Research Papers

Local Contact Stiffness Detection for Nondestructive Testing Based on the Contact Resonance of a Piezoelectric Cantilever

[+] Author and Article Information
Ji Fu, Yaqiong Liu, Yingwei Li

State Key Laboratory for Turbulence
and Complex Systems,
College of Engineering,
Peking University,
Beijing 100871, China

Xilong Zhou

State Key Laboratory for Turbulence
and Complex Systems,
College of Engineering

Faxin Li

State Key Laboratory for Turbulence
and Complex Systems,
College of Engineering,
Peking University,
Beijing 100871, China
Center for Applied Physics
and Technologies,
Peking University,
Beijing 100871, China
e-mail: lifaxin@pku.edu.cn

1Corresponding author.

Contributed by the Technical Committee on Vibration and Sound of ASME for publication in the JOURNAL OF VIBRATION AND ACOUSTICS. Manuscript received January 1, 2015; final manuscript received April 5, 2015; published online June 2, 2015. Assoc. Editor: Mohammed Daqaq.

J. Vib. Acoust 137(5), 051011 (Oct 01, 2015) (8 pages) Paper No: VIB-15-1001; doi: 10.1115/1.4030422 History: Received January 01, 2015; Revised April 05, 2015; Online June 02, 2015

In the field of nondestructive testing (NDT), a suitable defect identification parameter plays an important role in evaluating the reliability of structures or materials. In this work, we proposed a NDT method which detects the sample's local contact stiffness (LCS) based on the contact resonance of a piezoelectric cantilever. First, through finite element analysis (FEA) we showed that LCS is quite sensitive to typical defects including debonding, voids, cracks, and inclusions, indicating that LCS could be a good identification parameter. Then, a homemade NDT system containing a piezoelectric cantilever was assembled to detect the sample's LCS by tracking the contact resonance frequency (CRF) of the cantilever-sample system. Testing results indicated that the proposed NDT method could detect the above mentioned defects efficiently and precisely. The cantilever-stiffness dependent detection sensitivity was specially investigated and the stiffer cantilevers were found to be more sensitive to small defects, while the softer cantilevers were more suitable for large defects detecting with smaller pressing force. Finally, the detection limit of this NDT method is investigated both experimentally and computationally. The proposed LCS-based NDT method could be very promising for defect detecting in noncontinuous structures and composite materials.

Copyright © 2015 by ASME
Your Session has timed out. Please sign back in to continue.


Pernkopf, F., and O'leary, P., 2003, “Image Acquisition Techniques for Automatic Visual Inspection of Metallic Surfaces,” NDT&E Int., 36(8), pp. 609–617. [CrossRef]
Chimenti, D., 1997, “Guided Waves in Plates and Their Use in Materials Characterization,” ASME Appl. Mech. Rev., 50(5), pp. 247–284. [CrossRef]
Dobmann, G., Kröning, M., Theiner, W., Willems, H., and Fiedler, U., 1995, “Nondestructive Characterization of Materials (Ultrasonic and Micromagnetic Techniques) for Strength and Toughness Prediction and the Detection of Early Creep Damage,” Nucl. Eng. Des., 157(1), pp. 137–158. [CrossRef]
Zhu, Y.-K., Tian, G.-Y., Lu, R.-S., and Zhang, H., 2011, “A Review of Optical NDT Technologies,” Sensors, 11(8), pp. 7773–7798. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Cheng, C.-C., Cheng, T.-M., and Chiang, C.-H., 2008, “Defect Detection of Concrete Structures Using Both Infrared Thermography and Elastic Waves,” Autom. Constr., 18(1), pp. 87–92. [CrossRef]
Nagarkar, V. V., Miller, S. R., Tipnis, S. V., Gaysinskiy, V., Lempicki, A., and Brecher, C., 2002, “High-Resolution High-Speed CT/Radiography System for NDT of Adhesive Bonded Composites,” Proc. SPIE, 4503, pp. 265–273. [CrossRef]
Blitz, J., and Simpson, G., 1996, Ultrasonic Methods of Non-Destructive Testing, Chapman and Hall, London.
Drinkwater, B. W., and Wilcox, P. D., 2006, “Ultrasonic Arrays for Non-Destructive Evaluation: A Review,” NDT&E Int., 39(7), pp. 525–541. [CrossRef]
Beard, M., and Lowe, M., 2003, “Non-Destructive Testing of Rock Bolts Using Guided Ultrasonic Waves,” Int. J. Rock Mech. Min. Sci., 40(4), pp. 527–536. [CrossRef]
Lange, Y., and Moskovenko, I., 1978, “Low Frequency Acoustic Ndt Methods,” Sov. J. NDT, 14, pp. 788–797.
Cawley, P., and Nguyen, D., 1988, “The Use of the Impedance Method of Non-Destructive Testing on Honeycomb Structures,” Mech. Syst. Signal Process., 2(4), pp. 309–325. [CrossRef]
Cawley, P., and Adams, R., 1988, “The Mechanics of the Coin-Tap Method of Non-Destructive Testing,” J. Sound Vib., 122(2), pp. 299–316. [CrossRef]
Cawley, P., and Adams, R., 1989, “Sensitivity of the Coin-Tap Method of Nondestructive Testing,” Mater. Eval., 47(5), pp. 558–563.
Cawley, P., 1984, “The Impedance Method of Non-Destructive Inspection,” NDT Int., 17(2), pp. 59–65. [CrossRef]
Cawley, P., 1987, “The Sensitivity of the Mechanical Impedance Method of Nondestructive Testing,” NDT Int., 20(4), pp. 209–215. [CrossRef]
Hsu, D. K., Barnard, D. J., Peters, J. J., and Dayal, V., 2000, Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, AIP, New York.
Peters, J., Barnard, D., Hudelson, N., Simpson, T., and Hsu, D., 2000, Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, AIP, New York.
Li, X., and Bhushan, B., 2002, “A Review of Nanoindentation Continuous Stiffness Measurement Technique and Its Applications,” Mater. Charact., 48(1), pp. 11–36. [CrossRef]
Rabe, U., and Arnold, W., 1994, “Acoustic Microscopy by Atomic Force Microscopy,” Appl. Phys. Lett., 64(12), pp. 1493–1495. [CrossRef]
Zhou, X., Fu, J., Li, Y., and Li, F., 2014, “Nanomechanical Mapping of Glass Fiber Reinforced Polymer Composites Using Atomic Force Acoustic Microscopy,” J. Appl. Polym. Sci., 131(2), p. 39800. [CrossRef]
Hayes, S., Goruppa, A., and Jones, F., 2004, “Dynamic Nanoindentation as a Tool for the Examination of Polymeric Materials,” J. Mater. Res., 19(11), pp. 3298–3306. [CrossRef]
Killgore, J. P., Yablon, D. G., Tsou, A. H., Gannepalli, A., Yuya, P. A., Turner, J. A., Proksch, R., and Hurley, D. C., 2011, “Viscoelastic Property Mapping With Contact Resonance Force Microscopy,” Langmuir, 27(23), pp. 13983–13987. [CrossRef] [PubMed]
Zhou, X., Fu, J., and Li, F., 2013, “Contact Resonance Force Microscopy for Nanomechanical Characterization: Accuracy and Sensitivity,” J. Appl. Phys., 114(6), p. 064301. [CrossRef]
Rabe, U., 2006, Applied Scanning Probe Methods II, Springer, Berlin.
Rabe, U., Janser, K., and Arnold, W., 1996, “Vibrations of Free and Surface-Coupled Atomic Force Microscope Cantilevers: Theory and Experiment,” Rev. Sci. Instrum., 67(9), pp. 3281–3293. [CrossRef]
Yuya, P. A., Hurley, D. C., and Turner, J. A., 2011, “Relationship Between Q-Factor and Sample Damping for Contact Resonance Atomic Force Microscope Measurement of Viscoelastic Properties,” J. Appl. Phys., 109(11), p. 113528. [CrossRef]
Banerjee, S., Gayathri, N., Shannigrahi, S., Dash, S., Tyagi, A., and Raj, B., 2007, “Imaging Distribution of Local Stiffness Over Surfaces Using Atomic Force Acoustic Microscopy,” J. Phys. D-Appl. Phys., 40(8), p. 2539. [CrossRef]
Turner, J. A., and Wiehn, J. S., 2001, “Sensitivity of Flexural and Torsional Vibration Modes of Atomic Force Microscope Cantilevers to Surface Stiffness Variations,” Nanotechnology, 12(3), pp. 322–330. [CrossRef]


Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 1

Illustrations of different types of defects in the two-dimensional finite element model: (a) debonding; (b) cylindrical void; (c) cylindrical stiff inclusion; and (d) vertical crack

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 2

The calculated LCS variations across different defects using FEA models: (a) LCS variations across two debonding defects with the same depth of 5 mm; (b) LCS variations across a void and a stiff inclusion with the same depth of 20 mm, the diameters of both defects are 10 mm; (c) LCS variations across void defects with different sizes and depths; and (d) LCS variations across vertical cracks with the same length of 10 mm and depth of 15 mm, but different COD

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 3

Illustration of the piezoelectric unimorph cantilever for LCS detection: (a) basic assembly and (b) simplified mechanical model for contact vibration of the cantilever-sample system. The contact interaction between the cantilever tip and the sample is approximated by a linear spring with the stiffness of k*.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 4

The principle of LCS measurement based on contact-resonance-frequency detection using frequency-response curves. Subscript “R” represents “resonance;” subscripts “L” and “H” represent “low LCS” and “high LCS,” respectively; and subscripts “1” and “2” denote two different excitation frequencies in the single-frequency mode.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 5

Block diagram of the LCS-based NDT system. Components of different functional module are denoted by different colors.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 6

The two-layer polymer/PMMA specimen with a prefabricated debonding defect. (a) Diagram of the specimen. (b) Photography of the specimen (top view). The scanning area is denoted by the square with the size of 40 mm × 40 mm in which the debonding defect can be clearly seen.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 7

NDT imaging results of the specimen with a prefabricated debonding defect: (a) Amplitude image by the SF mode and (b) LCS image by the RT mode

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 8

The aramid fiber composite specimen with a longitudinal crack on the bottom surface. (a) Diagram of the specimen. The thickness of the specimen is 3 mm, and the crack runs through the specimen with a width of 4 mm and an averaged depth of 1 mm. (b) Photography of the specimen. The scanning area is denoted by the square with the size of 20 mm × 20 mm.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 9

NDT imaging results of the aramid fiber composite specimen using a stiff cantilever (kc = 120 kN/m) and a soft cantilever (kc = 6 kN/m). (a) Amplitude image; (b) LCS image using the stiff cantilever; (c) amplitude image; and (d) LCS image using the soft cantilever.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 10

Imaging results to determine the debonding detection limit of this LCS-based NDT system. (a) Photography of the two-layer specimen with triangle-shaped debonding, the acute angle for the triangle is 3 deg. The scanning area is denoted by the red rectangle with the size of 10 mm × 40 mm. (b) Amplitude image by the SF mode with the pixel of 20 × 80. (c) LCS image by the RT mode with the pixel of 15 × 60.

Grahic Jump Location
Fig. 11

The simulated LCS variations for defects with different sizes and depths by FEA: (a) The debonding defect and (b) The void defect




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