0
TECHNICAL PAPERS

Real-Time Weld Penetration Depth Monitoring With Laser Ultrasonic Sensing System

[+] Author and Article Information
Bao Mi

Intelligent Automation, Inc., Rockvill, MD 20855,bmi@i-a-i.com

Charles Ume

School of Mechanical Engineering, Georgia Institute of Technology, Atlanta, GA 30332charles.ume@me.gatech.edu

J. Manuf. Sci. Eng 128(1), 280-286 (Aug 08, 2005) (7 pages) doi:10.1115/1.2137747 History: Received June 15, 2004; Revised August 08, 2005

A real-time ultrasound-based system for controlling robotic weld quality by monitoring the weld pool is presented. The weld penetration depth is one of the most important geometric parameters that define weld quality, hence, remains a key control quantity. The sensing system is based on using a laser phased array technique to generate focused and steered ultrasound, and an electromagnetic acoustic transducer (EMAT) as a receiver. When a pulsed laser beam is incident on the surface of a condensed matter, either the thermoelastic expansion or ablation induces mechanical vibrations that propagate as ultrasound within the specimen. Both the ultrasound generation by the laser phased array and the reception by the EMAT are noncontact, which eliminates the need for a couplant medium. They are capable of operating at high temperatures involved in the welding process. The ultrasound generated by the laser phased array propagates through the weld pool and is picked up by the EMAT receiver. A signal-processing algorithm based on a cross-correlation technique has been developed to estimate the time-of-flight (TOF) of the ultrasound. The relationship between the TOF and the penetration depth of the weld has been established experimentally and analytically. The analytical relationship between the TOF and the penetration depth, which is obtained by the ray-tracing algorithm and geometric analysis, agrees well with the experimental measurements.

FIGURES IN THIS ARTICLE
<>
Copyright © 2006 by American Society of Mechanical Engineers
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.

References

Figures

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 1

Overall system setup

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 2

Fiber-phased array generation unit

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 3

Configuration of source and receiver

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 4

Illustration of torch-sensor distance

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 5

Specimen preparation

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 6

Experimental setup for EMAT measurement

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 7

Ultrasonic signals (average of three consecutive signals) received by EMAT at different penetration depths

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 8

Comparison of experimental and numerical TOF results (tts=1.0s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 9

Comparison of experimental and numerical TOF results (tts=1.5s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 10

Comparison of experimental and numerical TOF results (tts=2.0s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 13

Sum of square error versus welding-torch–sensor lag time

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 12

Comparison of experimental and numerical TOF results (tts=3.0s)

Grahic Jump Location
Figure 11

Comparison of experimental and numerical TOF results (tts=2.5s)

Tables

Errata

Discussions

Some tools below are only available to our subscribers or users with an online account.

Related Content

Customize your page view by dragging and repositioning the boxes below.

Related Journal Articles
Related eBook Content
Topic Collections

Sorry! You do not have access to this content. For assistance or to subscribe, please contact us:

  • TELEPHONE: 1-800-843-2763 (Toll-free in the USA)
  • EMAIL: asmedigitalcollection@asme.org
Sign In