See discussions, stats, and author profiles for this publication at: https://www.researchgate.

net/publication/311709246

Ultrasonics for Monitoring of Mining Mill Linings: Pilot Experiments

Technical Report · April 2016

CITATIONS READS

0 55

1 author:

Christer Stenström
Luleå University of Technology
37 PUBLICATIONS   275 CITATIONS   

SEE PROFILE

Some of the authors of this publication are also working on these related projects:

TOR project View project

All content following this page was uploaded by Christer Stenström on 18 December 2016.

The user has requested enhancement of the downloaded file.

  
Ultrasonics for Monitoring of Mining Mill Linings
Pilot Experiments

Christer Stenström

Center for Maintenance and Industrial Services (CMIS)

Division of Operation, Maintenance and Acoustics
Luleå University of Technology, Sweden
April 2016

Strategic Innovation Programme for the

Swedish Mining and Metal Producing Industry
P RINTED BY L ULEÅ U NIVERSITY OF T ECHNOLOGY, G RAPHIC P RODUCTION 2016

ISSN 1402-1528
ISBN 978-91-7583-609-6 (print)
ISBN 978-91-7583-610-2 (pdf)

Luleå 2016

www.ltu.se
 3

Preface

The research presented in this report has been carried out at the Center for Maintenance
and Industrial Services (CMIS) and Division of Operation, Maintenance and Acoustics,
Luleå University of Technology (LTU), Sweden.
The research was funded by Vinnova under grant no. 2015-01375. Vinnova is a
Swedish government agency that administers state funding for research and development.
The project was initiated and carried out in collaboration with Boliden AB.
The research project group consisted of Dr. Christer Stenström, Assoc. Prof. Örjan
Johansson and Prof. Jan Lundberg at the Division of Operation, Maintenance and Acoustics,
and Prof. Johan Carlson at the Division of Signals and Systems, LTU. Örjan Johansson
provided expertise in structural acoustics, computer simulation, experimental set-ups,
equipment selection and also reviewed the present report. Jan Lundberg provided expertise
regarding mining mills, experimental set-ups and maintenance engineering. Johan Carlson
provided expertise in signal processing and ultrasonics, as well as providing equipment for
laboratory experiments, besides reviewing the present report.
 5

Executive summary

Mining mill linings are continuously exposed to wear induced by the charge, and thus,
mill operation has to be interrupted on a regular basis for inspections. Stoppages due
to inspections and replacement of linings lead to large production and monetary losses;
especially in case of unplanned corrective maintenance. Condition monitoring during
mill operation can assist in the maintenance planning and decision process to increase the
availability and the overall performance of the material processing.
In this pilot study, the feasibility of using waterflow ultrasonics for condition moni-
toring of the lining of mining mills during operation is to be investigated. The proposed
waterflow ultrasonic technique uses a water beam to transmit the ultrasound to the mill
shell and lining. By measuring the time of flight (TOF), it can be possible to monitor
the thickness of mill linings, without the need of interrupting operation. The method can
lead to significant energy and monetary savings by reducing inspections and corrective
maintenance stoppages, and possibly increase product quality by optimised performance.
Since steel has a very high acoustic impedance in comparison to rubber, TOF mea-
surements on aluminium-rubber has been used as an intermediate step towards the goal
of measuring steel-rubber combinations. TOF measurements of aluminium-rubber layers
have been achieved, and advancement towards the understanding of TOF measurements in
steel-rubber laysers have been achieved.

The following conclusions have been reached:

• Rubber thickness can be measured through aluminium. In practice, aluminium

plugs/rivets can be mounted on the steel shell of a mill to measure TOF of rubber
shell plates and lifter bars.

• Ultrasound signals can be measured through steel-rubber layers in through-transmission

and pitch-catch set-ups.

• Ultrasound signals measured in pulse-echo or pitch-catch set-up on a solid steel plate

connected to rubber, give rise to reverberations (ringing signal) that mask the rubber
backwall echoes. For avoiding reverberations of steel plate sides, an experimental
set-up requires the steel plate to be at least eight times wider and deeper (x- and
y-axis) than the thickness (z-axis) of the rubber under inspection.
6

Further research could consider the following:

• Experimental TOF measurements with a steel layer eight times wider and deeper (x-
and y-axis) than the thickness (z-axis) of the rubber under inspection.

• Adopt a signal processing technique for suppressing near-transducer reverberations.

• Apply a impedance matching layer between the liquid-steel interface and/or the
steel/rubber interface.

Keywords: ultrasonic testing, mining mill lining, lined pipes, NDT, condition monitoring,
comminution, non-destructive testing, thickness gauge.
 Abbreviations and notations

CBM Condition based maintenance

NDT Non-destructive testing
TOF Time of flight
UT Ultrasonic testing
λ Wave length [m]
ρ Density [kg/m3 ]
ω Rotational speed [rad/s]
D Diameter of transducer active element [m]
f Frequency [Hz]
H Hilbert transform
N Near field length [m]
R Reflection coefficient
T Transmission coefficient
v Speed of sound [m/s]
vp Longitudinal speed of sound (pressure waves) [m/s]
vs Transverse speed of sound (shear waves) [m/s]
Z Acoustic impedance [rayl (kg/m2 s)]
 Contents

1 Introduction . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 11
1.1 Background 11
1.2 Project goal 13
1.3 Project objectives 13
1.4 Scope and limitations 13
1.5 Outline 13

2 Methodology . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 15
2.1 Basics of ultrasonics 15
2.2 Method 16
2.2.1 Equipment data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 16
2.2.2 Material data . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 17
2.2.3 Experimental set-ups . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 18
2.2.4 Feasibility of monitoring in operational environment . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 19

3 Results and discussion . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 21

3.1 Objective 1 21
3.2 Objective 2 21
3.3 Objective 3 23

4 Conclusions and further research . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 25

4.1 Conclusions 25
4.2 Further research 25

Bibliography . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 27
Articles 27
Proceedings 28
Miscellaneous 28
A Measurement through two layers . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
A.1 Contact mode set-up: 9 mm Al and 75/96 mm rubber 29
A.1.1 1 MHz pulse-echo set-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 29
A.1.2 0.1 MHz pulse-echo set-up . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 30
A.2 Immersion set-up: 9/10 mm Al and 41/75/96 mm rubber 31
A.3 Contact mode set-up: Steel and rubber 33
A.4 Through-transmission set-up: Steel-rubber-steel 35
A.5 Ringing signal of plate 37

B Depth of penetration . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 39
B.1 1 MHz transducer 39
B.2 0.1 MHz transducer 39

C Waterflow transducer test . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . . 41

 1. Introduction

Mining mill linings are continuously exposed to wear induced by the charge, and thus,
mill operation has to be interrupted on a regular basis for inspections. Stoppages due
to inspections and replacement of linings lead to large production and monetary losses;
especially in case of unplanned corrective maintenance. Condition monitoring during
mill operation can assist in the maintenance planning and decision process to increase the
availability and the overall performance of the material processing.
In this pilot study, the feasibility of using water flow ultrasonics for condition moni-
toring of the lining of mining mills during operation is to be investigated. The proposed
flow ultrasonic technique uses a water beam to transmit the ultrasound to the mill shell and
lining. By measuring the time of flight, it can be possible to monitor the thickness of mill
linings, without the need of interrupting operation. The method can lead to significant en-
ergy and monetary savings by reducing inspections and corrective maintenance stoppages,
and possibly increase product quality by optimised performance.
To succeed, the frequency of the transducer needs to be balanced. A lower frequency
improves penetration, which is required, but it comes with a lower resolution. The
problem of low resolution can be solved by increasing the number of measurement points.
Also, multiple echoes (reverberations) can shadow the echo from the lining, thus, signal
processing may be required. Further issues can be found: in the interface between the shell
and lining; in the correlation between low and high (lifter) profile lining elements; and
in the time of flight (TOF) relative to the peripheral speed of the mill. These issues are
studied within this pilot study.

1.1 Background
Water flow ultrasonics was used to measure discontinuities in mining mill shell by Sten-
ström et al. (2012, 2015); see Figure 1.1. This project extends the previous research on
mill shells to the study of mill lining thickness.
Non-destructive testing (NDT) refers to non-invasive techniques used for character-
isation and inspection of objects. NDT is used for research, manufacturing monitoring
and in-service inspections, to extract information of a material’s integrity. Besides visual
inspection, ultrasonic testing (UT) is one of the most used NDT techniques, together with
radiography and thermography. However, radiography requires two-sided access, has
limited thickness capabilities and it is hazardous, and thermography has limited application
when it comes to subsurface discontinuities.
Ultrasonic testing has high resolution, good penetration depth, one and two-sided set-up
possibilities and it is non-hazardous. A main drawback is its line-by-line scan which makes
it relatively slow compared to some other NDT methods (Berger 1969; Ball and Almond
12 Chapter 1. Introduction

0.4x1 mm
t = 15 mm

0.4x2 mm

Ø 0.8 mm

0.4x4 mm

Figure 1.1: Prototype of mining mill with fabricated discontinuities and results (Stenström
et al. 2012, 2015).

1998). Another drawback is that it is hard to use UT for detecting cracks in course-grained
materials due to diffuse scattering and attenuation (Lundberg et al. 2011a,b). Moreover,
ultrasonic inspection usually requires an experienced operator (Konshina and Dymkin
2008). Nevertheless, it is a capable technique.
The literature on condition monitoring of mill shell and liners is modest. Dandotiya
and Lundberg (2011, 2012) have studied different inspection techniques for measuring
wear and profile of liners to assess the remaining useful life, as significant savings due
to reduction of mill downtime can be achieved by efficient inspections, e.g. inspections
performed without stopping the mill. Besides evaluating various inspection techniques,
power signature analysis was carried out on a mill with charge lifters of two different
sizes. Results showed a small variation of the angular velocity when the larger lifters made
contact with the charge. Several authors have used vibration analysis, acoustic emission
and embedded strain gauges for monitoring of mills which have been focused on aspects
like feed rate, angular speed, impact, stresses and such, for increasing the performance and
minimise the wear of the lining (Spencer et al. 1999; Tano et al. 2003). Finite element
methods (FEM) have also been used in some research to study mill behaviour during
operation. Jonsén et al. (2012) combined FEM with smoothed particle hydrodynamic
(SPH) modelling to study mill interactions. Furthermore, Ahmadzadeh and Lundberg
(2013a,b) used artificial neural network (ANN) and process data to predict height and
volume of mill lifters. The ANN predicted the remaining height and life of the liners with
 1.2 Project goal 13

accuracy greater than 90 %. The method can give large savings as mill stoppage for lining
inspections can be reduced. However, the ANN needs training and is an indirect method
for measuring lining thickness.

1.2 Project goal

The goal of this pilot study is to measure the thickness of mill linings during operation
using water flow ultrasonics.

1.3 Project objectives

To fulfil the above goal, the following objectives have been formulated:

1. Analyse needs and equipment requirements, and carry out initial tests on transducers
and equipment in laboratory.

2. Carry out ultrasonic tests on aluminium-rubber combinations.

3. Carry out ultrasonic tests on steel-rubber combinations.

Objective 1 mainly refer to selection of transducer frequencies, pulse excitation and

characterisation of equipment performance. Test on aluminium in Objective 2 is used as
an intermediate step towards the goal to measure through steel and rubber. The acoustic
impedance (Z = ρv) of aluminium is about one third of the acoustic impedance of mild
steel. In Objective 3, the aluminium-rubber combination is changed to steel and rubber.
The tests in Objectives 2 and 3 includes pulse-echo, pitch-catch and through-transmission
contact mode set-ups, as well as immersion set-ups, as applicable.
Mill liner elements subjected to extensive wear and impacts are lifter bars and shell
plates; often just called lifters and plates. The project goal refers mainly to measure the
thickness of shell plates, but since the correlation between lifter and plate wear is not
certain, measurement regarding lifters are discussed.

1.4 Scope and limitations

The scope is on laboratory studies of rubber mill lining in conjunction with aluminium
and steel. Since the study is confined to certain test samples and equipment, the study is
limited when it comes to generalisation.

1.5 Outline
Following the introduction, the study is structured into chapters according to methodology,
results & discussion and conclusions. Supplementary details regarding equipment, material
samples and experiments are found as appendices.
 2. Methodology

2.1 Basics of ultrasonics

Ultrasonic testing (UT) is a non-destructive testing (NDT) technique widely used in quality
control and condition based maintenance (CBM). A UT system consist basically of a
pulser/receiver, transducer (probe), digitizer/oscilloscope and some visualisation hardware
and software.
The pulser produces high voltage electrical pulses; commonly 300-500 V, but also
higher for highly attenuating materials, like rubbers (elastomer; thus, high ability to
distribute stress) and coarse-grained materials (diffuse scattering), e.g. ceramics and
austenitic steels, such as manganese steel (Lundberg et al. 2011a,b). Common pulse types
are spike excitation (unit impulse or Dirac delta), square pulse excitation and sinusoidal
excitation.
The transducer includes a piezoelectric element, and thus, converts the electrical
pulse to a mechanical displacement, i.e. sound. The thickness of the active element,
i.e. the piezoelectric element, corresponds to half the desired wavelength, which in turn
gives a certain central frequency. Behind the active element, i.e. opposite to the face of
the transducer, is a backing material, which decides the damping characteristics of the
transducer according the acoustic impedance (Z) difference between the damping material
and the active element. The damping characteristics affects the transducer’s sensitivity and
the duration of vibration (decrease of amplitude). High damping (ZBacking ≈ ZActive element )
gives less ring down (multiple reflections in a thin material, i.e. reverberations) time of the
active element, shorter echoes (higher axial resolution, i.e. resolving power) and higher
sensitivity (ability to detect weak signals) due to wider bandwidth. On the other hand, low
damping gives a longer waveform duration (more energy), narrower bandwidth, greater
material penetration, but less sensitivity.
An impedance matching layer is often found on the face of the transducer. If the
impedance matching layer is made one forth of the wavelength thick and given an acoustic
impedance between the active element and the item under inspection, the waves reflect in
phase and maximum energy is transmitted. However, effective matching is limited to the
centre frequency of transducers.
Penetration and resolution are highly dependent on transducer frequency and diameter.
Higher frequencies give higher axial resolution, but attenuate more due to material mi-
crostructure, e.g. grains (crystallites) and concrete aggregates. Lower frequencies attenuate
less but diverge more, i.e. larger beam spread, which in turn depends on the active element
diameter, and thus, diffraction. The sound field can then be divided into near field (N) and
far field, which are characterised by complex interference effects to a more uniform wave
front. The near field length is given by N = D2/4λ , where D is the active element diameter
 16 Chapter 2. Methodology

and λ is the wavelength.

Transducers can be found as longitudinal wave or shear wave transducers. In a longitu-
dinal wave, or pressure wave, the particle motion are parallel to the wave direction, and in
a shear wave, or transverse wave, the motion is perpendicular to the wave direction. The
study of this report pertains to longitudinal wave transducers.
Common UT set-ups are pulse-echo, pitch-catch and through-transmission. A single
active element is used for both transmitting and receiving waves in pulse-echo set-ups. In
pitch-catch set-ups, two transducers, or a two-element transducer, is used for transmission
from one element to receive in another element, where the both elements are on the same
side of the sample under test. A through set-up differs in the placement of the elements;
the transmission and receiving is on the opposite side of the sample under test.
Received ultrasound echoes go back to the receiving side of the pulser/receiver, where
high/low pass filter is applied to the signal, followed by digitisation and display. Common
graphical representations are A-scan, B-scan and C-scan. An A-scan shows the voltage
(arbitrary unit – a.u.) as a function of time or distance (t = vt/2) at a measurement spot.
A B-scan is constructed from A-scans along a line, which graphically gives the cross-
section data of a sample. A C-scan is then constructed from lines of A-scans (a grid of
measurement spots), which graphically is presented as if the sample is seen from the above.
The acoustic impedance, given by Z = ρv, is important in determining the transmission
and reflection of sound at medium interfaces. The share of reflected energy is given by
R = {(Z2 − Z1 )/(Z2 + Z1 )}1/2 . However, in case of a layer, the transmitted energy also depends
on the layer thickness i relation to the wave length, as discussion above.

2.2 Method
2.2.1 Equipment data
Requirements for laboratory tests concern mainly the pulser/receiver, transducers and
experimental set-up. High voltages and low frequencies are desired due to layered materials
under test and high attenuation.
Three different pulser/receivers have been used in the experiments: GE USM Go,
Matec PR 5000 and JSR Ultrasonics DPR300. The GE USM Go is on 300 V amplitude
and can produce spike and square wave excitation. The Matec PR5000 is on 600 Volt
amplitude, 2500 W RMS and produces a sinusoidal tone burst. The DPR300 is on 900
Volt amplitude and produce a spike excitation.
Two different transducer frequencies have been used; 1 MHz and 0.1 MHz. For the
purpose of the present study, 1 MHz may be the upper limiting range and 0.1 MHz may
be the lower limiting. Transmission and returning echoes attenuate with distance and
depends on the transducer frequency. Thus, material thickness can be adjusted according
to transducer frequency. Nevertheless, the mill shell, lining plates and lifter are often tens
of centimetres thick, so 1 MHz or lower seems appropriate.
The transducers are: one GE K1SC, one GE K1S and two GE K0.1G (GE 2004); see
Table 2.1.
For digitising the analogue signal, ADQ214 from SP Devices are used. The ADQ214
has 14 bits resolution and a sampling rate of 400 MS/s.
 2.2 Method 17

Table 2.1: Transducers data.

K1SC K1S K0.1G #1 K0.1G #2

Frequency (f) [MHz] 1 1 0.10 0.11

Diameter (D) [mm] 24 34 34 34

Waveform duration [µs] ≈ 2.5-3.5(1) ≈ 2.5-3.5(2) ≈ 30(3) ≈ 30(3)

Relative bandwidth at -6 dB 100 ± 35 % 80 ± 20 % 66 % 52 %

Near field length (N) [mm] 22.7 ± 3.4 41 ± 6 – –

Focal width at -6 dB [mm] 2.9 ± 0.1 4.2 ± 0.1 – –

Measured at: 1) polystyrene, 2) poly(methyl methacrylate) and 3) polyvinyl chloride.

2.2.2 Material data

The longitudinal speed of sound has been measured for the rubber, aluminium and steel
under tests. The thickness of the test pieces was measured by taking the average of three
measurements. Using the thickness measurements, the longitudinal speed of sound was
calculated by measuring the TOF between front and back wall echoes in a echo set-up
using 1 MHz K1SC transducer, i.e. no end correction was applied. See Table 2.2. Table
values are for example provided by Olympus, GE and Class Instrumentation Ltd.

Table 2.2: Measured values and table values of TOF.

Material Measured vl [m/s] Table values [m/s]

Rubber of mill lining 1 566 1 600–1 800(1)

Aluminium 6 315 6 300

Steel, low carbon – 5 900

Water – 1 480
1) 1 600 m/s for polybutadiene and 1 800 m/s for butyl.

Coefficients of reflection and transmission are given by:

ρ2 v2 − ρ1 v1 Z2 − Z1
R= = (2.1)
ρ1 v1 + ρ2 v2 Z2 + Z1

and

2ρ2 v2 2Z2
T= = , (2.2)
ρ1 v1 + ρ2 v2 Z1 + Z2
 18 Chapter 2. Methodology

where:

R = Reflection coefficient
T = Transmission coefficient
ρ = Density [kg/m3 ]
v = Speed of sound [m/s]
Z = Characteristic (acoustic) impedance [rayl]

The numbers (1 and 2) in Eq. 2.1–2, refer to the media of the incident wave and the
media of the transmitted wave, respectively. Using water and steel as and example, i.e.
ZSteel = 45.5 × 106 rayl and ZWater = 1.48 × 106 rayl, for water-to-steel R = 0.937 and
T = 0.063. For steel-to-water, R = −0.937 and T = 0.063; the minus signs indicates
that the phase is shifted 180°. For aluminium-water, these figures are R = 0.840 and
T = 0.160. Similar values are found for when water is replaced with the rubber in question,
i.e. aluminium-rubber gives R = 0.815 and T = 0.185 and steel-rubber gives R = 0.926
and T = 0.074. Moreover, ZAl = 17.0 × 106 rayl and ZRubber = 1.74 × 106 rayl.

2.2.3 Experimental set-ups

Experimental tests have been carried out in increments to estimate where the limitation
of ordinary UT is, regarding measuring rubber thickness through metal. In this context,
ordinary UT refer to UT without extensive signal processing or use of impedance matching
layers, or other more sophisticated solutions. Planned experiemental set-ups are as follows:

Test 1: Test of penetration capability of transducers and pulser/receivers.

Test 2: Pulse-echo measurement of Al-rubber in contact mode.
Test 3: Pulse-echo measurement of Al-rubber immersed in water.
Test 4: Pulse-echo measurement of steel-rubber in contact mode.
Test 5: Pulse-echo measurement of steel-rubber immersed in water.
Test 6: Comparison of detectability between waterflow and immersion set-ups.
Test 7: Frequency response test of mill liner lifter bar.

In case measurement of rubber thickness through metal, aluminium or steel, cannot be

reached, the following additional tests follow:

Test 8: Test with varying thickness of metal layer with reference to wavelength and
also with liquid (honey) between the layers.
Test 9: Through transmission test of metal-rubbber-metal to assess energy through-put.

Metals that have been used are aluminium and steel. The aluminium thicknesses are 9, 10
and 31.5 mm, and the steel thicknesses are 5.9, 10 and 29.5 mm. The 5.9 mm steel equals
the wavelength at 1 MHz, and the 29.5 mm steel equals the ½-wavelength at 0.1 MHz.
The 31.5 mm aluminium equals the ½-wavelength at 0.1 MHz. The used steel samples are
shown in Figure 2.1.
 2.2 Method 19

(a) Lifter bar samples. 75 and 96 mm of rubber measured (b) 60 and 133 mm thick rub-
from the aluminium bar. ber samples.

(c) 5.9, 29.5 and 10 mm mild steel samples. Holes are made (d) Clamp used for coupling
to hinder edge reflections. of metal and rubber.

Figure 2.1: Samples of lifter bars, rubber and steel layers, and clamp for fastening.

2.2.4 Feasibility of monitoring in operational environment

A cross-sectional sketch of a mining mill section is shown in Figure 2.2. The steel shell is
2-3 cm thick, the shell plates are less than 10 cm thick and the lifter bars may be 10-30 cm
thick/high.
The feasibility of monitoring mining mills with waterflow ultrasonics have been dis-
cussed in the preceding project by Stenström et al. (2015). Considering an mill of 10 m in
diameter and an ultrasonic waterflow beam with an diameter of 10 mm, it gives a versine
2 2


of x = r − sqrt r − chord /4 = 2.5 µm, i.e. not considerably large. However, since the
object is cylindrical, all measurements are affected in the same way.
Another issue is the TOF from transmitting sound to receiving the rubber backwall
echo. Since the mill is rotating, their might be a chance that the point of measurement
spatially moves away from the waterflow too far. For calculating the tangential speed at
the mill shell periphery, two mills are considered (Dandotiya and Lundberg 2012). Mill
one has a diameter of 5.7 m and an operating angular speed of 8 rpm. Mill two has a
diameter of 10.6 m and operates at 10.4 rpm. The speeds are then given by v = ωr = 2πr f ,
resulting in 2.4 ms-1 and 5.8 ms-1 for mill one and two, respectively. However, the speed
can be varied and mills are commonly not operated at full speed. If it is assumed that we
have 100 mm of water (v = 1 480 m/s), 30 mm of steel (v = 5 900 m/s) and 70 mm of
rubber (v = 1 566 m/s), and TOF = l/v, the TOF back and forth equals 235 µs. A tangential
speed of 5 m/s = 0.005 mm/µs then gives a rotation of 1.2 mm in 235 µs. With reference
to a waterflow beam diameter of 10 mm, 1.2 mm shift can be accepted. However, a larger
20 Chapter 2. Methodology

Rubber lifter bar

Aluminium bar

Rubber shell plate

Fastening
Steel shell

Figure 2.2: Cross-sectional sketch of mill shell and lining section.

waterflow beam diameter might be required due to diffraction and depth of penetration.
This may also be required in case of thicker rubber, e.g. lifters of 20 cm or more.
For good acoustic coupling between the steel shell and lining, it is important that the
steel-rubber interface is free from air bubbles. Placing the UT equipment underneath the
mill, where high mill charge load is found, is then optimal considering acoustic coupling.
Also, the water from the waterflow transducer will fall down, and if needed, it is easier to
suck up. However, this also improves the acoustic coupling between the mill lining and
charge, and may also deform the steel-rubber interface, which in turn gives smaller echo
reflection. Alternatively, the UT equipment can be placed on the side or top of the mill.
Mining mills shells consist of several pieces bolt joined, which results in up to about
10 cm high flanges stretching along the axis of rotation of mills. Sound does not attenuate
much in water, but a water beam of 10 cm in free air require somewhat high pressure, and
thus, more water than desired. A possible alternative is to use a pneumatic system to shift
the transducer radially for passing flanges.
Considering cost, designing a UT system for mill monitoring is a significant investment.
The experience within the present project, is that the cost of unplanned stoppage of a mill
can cost between e10 000-40 000 per hour. However, costs are out of the scope of this
study.
For a brief review of mining mills and their condition monitoring, see the preceding
project by Stenström et al. (2015).
 3. Results and discussion

3.1 Objective 1
Objective 1 is to ‘Analyse needs and equipment requirements, and carry out initial tests on
transducers and equipment in laboratory’. With reference to the thickness of common mill
liner components, 1 MHz transducer was reasoned as the upper limit for measuring lining
thickness through metal, if possible. 0.1 MHz transducer was chosen as the lower limit
considering spatial resolution and results from computer simulations. See Appendix B for
transducer tests.
A main concern regarding measuring rubber through metal is the multiple echoes
within the metal layer that give rise to a ringing effect, i.e. reverberations. If the ringing has
not declined enough before the returning rubber backwall echo, it may be hidden within
the ringing signal. Increasing the voltage would increase the returning echo energy, at the
same time as it would increase the ringing signal. High voltage is therefore only needed
for penetrating through the thick rubber. The ability to penetrate rubber with the chosen
transducers have been tested in Appendix B. The tests in Appendix B concerns 300 V spike
and square pulse excitation using GE USM Go and 600 V sinusoidal wave using Matec
PR5000. The GE USM Go and Matec PR5000 showed similar results using transducer
K1SC. The JSR Ultrasonics DPR300 at 900 V gave 1-2 more echoes compared than what
is seen in Figures B.2 and B.3.
Since ringing can be a major concern, it might be advantageous to use two transducers
in a pitch-catch set-up. Thus, pitch-catch set-ups are to be tried out using two transducers
of the same frequency, 1 and/or 0.1 MHz. Furthermore, two transducers of the same
frequency can be used in a through set-up to measure the outgoing energy.
Besides that signal processing may be required to be able to measure rubber thickness
through metal due to ringing, another solution can be to use impedance matching layers.
Such layers can be used in the water-metal and metal-rubber interfaces. Total transmission
and zeros reflection can be reached for the centre frequency of a transducer between
different materials using√ a matching layer that is a quarter-wavelength thick and has
an impedance of Z0 = Z1 Z2 (Callens et al. 2004). Besides increasing the energy into
the rubber, it would also reduce the ringing effect. However, the result depends on the
pulse excitation, and it can also be hard in practice to find a matching layer of a specific
impedance. However, signal processing and impedance matching layers are out of the
scope of the present pilot experiments.

3.2 Objective 2
Objective 2 is to ‘Carry out ultrasonic tests on aluminium-rubber combinations’. Tests have
been carried out firstly in contact mode and secondly in water immersion (See Appendix C
22 Chapter 3. Results and discussion

for comparison of waterflow and immersion set-ups performance).

In contact mode, 1 MHz K1SC transducer has been used on a lifter of 9 mm Al
vulcanized to 75 mm rubber, and on another lifter of 9 mm Al vulcanized to 96 mm rubber.
Rubber backwall echo from 9 mm Al vulcanized to 96 mm rubber is shown in Figure 3.1.
The measurements coincide well with theoretically calculated TOF values using the vl of
Table 2.2. See Appendix A for measurement on 9 mm Al vulcanized to 75 mm rubber.

(a) 9 mm Al + 96 mm rubber giving ≈125 µs TOF. Theo- (b) Test piec and 1 MHz transducer.
retical TOF equals 126 µs.

Figure 3.1: Al + rubber pulse-echo measurement using 1 MHz transducer at 300 Volts,
500 ns, square wave pulse. The x-axes in (a) is of µs.

In water immersion, 1 MHz K1SC transducer has been used on lifters of: 10 mm Al
vulcanized to 41 mm rubber, 9 mm Al vulcanized to 75 mm rubber, and of 9 mm Al
vulcanized to 96 mm rubber. The rubber thickness of all three samples was accurately
measured. Figure 3.2 shows the result of 76 mm water + 9 mm Al + 76 mm rubber. The
results from the other two lifter samples are given in Appendix A.

(a) 9 mm Al + 75 mm rubber giving ≈100 µs TOF. Theoreti- (b) The experimental set-up corre-
cal TOF equals 99 µs. sponding to the A-scan to the left
(a).

Figure 3.2: 76 mm water + 9 mm Al + 76 mm rubber pulse-echo measurement using 1

MHz transducer at 300 Volts, 500 ns, square wave pulse. The x-axis in (a) is of µs.
 3.3 Objective 3 23

3.3 Objective 3
Objective 3 is to ‘Carry out ultrasonic tests on steel–rubber combinations’. The acoustic
impedances of aluminium and steel are 17 and 45 MRayl, respectively, due to the large
difference in material density. The transmission coefficient of aluminium–rubber and steel–
rubber then turns out to be 0.185 and 0.074, respectively. It is therefore a considerable step
to go from aluminium to steel.
Various UT measurements on steel and rubber clamped together have been tried out.
Some measurements were promising but consistent results could not be reached. Example
measurements are shown in Figures A.7-A.9.
In a pulse-echo set-up of steel-rubber, the sound passes through the steel layer two
times, which is similar to steel-rubber-steel through-transmission. To see if there is any
energy that comes through the layers, measurements on such an set-up was carried out
(Figures A.10). Moreover, to compare the amount of energy that comes through aluminium-
rubber and steel-rubber, another set-up was carried through.Two set-ups where studied:
31.5 mm aluminium with 54.5 mm rubber, and 29.5 mm steel with 54.5 mm rubber. The
thicknesses of the aluminium and steel corresponds to 5 wavelengths of 1 MHz frequency.
The measurement results from using 1 MHz K1SC and K1C are shown in Figure 3.3. The
figure shows the envelope of the signal, given by:

y(n) = |x(n) + iH {x(n)} | (3.1)

where H {x(n)} denotes the discrete Hilbert transform of x(n). The area underneath the
curves is then proportional to the energy throughput. Using trapezoidal integration in
Matlab, the ratio between of the integrated curves becomes 1.08. The value from integration
is eight percent larger for aluminium in relation to steel. By study the amplitudes, it is
found that the amplitude ratio of the first arriving sound wave is AAl/AFe = 2.51, and of the
second arriving sound wave is AAl/AFe = 1.27. However, this value would differ more in
case of two layers of metal instead of one.

6000 6000

4000 4000

2000 2000

0 0
0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150
Time [us] Time [us]

(a) 31.5 mm aluminium and 54.5 mm rubber. (b) 29.5 mm steel and 54.5 mm rubber.

Figure 3.3: Envelope of through-transmission in steel-rubber and al-rubber using 1 MHz

K1SC and K1S.

The difficulty of measuring rubber thickness through steel is found to be a combination

of ringing signal in the steel and weaker returning signal from the rubber. As the width
and depth of the steel plates (≈ 160 × 100) are on a scale close to the rubber under test and
24 Chapter 3. Results and discussion

transducer wavelengths, a large number of reflections (reverberation) appear from plate

edges and drill holes, which in turn give rise to a slowly decaying noise of both pressure
and shear waves. This effect is shown in Figure A.13; it can somewhat be compared to an
echo chamber. With a larger steel plate, the sound can continue to propagate away from
the transducer, and in combination with a larger rubber lining sample, a greater damping
can be achieved. Therefore, a more realisic experimental set-up is where the steel plates is
at least eight1 times larger than the thickness of the rubber under inspection.
Further actions for estimating the TOF in rubber lining include impedance matching
layers and signal processing. However, the matching capability drops quickly for frequen-
cies higher or lower than the centre frequency, and it might also be hard to find a matching
layer with the required impedance. The logic behind impedance layers is briefly discussed
in Section 3.1. Signal processing can then be a more feasible approach. The reverberations
in the steel shell mask the echoes from the rubber lining. In order to estimate TOF in the
lining, some technique for suppressing near-transducer reverberations can be adopted, e.g.
the echo-cancellation method described by Carlson et al. (2002).
The present study is focused towards measuring thickness of rubber shell plates of
mill liners. However, the correlation between lifter bars and plates wear is not certain.
It is therefore desired to measure the thickness of lifters. As the rubber is considerably
thicker when it comes to lifters, a lower frequency is likely required. From the tests in
Figures 3.1 and 3.2, 0.5 MHz can be a suitable frequency for larger lifters. However, since
it is an aluminium bar vulcanised into the lifter, it is most likely impossible to assess lifter
thickness using TOF measurements. A possible solution is to study the frequency response
instead of study the time domain. Excitation may then be done through a fastening screw
(Figure 2.2) using a stationary wireless self-powered sensor. Another solution, wich is
known to work from the present study, is to mount an aluminium plug on the steel shell
that stretches in to the lifter bar and measure with a waterflow transducer.

1 The
speed of sound in steel is about four times the speed in rubber, and the transducer is placed in the
middle of the steel plate.
 4. Conclusions and further research

4.1 Conclusions
The following conclusions have been reached:

• Rubber thickness can be measured through aluminium (Figures 3.2). In practice,

aluminium plugs/rivets can be mounted on the steel shell of a mill to measure TOF
of rubber shell plates and lifter bars.

• Ultrasound signals can be measured through steel-rubber layers in through-transmission

and pitch-catch set-ups (Figures A.13 and A.12b).

• Ultrasound signals measured in pulse-echo or pitch-catch set-up on a solid steel plate

connected to rubber, give rise to reverberations (ringing signal) that mask the rubber
backwall echoes. For avoiding reverberations of steel plate sides, an experimental
set-up requires the steel plate to be at least eight times wider and deeper (x- and
y-axis) than the thickness (z-axis) of the rubber under inspection (Section 3.3 and
Figure A.13).

4.2 Further research

Further research could consider the following:

• Experimental TOF measurements with a steel layer eight times wider and deeper (x-
and y-axis) than the thickness (z-axis) of the rubber under inspection.

• Adopt a signal processing technique for suppressing near-transducer reverberations.

• Apply a impedance matching layer between the liquid-steel interface and/or the
steel/rubber interface.
 Bibliography

Articles
Ahmadzadeh, F. and J. Lundberg (2013a). “Application of multi regressive linear model
and neural network for wear prediction of grinding mill liners”. In: International
journal of advanced computer science and applications 4.5, pages 53–58. DOI: 10.
14569/IJACSA.2013.040509 (cited on page 12).
— (2013b). “Remaining useful life prediction of grinding mill liners using an artificial
neural network”. In: Minerals engineering 53, pages 1–8. DOI: doi:10.1016/j.
mineng.2013.05.026 (cited on page 12).
Ball, R. and D. Almond (1998). “The detection and measurement of impact damage in thick
carbon fibre reinforced laminates by transient thermography”. In: 31.3, pages 165–173.
DOI : 10.1016/S0963-8695(97)00052-2 (cited on page 11).
Berger, H. (1969). “Ultrasonic imaging systems for nondestructive testing”. In: The journal
of the acoustical society of america 45.4, pages 859–867. DOI: 10.1121/1.1911560
(cited on page 11).
Callens, D., C. Bruneel, and J. Assaad (2004). “Matching ultrasonic transducer using two
matching layers where one of them is glue”. In: NDT&E International 37.8, pages 591–
596. DOI: doi:10.1016/j.ndteint.2004.03.005 (cited on page 21).
Dandotiya, R. and J. Lundberg (2011). “Evaluation of abrasive wear measurement devices
of mill liners”. In: International journal of COMADEM 14.2, pages 3–17 (cited on
page 12).
— (2012). “Economic model for maintenance decision: A case study for mill liners”. In:
Journal of quality in maintenance engineering 18.1, pages 79–97. DOI: 10.1108/
13552511211226201 (cited on pages 12, 19).
Jonsén, P., B. I. Pålsson, and H.-Å. Häggblad (2012). “A novel method for full-body
modelling of grinding charges in tumbling mills”. In: Minerals engineering 33, pages 2–
12. DOI: 10.1016/j.mineng.2012.01.017 (cited on page 12).
Konshina, V. N. and G. Y. Dymkin (2008). “Modern approaches to the certification of
ultrasonic testing techniques”. In: Russian journal of nondestructive testing 44.2,
pages 77–85. DOI: 10.1134/S1061830908020010 (cited on page 12).
Lundberg, J., A. Bohlin, and M. Syk (2011a). “Blindfold tests on manganese crossing in
railway application”. In: International journal of system assurance engineering and
management 2.2, pages 169–182. DOI: 10.1007/s13198- 011- 0073- 6 (cited on
pages 12, 15).
— (2011b). “Capacity test of ultrasonic equipment used for crack detection in railway ap-
plication”. In: International journal of system assurance engineering and management
2.2, pages 163–168. DOI: 10.1007/s13198-011-0074-5 (cited on pages 12, 15).
28 Bibliography

Stenström, C., J. Carlson, and J. Lundberg (2015). “Condition monitoring of cracks and
wear in mining mills using water squirter ultrasonics”. In: International journal of
condition monitoring 5.1, pages 2–8. DOI: 10.1784/204764215814981585 (cited on
pages 11, 12, 19, 20, 41).

Proceedings
Carlson, J., F. Sjöberg, N. Quieffin, R. K. Ing, and S. Catheline (2002). “Echo-cancellation
in a single-transducer ultrasonic imaging system”. In: The Institute of Electrical and
Electronics Engineers (cited on page 24).
Spencer, S. J., J. J. Campbell, K. R. Weller, and Y. Liu (1999). “Acoustic emissions
monitoring of SAG mill performance”. In: Intelligent processing and manufacturing of
materials, 1999. IPMM ’99. proceedings of the second international conference on.
Volume 2, pages 939–946. DOI: 10.1109/IPMM.1999.791509 (cited on page 12).
Stenström, C., J. Carlson, and J. Lundberg (2012). “Mining mill condition monitoring
using water jet ultrasonics”. In: IEEE international ultrasonics symposium. Springer,
pages 1913–1916. DOI: 10.1109/ULTSYM.2012.0480 (cited on pages 11, 12).
Tano, K., B. Pålsson, and S. Persson (2003). “Continuous monitoring of a tumbling mill”.
In: Proceedings of the XXII international mineral processing congress. Edited by M.
Castro, J. Remmerswaal, M. Reuter, and U. Boin. Southern African Institute of Mining
and Metallurgy (cited on page 12).

Miscellaneous
GE (2004). Coarse grain probes. General Electric (cited on page 16).
Matec (2000). PR5000 pulser/receiver operator’s manual. Matec Instrument Companies
(cited on pages 30, 39).
 A. Measurement through two layers

A.1 Contact mode set-up: 9 mm Al and 75/96 mm rubber

A.1.1 1 MHz pulse-echo set-up
Backwall echoes (thickness measurements) from 9 mm Al vulcanised to 75/96 mm rubber
is shown in Figure A.1. The measurements coincide well with theoretically calculated
TOF values using the vl of Table 2.2. The transducer used was a 1 MHz K1SC and the
instrument was a GE USM Go at 300 Volts square pulse.

(a) No contact; only ringing signal. (b) 9 mm Al + 75 mm rubber giving ≈100 µs

TOF. Theoretical TOF equals 99 µs.

(c) 9 mm Al + 96 mm rubber giving ≈125 µs (d) Test pieces and 1 MHz transducer.
TOF. Theoretical TOF equals 126 µs.

Figure A.1: Al + rubber pulse-echo measurement using 1 MHz transducer at 300 Volts,
500 ns, square wave pulse. The x-axes in (a)–(c) are of µs.

To compare if there is any possible difference in acoustic coupling between rubber vulcan-
ised against aluminium and rubber clamped against aluminium, another set-up was tried
out. The clamp shown in Figure 2.1 was used together with 10 mm aluminium and 60 mm
 30 A. Measurement through two layers

rubber fastened together; the rubber was compressed to 58 mm. The 1 MHz K1SC was
used together with Matec PR5000 pulser/receiver. See Figure A.2; no liquid was added in
the aluminium-rubber interface.

Amplitude

Figure A.2: 10 mm Al + 60 mm rubber compressed to 58 mm, giving ≈76 µs TOF.

Theoretical TOF equals 77 µs. Without any liquid in the aluminium-rubber interface.

A.1.2 0.1 MHz pulse-echo set-up

A similar measurement as in the previous section (Figure A.1 and A.2) is seen in Fig-
ure A.3, using 0.1 MHz GE K0.1G, with sinusodial pulse excitation of Matec PR5000
pulser/receiver (Matec 2000). The pulser/receiver were as follows: freq. equals 100 kHz,
pulse width equals 2.5 µs, amplitude equals 50 %, gain equals 20 dB and high/low pass
filters disabled.

5000

2500
Amplitude

-2500

-5000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600
Time [us]

Figure A.3: 9 mm Al + 75 mm rubber pulse-echo measurement using 0.1 MHz transducer.

3-4 backwall echoes are visible. See Figure A.1d for the sample under test.
 A.2 Immersion set-up: 9/10 mm Al and 41/75/96 mm rubber 31

A.2 Immersion set-up: 9/10 mm Al and 41/75/96 mm rubber

Three aluminium rubber samples have been tested immersed into water. The samples
are: 10 Al + 41 mm rubber, 9 Al + 76 mm rubber and 9 Al + 96 mm rubber. The rubber
backwall echoes can be seen in all three samples; see Figures A.4-A.6. The transducer
used is 1 MHz K1SC together with GE USM Go.

(a) 10 mm Al + 41 mm rubber giving ≈55 µs (b) The experimental set-up corresponding to

TOF. Theoretical TOF equals 55.5 µs. The x- the A-scan to the left (a). The water distance
axis ranges from 0-120 µs. equals 71 mm.

(c) 10 mm Al + 41 mm rubber giving ≈55 µs (d) The experimental set-up corresponding to

TOF. Theoretical TOF equals 55.5 µs. The x- the A-scan to the left (a). The water distance
axis ranges from 0-80 µs. equals 49 mm.

Figure A.4: 49/71 mm water + 10 mm Al + 41 mm rubber pulse-echo measurement using

1 MHz K1SC at 300 Volts, 500 ns, square wave pulse. The x-axes in (a) and (c) are of µs.
32 A. Measurement through two layers

(a) 9 mm Al + 75 mm rubber giving ≈100 µs (b) The experimental set-up corresponding to

TOF. Theoretical TOF equals 99 µs. The x-axis the A-scan to the left (a). The water distance
ranges from 0-150 µs. equals 76 mm.

Figure A.5: 76 mm water + 9 mm Al + 76 mm rubber pulse-echo measurement using 1

MHz transducer at 300 Volts, 500 ns, square wave pulse. The x-axis in (a) is of µs.

(a) 9 mm Al + 96 mm rubber giving ≈125 µs TOF. Theoretical

TOF equals 126 µs. The x-axis ranges from 0-150 µs.

(b) The same measurement as shown in the fig- (c) The experimental set-up corresponding to
ure above (a), but without probe delay. The the A-scans in (a) and (b). The water distance
x-axis ranges from 0-260 µs equals 94 mm.

Figure A.6: 94 mm water + 9 mm Al + 96 mm rubber pulse-echo measurement using

1 MHz transducer at 300 Volts, 500 ns, square wave pulse. The x-axes are of µs.
 A.3 Contact mode set-up: Steel and rubber 33

A.3 Contact mode set-up: Steel and rubber

Various tests on steel and rubber has been carried out but consistent results have not been
reached. Some of the tests are shown in Figures A.7. Steel and rubber were clamped
together as show in Figure A.11 but with one layer of steel instead of two. The marked out
timings in the A-scans of the figures does not necessarily have to come from the rubber
backwall. Tests were carried out both with and without honey in the steel-rubber interface;
no visible differences in the results were seen (see Figure A.2).

3000

2000

1000
Amplitude

-1000
∆84 ∆76
-2000
∆103
-3000

-4000
0 100 200 300 400 500 600 700 800
Time [us]

(a) A-scan with some time differences marked out.

∆t = 116 ∆t = 116+114
5.9 mm

90.25 mm

Honey

(b) Experimental set-up with transducers touching each other and theoreti-
cal TOF.

Figure A.7: 5.9 mm steel + 93 mm rubber pitch-catch measurement using 0.1 MHz
transducers and Matec PR5000 at 2.5 µs pulse width and a frequency of 0.1 MHz.
34 A. Measurement through two layers

332 us
Amplitude

Honey

∆340 us ∆t = 124 + 114 + 114 = 352 us

29.5 mm

89.2 mm

(a) A-scan with some times marked out. The initial pulse (b) Experimental set-up with trans-
starts a few µs before x-axis time zero. ducers not touching each other and
theoretical TOF.

Figure A.8: 29.5 mm steel + 93 mm rubber compressed to 89 mm with pitch-catch

measurement using 0.1 MHz transducer and Matec PR5000 at 2.5 µs pulse width and a
frequency of 0.1 MHz.

77.88 us
Amplitude

77.90 us
Amplitude

∆t = 74.5 us

5.9 mm

56.8 mm

Honey

(a) A-scans with some times marked out. The initial pulse (b) Experimental set-up.
starts a few µs before x-axis time zero.

Figure A.9: 5.9 mm steel + 60 mm rubber compressed to 57 mm in echo mode using

1 MHz transducer and Matec PR5000 at 0.5 µs pulse width and a frequency of 1 MHz.
 A.4 Through-transmission set-up: Steel-rubber-steel 35

A.4 Through-transmission set-up: Steel-rubber-steel

Since consistent results were not reach in steel-rubber pulse-echo mode, it is interesting
to see if there is any energy that comes through the layers. The sound passes through
the steel layer two times in a pulse-echo set-up, which is similar to steel-rubber-steel
through-transmission. Figure A.10 shows A-scans from through-transmission set-up using
1 MHz K1SC and 1 MHz K1S together and two 0.1 MHz K0.1G together. The layers
are 5.9 mm steel, 56.6 mm rubber and 29.5 mm steel. Multiple echoes from the two steel
layers are seen in Figure A.10a. In Figure A.10b, the marked out 84 µs corresponds fairly
good to the time it takes for the sound to reflect back and fourth in the rubber (2 × 56.6
mm additional distance); theoretical TOF equals 72 µs. The clamping set-up together with
the 0.1 MHz transducers are shown in Figure A.11.

6000

4000
Amplitude

2000

-2000

-4000
0 50 100 150 200
∆t = 10.0 us Time [us]

(a) Through transmission using 1 MHz transducers ( GE K1SC and K1S). The
29.5 mm steel echos are visible and equals 10 µs.

∆t = 84.0 us
400

200
Amplitude

-200

-400
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200
Time [us]

(b) The same measurement as above, but with two 0.1 MHz K0.1G.

Figure A.10: Through-transmission from 5.9 mm steel, through 56.6 mm rubber and 29.5
mm steel.

To compare how much energy that comes through aluminium-rubber and steel-rubber,
further measurements were carried out. Two set-ups where studied: 31.5 mm aluminium
with 54.5 mm rubber, and 29.5 mm steel with 54.5 mm rubber. The thicknesses of the
aluminium and steel corresponds to 5 wavelengths of 1 MHz frequency. The measurement
36 A. Measurement through two layers

Figure A.11: Experimental set-up for through-transmission, from 5.9 mm steel, through
56.6 mm rubber and 29.5 mm steel.

results from using 1 MHz K1SC and K1C are shown in Figure A.12. The figure shows the
envelope of the signal, given by:

y(n) = |x(n) + iH {x(n)} | (A.1)

where H {x(n)} denotes the discrete Hilbert transform of x(n). The area underneath the
curves is then proportional to the energy throughput. Using trapezoidal integration in
Matlab, the ratio between of the integrated curves becomes 1.08. The value from integration
is eight percent larger for aluminium in relation to steel. By study the amplitudes, it is
found that the amplitude ratio of the first arriving sound wave is AAl/AFe = 2.51, and for the
second arriving sound wave is AAl/AFe = 1.27. However, this value would differ more in
case of two layers of metal instead of one.

6000 6000

4000 4000

2000 2000

0 0
0 50 100 150 0 50 100 150
Time [us] Time [us]

(a) 31.5 mm aluminium and 54.5 mm rubber. (b) 29.5 mm steel and 54.5 mm rubber.

Figure A.12: Envelope of through-transmission in steel-rubber and al-rubber using 1 MHz

K1SC and K1S.
 A.5 Ringing signal of plate 37

A.5 Ringing signal of plate

To illustrate the ringing signal of a plate, the 5.9 mm steel plate in Figure 2.1c was partly
cut in the middle, measured, cut completely, and measured once again. See Figure A.13.
The four edges and the drill holes causes a large number of reflections (reverberation) that
give rise to a noise with a long decay time (Figure A.13c). It can somewhat be compared
to an echo chamber.

(a) 5.9 mm plate partly cut. (b) The experimental set-up with inclined trans-
ducers. The 5.9 mm steel plate is not visible.

1000 1000

0 0

-1000 -1000
0 50 100 150 200 0 50 100 150 200
Time [us] Time [us]

(c) Pitch-catch A-scan of partly cut steel plate. (d) Pitch-catch A-scan of partly completely cut
Rubber backwall echo at ≈100 µs. steel plate. Rubber backwall echo at ≈100 µs.

Figure A.13: Test for illustration of ringing signal in plate using 1 MHz K1SC and K1S.
 B. Depth of penetration

This appendix shows K1SC and K0.1G (Table 2.1) transducers ability to penetrate rubber
(Figure B.1).

B.1 1 MHz transducer

Figure B.2 shows multiple backwall echoes of a 60 mm rubber sample. The measurements
give an indication of penetration depth in this kind of rubber using 1 MHz K1SC at
300 V spike and square pulse excitation. In Figure B.2a, using spike pulse excitation, five
backwall echoes are easily seen and an indication of a sixth echo can be seen as a change
in the otherwise continuous noise. In Figure B.2b, using square pulse excitation of 500 ns
width, six echoes are easily seen, compared to five easily seen with the spike excitation.

B.2 0.1 MHz transducer

Figure B.3 shows multiple backwall echoes of a 132.8 mm rubber sample. The transducers
used were two 0.1 MHz K0.1G, with sinusodial pulse excitation from a Matec PR5000
pulser/receiver (Matec 2000). Echoes corresponding to about 90-100 cm of rubber is seen
in Figure B.3. The pulser/receiver were as follows: freq. equals 100 kHz, pulse width
equals 2.5 us, amplitude equals 50 %, gain equals 20 dB and high/low pass filters turned
disabled.

Figure B.1: 60 and 133 mm thick rubber samples together with K1SC and K0.1G trans-
ducers.
40 B. Depth of penetration

(a) Spike pulse excitation, givig 5–6 backwall (b) Square pulse excitation, givig 6 backwall
reflections; equals 30–36 cm. reflections; equals 36 cm

Figure B.2: Depth of penetration measurement using a 1 MHz K1SC transducer at 300 V.
The x-axes are of millimetres.

#10 4 #10 4
1 1

0.5 0.5
Amplitude

Amplitude

0 0

-0.5 -0.5

-1 -1
0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400 0 200 400 600 800 1000 1200 1400
Time [us] Time [us]

(a) Sinusodial pulse-echo excitation, givig ≈ 8 (b) Sinusodial pitch-catch (two transducers side-
backwall echoes; equals ≈ 100 cm. by-side) excitation, givig ≈ 7 backwall echoes;
equals ≈ 90 cm.

Figure B.3: Depth of penetration in 132.8 mm rubber, using 0.1 MHz K0.1G transducers.
 C. Waterflow transducer test

The aim of measuring mill linings condition during operation requires a waterflow set-up.
Stenström et al. (2015) used waterflow ultrasonics to monitor the steel shell of mining
mills, but any study of waterflow transducer performance was left out. This appendix
provides comparison of waterflow and water immersion transducer performance. The
experimental set-ups are shown in Figure C.1, and the measurement results are shown in
Figure C.2. The test sample is a piece of steel. As the speed of sound in water (1 480 m/s)
is very high in comparison to the waterflow, any time a sound wave goes through the water,
it can be compared to water that stands still, i.e. similar to water immersion. Ultrasonic
testing can be done as long as the waterflow is fairly steady.

(a) Set-up for waterflow test. (b) Set-up for immersion test (c) Set-up for immersion test
without waterflow. without nozzle.

Figure C.1: Set-ups for test of 5 MHz GE H5KF waterflow transducer.

42 C. Waterflow transducer test

Amplitude

(a) A-scan of waterflow test.

Amplitude

(b) A-scan of immersion test without waterflow.

4000

2000

-2000

-4000
0 10 20 30
Time [us]

(c) A-scan of immersion test without nozzle.

Figure C.2: Results of 5 MHz GE H5KF waterflow transducer test.

  
   

View publication stats