance of excess couplant.
depends on the nature of the material being examined. The The amount of couplant should not be such that it overflows at
material may require the use of a broadband ultrasonic sender the edge of the probe face, thereby absorbing energy and
and a resonant AE sensor as receiver. A broadband sender altering results.
would cover frequencies potentially passed by the examination
9.3.2 Coupling Pressure—Laboratory experiments have
sample, while the receiving sensor would be tuned to a
shown that an optimum coupling pressure exists. When the
particular frequency determined to be the most appropriate for
pressure applied to the probes is small, the received signal will
assessing a particular property.
also be small. As the pressure is increased, a definite increase
9.2.3 Probe Facing—To improve coupling, it is useful to
in signal strength will occur until the pressure is optimal for the
machine the epoxy face or wearplate of the probes so that the
probe-couplant-material combination. Any further increase in
contact area is reduced to a fraction of 1 cm.2 To reduce the
pressure will have no significant effect on the signals.
area of contact, it also helps to bond waveguides to the faces of
the probes. Waveguides should consist of truncated solid cones 9.3.3 Dry Coupling—The need for dry, soft coupling occurs
with their wide ends bonded to probe faces. in instances in which it is necessary to either deal with rough
9.2.4 Reverberation Effects—Reverberations in faceplates surfaces or avoid the infusion of fluid into porous materials.
and facing attachments can mimic probe ringdown. The Efficient coupling can be achieved with elastomer pads bonded
reverberations can be quite strong if the acoustic impedances to the probe face. When pressed against the examination
between layers (wearplate, facing, and examination materials) surface, the elastomer will conform to any surface roughness or
are significantly mismatched. The effect will appear in wave- texture providing good coupling.
forms as additional ringdown and in spectra as spurious 9.3.4 Example—For the laboratory prototype apparatus de-
interference peaks. Since these effects do not represent the picted in Fig. 2, the force applied was roughly 12 N (2.7 lb) at
examination sample, care should be taken to avoid or eliminate a pressure of 120 000 Pa (18 psi) per probe over the area of the
them during signal analysis. silicon rubber pads. The uncompressed elastomer pad thick-
9.2.5 Probe Fixturing—The probes shown in Fig. 2 are held ness was approximately 1 mm, and the contact area was
firmly in a support fixture so that a predetermined spacing is approximately 0.2 cm2. The pads did not cover the entire probe

4
 E 1495 – 02
face, so that the contact area with the examination piece was conventional ultrasonic scanning. A dual probe fixture with two
small enough to ensure uniform pressure. water jets side by side can be used for AU, as in the standard
9.4 Examination Sample—Because of the sensitivity of the single-side configuration.
AU method, seemingly minor variations in material conditions, 9.6 Instrumentation—Representative electronic instrumen-
examination setup, and execution can alter results. This paral- tation for AU signal generation, acquisition, and processing is
lels the situation in AE examination, in which material and depicted in Fig. 2. An ultrasonic pulser is used to excite the
examination condition variations can have pronounced effects. sending probe periodically. The pulser repetition rate is set so
9.4.1 Surface Roughness—Composites may have rough or that signals reaching the receiver probe die out before the next
textured surfaces (as in autoclaved and filament-wound struc- pulse. The pulser triggers the time base to synchronize the
tures). Superficial factors can imprint on the received signal. waveform digitizer oscilloscope sweep with the receiver probe
Substrate variations can obscure the effects of volume varia- output.
tions. Overcoming these surface and substrate effects may 9.6.1 Signal Processing—Analog or semi-digital processing
require trials with various frequency bandpasses to isolate and of signals can be used to monitor variations of the material
eliminate these variables. sample being examined. This can be accomplished by methods
9.4.2 Sample Support—In the laboratory setup shown in developed for AE, for example, the use of a ringdown count or
Fig. 2, the examination article is clamped between the probes rms voltage to evaluate changes in the received signal. With
and a backing consisting of a ribbed, hard, rubber pad. Ribs digital acquisition, storage, and display, each signal should be
minimize contact and substantially reduce the leakage of spectrum analyzed and stored along with data concerning the
ultrasonic energy from the back surface. This prevents any examination piece and coordinates of each AU measurement.
short circuiting of the examination piece through the backing
9.6.2 Bandwidth—Commercial ultrasonic pulsers and AE
support. Special backing may not be necessary in field appli-
instrumentation can be adapted for AU applications. However,
cations, but the examination article must be held in fixturing
many composites and bonded joints will require interrogation
that assures firm and precise probe contact.
at frequencies higher than those commonly used in AE. In
9.4.3 Sample Geometry Effects—Sample geometry effects
these cases, instruments require a bandwidth greater than that
will be more significant for small examination articles. Even
typical for current AE systems. These applications may require
for large composite structures, cross-section changes or edges
bandwidths of up to 5 MHz. Nevertheless, for many types of
near the probes will affect signals reaching the receiver.
composites and composite-like materials (that is, large, coarse
Uniform size, shape, and thickness measurements shared by
textured structures), frequencies down to tens of kHz may be
the examination articles help ensure that the signals truly
appropriate.
characterize material anomalies. The AU method requires
constant material thickness and uniformity for comparative 9.6.3 Pulser—Commercial ultrasonic pulsers are appropri-
measurements. ate for AU. Pulser circuits provide appropriate excitation
9.5 Mapping and Scanning—The mapping of material voltages and selections of rise times, pulse durations, and
variations requires scanning by lifting and recoupling the repetition rates. Ultrasonic pulsers are used in AU practice to
probes or using rolling probes. Water jet methods can scan drive either damped probes or undamped resonant AE sensors.
large areas and curved surfaces readily. It is preferable to use pulsers that can generate broadband
signals from tens of kHz to several MHz.
9.5.1 Mapping Methods—Single AU measurements on an
examination sample should not be relied on. It is advisable to 9.6.4 Preamplification—The receiver probe output should
make a number of overlapping measurements to characterize be preamplified before entering the vertical amplifier of an
an examination sample. This can be systematized by defining a oscilloscope or digitizer. This is to overcome the electronic
grid over an area on an examination sample. It is also useful to noise associated with the antenna effect of the cable between
make AU measurements in several directions. There is much to the AU sensor and oscilloscope. The AE preamplifiers with
be gained from mapping the SWF relative to fiber orientation either 40 or 60-dB gain are appropriate for this purpose. The
in fiber-reinforced composites. AE preamplifiers are usually powered by d-c voltage from the
9.5.2 Rolling Coupling—Dry or fluid-coupled mapping can main AE electronic unit. Stand-alone battery-powered units are
be accomplished by probes stationed in the hubs of elastomer- preferable because they have less electronic noise.
rimmed wheels. Elastomer wheeled probes are commercially 9.6.5 Preamplifier Cables—The cable that connects the
available. Trials should be conducted with the type of compos- preamplifier to the AU sensor is normally coaxial. Unless the
ite and defect population being examined to ensure that their cable is perfectly shielded, it can act as an antenna and pick up
frequency range or bandwidth sensitivity falls within that ambient electromagnetic radiation. This electronic noise can be
required for the best results. The alignment and footprint of kept low by either using a short cable (for example, 1-m long)
wheeled probes should be optimized for the examination or making the preamplifier integral with the probe. A standard
material and conditions. cable length is desirable for preamplifiers, and the cable should
9.5.3 Water Jet Coupling—The AU method has been ap- be terminated with its own characteristic impedance for maxi-
plied successfully to contoured and curved surfaces using mum power transfer.
probes encased in a squirter fixture (8). Water jets couple the 9.6.6 Digitizer—Programmable digitizing oscilloscopes are
probes to a part and allow free scan movement. Water jet probe ideal for signal acquisition. The preamplifier output is fed into
fixtures are commercially available and are currently used for the vertical amplifier while the synchronization signal from the

5
 E 1495 – 02
pulser repetition control is fed into the time base. Contempo- elastic moduli and attenuation properties of the material. The
rary digitizers can perform essentially real-time operations. resultant waveform at the point receiver will have an envelope
They have a wide signal processing repertoire that includes and other characteristics peculiar to the material properties and
peak voltage, rms power, and spectrum analysis. These capa- boundaries.
bilities can be used for evaluating AU signals in accordance 10.3 Waveform Envelope—The AU waveform envelope is
with the procedures described in Section 11. initially shaped by small oscillations that precede a series of
9.6.7 Data Processor—Personal computers modified for increasing oscillations that reach a maximum, as shown in Fig.
AU signal processing are available for use with digitizing 4. These initial oscillations arise from the first direct reflections
oscilloscopes. With general purpose interface boards, personal from the back surface (Fig. 3). The initial oscillations are small
computers can be used to collect and store AU signals and because they arise from reflections at obtuse angles, as in Fig.
auxiliary data such as current coordinates of probe fixtures 4 (a). Following the maximum oscillation of a waveform,
relative to test samples. Specialized software should be devel- subsequent oscillations diminish in amplitude. These trailing
oped for utilizing advanced methods for signal analysis, such ringdown oscillations arise from reflections that are attenuated
as those discussed in Section 12. over longer multiple reflection paths.
10.4 Variables Affecting Signals—The AU signals are influ-
10. Signal Characteristics
enced by a number of material parameters. These include
10.1 Nature of AU Signals—A simplified account of AU elastic moduli, density, reflection and attenuation coefficients,
signal generation in a flat monolithic plate follows. The probes longitudinal and shear wave velocities, texture, microstructure,
are represented by a point sender and point receiver, as shown and, of course, boundary conditions (surfaces, edges, curva-
in Fig. 3. The point sender emits pressure waves (P-waves) tures, etc.). The presence and nature of diffuse microflaw
uniformly into the plate. For any nearby arbitrary point populations and other flaw states can be inferred from their
receiver, it is possible to trace a P-wave ray that has been effects on the velocity and attenuation of AU signals.
reflected from the back surface of the plate. Similarly, it is
possible to trace a second ray that arrives at the point receiver 11. Signal Quantification
after it has been mode-converted to a shear wave (S-wave).
11.1 Stress Wave Factor—The SWF concept was developed
More P-waves arrive after reflections from the back and front
to quantify signals generated by the AU method. This section
surfaces of the plate. Additional reflected S-waves will also
provides various definitions of SWF. The simplest definitions,
arrive at later times and add to the resultant signal sensed by
based on AE peak voltage or ringdown count methods, often
the point receiver (17).
correlate quite well with particular flaw conditions. Examples
10.2 Signal Development—The resultant waveform at the
of empirically viable approaches for calculating SWF are given
point receiver will consist of the superposition of numerous
below.
separate wavelets. The resultant waveform consists of several
generations of P- and S-waves. Angles of reflection 11.2 Peak Voltage SWF Method—The peak voltage in most
wavespeeds, and attenuation of the wavelets, are governed by materials changes inversely with attenuation and affords an
effective basis for defining SWF. Using either analog or digital
peak detection, SWF may be defined as follows:
peak voltage 5 Vmax (1)

where:
Vmax = maximum (peak-to-peak) voltage oscillation.
This SWF formulation assumes that the peak voltage varies
with the flaw state of the material being examined.
11.3 The peak voltage definition of SWF has proven useful
for assessing microcrack damage accumulation in composite
laminates subjected to tensile loading. A related definition
equates SWF to the integral of voltage squared, V2, taken over
the duration of the AU signal. This later definition appears to be
sensitive to initial stages of damage accumulation.
11.4 Ringdown SWF Method—The AU signals frequently
resemble AE burst waveforms that decay exponentially. Ac-
cordingly, SWF can be quantified as a ringdown count. Using
AE methodology and a ringdown count totalizer, SWF can be
defined as follows:
ringdown count 5 PRC (2)

where:
P = pulser repetition rate,
FIG. 3 Point Source-Receiver Ray Traces Illustrating the R = totalizer reset time, and
Development of AU Signals from Reflected Waves in a Monolithic
C = ringdown count per waveform.
and Laminated Solid

6
 E 1495 – 02

FIG. 4 Standard (Same-Side) AU Probe Configuration and Characteristic Waveform and Spectrum for a Monolithic Plastic Plate

The repetition rate is set so that each signal rings down This is a better quantification of SWF than a simple
below the threshold voltage before a new signal starts. The ringdown count. As with the previous definitions of SWF, the
reset time allows for averaging a predetermined number of measurement will be inversely proportional to relative attenu-
signals into the total count display, such as that which would be ation changes in the examination material.
shown by an AE totalizer. Defined in this way, SWF is 11.8 The weighted ringdown count has been applied to the
inversely proportional to relative attenuation predicated on the assessment of impact damage in fiber composites and strength
number of oscillations that occur before the signal decays variations of adhesively bonded joints. Correlations between
below the threshold. the weighted ringdown count SWF and adhesive bond degra-
11.5 The ringdown definition of SWF assumes that the
dation can be improved by frequency filtering or spectral
waveform always has a monotonic decay envelope; it is likely
partitioning. This involves taking the Fourier transforms of
to be inappropriate if the waveform is multimodal and has a
original waveforms and zeroing out digitally all but a narrow
non-monotonic decay envelope, for example, as in Fig. 4.
portion of the spectrum. The reduced spectrum is then reverse
Moreover, the ringdown waveform may include probe ring-
down if resonant or undamped probes are used. transformed to obtain a reduced waveform that exhibits a
11.6 The earliest work with AU used the ringdown defini- smaller frequency range. This range can be determined by
tion for SWF and produced good correlations with ultimate frequency partitioning and regression analysis, which is dis-
strength and interlaminar strength in fiber-reinforced epoxy cussed in this section. Once the optimum range is determined,
composite panels. The ringdown count formulation of SWF a weighted ringdown count is calculated for the reduced
has become the definition against which new definitions are waveform (18).
compared. The ringdown definition was merely the first but 11.9 Energy Integral SWF Method—The relative energy of
still useful quantification of the SWF. AU signals can be defined as follows:
11.7 Weighted Ringdown SWF Method—An alternative to
*
t2
the previously described ringdown definition of SWF is a energy integral 5 @v~t!# 2dt (4)
t1
refinement that accounts for the amplitude of each ringdown
oscillation. This formulation for SWF is defined as a sum of
over the interval t1 to t2, where v (t) = voltage. By producing
threshold voltages, Vi, that increase from the noise level Vo to
the Fourier transform of the signal, a frequency domain
the peak amplitude by a fixed voltage increment:
definition of SWF can be given in terms of the power spectrum:
p
weighted ringdown 5 ( Vi ~Ci 2 Ci11!
*
(3) f2
i power spectrum 5 @s~f!# 2df (5)
f1

where: over the frequency interval f1 to f2, where s (f) = spectral

Vi and Ci = threshold voltage and number of oscillation distribution function for the waveform. The SWF definitions
counts at the i-th level, respectively, and given in (Eq 4) and (5) are equivalent if applied to the entire
Vp = peak amplitude of the waveform.
waveform or spectrum. The power spectrum definition of SWF

7
 E 1495 – 02
of (Eq 5) has been found to be a sensitive indicator of the 11.10 Unlike the case with the SWF definitions in (Eq 2)
development of fatigue damage in graphite/epoxy composite and (Eq 3), there is no need to specify a threshold voltage with
laminates. the energy integral methods. However, it is necessary to
specify the time and frequency intervals of the integrals in (Eq
4) and (Eq 5). Consideration should therefore be given to
empirical selection of the time or frequency intervals that
correlate best with the particular flaw states or material
properties of interest.
11.11 Partitioning Method—Regression analysis can be
used to determine whether particular time or frequency parti-
tions produce strong correlations with specific defect states.
The rationale is that only certain parts of waveforms or spectra
contain relevant information. A scheme for waveform and
spectrum partitioning is illustrated in Fig. 5 (6).
12. Interpretation of Results
12.1 General—The fundamental quantity measured in AU
is relative attenuation. This can be accomplished using the
SWF quantification methods described. However, signal inter-
pretation may require methods such as neural network and
pattern recognition (19) in association with spectral moments
analysis (20).
12.2 Neural Network Method—Pattern recognition, feature
extraction, and statistical classification methodologies should
be applied. By using training samples, key signal patterns can
be identified and associated with specific flaw conditions.
12.3 Spectral Moments Method—The AU signals usually
exhibit characteristic spectra associated with different flaw
states in a material. Relative changes in spectra suggest the
FIG. 5 Diagram of Waveform Partitioning Scheme for Regression application of homomorphic and spectral moment analyses.
Analysis Method for Determining Optimum SWF for Correlating
with Material Properties. Partition Blocks are Filled with
13. Keywords
Coefficients Obtained by Regressing SWF Values Within the
Time and Frequency Intervals Shown Against the Material 13.1 acoustic emission; acousto-ultrasonics; bonded joints;
Property of Current Interest. Blocks with the Highest Values composites; laminates; materials characterization; mechanical
Indicate Time or Frequency Intervals that Correlate Most properties assessment; nondestructive evaluation; nondestruc-
Strongly with the Material Property
tive testing; stress wave factor; ultrasonic attenuation

REFERENCES

(1) Vary, A., “Acousto-Ultrasonics,” Non-Destructive Testing of Fiber Materials, Vol 5, Materials Research Society, Pittsburgh, PA, 1989, pp.
Reinforced Plastics, Vol 2, Elsevier Applied Science Publishers, Essex, 475–480.
England, 1990, pp. 1–54. (8) Sundaresan, M. J., Henneke, E. G., II, and Brosey, W. D., “Acousto-
(2) Vary, A., “Material Property Characterization,” Nondestructive Testing Ultrasonic Investigation of Filament-Wound Spherical Pressure Ves-
Handbook—Ultrasonic Testing, Vol 7, American Society for Nonde- sels,” Materials Evaluation, Vol 49, No. 5, 1991, pp. 601–606 and 612.
structive Testing, Columbus, Ohio, 1991, pp. 383–431. (9) Tanary, S., “Characterization of Adhesively Bonded Joints Using
(3) Vary, A., and Lark, R. F., “Correlation of Fiber Composite Tensile Acousto-Ultrasonics,” Masters Thesis, Department of Mechanical
Strength with the Ultrasonic Stress Wave Factor,” Journal of Testing Engineering, University of Ottawa, Canada, 1988.
and Evaluation, Vol 7, No. 4, 1979, pp. 185–191. (10) Beall, F. C., “Fundamentals of Acoustic Emission and Acousto-
Ultrasonics,” Proceedings 6th Symposium on Nondestructive Testing
(4) Duke, J. C., Jr., Acousto-Ultrasonics—Theory and Application, Ple-
of Wood, Washington State University, Pullman, WA, 1987, pp. 3–28.
num Press, New York, NY, 1988.
(11) Williams, J. H., Jr., Hainsworth, J., and Lee, S. S., “Acousto-
(5) Fahr, A., Lee, S., Tanary, S., and Haddad, Y., “Estimation of Strength Ultrasonic Nondestructive Evaluation of Double-Braided Nylon
in Adhesively Bonded Steel Specimens by Acousto-Ultrasonic Tech- Ropes Using the Stress Wave Factor,” Fiber Science and Technology,
nique,” Materials Evaluation, Vol 47, No. 2, 1988, pp. 233–240. Vol 21, 1984, pp. 169–180.
(6) Kautz, H. E., “Ultrasonic Evaluation of Mechanical Properties of (12) Vary, A., and Bowles, K. J., “Ultrasonic Evaluation of the Strength of
Thick, Multilayered, Filament Wound Composites,” Materials Evalu- Unidirectional Graphite/Polyimide Composites,” Proceedings 11th
ation, Vol 45, No. 12, 1985, pp. 1404–1412. Symposium on Nondestructive Evaluation, ASNT and Southwest
(7) Lo, Y. J., Wu, S. K., Hwang, D. C., and Hsu, S. E., “A Correlation Research Institute, San Antonio, TX, 1977, pp. 242–258.
Between Strength and Acousto-Ultrasonic Signal for a CFRP Lami- (13) Hemann, J. H., Cavano, P., Kautz, H. E., and Bowles, K. J.,
nate,” Proceedings 1st MRS International Meeting on Advanced “Trans-Ply Crack Density Determination by Acousto-Ultrasonics,”

8
 E 1495 – 02
Acousto-Ultrasonics—Theory and Application, Plenum Press, New Input-Output for Transmitting and Receiving Longitudinal Transduc-
York, NY, 1988, pp. 319–325. ers Coupled to Same Face of Isotropic Elastic Plates,” Materials
(14) Phani, K. K., and Bose, N. R., “Hydrothermal Aging of Jute-Glass Evaluation, Vol 40, No. 6, 1982, pp. 655–662.
Fiber Hybrid Composites—An Acousto-Ultrasonic Study,” Journal (18) Williams, J. H., Jr., and Lampert, N. R., “Ultrasonic Evaluation of
of Materials Science, Vol 22, 1987, pp. 1929–1933. Impact-Damaged Graphite Fiber Composite,” Materials Evaluation,
(15) Lorenzo, L., and Hahn, H. T., “Damage Assessment by Acousto- Vol 38, No. 12, 1980, pp. 68–72.
Ultrasonic Technique in Composites,” Composite Materials: Testing
and Design, ASTM STP 972, ASTM, Philadelphia, PA, 1988, pp. (19) Williams, J. H., Jr., and Lee, S. S., “Pattern Recognition Character-
380–397. izations of Micromechanical and Morphological Material States via
(16) Nayeb-Hashemi, N., Cohen, M. D., Zotos, J., and Poormand, R., Analytical Ultrasonics,” Materials Analysis by Ultrasonics, Noyes
“Ultrasonic Characteristics of Graphite/Epoxy Composite Material Data Corp., Park Ridge, NJ, 1987, pp. 192–206.
Subjected to Fatigue and Impacts,” Journal of Nondestructive Test- (20) Thomsen, J. J., and Lund, K., “Quality Control of Composite
ing, Vol 5, No. 3/4, 1986, pp. 119–131. Materials by Neural Network Analysis of Ultrasonic Power Spectra,”
(17) Williams, J. H., Jr., Karagülle, H., and Lee, S. S., “Ultrasonic Materials Evaluation, Vol 49, No. 5, 1991, pp. 594–600.

ASTM International takes no position respecting the validity of any patent rights asserted in connection with any item mentioned
in this standard. Users of this standard are expressly advised that determination of the validity of any such patent rights, and the risk
of infringement of such rights, are entirely their own responsibility.

This standard is subject to revision at any time by the responsible technical committee and must be reviewed every five years and
if not revised, either reapproved or withdrawn. Your comments are invited either for revision of this standard or for additional standards
and should be addressed to ASTM International Headquarters. Your comments will receive careful consideration at a meeting of the
responsible technical committee, which you may attend. If you feel that your comments have not received a fair hearing you should
make your views known to the ASTM Committee on Standards, at the address shown below.

This standard is copyrighted by ASTM International, 100 Barr Harbor Drive, PO Box C700, West Conshohocken, PA 19428-2959,
United States. Individual reprints (single or multiple copies) of this standard may be obtained by contacting ASTM at the above
address or at 610-832-9585 (phone), 610-832-9555 (fax), or service@astm.org (e-mail); or through the ASTM website
(www.astm.org).