ULTRASONIC

PROPAGATION

APPROXIMATE

IN AUSTENITIC

MODEL AND NUMERICAL

STAINLESS STEEL WELDS -

METHODS RESULTS AND COMPARISON

WITH EXPERIMENTS
B . Chassignole , D. Villard and G. Nguyen Van Chi *
ELECTRICITE DE FRANCE
R and D Division, Material Study Branch
Les Renardieres, MORET SUR LOING 77818 France
2 R and D Division, Mechanics and Numerical Modeling Department
CLAMART 92 14 1 France
N. Gengembre and A. Lhemery
CEA / CEREM
Bat.61 1, CEA SACLAY 91191 Gif-sur-Yvette cedex, France
INTRODUCTION
Ultrasonic testing of austenitic stainless steel welds is often difficult because the ultrasonic
beam is subjected to many perturbations : deviation, partition, distortions and sometimes ghost
echoes. These perturbations are due to the anisotropic and heterogeneous metallurgical structure of
the welds. We are carrying out a research program in order to evaluate the influence of the main
parameters of the structure on the perturbations of the beam.
This program largely leans on modeling which can bring a theoretical justification for experimental results and allows to reduce the number of required tests. We present some modeling
results obtained on various types of welds with two different computer codes : ULTSON, a 2D
finite element code, and CHAMP-SONS, a 3D semi-analytical one. The modeling results are compared with experiments.
CHARACTERIZATION
Metallurgical

OF AUSTENITIC

WELDS FOR MODELING

INPUT DATA

Structure of an Austenitic Weld

This study was performed on mockups representative of 316L industrial austenitic stainless
steel welds. They were manufactured using a manual welding process with coated electrodes (weld
thickness 40 mm). We developed a method of characterization of the metallurgical structure of
austenitic welds, which would allow to understand the perturbations of the beam and would be
compatible with the needs of modeling codes. We deliberately choose a description at a macroscopic scale in order to simplify the modeling process [ 11.

0a
@o
Figure 1: Metallurgical structure of 316L austenitic weld (type 1). (a) Macrographic structure of
type 1 weld in a plane perpendicular to the welding direction. (b) Delimitation of the homogeneous
areas and mean direction of the columnar structure ($ angle values) in each area.
A cross section of type 1 weld (Fig.1) perpendicular to the welding direction, shows a columnar structure, formed of long shape solidification dendrites. The size and the direction of the
solidification dendrites fundamentally depend on the thermal conditions existing in the melted
metal during solidification. These thermal conditions themselves mainly depend on the welding
process and the welds geometry.
In the weld presented, we can observe that the solidification dendrites grew up through
several welded layers keeping approximately the same direction (epitaxic structure). So they may
keep nearly the same direction in rather large areas. A metallurgical examination in a section parallel to the welding direction shows that the columnar structure is not tilted in the welding direction.
We carried out a study by X-rays diffraction which showed that the columnar grain axis is
parallel to a <lOO> cristallographic axis. It also showed that the areas in which the morphological
texture keeps nearly the same direction, can be considered as homogeneous with an orthotropic
symmetry.
These observations lead to the conclusion that austenitic welds can be considered as a set
of anisotropic homogeneous areas. We can delimit these homogeneous areas by visual examination
or, better, using a image processing software.
Ultrasonic Characterization of the Type 1 Weld
The computer codes need, as input of material characteristics, the stiffness tensor for each
homogeneous area of the weld. We determined the elastic constants in one homogeneous area and
for the others, we assumed that the tensor can be obtained from the first one only by a rotation
representative of the variation of the columnar grain axis between the areas.
The elastic constants were evaluated by an optimization process using the values of compression and shear waves velocities measured for various incident angles in a transmission mode,
in thin small plates taken off from homogeneous areas of the weld [ 11.

154

Transducer
/

/f,

- Ultrasonic testing in pulse-echo mode

Y

- Contact transducer, diam. 13 mm

- Compression waves, 2.25 MHz
- Normal incidence

4h-m

32 mm

Side drill hole

Diam. 1.5 mm

- Surface of the weld : machined

- Acquisition step distance : 1 rnm

Figure 2 : Ultrasonic testing of a type A weld in pulse-echo mode with normal incidence
MODELING

OF ULTRASONICS

IN AN AUSTENITIC

WELD WITH ULTSON (2D CODE)

Experimental Results
We present an example illustrating the complexity of ultrasonic testing of an austenitic
weld. The test was performed on a type 1 weld mockup containing a side drilled hole, in a pulseecho mode and normal incidence (Fig. 2).
On the Bscan views of the results (Fig. 3), we can see the discontinuities of the back-wall
echoes produced by the complex shape of the opposite surface of the mockup (last machining, first
pass penetration). The interaction of the ultrasonic beam with the side drill hole leads to two additional echoes, obtained for two different locations of the transducer Pl and P2, whereas only one
echo was expected. The ultrasonic times of flight of these echoes are rather similar and seem to
correspond to two different reflections of the compression waves on the defect.
Modeling with the Code ULTSON 2D
We implemented the modeling of the above ultrasonic testing case with ULTSON 2D to
understand the origin of these two surprising echoes. ULTSON is a 2D finite-element code, developed by EDF, which can describe the propagation of ultrasonic waves, radiated by a contact or a
focused transducer, in an anisotropic heterogeneous material, either in transmission or in reflection
mode. It can simulate all the configurations of an ultrasonic examination (instantaneous wavefronts
and full beam in solid areas, interaction with flaws, echoes received by the transducer) in a 2D
geometry. The transducer is simulated by a thin piezoelectric plate located inside a Plexiglas block
coupled with the testing surface with a thin water layer.

Side drilled hole echoes

1

0a

(b)

Figure 3 : Ultrasonic examination of the type 1 weld mockup. (a) Experimental B-scan. (b) Simulated B-scan.

155

Table I Elastic constants for type 1 austenitic weld (GPa)

~
We assume that there is a linear relation between the electric signal and the normal vibration velocity on the surface of the transducer. The pressure at the interface between water and solid
can then be calculated starting from this velocity and using a time-dependant Kirchhoffs integral,
which is valid for high frequencies. The pressure after return is calculated by the same way,
knowing the calculated displacement field in the mockup [2].
The weld is described as a set of seven homogeneous anisotropic areas. Moreover, since
we deal with the case of waves polarized and propagating in a symmetry plane of an orthotropic
medium (the columnar structure is not tilted in the plane perpendicular to the incident plane), the
resolution of the general equation of motion only requires four elastic constants : C,,, C??,
- - C,, and
C,, (table I).
We calculated the echoes received for forty different locations of the transducer along a direction perpendicular to the weld. The calculated B-scans views (Fig. 3) confirm there are two
different echoes for only one defect. Moreover the echoe structure is very similar to the experimental one. The visualization of the beam paths inside the weld, corresponding to these echoes,
shows clearly that the beam is progressively curved and finally strongly deviated by the heterogeneous anisotropic structure (Fig. 4).

$+fi;:
:.;,Jr$
$22
Q$
3f:,~
t - ~..xpxr9rr~
: Q %.&
6
/ L..,,, ypgdg?$
f:
:;;:$
.:: :
te
:
;,;g.t
,....
....:,,
/,. \:..:. .::
(i p*8
,..

y
::
::.
t
f
i> :
;:
1/.::
:::$:.T$
,.
f
2:.,
f
f.,
y;
.
.,..,
i.;:. ::
:.,.:
.,.F
.:
:
::
:.
y::y
$
:;,.$44
f.:
:,Z
( :f
..
.::. . .
::.:,
2
9+,
A.
.::
:..:,
:5
; ..:.
.:
2 ,,,,,
Z
f.
.4.
,.,.,......
.V.
3
,
. .,..
..:.
..
:::::B.<f
:,,.;
:,;.:
j .:..:...:,:..:*
*
8
+, ..$
,...................
::I:.::?;
.,:.,
fl$
.I,.,:
.>
.A.
$
.;
p:
f ::,,,.
.y.:.:.;
..,..
0:f.,
:...:
Q
3;s;
$$xy>y,:v,y,n;:
$,y:..I
:,.,::.
:p,3f.3
:;::$,,,)
ii,:,.X
B
p<
,:.8..:,y$
: ,
. r.,
.,.
.,,.j.Q,
.,.y
.,.,:*pj
.,<;2$$,.g<.&
.,.,)$.:..
c.,.8, Ip.,::/
.,.:,:
0C
w
Figure 4 : Modeling results - examination of type 1 weld mockup - image processing description.
(a) Beam path inside the weld for position Pl. (b) Beam path inside the weld for position P2.
(c) Echodynamic curves. (d) Instantaneous amplitude of the displacements.

156

Table II. Positions of the transducer source in y direction (hole position = 0) and time of flight
values
Pl cm@

p2 b-w

T1 w

T2 w

Experimental results

-9

11.5

12.1

Modeling results

-9

12.0

13.0

The visualization of snapshots of the ultrasonic field inside the weld shows the distortion
of the wavefronts and allows to understand the origin of the various observed and predicted echoes.
We observe a very good agreement between calculated and experimental positions of the
transducer source giving an optimal interaction with the hole, especially for the position Pl (table
II). For the position P2 there is a little difference. It can be assumed that the metallurgical structure
of the mockup used for the ultrasonic tests could be a little different from the mockup used for the
structural characterization. On the other hand, we can note that the experimental time-of-flight is
greater for position P2 than for Pl. The simulated results confirm and allow to understand this
observation. Indeed, for position P2, the beam mainly propagates in a domain where the velocity is
slow because of the grain orientation (propagation quasi-parallel to the grain orientation).
We note, on experimental results, that the amplitude of the echo for position P2 is higher
than for position Pl but it is the opposite for simulated results (Fig. 4). The theoretical studies
show that attenuation of the beam, due to back scattering at grain joints, strongly depends on the
direction of the beam with respect to the columnar structure direction [3]. In its actual state of development, ULTSON 2D cannot take into account this attenuation.
We can see on Fig. 5 the results of another modeling implementation of the above ultrasonic situation obtained with a simple and symmetrical description of the weld (five homogeneous
domains with vertical grains in the middle).We can observe that this description predict only one
echo generated by the side drilled hole and no beam skewing. This result outlines the necessity to
provide a description of the weld as realistic as possible to get accurate modeling results.

Pressure

40
50
20
30
Transducer position (mm> (Side drilled hole position = 35 mm>

Figure 5: Modeling results - Examination of type 1 weld mockup - Symmetric description. a)

Weld description. b) Bscan view. c) Echodynamic curve

157

MODELING
CODE)

OF ULTRASONICS

IN AN AUSTENITIC

WELD WITH CHAMP-SONS

(3D

Modeling of a 2D Ultrasonic Testing Situation

The software Champ-Sons has been developed at the French Atomic Energy Comrnission
(CEA), and recently extended to deal with heterogeneous and anisotropic media. The main principle is to discretize the emitting surface into elementary point sources, and to evaluate approximately each elementary contribution, by means of the pencil method, applied to elastodynamic
fields computation. An overview of the principles of this method is given in [4].
The first application concerns the above described type 1 weld structure for which the
crystallographic system is only disoriented in the incident plane. Here, only the field radiated into
the weld is considered. The constant given in table I are used, and in addition for the third dimension, the constants Cl1 = 245 GPa, Cl2 = 110 GPa, Cl3 = 145 GPa, C55 = 110 GPa, and C66 =
75 GPa.
The field predicted by Champ-Sons for the 13rnm - diameter LO transducer at the position
Pl is plotted on Fig. 6. Only quasi-longitudinal waves, as transmitted waves, have been calculated.
We assume that mode conversion in quasi-shear waves doesnt lead to significant contributions.
We observe that the beam skewing in the incident plane, previously experimentally measured and predicted by the numerical model Ultson, is also recovered by Champ-Sons.
Modeling of a 3D Ultrasonic Testing Situation
We performed other ultrasonic tests on another 316L specimen taken of a welding mold
(type 2 weld). The main difference with type 1 weld is that the width of this welding mold is much
larger. The solidification conditions of this mold results in a metallurgical structure greatly different (Fig. 7). The cross section, perpendicular to the welding direction, reveals a much more homogeneous columnar structure, especially apart the chamfers (@= 3). In the plane Parallel to the
welding direction we clearly observe a layback of the structure (<p= 9).

Figure 6: Quasi-longitudinal
Champ-Sons.

wave field into type 1 weld for transducer at position Pl, predicted bY

158

Columnar
grain axis
,,@
:....
\ ..
...
.. Y
@=3 i .

1 cm

Columnar
grain axis
Fcp
...
\
(()= 90ii \

1 cm

0a
@I
Figure 7: Macrographic structure of 316L austenitic welding mold specimen (type 2). (a) plane
transverse to the welding direction. (b) plane parallel to the welding direction.
One could verify, by a crystallographic study and image processing, that this weld could be
considered as a quasi homogeneous and transversely isotropic medium. (Cl1 = 233 GPa, Cl2 = 100
106 GPa). In this case the incident plane is not a
@a, CM = 139 GPa, C?q
- _ = 194GPaandCa=
symmetry plane so we may expect that the ultrasonic beam will be deviated in the welding direction. This situation must be simulated by a 3D code.
This configuration has been implemented in Champ-Sons and compared with an experiment performed in transmission mode with a LO0 transducer, 20 rnrn - diameter, 2.25 MHz. The
position of the maximum amplitude on the simulated beam is in an excellent agreement with that of
the experimental beam (fig. 8). We particularly observe beam skewing both in x and y directions.
Moreover, a comparison between experimental and calculated beam shapes confirms that the
model well predicts the distortion effect. However, the experimental beam is a bit larger than the
simulated one. Two main reasons can explain these differences: first, the 6mm -diameter aperture
of the receiver in the experimental set-up, and second, small local variations in the grain orientations, observed in the metallurgic study.

max-2.5dIh <*.
.):
;:VW
::

CONCLUSIONS
The presented results demonstrate that ultrasonic beam perturbations (beam skewing and distortion effects) in industrial austenitic welds can be accurately simulated on condition that a convenient description of the weld is provided. We propose a description at a macroscopic scale which lies
on the division of the weld in a set of homogeneous domains in which we are able to evaluate the
texture orientation and the elastic constants.
The fact that this common description was used in two different modeling approaches and that
in both cases results are in good agreement with experiment, leads us to conclude that we obtain a
intrinsic description of the weld structure as far as ultrasonic wave propagation is concerned. We
showed more particularly that, in the studied cases, unaccurate values of grain orientations give rise to
a false prediction of experimental echoes.
This description can be implemented in a 2D finite element code such as Ultson 2D which is
able to simulate pulse-echo ultrasonic testing situations when there is no skewing out of the incident
plane.
The description can also be implemented in a 3D semi-analytical code (Champ-Sons) which is
able to simulate the ultrasonic field in 3D situations with skewing effect out of the incident plane, in
case of simplified description.
Future work will deal with determining the influences of the weld description (number and
shape of domains) and the elastic constants values on beam propagation and validating the two codes
on a large number of NDT cases (different welds and NDT configurations and different defects).

REFERENCES
1. B. Chassignole, D. Villard, M. Dubuget, J.-C. Baboux and R. El Guerjouma, in Review of Progress
in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, Vol. 19, eds. D. 0. Thompson and D. E. Chimenti
(Plenum, New York, 2000), (present volume).
2. B.Nouailhas., G. Van Chi Nguyen, F. Pons and S. Vermersch, J. NDE, 9, 145 (1990).
3. S. Ahmed and R.B. Thompson, in Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation,
Vol. 14, op. cit. (1995), p. 1617.
4. N. Gengembre and A. Lhemery, in Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation,
Vol. 19, op. cit. (2000>, present volume.

160