materials

Article
Internal Stress Monitoring of In-Service Structural
Steel Members with Ultrasonic Method
Zuohua Li 1,2 , Jingbo He 1,2 , Jun Teng 1,2, * and Ying Wang 3, *
1 School of Civil and Environment Engineering, Shenzhen Graduate School, Harbin Institute of Technology,
Shenzhen 518055, China; lizuohua@hit.edu.cn (Z.L.); hejingbo@stmail.hitsz.edu.cn (J.H.)
2 IoT Application Technology Center of NDT, Shenzhen Graduate School, Harbin Institute of Technology,
Shenzhen 518055, China
3 Department of Civil and Environmental Engineering, University of Surrey, Guildford GU2 7XH, UK
* Correspondence: tengj@hit.edu.cn (J.T.); ying.wang@surrey.ac.uk (Y.W.); Tel.: +86-755-2603-3806 (J.T.);
+44-1483-683995 (Y.W.); Fax: +86-755-2603-3509 (J.T.)

Academic Editor: Jung Ho Je

Received: 29 January 2016; Accepted: 17 March 2016; Published: 23 March 2016

Abstract: Internal stress in structural steel members is an important parameter for steel structures
in their design, construction, and service stages. However, it is hard to measure via traditional
approaches. Among the existing non-destructive testing (NDT) methods, the ultrasonic method has
received the most research attention. Longitudinal critically refracted (Lcr) waves, which propagate
parallel to the surface of the material within an effective depth, have shown great potential as an
effective stress measurement approach. This paper presents a systematic non-destructive evaluation
method to determine the internal stress in in-service structural steel members using Lcr waves. Based
on theory of acoustoelasticity, a stress evaluation formula is derived. Factor of stress to acoustic
time difference is used to describe the relationship between stress and measurable acoustic results.
A testing facility is developed and used to demonstrate the performance of the proposed method.
Two steel members are measured by using the proposed method and the traditional strain gauge
method for verification. Parametric studies are performed on three steel members and the aluminum
plate to investigate the factors that influence the testing results. The results show that the proposed
method is effective and accurate for determining stress in in-service structural steel members.

Keywords: ultrasonic method; longitudinal critically refracted waves; in-service structural steel
members; internal stress; acoustoelasticity

1. Introduction

1.1. Internal Stress and Stress Measurement Methods

Internal stress in in-service structural steel members plays an important role in the design and
analysis of steel structures. The effective and reliable measurement of internal stress can provide
useful information that allows the safety of existing structures to be evaluated. For example, stress
concentration could lead to abnormal functioning and even structural failures. The early detection of
problematic stress concentrations may help asset managers to solve the issue in advance, which can
minimize the risk of structural malfunction and failure. However, in current practices, the stresses
in in-service structural members are usually calculated indirectly based on the design draft and the
measured or estimated loading, because accurate and reliable measurement of in-service stresses
through traditional approaches is difficult. This results in the differences between estimated and actual
stress conditions, which may increase the risk of structural failure.
Traditional stress measurement methods include the sectioning method, hole-drilling method,
strain gauge method, X-ray diffraction, magnetic-elastic method, and neutron diffraction method. The

Materials 2016, 9, 223; doi:10.3390/ma9040223 www.mdpi.com/journal/materials

Materials 2016, 9, 223 2 of 17

sectioning method [1] and hole-drilling method [2] are both destructive to members and thus are not
suggested to be used in existing structures. The strain gauge method [3] can be used to determine stress
values indirectly by measuring the strain change on the surface of the structural member. However,
it can only measure stress change, instead of the absolute value of stress. In addition, only stress at
the structural surface can be measured by using strain gauges. The X-ray diffraction method [4] can
determine the surface strain by measuring intercrystalline distance of a crystal structure according to
Bragg’s law. It is non-destructive, but only allows measurement of stresses to a depth of 10 µm. Neutron
diffraction method [5] is very similar to the X-ray method as it relies on elastic deformations within a
polycrystalline material that cause changes in the spacing of the lattice planes from their stress-free
condition. The equipment for this method is complex and therefore not suitable for field testing. The
magnetic elastic method [6] is based on the Barkhausen effect; it is limited by magnetization conditions
and the complex equipment required. Its measurement reliability and precision are inferior to those
of other methods. Therefore, the traditional methods described above are unsuitable for efficiently
measuring internal stress in steel structure members.
In recent years, ultrasonic methods using piezoelectric transducers have been proposed to detect
and identify damage in complex structures [7,8]. However, studies that investigate the application of
ultrasonic methods to measure the internal stress levels of in-service structural steel members remain
rare in the literature.

1.2. Ultrasonic Stress Measurement

Ultrasonic wave propagation in a solid medium is affected by the internal stress of the medium.
This property makes non-destructive measurement of internal stress possible. A linear relationship
can be found between ultrasonic velocity and material stress, which is called acoustoelasticity. In the
range of elasticity, the time-of-flight (TOF) of ultrasonic waves presents a linear relationship with
material stress when a wave propagates in a fixed acoustic path. According to finite deformation
theory, Hughes [9] proposed a formula for isotropic materials based on acoustoelasticity theory.
Based on this, a stress measurement method was first proposed in 1950. Crecraft [10] formulated the
stress-induced velocity variations of both longitudinal and shear waves for steel, aluminum, and copper
through experiments; the corresponding third-order elastic constants were also obtained. Makhort [11]
described the theory of the propagation of longitudinal, shear, and surface Rayleigh waves in initially
stressed members, and proposed the basic approaches and principles of the ultrasonic non-destructive
technique for finding biaxial and triaxial stresses in solids. On this basis, an internal stress formula was
derived, and the method was verified through a test on polymeric material. Compared with traditional
methods, ultrasonic stress measurement methods have advantages in terms of both cost and flexibility;
and are regarded as a promising approach for the non-destructive evaluation of stress [12].
Internal stress measurement using ultrasonic methods can be classified into three groups according
to the different wave types employed. The first group aims to directly use TOF, mainly for longitudinal
waves. Joshi [13] used longitudinal waves to measure the axial stress in bolts. Because the variation of
ultrasonic wave velocity in the range of actual stress in the bolt is very small, the determination of stress
requires precise and accurate measurement of the wave velocity. The phase detection method [14] was
then used for the precise measurement of TOF; and the experimental results showed that ultrasonic
wave velocity decreases linearly with the increase of stress. Chaki [15] used the velocity ratio (the
difference in the acoustoelastic coefficients of longitudinal waves and transverse waves) method to
measure the axial stress in bolts. This method is more effective because the value of axial load is
calculated from the ratio of TOF in the stressed state only, without accounting for the TOF measurement
in the unstressed state. The TOF variation and frequency shift of longitudinal waves are very small, and
thus the stress-induced velocity changes are very difficult to detect. For this reason, a data acquisition
device with a high sampling rate is needed and this increases the cost of this approach. A number
of factors, including the material-microstructure effects, environmental noise, and the bonding layer
Materials 2016, 9, 223 3 of 17

thickness, can negatively affect the measurement accuracy of the TOF method. These factors make in
situ measurement difficult.
The second group combines information from both longitudinal and transverse waves for stress
measurement. In the railroad industry, temperature changes lead to stresses in segments of seamless
railway track. In addition, performing stress measurements on active railway routes is a dangerous
task. To overcome these challenges, Szelazek [16] used a birefringence based approach to measure the
stress on the train wheel rim caused by braking. This method determines the stress of the wheel rim by
measuring the TOFs of both longitudinal and shear waves propagating perpendicularly to the acoustic
stress field. The stress measured by this method is the mean value of the whole rim and cannot reflect
the gradient distribution of the stress in the whole rim. Yasui and Kawashima [17] used a broadband
normal incidence transducer, which excited and received a 10 MHz longitudinal wave and a 5 MHz
transverse wave simultaneously, to measure the axial stress of a bolt. Unfortunately, employing both
longitudinal and transverse waves to measure stress is complex and time-consuming. Therefore, it is
not a feasible method in practice.
The third group employs critically refracted longitudinal (Lcr) waves to measure stress. Since
the variation of Lcr wave velocity due to stress change is much greater than those of other types of
waves, they become the best candidates to be used for the stress evaluation [18]. The most common
application of this approach is for residual stress measurement after welding. Welding residual stress
results from complex thermo-plastic deformations in the material [19–21]. The sensitivity of ultrasonic
waves to stress has been tested by Egle and Bray [18] with a pearlitic steel bar under tensile and
compressive loads. Among all ultrasonic waves, Lcr waves exhibited the largest sensitivity to stress.
Therefore, the Lcr wave method has been the focus of many studies recently. Bray and Santos [19,20]
used Lcr waves to detect the residual stresses of an aluminum welded seam and a steel welded
seam. The results confirmed the relaxation phenomenon of welding residual stress, and that the stress
relaxation of the aluminum welded seam was less than that of the steel counterpart. Javadi [21–24]
used Lcr waves to measure the overall distribution of welding residual stress in an austenitic stainless
steel member using friction stir welding. Experimental results were verified by the hole-drilling
method and theoretical analysis. Based on this, welding residual stress distribution at different depths
was obtained. Combining this with numerical simulation results using ANSYS, the diagram of stress
distribution was drawn. The majority of studies on Lcr wave are still in their early stages, with a limited
number of industrial applications. There are three possible reasons. First, ultrasonic wave propagation
characteristics are influenced by multiple factors including grain size [25], carbon content [26], material
texture [27], temperature [28], water environment [29,30], and coupling conditions [31]. All these
factors present different challenges and can increase the difficulty level of accurate stress measurement.
Second, stress measured by this approach represents the average value in a fixed path and may result
in noticeable errors in residual stress sections with high gradients. Third, when using the Lcr wave
method, some parameters need to be measured on in-service structural members. For example, the
elastic modulus of steel members needs to be measured by using the tensile test, and Lcr travel time
data in in-service structural steel members under a “stress-free” condition need to be collected. These
may not be practical in many applications. Internal stress of in-service structural steel members is one
of the mechanical stress. It is present in materials with external loading and has an associated length
change according to the loading form, which is different from residual stress. Compared to massive
studies on the measurement of residue stresses, studies to measure the internal stress of in-service
structural steel members remain rare in the literature.

1.3. Goals and Objectives of This Study

Realizing the above difficulties, this paper aims to propose a practical non-destructive evaluation
approach to determine the internal stress of in-service structural steel members using Lcr waves, and
the ultimate objective of this study is for industrial application. In accordance with the characteristics
of in-service structural steel members, a stress evaluation formula is derived. A comprehensive
Materials 2016, 9, 223 4 of 17

testing equipment, including both hardware and software systems, is designed and developed in
the laboratory. Six structural members are tested using the proposed method. The results of two
members are validated by using the traditional strain gauge method. The influencing factors, such as
the position of probes, materials, and ultrasonic path, are investigated by combining theoretical and
experimental studies on the other four specimens.

2. Theory
Hughes and Kelly [32] derived the relationship between elastic wave velocity and stress for the
theory of acoustoelasticity. Tokuoka and Iwashimizu [33] further developed the theory based on the
following four basic assumptions: (1) continuity for a solid body; (2) small perturbation of ultrasonic
waves are superimposed on the finite static deformation of the object; (3) the deformations of objects
are super elastic and uniform; (4) the object deformation process is isentropic. Based on these studies,
when the ultrasonic longitudinal wave reaches an interface between two media with different acoustic
impedance, wave mode conversion occurs. At that time, one part of the energy is reflected by the
interface back to the first medium, and the reflected angle equals to the incident angle. The other part
of the energy refracts into the second medium, and the refracted longitudinal wave and shear wave
are generated. According to Snell’s law [34], when ultrasonic velocity in the second medium is greater
than in the first one, the angle between the refracted longitudinal wave and shear wave increases with
the increase of the incidence angle of the longitudinal wave. When the incident angle increases to
a certain value (different for different materials), the refracted longitudinal wave travels parallel to
member surface. Now, the refracted longitudinal wave becomes the critically refracted longitudinal
wave, namely, the Lcr wave. As a special ultrasonic wave mode, the Lcr wave travels parallel to the
member surface and propagates beneath the surface at a certain depth. The propagation depth of the
Lcr wave is a function of frequency, but an explicit form of this function has not yet been derived [22].
In this study, structural steel member material is assumed to be isotropic and homogeneous.
Further, it is assumed to be in its elastic range. The speed of the Lcr wave traveling parallel to the load
can be related to stress by the following expression [35]:
„ 
2 σ λ`µ
ρ0 V “ λ ` 2µ ` p4λ ` 10µ ` 4mq ` λ ` 2l (1)
3λ ` 2µ µ

where ρ0 is the material density before deformation; V is the velocity of the Lcr wave when the
steel member is under stress; σ is the stress of the steel member; λ and µ are the second order
elastic constants of the material; and l, m, and n are the third order elastic constants of the material.
Equation (1) illustrates that stress is a complex function of second order wave velocity, and it is
influenced by the materials’ second and third order elastic constants. Therefore, the relationship
between stress and velocity is not practically convenient for stress measurement.
To allow feasible stress measurements, this paper proposed the following steps to simplify the
relationship between stress and velocity.
When the steel member is under zero-stress condition, the velocity of the Lcr wave is:

ρ0 V0 2 “ λ ` 2µ (2)

where V0 is the Lcr wave velocity when steel member is under zero-stress condition. By substituting
Equation (2) into Equation (1), a new formula can be obtained:

V2 “ V20 p1 ` kσq (3)

where k is a constant related to the material properties:

Materials 2016, 9, 223 5 of 17

4λ ` 10µ ` 4m 2l ´ 3λ ´ 10µ ´ 4m
`
µ λ ` 2µ
k“ (4)
3λ ` 2µ
The Equation (3) can be written as the following form:

1 V2
σ“ ¨p ´ 1q (5)
k V20

The second order Taylor series expansion of Equation (5) about the point V = V0 can be written as:

2 V ´ V0 3 pV ´ V0 q2
σ“ ¨ ` ¨ (6)
k V0 k V20

The velocity change of Lcr wave caused by stress is too small to be measured, so further
simplification is necessary. Based on the fixed acoustic path method [36], this study transforms
the relationship between stress and velocity to the relationship between stress and TOF in a fixed
acoustic path, L.
The TOF of Lcr waves in the path are t0 and t when steel member is under zero-stress and stress
L L
conditions, respectively. By substituting V “ , and V0 “ , into Equation (6), it becomes:
t t0

1 3t20 4t0
σ“ ¨p 2 ´ ` 1q (7)
k t t
By expanding Equation (7) in the Taylor series about the point t = t0 , the following formula can
be obtained:
1 2 5 8 3n ´ 1
σ“ ¨ r ¨ pt0 ´ tq ` 2 ¨ pt0 ´ tq2 ` 3 ¨ pt0 ´ tq3 ` ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ ¨ `p´1qn ¨ ¨ pt ´ t0 qn s (8)
k t0 t0 t0 tn0

It can be seen from Equation (8) that stress and the TOF of Lcr wave of the first item represents
a linear function. The remainder items could be ignored, which are infinitesimal of higher order.
In order for the convenience of discussion and analysis, a parameter ζ is defined in the following form:

t0 ´ t
ζ“ (9)
t0

where ζ expresses the TOF change rate of Lcr waves influenced by stress in a fixed acoustic path. The
sum of Taylor series expansion in Equation (8) is:

1 2ζ 3ζ2 3ζn`1 p3n ´ 1qζn`1

σ“ ¨r ` ´ ´ s (10)
k 1 ´ ζ p1 ´ ζq2 p1 ´ ζq2 1´ζ

In order to study the degree of the linear correlation between stress and Lcr wave TOF, the
percentage of the contribution from the first item in Equation (8) needs to be determined. The formula
can be written as:
1
¨ 2ζ
η“ k ¨ 100% (11)
1 2ζ 3ζ2 3ζn`1 p3n ´ 1qζn`1
¨r ` ´ ´ s
k 1 ´ ζ p1 ´ ζq2 p1 ´ ζq2 1´ζ

In actual measurements, when the Lcr wave propagates in a length of 120 mm in steel members,
the TOF of Lcr wave in steel member under different stress and the corresponding parameter ζ are
Materials 2016, 9, 223 6 of 17

shown in Table 1. The percentage of the first few items (n) has been calculated by using Equation (11).
The results are shown in Table 1.

Table 1. The contribution percentage of the first item in Equation (8) under different stresses.

η
σ (MPa) t (ns) ζ
(n = 1) (n = 2) (n = 10) (n = 100)
0.00 40,534 0.0000 - - - -
´11.54 40,552 ´0.0004 100.00% 100.10% 100.10% 100.10%
´49.58 40,576 ´0.0010 100.00% 100.25% 100.25% 100.25%
´105.40 40,604 ´0.0017 100.00% 100.43% 100.43% 100.43%
´158.29 40,635 ´0.0025 100.00% 100.63% 100.63% 100.63%
´219.64 40,686 ´0.0037 100.00% 100.93% 100.93% 100.93%

It can be seen from Table 1 that the first item in Equation (8) plays a major role in the results.
In addition, the effect of the second item gradually becomes larger with the increase of stress, but its
influence is still negligible. According to the trend, the quadratic expression will be more accurate
at larger stress values. In this study, structural steel member material is assumed to be in its elastic
range. The remainder items have little influence on stress calculation and can be ignored. Therefore,
Equation (8) can be further simplified to a linear equation:

2
σ“ pt0 ´ tq (12)
kt0

k
Let K “ , and then K becomes the acoustoelastic constant for ultrasonic waves [18].
2
The acoustoelastic constant (K) functionally links the stress and TOF change, which should be
measured by the uniaxial tensile test performed on the samples with the same materials as structural
steel members.
The relationship between stress and the TOF of an Lcr wave can be further simplified as:

σ “ Bpt0 ´ tq (13)

where B is defined as Stress to Acoustic Time Difference (SATD) factor, which represents the linear
relationship between stress and the TOF of an Lcr wave:

1
B“ (14)
Kt0

B is a combination of the acoustoelastic constant (K) and TOF (t0 ) in stress-free samples. In many
studies [19,20,24], both the acoustoelastic constant (K) and elastic modulus (E) need to be calibrated by
standard uniaxial tensile tests. In contrast, only the SATD factor (B) needs calibration in this study.
It can be seen from the above derivation that Equation (6) is a reduced form of Equation (1).
By employing the fixed acoustic path method, Equation (6) becomes Equation (7). Equation (12)
represents the linear term in the Taylor series expansion of Equation (7) about the point t=t0 . Based on
this, the linear relationship between stress and Lcr wave TOF is obtained in Equation (13). Therefore,
Equation (13) is intrinsically a simplified representation of Equation (1). Compared with other
theoretical formulae [19,20,35], the formula presented in this study has three main advantages. Firstly,
the factors that influence stress measurement in Equation (1), including material density and the second
and third order elastic constants of material, are integrated into a single SATD factor. This factor
represents the linear relationship between stress and the TOF of an Lcr wave directly. Secondly, the
calculation of SATD factors depends on experimental data fitting, instead of measurement of material
density and the second and third order elastic constants of material. This simplifies the experimental
Materials 2016, 9, 223 7 of 17

work. Thirdly, Equation (13), the simplified representation of Equation (1), allows this method to be
Materials 2016,
Materials 2016, 9,
9, 223
223 77 of
of 16
16
easily programmed and implemented.

3. Methodology
3. Methodology
Methodology

Development of
3.1. Development of Measurement System

Based on on above
on above theory,
theory,aa ameasurement
abovetheory, measurement
measurement system
system
system is designed
is designed
is designed andand
and developed
developed
developed in this
in this study.
in study. The
this study.
The
measurement
The measurement system
systemincludes
includesboth hardware
both hardware and
andsoftware
software systems.
systems.
measurement system includes both hardware and software systems. The schematic diagram The
The schematic
schematic diagram
diagram and
the photo
the photo of of the
the developed
developed hardware
hardware system
system are
are shown
shown
shown in in Figures
Figures 11 and
in Figures and
and 2,2, respectively. As
2 respectively.
respectively. As can
can be be
seen, there are are aa total
total of
of eight
eight components in hardware
hardware system.
system. Specifically,
Specifically, (1)
Specifically, (1)is
(1) isthe
is the loading
the loadingdevice;
loading device;
device;
(2) is
(2) is the
the oscilloscope
oscilloscope (Tektronix
(Tektronix
the oscilloscope (Tektronix company company
company production,
production, MDO3024);
MDO3024); (3) is
is an
an ultrasonic
ultrasonic preamplifier
preamplifier
(OLYMPUS, 5670
(OLYMPUS, 5670 PREAMP;
PREAMP; New New York,
York, NY,
NY, USA);
NY, USA); (4)
USA); (4) is
(4) is the
is the static
the static resistance
static resistance strain
resistance strain gauge;
gauge; (5)
(5) is
is the
the
ultrasonic generator (Shantou Institute Institute of
of Ultrasonic
Ultrasonic Instruments
Instruments Co., Co., Ltd.,
Ltd., CTS-22;
Ltd., CTS-22; Shantou,
CTS-22; Shantou, China);
Shantou, China);
China);
(6) is
(6) is aa computer;
computer; (7) (7) is
is the
the transmitting
transmitting probe; and (8) is is the
the receiving
receiving probe
probe connected
connected to the signal
amplifier through
amplifier through wires.
wires.
wires.

Figure 1.
Figure 1. Measurement
Measurement system
system schematic
schematic diagram.
diagram.

66

55
77 88

22
11

33
44

Figure 2.
Figure 2. Measurement
Measurement hardware
hardware system.
system.

The core
The core device
device used
used to to generate
generate and
and receive
receive LcrLcr waves
waves is is shown
shown in in Figure
Figure 3. 3. Two
Two ultrasonic
ultrasonic
The core device used to generate and receive Lcr waves is shown in Figure 3. Two ultrasonic
transducers
transducers areare attached
attached to to the
to the test
the test specimen.
test specimen.
specimen. The The role of the transmitting probe is to generate an
transducers are attached The role
role of
of the
the transmitting
transmitting probeprobe is to generate
is to generate an an
ultrasonic wave
ultrasonic wave at aa specific
specific frequency.
frequency. The generated
generated ultrasonic
ultrasonic wavewave propagates
propagates from from poly
poly
ultrasonic wave atata specific frequency. The The generated ultrasonic wave propagates from poly methyl
methyl methacrylate
methyl methacrylate (PMMA) material to the steel, and then to the receiving probe via PMMA
methacrylate (PMMA)(PMMA) materialmaterial to the
to the steel, andsteel,
thenand thenreceiving
to the to the receiving
probe viaprobe PMMA viamaterial.
PMMA
material. According
material. According to to Snell’s
Snell’s law
law [34],
[34], the
the incident
incident longitudinal
longitudinal wave wave angle
angle isis set
set
˝ as 25.7°
as 25.7° so
so that
that
According to Snell’s law [34], the incident longitudinal wave angle is set as 25.7 so that Lcr wave
Lcr wave
Lcr wave can
can bebe generated
generated and and received.
received. The
The nominal
nominal frequencies
frequencies of of the
the transducers
transducers for for the
the probes
probes
can be generated and received. The nominal frequencies of the transducers for the probes are 5 MHz.
are 5 MHz.
are 5 MHz. Based
Based on Javadi
on the
Javadi [37], the propagation
[37], the propagation depth
depth of the
of the Lcr wave
Lcr wave generated
generated in this study is
Based on Javadi [37], propagation depth of the Lcr wave generated in this study isinaboutthis study
1.1 mm is
about 1.1
about 1.1 mm
mm beneath
beneath the the member’s
member’s surface.
surface. TheThe functions
functions of of the
the remaining
remaining components
components are are
summarized as
summarized as follows:
follows: thethe loading
loading device
device is is used
used toto generate
generate measurable
measurable loading
loading on on the
the test
test
specimens; the
specimens; the signal
signal amplifier
amplifier amplifies
amplifies the
the received
received signals;
signals; thethe signal
signal acquisition
acquisition devicedevice can
can
capture, display,
capture, display, and and record
record signals
signals from
from thethe transducers,
transducers, by by using
using thethe oscilloscope;
oscilloscope; and and thethe
computer is used to process the collected signal using the
computer is used to process the collected signal using the software system.software system.
Materials 2016, 9, 223 8 of 17

beneath the member’s surface. The functions of the remaining components are summarized as follows:
the loading device is used to generate measurable loading on the test specimens; the signal amplifier
amplifies the received signals; the signal acquisition device can capture, display, and record signals
from the transducers, by using the oscilloscope; and the computer is used to process the collected
Materialsusing
signal 2016, 9,
the223software system. 8 of 16

Figure 3.
Figure 3. Lcr
Lcr wave
wave testing
testing device.
device.

In this study, an in-house software is designed on the Labview platform, which consists of
In this study, an in-house software is designed on the Labview platform, which consists of
modules for signal generation, signal de-noising, pulse capturing, calibration of SATD factors, and
modules for signal generation, signal de-noising, pulse capturing, calibration of SATD factors, and
stress calculation for in-service structural steel members. The signals generated can be of different
stress calculation for in-service structural steel members. The signals generated can be of different
forms, such as sine wave and square wave. In practice, a series of pulse signals are generated by the
forms, such as sine wave and square wave. In practice, a series of pulse signals are generated by
ultrasonic generator, and then propagate in the steel member. The propagating wave signals are
the ultrasonic generator, and then propagate in the steel member. The propagating wave signals are
captured at the receiving probe, and then transmitted to the computer. The received data are
captured at the receiving probe, and then transmitted to the computer. The received data are filtered
filtered by using wavelet transform method. The program is written in MATLAB software
by using wavelet transform method. The program is written in MATLAB software (MATLAB 7.14,
(MATLAB 7.14, The MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA) and embedded in Labview platform. This
The MathWorks, Natick, MA, USA) and embedded in Labview platform. This combination takes
combination takes the advantages of both software, since MATLAB is more suitable for filtering
the advantages of both software, since MATLAB is more suitable for filtering while Labview is more
while Labview is more suitable for data acquisition and instrument control.
suitable for data acquisition and instrument control.
To accurately measure the TOF of Lcr waves, the following process is proposed. In the
To accurately measure the TOF of Lcr waves, the following process is proposed. In the beginning,
beginning, the user controls the software system for signal generation. Then, the ultrasonic
the user controls the software system for signal generation. Then, the ultrasonic generator transmits
generator transmits a chain of pulse signals, and shunts them into a transmitting signal and
a chain of pulse signals, and shunts them into a transmitting signal and synchronization signal by a
synchronization signal by a transfer head. After wave mode conversion, the Lcr wave is generated.
transfer head. After wave mode conversion, the Lcr wave is generated. The Lcr wave, which propagates
The Lcr wave, which propagates in a fixed acoustic path, is then received by the receiving probe.
in a fixed acoustic path, is then received by the receiving probe. After being amplified, the received
After being amplified, the received signal of the Lcr wave is displayed on the oscilloscope. In the
signal of the Lcr wave is displayed on the oscilloscope. In the above process, the synchronization
above process, the synchronization signal of the incident wave is directly inputted to the
signal of the incident wave is directly inputted to the oscilloscope. This results in two signals being
oscilloscope. This results in two signals being displayed on the oscilloscope: one received signal and
displayed on the oscilloscope: one received signal and one synchronization signal. The time difference
one synchronization signal. The time difference between these two signals is the TOF of the Lcr wave.
between these two signals is the TOF of the Lcr wave. The oscilloscope works with a resolution of
The oscilloscope works with a resolution of 0.4 ns which allows very precise measurements of TOF.
0.4 ns which allows very precise measurements of TOF.
3.2. Stress
3.2. Stress Measurement
Measurement Method
Method
Based on
Based on the
the theory
theory and
and the
the developed
developed measurement
measurement system,
system, aa five-step
five-step framework
framework for for the
the
measurement of stresses of in-service structural steel members is proposed. The flowchart
measurement of stresses of in-service structural steel members is proposed. The flowchart is shown in is shown
in Figure
Figure 4. The
4. The detailed
detailed process
process is follows:
is as as follows:
(1) Replication of in-service structural steel member. Structural steel members are usually
(1) Replication
non-removable of installation.
after in-service structural steel member.
Since the calibration Structural
of SATD steel members
factors should ideally beare usually
performed
on the non-removable after installation.
original in-service member, a steel Since the calibration
member with the ofsame
SATD factorsand
material should ideally
geometrical
be performed on the original in-service member, a steel member
parameters to the in-service structural steel member should be used as a replication member.with the same material
and
(2) geometrical of
Measurement parameters
Lcr wave TOF to theforin-service structural
the replication membersteelunder
member should condition,
zero-stress be used asi.e., a
replication
t0 in Equation member.
(13). Transmitting probe and receiving probe should be placed with a fixed distance
(2) Measurement
apart on the replication of Lcr wave TOF
member. for the
Under replication
stress-free member under
conditions, zero-stresscaptures
the oscilloscope thei.e.,
condition, t0 in
arrival
time ofEquation (13). Transmitting
the transmitting probe
wave signal andand thereceiving probe should
synchronization be The
signal. placed with atime
acoustic fixeddifference
distance
(ATD) between the two signals is t0.
(3) Calibration of the SATD factor for the replication member. This step is the core of the
proposed method. The parameter to be calculated is B in Equation (13). A group of axial forces
(σ1, σ2, …, σn) are applied on the replication member that can be determined by strain gauges.
Based on the tested axial forces and the corresponding Lcr wave TOFs obtained from step (2), a set
Materials 2016, 9, 223 9 of 17

apart on the replication member. Under stress-free conditions, the oscilloscope captures the
arrival time of the transmitting wave signal and the synchronization signal. The acoustic time
difference (ATD) between the two signals is t0 .
(3) Calibration of the SATD factor for the replication member. This step is the core of the proposed
method. The parameter to be calculated is B in Equation (13). A group of axial forces (σ1 , σ2 ,
. . . , σn ) are applied on the replication member that can be determined by strain gauges. Based
on the tested axial forces and the corresponding Lcr wave TOFs obtained from step (2), a set
of data ((t1 , σ1 ), (t2 , σ2 ), . . . , (tn , σn )) can be obtained. The SATD factor (B) can then be easily
Materials 2016, 9, 223 as the slope of the trend line of the data.
calculated 9 of 16

(4) Measurement of the Lcr waves TOF in the in-service structural steel member. The transmitting
(4)
andMeasurement
receiving probesof the Lcr waves
are placed on theTOF in thesteel
in-service in-service
memberstructural steel probe
with the same member. The
distance
transmitting and receiving probes are placed on the in-service steel member with
as that in step (2). The Lcr wave TOF in the in-service member (t in Equation (13)) can then be the same probe
distance as that in
measured stepthe
using (2).same
The Lcr wave TOF in the in-service member (t in Equation (13)) can then
procedure.
be measured using the same procedure.
(5) Calculation of the internal stress of the in-service structural steel member. By substituting the
(5) Calculation of the internal stress of the in-service structural steel member. By substituting
obtained parameters: t0 , B, and t, into Equation (13), internal stress of the in-service structural
the obtained parameters: t0, B, and t, into Equation (13), internal stress of the in-service structural
steel member can be determined.
steel member can be determined.

Figure 4.
Figure 4. Flow
Flow chart of ultrasonic
chart of ultrasonic method.
method.

4. Experimental Studies
4. Experimental Studies
4.1. Test
4.1. Sample
Test Sample
In this
In thisstudy,
study,five
five
steelsteel members
members and and one aluminum
one aluminum plate
plate are used areasused as test specimens.
test specimens. To representTo
represent
the the actual conditions,
actual conditions, the full-scale the full-scale
steel members steel
aremembers
chosen asare testchosen as test
specimens. specimens.
Angle Angle
steel is widely
steel is widely used to build steel structure workshops, steel bridges, and electrical
used to build steel structure workshops, steel bridges, and electrical transmission towers in the building transmission
towers in and
structure the building
engineering structure and fields.
structure engineering structure
It is used as notfields. It isbearing
only the used as member
not onlybut the also
bearing
the
member but also the connecting member, which makes it one of the most
connecting member, which makes it one of the most important and typical components. However, the important and typical
components.
current studiesHowever,
concerning the internal
current studies concerning internal
stress measurement of anglestress
steelmeasurement of angle
are rare [12,18–21]. steel are
Therefore,
rare paper
this [12,18–21].
choose Therefore,
the anglethis steel paper
memberchoose the of
as one angle steelspecimens
the test member as to one
study of how
the test specimensthe
to determine to
study how to determine the internal stress using ultrasonic method. To investigate
internal stress using ultrasonic method. To investigate the factors that may affect the results, four steel the factors that
may affect
plates the results,
and one aluminum four steelare
plate plates andasone
chosen aluminum
other plate are
test specimens. Thechosen as other
dimensions oftest
testspecimens.
specimens
The dimensions of test specimens are determined by the bearing load value
are determined by the bearing load value of the loading device and the probe size. The dimensions of the loading device
and the probe size. The dimensions and material
and material categories of the specimens are summarized in Table 2.categories of the specimens are summarized in
Table 2.
4.2. Validation of the Proposed Method
Table 2. Test samples material and dimension.
To validate the proposed method, two structural steel members, steel plate A and angle steel,
Name SATD factors.
were firstly used to calibrate Material
The distance between Dimension
the transmitting and receiving
Steel
probes was 100 mm for plate
steel A A and 120
plate Q235mmsteel
for angle400 mmThe
steel. × 40 mm values
stress × 8 mmand corresponding
Angle steel Q235 steel ∠80 mm × 80 mm × 6 mm
Steel plate B Q235 steel 450 mm × 40 mm × 12 mm
Steel plate C Q235 steel 600 mm × 40 mm × 12 mm
Steel plate D Q235 steel 600 mm × 40 mm × 20 mm
Aluminum plate 6061 450 mm × 40 mm × 12 mm
Materials 2016, 9, 223 10 of 17

t0 of both specimens were measured, as shown in Figure 5. Using the least squares method, linear
relationships between the stresses and t0 were fitted. Based on these relationships, the slopes can
be obtained as the SATD factors, which are 2.2632 MPa/ns and 1.4463 MPa/ns for steel plate A and
angle steel, respectively. Based on Equation (13) and the obtained SATD factor, the internal stress of
in-service structural steel members can be easily calculated via the measurement of Lcr wave TOF (t),
as shown in Table 3.

Table 2. Test samples material and dimension.

Materials 2016, 9, 223 Name Material Dimension 10 of 16

Steel plate A Q235 steel 400 mm ˆ 40 mm ˆ 8 mm

method, linear relationships
Anglebetween
steel theQ235
stresses
steel and=80
t0 were
mm ˆfitted.
80 mm Based
ˆ 6 mmon these relationships,
the slopes can be obtainedSteelas theB SATDQ235
plate factors,
steelwhich
450 are
mm 2.2632
ˆ 40 mmMPa/ns
ˆ 12 mmand 1.4463 MPa/ns for
Steel plate C Q235 steel 600 mm ˆ 40 mm ˆ 12 mm
steel plate A and angle steel, respectively. Based on Equation (13) and the obtained SATD factor, the
Steel plate D Q235 steel 600 mm ˆ 40 mm ˆ 20 mm
internal stress of in-service structural steel members can be easily calculated via the measurement
Aluminum plate 6061 450 mm ˆ 40 mm ˆ 12 mm
of Lcr wave TOF (t), as shown in Table 3.

Figure 5. Fitting
Figure 5. Fitting line
line between
between stress
stress and
and TOF
TOF of
of steel
steel plate
plate A
A and
and angle
angle steel.
steel.

To verify theTable 3. Comparison

stress between two
values measured bymethods of steel plate
the proposed A andthe
method, angle steel.
standard strain gauge
method was employed as a reference method. Several strain gauges were attached on the surface of
Ultrasonic Strain Gauge Difference
both specimens, before load was applied to the steelUltrasonic Strain Gauge
member. The stresses of the steelDifference
members are
Method (Steel Method (Steel (Steel Plate A) Method (Angle Method (Angle (Angle Steel)
calculated based
Plate A) (MPa) on the product
Plate A) (MPa) of Young’s
(%) modulus and the
Steel) (MPa) measured strain.
Steel) (MPa) It should be noted
(%)
that the load applied´78.93
´81.08
to test specimens2.72 can produce uniformly
´67.28
distributed axial stress, so the
´69.13 2.68
surface
and internal
´107.20 stresses are equal.
´108.64 1.32 ´95.05 ´95.16 0.11
The comparison´142.41
´143.24 results using both 0.59 methods are listed in Table ´107.84
´103.73 3. The results show 3.81that the
2.46
´186.48
difference between the´182.01
stresses measured by the two´115.88 than 5% for every 4.36
methods is less ´121.16 single test.
´189.18 ´188.86 0.17 ´132.65 ´129.91 2.11
This ´197.29
demonstrates the reliability
´189.87 and accuracy
3.91 of the proposed
´156.37 method. ´160.63 2.65
´209.91 ´210.67 0.36 ´178.36 ´182.92 2.49
´227.92 Table
´232.28 1.88 two methods
3. Comparison between of steel plate A and
´194.56 angle steel.
´188.98 2.95
- - - ´211.91 ´212.81 0.42
Ultrasonic
- Strain
- Gauge Difference
- Ultrasonic
´214.80 Strain
´221.60Gauge Difference
3.07
Method (Steel Method (Steel (Steel Plate A) Method (Angle Method (Angle (Angle Steel)
Plate A) (MPa) Plate A) (MPa) (%) Steel) (MPa) Steel) (MPa) (%)
To−81.08
verify the stress −78.93
values measured 2.72
by the proposed−67.28
method, the standard
−69.13 strain gauge2.68method
−107.20
was employed −108.64 method. Several
as a reference 1.32 −95.05 were attached
strain gauges −95.16on the surface
0.11of both
−143.24 −142.41 0.59 −103.73 −107.84 3.81
specimens, before load was applied to the steel member. The stresses of the steel members are
−186.48 −182.01 2.46 −115.88 −121.16 4.36
calculated based
−189.18 on the product
−188.86 of Young’s0.17modulus and the measured
−132.65 strain.
−129.91It should be noted
2.11 that
−197.29 −189.87 3.91 −156.37 −160.63 2.65
−209.91 −210.67 0.36 −178.36 −182.92 2.49
−227.92 −232.28 1.88 −194.56 −188.98 2.95
- - - −211.91 −212.81 0.42
- - - −214.80 −221.60 3.07
Materials 2016, 9, 223 11 of 17

the load applied to test specimens can produce uniformly distributed axial stress, so the surface and
internal stresses are equal.
The comparison results using both methods are listed in Table 3. The results show that the
difference between the stresses measured by the two methods is less than 5% for every single test.
This demonstrates the reliability and accuracy of the proposed method.

4.3. Investigation of Influencing Factors

To further
Materials 2016, 9,investigate
223 the factors that may affect the results, extensive experimental studies
11 ofhave
16
been conducted
Materials in this section.
2016, 9, 223 11 of 16
4.3.1. The Positions of Probes
4.3.1. The
4.3.1. Positions
The PositionsofofProbes
Probes
Structural steel members are generally slender with both ends fixed. The positions of the two
Structural
probes on thesteel
Structural steelmembers
in-service member
members are
are generally
and slenderwith
the replication
generally slender with
memberbothends
both ends
are not fixed.
always
fixed. TheThe positions
identical.
positions of SATD
If the
of the the
two two
probes
factor
probesonison
thethein-service
different
in-service member
in two and
and the
positions,
member thereplication
the stress values
replication member
membermeasuredarenot
are not
by always
ultrasonic
always identical.
method
identical. If may
If the the
SATDSATD
be
erroneous.
factor
factor is differentTherefore,
is different in this
in two two subsection
positions,
positions, focuses
the stress
the stress on values
values the influence
measured byofultrasonic
measured the
byprobes’ positions
ultrasonic
method method
may onbethe
may SATD
be
erroneous.
factor
Therefore,when
erroneous. the distance
thisTherefore,
subsection between
thisfocuses
subsection
onthethe
two probes
focuses on the
influence isoffixed.
influence of the
the probes’ probes’ on
positions positions
the SATDon the SATD
factor when
factor when
Steel the
plate distance
C was between
used for
the distance between the two probes is fixed. the
this two probes
analysis. The is fixed.
distance between the transmitting probe and the
Steel
receiving plate
probe C
waswas used
set as for
120 this
mm. analysis.
Two The
different distance
positions between
were the
marked
Steel plate C was used for this analysis. The distance between the transmitting probe and the transmitting
on steel probe
plate C.and the
Position
receiving
one
receiving inprobe
wasprobe thewas wassetset
middle ofas
as 120
steel
120 mm.
plate
mm. CTwo
Two and different positions
positionpositions
different two waswereweremarked
close tomarked
the edge,onsteel
on steel
as plate C.
C.in
illustrated
plate Position
Figure one
Position 6.
one wasboth
Under in the middle of steel
conditions, the plate Cof
values andB position
and t two the
0 and was corresponding
close to the edge, as illustrated
stresses were in Figure 6.
obtained by
was in the middle of steel plate C and position two was close to the edge, as illustrated in Figure 6.
Underthe
using both conditions,
proposed the values
method, as shown of Binand t0 and
Figure the corresponding
7. The stressesare
fitted linear functions were obtained
almost by
identical,
Under both conditions, the values of B and t0 and the corresponding stresses were obtained by using
usinga the
with proposed
difference method,
of only as shown
0.512%. in Figure
This small 7. Themay
difference fittedbelinear
caused functions are almost
by the fitting processidentical,
and can
the proposed method, as shown in Figure 7. The fitted linear functions are almost identical, with a
with a difference
usually be ignored. of only 0.512%. This small difference may be caused by the fitting process and can
difference
usually beof only 0.512%. This small difference may be caused by the fitting process and can usually
ignored.
be ignored.

Figure6.6. Position
Position of probes.
Figure
Figure 6. Position ofofprobes.
probes.

Figure
Figure 7.
7. 7.
Figure Fittingline
Fitting
Fitting linebetween
line betweenstress
between stressand
stress andTOF
TOFof
TOF ofsteel
of steelplate
steel plate
plateBBBon
on
on position
position
position one
one
one and
and
and position
position
position two.
two.two.

Theoretically, stress is
Theoretically, stress is related
related to
to the
the SATD
SATDfactor
factorand
andt0t0only,
only,according
accordingtotoEquation
Equation(13).
(13).Both
Both
parameters
parameters are not sensitive
are not sensitive to
to probe
probe positions.
positions.This
Thisconfirms
confirmsthat
thatininactual
actualstress
stressmeasurement,
measurement, the
the
position
position of the probes does does not
not affect
affect the
thefinal
finalresult.
result.To
Tomaximize
maximizethe theconvenience
convenienceofofmeasurement,
measurement,
itit is
is recommended to select
select probe
probe positions
positionsthat
thatallow
alloweasy
easyinstallation
installationand andremoval.
removal.
Materials 2016, 9, 223 12 of 17

Theoretically, stress is related to the SATD factor and t0 only, according to Equation (13).
Both parameters are not sensitive to probe positions. This confirms that in actual stress measurement,
the position of the probes does not affect the final result. To maximize the convenience of measurement,
it is recommended to select probe positions that allow easy installation and removal.

4.3.2. Materials
Equation
Materials (14) shows that the SATD factor is influenced by the second and third order elastic
2016, 9, 223 12 of 16
constants of materials. To investigate its influence, the SATD factors were calibrated for steel plate
Band
andthethealuminum
aluminum plate. The
plate. dimensions
The dimensions of of
plate steel
plate B and
steel thethe
B and aluminum
aluminum plate areare
plate thethe
same,
same,as
shown
as shown in in
Table
Table 2.2.The
Thedistance
distancebetween
betweenthe thetwo
twoprobes
probeswas
wasset
set as
as 120
120 mm. The results
results obtained
obtained
using the
using the proposed
proposed methodmethod and
and the
the fitted
fitted linear
linearrelationships
relationshipsare
areshown
shownin inFigure
Figure8.8.

Figure 8.
Figure 8. Fitting
Fitting line
line between
between stress
stress and
and TOF
TOF of
of steel
steel plate
plate BB and
and aluminum
aluminum plate.
plate.

As can be seen, the SATD factor of steel plate B and the aluminum plate are 0.4896 MPa/ns and
As can be seen, the SATD factor of steel plate B and the aluminum plate are 0.4896 MPa/ns
0.6165 MPa/ns, respectively. The difference between them is 22.801%. This means that material
and 0.6165 MPa/ns, respectively. The difference between them is 22.801%. This means that material
properties have a direct influence to the SATD factor. This matches with the conclusion from the
properties have a direct influence to the SATD factor. This matches with the conclusion from the
theoretical study. Furthermore, a previous study [26] suggests that ultrasonic wave propagation
theoretical study. Furthermore, a previous study [26] suggests that ultrasonic wave propagation
characteristics will vary depending on the steel’s carbon content. Therefore, the SATD factor should
characteristics will vary depending on the steel’s carbon content. Therefore, the SATD factor should be
be calibrated independently for each structural steel member.
calibrated independently for each structural steel member.
In the welding field, welding procedure has a severe effect on the parent material. The
In the welding field, welding procedure has a severe effect on the parent material. The
acoustoelastic constant of the weld zone differs considerably from the parent material and the heat
acoustoelastic constant of the weld zone differs considerably from the parent material and the heat
affected zone as well. This practical problem in ultrasonic stress measurement limits it to laboratory
affected zone as well. This practical problem in ultrasonic stress measurement limits it to laboratory
applications only. However, this problem could be minimized in the measurement of steel
applications only. However, this problem could be minimized in the measurement of steel structural
structural members’ internal stresses. Standardized production of structural steel members makes
members’ internal stresses. Standardized production of structural steel members makes the material
the material of each member almost the same. So it is not necessary to measure every acoustoelastic
of each member almost the same. So it is not necessary to measure every acoustoelastic constant or
constant or SATD factor, which enables the proposed method to be applied in engineering practices.
SATD factor, which enables the proposed method to be applied in engineering practices.
All the results shown in Figures 5, 7, and 8 exhibit a nearly perfect linear relationship between
All the results shown in Figures 5, 7 and 8 exhibit a nearly perfect linear relationship between
the stress and TOF of propagating Lcr wave, with less than a 1% fitting error. This is consistent with
the stress and TOF of propagating Lcr wave, with less than a 1% fitting error. This is consistent with
other scholars’ research results [19–22] and theory of acoustoelasticity, which demonstrate that the
other scholars’ research results [19–22] and theory of acoustoelasticity, which demonstrate that the
proposed method is suitable for the stress evaluation of steel members with different shapes,
proposed method is suitable for the stress evaluation of steel members with different shapes, materials,
materials, and probe positions.
and probe positions.
4.3.3. Distance between Probes
Steel plate C and steel plate D were employed in this study to investigate the influence of
different probe distances on the accuracy of the proposed method. The SATD factors and their
corresponding distances between the two probes was measured using the proposed framework.
The obtained results are shown in Figures 9 and 10.
L
By substituting t 0  into Equation (14), a new form of the SATD factor can be obtained:
Materials 2016, 9, 223 13 of 17

4.3.3. Distance between Probes

Steel plate C and steel plate D were employed in this study to investigate the influence of different
probe distances on the accuracy of the proposed method. The SATD factors and their corresponding
distances between the two probes was measured using the proposed framework. The obtained results
are shown
Materials
Materials in9,
2016,
2016,
9,Figures
223
223 9 and 10. 13 of 16
13 of 16

Figure 9.
Figure 9. Fitting
Fitting trend
trend line
line between
between probe
probe distance
distance and
and the
the SATD
SATDfactor
SATD factorof
factor ofsteel
of steelplate
steel plateC.
plate C.
C.

Figure 10.
Figure 10. Fitting trend
trend line
line between
between probe
probe distance
distance and
and the
the SATD
SATD factor
factor of
of steel
steel plate
plate D.
D.
Figure 10. Fitting
Fitting trend line between probe distance and the SATD factor of steel plate D.
Equation (15)
Equation (15) shows
shows thatthat when ultrasonic
L when ultrasonic waves
waves propagate
propagate in in aa single
single medium,
medium, ultrasonic
ultrasonic wave wave
By
velocity V substituting
V00 and
and the t0 “ into
the acoustoelastic
acoustoelastic Equation (14),
constant (K) a
(K) arenew form
are constants.of the
constants. The SATD
The SATD factor
SATD factor can be obtained:
factor decreases
decreases as as the
the
velocity V0 constant
distance between the two probes increases in the form of an inversely proportional function. Figures 99
distance between the two probes increases in the form of an inversely proportional function. Figures
and 10 10 illustrate
illustrate that
that thethe SATD
SATD factor
factor decreases
decreases as asV0the ultrasonic path length increases. However,
and B “ the ultrasonic path length increases. However, (15)
the figures
figures also
also show
show obvious
obvious discrepancies
discrepancies between KL
between the the fitted
fitted functions
functions and and the
the experimental
experimental
the
results,
results, which(15)
which
Equation confirms
confirms
shows that thewhen
the complexity
complexity
ultrasonic of waves
of the problem.
the problem.
propagateThe The discrepancies
in a discrepancies
single medium,may may come wave
come
ultrasonic from
from
inaccurate
inaccurate
velocity consideration
V0 consideration of the ultrasonic
of the ultrasonic
and the acoustoelastic constant (K)path.
path. As
areAs shown in
shown inThe
constants. Figure
Figure
SATD 3, the
3,factorultrasonic
the ultrasonic path
decreasespath
as the consists
consists
distance of
of
three parts:
three
between parts: propagation
thepropagation distance in
distance
two probes increases in the
the air,
air, PMMA,
form PMMA, and the
and
of an inversely the steel
steel member.function.
member.
proportional Ultrasonic
Ultrasonic velocity
velocity
Figures in the
in
9 and the
10
air and
air and PMMA
illustrate PMMA is unchanged,
that theisSATD
unchanged, while the steel
while theassteel
factor decreases member
the member changed
ultrasonicchanged
path length with stress.
withincreases. Therefore,
stress. Therefore,
However,thethe accurate
theaccurate
figures
ultrasonic
ultrasonic
also path should
path
show obvious should not include
not include
discrepancies propagation
propagation
between the fitted distance
distance
functionsin air
in air
and and
and PMMA.
thePMMA. However,
However,
experimental thiswhich
this
results, is not
is not
easy for implementation
easy for implementation
confirms the complexity ofinthe in practice.
practice.
problem. In order
In The
order to accurately
to accurately
discrepancies may evaluate
evaluate
come from the relationship
the relationship between
between the
inaccurate consideration the
SATD
SATD
of factor
the ultrasonic and
factor andpath. the ultrasonic
the ultrasonic
As shown pathpath length,
length,
in Figure the calculation
theultrasonic
3, the calculation and calibration
andconsists
path calibration of the
of the
of three effects
effects
parts: from
from air
propagation air
and PMMA
and PMMA
distance should
should
in the be
air, be investigated
investigated
PMMA, and thein steel
in moremember.
more detail in
detail in future
future studies.
studies.
Ultrasonic velocity in the air and PMMA is
It should be noted that the inclusion of wave
It should be noted that the inclusion of wave propagation in propagation in air
air and
and PMMA
PMMA does does not
not affect
affect the
the
results in previous cases. The reason is that their ultrasonic path lengths
results in previous cases. The reason is that their ultrasonic path lengths are the same in each case. are the same in each case.
So the
So the effects
effects are
are self-eliminated.
self-eliminated.

4.4. Discussions
4.4. Discussions
Materials 2016, 9, 223 14 of 17

unchanged, while the steel member changed with stress. Therefore, the accurate ultrasonic path should
not include propagation distance in air and PMMA. However, this is not easy for implementation in
practice. In order to accurately evaluate the relationship between the SATD factor and the ultrasonic
path length, the calculation and calibration of the effects from air and PMMA should be investigated
in more detail in future studies.
It should be noted that the inclusion of wave propagation in air and PMMA does not affect the
results in previous cases. The reason is that their ultrasonic path lengths are the same in each case.
So the effects are self-eliminated.

4.4. Discussions
There are some advantages of the proposed ultrasonic method, compared with other methods,
to measure internal stress of in-service structural steel members. Firstly, it is a non-destructive method.
The internal stress of steel members, measured by the proposed ultrasonic method, was compared
with those obtained by the standard strain gauge method. The results from the two methods show
good agreement. As the Lcr wave is less sensitive to texture and most sensitive to stress, the proposed
method offers advantages not shared with other ultrasonic based techniques, such as shear wave
method [12,20]. Secondly, the test procedure is straightforward, without the measurement of second
and third order elastic constants. Thirdly, the measurement system consists of five portable devices,
which is convenient for field measurement. Finally, the cost of the developed equipment is relatively
low, compared with X-ray diffraction and magnetic-elastic method. Although it is a promising method
which may find immediate industry application, the implementation of the proposed method needs
careful calibration. The reason is that the propagation characteristics of ultrasonic wave modes vary in
different materials and/or in different shapes [38–40]. The extension to more general models requires
a more detailed investigation of wave propagation, specifically when it applies to higher gradient and
micromorphic materials, as discussed in [41,42].
It should be pointed out that calibration of structural steel members is more accurate than that
in the welding field. Material properties near the welding zone change in different degrees, which
are difficult to simulate. The zero-stress reference points of changed material properties are often
unknown. Thus, the fitting parameters may not reflect the true condition of the material, which leads
to inaccurate measurement results. In contrast, the above problems are not dominant in internal stress
measurement. Steel members are standardized; their material properties are constant; and thus the
zero-stress reference point can be obtained. The simplified relationship between stress and the TOF of
an Lcr wave, i.e., Equation (13), makes the calibration of SATD factor convinient.

5. Conclusions
This paper presents a non-destructive evaluation method to determine the internal stress of
in-service structural steel members using Lcr waves. Based on the theory of acoustoelasticity,
a measurement system is designed and developed. Using the developed equipment and the proposed
methodology, tests of ultrasonic stress measurement were performed on six specimens with different
geometries and materials, as well as varying probe positions and distances. Experimental results show
that the TOF of Lcr wave and its corresponding stress in steel member exhibits an almost perfect linear
relationship with less than a 1% fitting error. The strain gauge method was employed to validate the
results measured by the ultrasonic method. The obtained results show that the difference is within
5%, which confirms the effectiveness of the proposed method. The experimental results from this
study show that the proposed measurement process is convenient and quick, and that the results are
reliable. Parametric studies are performed to investigate the factors that may influence testing results.
Experimental results show that the position of the probes on the members will not affect results when
the distance between the probes is fixed. On the other hand, the distance has an inversely proportional
relationship with the SATD factor. In addition, material properties affect the stress measurement results
through the SATD factor. The experimental results are consistent with the theory of acoustoelasticity.
Materials 2016, 9, 223 15 of 17

Since in-service structural steel components are not removable and the determination of internal
stress is critical, the proposed method will find immediate application in many construction and
industrial areas. Future research efforts should focus on the measurement of two-dimensional and
three-dimensional stresses using ultrasonic methods, when structural steel members are subjected to
more complex loading conditions. The relationships between the test results and other influencing
factors including temperature and coupling medium, are also recommended for future study.

Acknowledgments: The research described in this paper was financially supported by the Major International
(Sino-US) Joint Research Project of the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51261120374),
the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant No. 51378007), and Shenzhen Technology Innovation
Program-Technology Development Projects (Grant No. CXZZ20140904154839135).
Author Contributions: Zuohua Li and Jun Teng proposed the topic of this study and monitored the whole
research project. Jingbo He performed the experiments, analyzed the data and wrote the initial draft of the
manuscript. Ying Wang participated in the discussions of experimental results and led a thorough revision of the
manuscript. All authors read and approved the final manuscript.
Conflicts of Interest: The authors declare no conflict of interest.

Abbreviations
The following abbreviations are used in this manuscript:

NDT: non-destructive testing

Lcr waves: Longitudinal critically refracted waves
TOF: time-of-flight
SATD factor: Stress to Acoustic Time Difference factor
PMMA: poly methyl methacrylate
ATD: acoustic time difference

References
1. Tebedge, N.; Alpsten, G.; Tall, L. Residual-stress measurement by the sectioning method. Exp. Mech. 1973,
13, 88–96. [CrossRef]
2. Leggatt, R.H.; Smith, D.J.; Smith, S.D.; Faure, F. Development and experimental validation of the deep hole
method for residual stress measurement. J. Strain. Anal. Eng. Des. 1996, 31, 177–186. [CrossRef]
3. Watanabe, K.; Oguro, H.; Minegishi, K.; Awaji, S.; Nishijima, G. Strain gauge method for evaluating a
three-dimensional residual strain state in wires. IEEE Trans. Appl. Supercond. 2010, 20, 1420–1423. [CrossRef]
4. Gou, R.B.; Dan, W.J.; Qiu, F.; Yu, M.; Zhang, W.G. Welding residual stress measurement of an urban buried
gas pipeline by X-ray diffraction method. Insight Non-Destr. Test. Cond. Monit. 2015, 57, 556–561.
5. Palkowski, H.; Brück, S.; Pirling, T.; Carradò, A. Investigation on the residual stress state of drawn tubes by
numerical simulation and neutron diffraction analysis. Materials 2013, 6, 5118–5130. [CrossRef]
6. Mierczak, L.; Jiles, D.C.; Fantoni, G.A. New method for evaluation of mechanical stress using the reciprocal
amplitude of magnetic barkhausen noise. IEEE Trans. Magn. 2011, 47, 459–465. [CrossRef]
7. Duan, W.H.; Quan, W.; Quek, S.T. Applications of piezoelectric materials in structural health monitoring and
repair: Selected research examples. Materials 2010, 3, 5169–5194. [CrossRef]
8. Liao, X.C.; Qiu, Z.; Jiang, T.Y.; Sadiq, M.R.; H, Z.H.; Demore, E.M.; Cochran, S. Functional piezocrystal
characterisation under varying conditions. Materials 2015, 8, 8304–8326. [CrossRef]
9. Hughes, D.S.; Blankenship, E.B.; Mims, R.L. Variation of elastic moduli and wave velocity with pressure and
temperature in plastics. J. Appl. Phys. 1950, 21, 294–297. [CrossRef]
10. Crecraft, D.I. The measurement of applied and residual stresses in metals using ultrasonic waves.
J. Sound. Vibr. 1967, 5, 173–192. [CrossRef]
11. Guz’, A.N.; Makhort, F.G. The physical fundamentals of the ultrasonic nondestructive stress analysis of
solids. Int. Appl. Mech. 2000, 36, 1119–1149. [CrossRef]
12. Rossini, N.S.; Dassisti, M.; Benyounis, K.Y.; Olabi, A.G. Methods of measuring residual stresses in
components. Mater. Des. 2012, 35, 572–588. [CrossRef]
Materials 2016, 9, 223 16 of 17

13. Joshi, S.G.; Pathare, R.G. Ultrasonic instrument for measuring bolt stress. Ultrasonics 1984, 22, 261–269.
[CrossRef]
14. Jhang, K.Y.; Quan, H.H.; Ha, J.; Kim, N.Y. Estimation of clamping force in high-tension bolts through
ultrasonic velocity measurement. Ultrasonics 2006, 44, e1339–e1342. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
15. Chaki, S.; Corneloup, G.; Lillamand, I.; Walaszek, H. Combination of longitudinal and transverse ultrasonic
waves for in situ control of the tightening of bolts. J. Press. Vessel Technol. 2007, 129, 383–390. [CrossRef]
16. Szela¸żek, J. Ultrasonic measurement of thermal stresses in continuously welded rails. NDT E Int. 1992, 25,
77–85. [CrossRef]
17. Yasui, H.; Kawashima, K. Acoustoelastic measurement of bolt axial load with velocity ratio method.
In Proceedings of the 15th World Conference on Non-Destructive Testing, Rome, Italy, 15–21 October 2000.
18. Egle, D.M.; Bray, D.E. Measurement of acoustoelastic and third-order elastic constants for rail steel.
J. Acoust. Soc. 1976, 60, 741–744. [CrossRef]
19. Andrino, M.H.; Santos, A.A.; Bray, D.E.; Trevisan, R.E. Stress relaxation in aluminum welding using
ultrasonic method. In Proceedings of the Pressure Vessels and Piping Conference of the American Society of
Mechanical Engineers, San Antonio, TX, USA, 22–26 July 2007.
20. Santos, A.A.; Bray, D.E. Comparison of acoustoelastic methods to evaluate stresses in steel plates and bars.
J. Press. Vessel. Technol. 2002, 124, 354–358. [CrossRef]
21. Javadi, Y.; Akhlaghi, M.; Najafabadi, M.A. Nondestructive evaluation of welding residual stresses in
austenitic stainless steel plates. Res. Nondestruct. Eval. 2014, 25, 30–43. [CrossRef]
22. Javadi, Y.; Pirzaman, H.S.; Raeisi, M.H.; Najafabadi, M.A. Ultrasonic stress evaluation through thickness of
a stainless steel pressure vessel. Int. J. Pres. Ves. Pip. 2014, 123, 111–120. [CrossRef]
23. Shokri, V.; Sadeghi, S.; Sadeghi, M.H. Effect of heat input ratio on residual stress in multipass welding using
finite element method and ultrasonic stress measurement. J. Nondestruct. Eval. 2015, 34, 1–13. [CrossRef]
24. Javadi, Y.; Hasani, M.; Sadeghi, S. Investigation of clamping effect on the welding sub-surface residual stress
and deformation by using the ultrasonic stress measurement and finite element method. J. Nondestruct. Eval.
2015, 34, 1–11. [CrossRef]
25. Palanichamy, P.; Joseph, A.; Jayakumar, T.; Raj, B. Ultrasonic velocity measurements for estimation of grain
size in austenitic stainless steel. NDT E. Int. 1995, 28, 179–185. [CrossRef]
26. Gur, C.H.; Tuncer, B.O. Nondestructive investigation of the effect of quenching and tempering on
medium-carbon low alloy steels. Int. J. Microstruct. Mater. Prop. 2005, 1, 51–60. [CrossRef]
27. Ploix, M.A.; Guerjouma, R.E.; Moysan, J.; Corneloup, G.; Chassignole, B. Acoustical characterization of
austenitic stainless steel welds for experimental and modeling. NDT. J. Adv. Sci. 2005, 17, 76–81. [CrossRef]
28. Zou, D.; Liu, T.; Liang, C.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, F.; Du, C. An experimental investigation on the health
monitoring of concrete structures using piezoelectric transducers at various environmental temperatures.
J. Intell. Mater. Syst. Struct. 2015, 26, 1028–1034. [CrossRef]
29. Zou, D.; Liu, T.; Huang, Y.; Zhang, F.; Du, C.; Li, B. Feasibility of water seepage monitoring in concrete with
embedded smart aggregates by P-wave travel time measurement. Smart Mater. Struct. 2014, 23, 1257–1268.
[CrossRef]
30. Zou, D.; Liu, T.; Qiao, G.; Huang, Y.; Li, B. An experimental study on the performance of piezoceramic-based
smart aggregate in water environment. IEEE Sens. J. 2014, 14, 943–944. [CrossRef]
31. Lhémery, A.; Calmon, P.; Chatillon, S.; Gengembre, N. Modeling of ultrasonic fields radiated by contact
transducer in a component of irregular surface. Ultrasonics 2002, 40, 231–236. [CrossRef]
32. Hughes, D.S.; Kelly, J.L. 2nd-order elastic deformation of solids. Phys. Rev. 1953, 92, 1145–1149. [CrossRef]
33. Tatsuo, T.; Yukio, I. Acoustical birefringence of ultrasonic waves in deformed isotropic elastic materials. Int. J.
Solids Struct. 1968, 4, 383–389. [CrossRef]
34. Godin, O.A. Wave refraction at an interface: Snell’s law versus Chapman’s law. J. Acoust. Soc. Am. 2009, 125,
117–122. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
35. Bray, D.E.; Wei, T. Subsurface stress evaluation in steel plates and bars using the Lcr ultrasonic wave.
Nucl. Eng. Des. 2001, 207, 231–240. [CrossRef]
36. Noronha, P.J.; Chapman, J.R.; Wert, J.J. Residual stress measurement and analysis using ultrasonic techniques.
J. Test. Eval. 1973, 1, 209–214.
37. Javadi, Y.; Pirzaman, H.S.; Raeisi, M.H.; Najafabadi, M.A. Ultrasonic evaluation of welding residual stresses
in stainless steel pressure vessel. J. Press. Vessel Technol. 2013, 135, 14–16. [CrossRef]
Materials 2016, 9, 223 17 of 17

38. Dell, I.F.; Madeo, A.; Placidi, L. Linear plane wave propagation and normal transmission and reflection at
discontinuity surfaces in second gradient 3D Continua. J. Test. Eval. 2012, 92, 52–71.
39. Dell, I.F.; Seppecher, P.; Madeo, A. Fluid Shock Wave Generation at Solid-Material Discontinuity Surfaces
in Porous Media. In Variational Models and Methods in Solid and Fluid Mechanics, 1st ed.; Dell’Isola, F.,
Gavrilyuk, S., Eds.; Springer Vienna: New York, NY, USA, 2011; Volume 535, pp. 315–358.
40. Placidi, L.; Dell, I.F.; Ianiro, N.; Sciarra, G. Variational formulation of pre-stressed solid-fluid mixture theory,
with an application to wave phenomena. Eur. J. Mech. A Solids 2008, 27, 582–606. [CrossRef]
41. Berezovski, A.; Giorgio, I.; Corte, A.D. Interfaces in micromorphic materials: Wave transmission and
reflection with numerical simulations. Math. Mech. Solids 2015, 21, 37–51. [CrossRef]
42. Altenbach, H.; Eremeyev, V.A.; Lebedev, L.P.; Rendón, L.A. Acceleration waves and ellipticity in thermoelastic
micropolar media. Arch. Appl. Mech. 2010, 80, 217–227. [CrossRef]

© 2016 by the authors; licensee MDPI, Basel, Switzerland. This article is an open access
article distributed under the terms and conditions of the Creative Commons by Attribution
(CC-BY) license (http://creativecommons.org/licenses/by/4.0/).