Hostname: page-component-7b7567c8c-2n9c9 Total loading time: 0 Render date: 2026-11-15T04:25:59.101Z Has data issue: false hasContentIssue false
  • English
  • Français

Ultrasonic Quantification Of Corroded Surfaces

Published online by Cambridge University Press:  10 February 2011

W. M. Mullins and
S. S. Shamachary
W. M. Mullins
Affiliation:
Visiting Scientist, AFRL/MLLP-TMCI, Wright-Patterson AFB, Ohio
S. S. Shamachary
Affiliation:
Research Professor, University of Dayton Research Institute, Dayton, Ohio
Get access

Abstract

The surface damage introduced by general corrosion attack of surfaces is considered deleterious to long term structural integrity. As a result, the quantification of this damage represents an interest in the NDE community. In this document, the chemical kinetics of general attack are used to model the morphology of the surface as a function of time of exposure. Timeof- flight ultrasonic data for corroded surfaces are presented which appear to agree with the model predictions. The experimental results are critically reviewed with respect to the practical limitations of the ultrasonic experiments. The effect of exposure on surface morphology and surface stress concentration are shown and related to the classic ultrasonic measurement techniques. The relationships are used to suggest potentially important ultrasonic measurement techniques and to underline the inherent limitations of many classical ultrasonic measurements.

Access options

Get access to the full version of this content by using one of the access options below. (Log in options will check for institutional or personal access. Content may require purchase if you do not have access.)

Article purchase

Temporarily unavailable

References

REFERENCES

1. Harmsworth, C. L., Wright Laboratory, ASD-TR-61–121, 1961.Google Scholar
2. Mandelbrot, B. B., Passoja, D. E. and Paullay, A. J., Nature 308 (1984) 721.Google Scholar
3. Milman, V. Y., Stelmashenko, N. A. and Blumenfeld, R., Prog. Mat. Sci. 38 (1994) 425.Google Scholar
4. Cherepanov, G. P., Balankin, A. S. and Ivanova, V. S., Eng. Frac. Mech. 51 (1995) 997.Google Scholar
5. Dauskardt, R. H., Haubensak, F. and Ritchie, R. O., Acta Met. 38 (1990) 143.Google Scholar
6. Jin, F. and Chiang, F. P., Res. Nondestr. Eval. 7 (1996) 229.Google Scholar
7. Weiping, C., Chenghui, X., J. Mat. Sci. Let. 16 (1997) 113.Google Scholar
8. Markworth, A. J., Mater. Sci and Eng. A 150 (1992) 37.Google Scholar
9. Shibata, T., Corrosion Sci. 52 (1996) 813.Google Scholar
10. Roberge, P. R., Corrosion Sci. 50 (1995) 503.Google Scholar
11. Legat, A. and Dolecek, V., J. Electrochem. Soc. 142 (1995) 1851.Google Scholar
12. Stringer, J. and Markworth, A. J., Corroaion Sci. 35 (1993) 751.Google Scholar
13. Martin, R. W., Karpur, P., Matikas, T. E., Ruddell, M. J., Fox, J. A., in Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation Vol.15B, Thompson, D. O. and Chimenti, D. E. (eds.), Plenum Press, New York, 1996, p2031.Google Scholar
14. Voss, R. F., in Fundamental Algorithms for Computer Graphics, Earnshaw, R. A. (ed.), Springer-Verlag, Berlin, 1985, p 805.Google Scholar
15. for a detailed description see Bockris, J. O'M and Reddy, A. K. N, Modem Electrochemistry, Plenum Press, New York, 1970.Google Scholar
16. Gibbs, J. W., The Scientific Papers of J. Willard Gibbs, Vol. 1 Thermodynamics, Ox Bow Press, 1993, p219.Google Scholar
17. Reference 15, p1273 and the references therein.Google Scholar
18. Papoulis, A., Probability, Random Variables and Stochastic Processes (2nd Ed.). McGraw-Hill Publishing, New York, 1984, p217.Google Scholar
19. Ito, K., J. Math. Soc. Japan 3 (1951) 157.Google Scholar
20. Oksendal, B., Stochastic Differential Equations: An Introduction with Application (4th Ed.) Springer-Verlag, New York, 1995, p23.Google Scholar