Blekinge Institute of Technology

Doctoral Dissertation Series No. 2008:16

School of Engineering
low frequency acoustic excitation
and laser sensing of vibration as a
tool for remote characterization
of thin sheets
Etienne Mfoumou
ISSN 1653-2090
ISBN 978-91-7295-155-6
There is a need to monitor the existence and ef-
fects of damage in structural materials. Bulk com-
ponents provide a much publicized example, but
the need exists in a variety of other structures,
such as layered materials used in food packaging
industries. While several techniques and models
have been proposed for characterization and con-
dition monitoring of bulk materials, less attention
has been devoted to thin flms having no bending
rigidity. This study is therefore devoted to the de-
velopment of a new method for remote acoustic
non-destructive testing and characterization of
thin flms used in food packaging materials or si-
milar structures.
A method for assessing the strength in the presen-
ce of crack of thin layers used in food packaging is
frst presented using a modifed Strip Yield Model.
Resonance frequency measurement is then intro-
duced and it is shown, at low frequency range, less
than 2kHz, that a change in the physical properties
such as a reduction in stiffness causes detectable
changes in the modal properties, specifcally in
the resonance frequency. This observation leads
to the implementation of a method for damage
severity assessment on sheet materials, suppor-
ted by a new theory illustrating the feasibility of
the detection of inhomogeneity in form of ad-
ded mass, as well as damage severity assessment,
using a measurement of the resonance frequency
shift. A relationship is then established between
the resonance frequency and the materials elastic
property for single layers as well as for laminates,
which yields a new modality for sheet materials
remote characterization.
Further, the method has allowed demonstrating
that thin sheets having no bending stiffness exhi-
bit a slow non-equilibrium dynamics when slightly
loaded within their elastic region and monitored
at constant strain. We found that the resonance
frequency shifts downward in response to a con-
ditioning strain and to the number of cycles. This
is an indication of a long-time slow dynamics re-
laxation, similar to that observed on bulk materi-
als of many types. Differences and similarities in
the setup as well as features observed are poin-
ted out in this work. This type of measurement is
important for the fundamental understanding of
material dynamics and for further development of
theories on thin sheets dynamics.
The result of this study is the foundation of a
method, based on low-frequency acoustic exci-
tations and laser detection, for non-contact non-
destructive testing and characterization of sheet
materials.
Keywords: nondestructive testing, remote acous-
tics, slow dynamics, nonequilibrium dynamics,
resonance frequency, material characterization,
vibration-based technique, fracture toughness.
abstract
2008:16
l
o
w

f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

a
c
o
u
s
t
i
c

e
x
c
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

l
a
s
e
r

s
e
n
s
i
n
g

o
f

v
i
b
r
a
t
i
o
n

a
s

a

t
o
o
l

f
o
r

r
e
m
o
t
e

c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

t
h
i
n

s
h
e
e
t
s
E
t
i
e
n
n
e

M
f
o
u
m
o
u
2
0
0
8
:
1
6

Low Frequency Acoustic Excitation and Laser
Sensing of Vibration as a Tool for Remote
Characterization of Thin Sheets
Etienne Mfoumou
Low Frequency Acoustic Excitation and Laser
Sensing of Vibration as a Tool for Remote
Characterization of Thin Sheets
Etienne Mfoumou
Blekinge Institute of Technology Doctoral Dissertation Series
No 2008:16
ISSN 1653-2090
ISBN 978-91-7295-155-6
Department of Mechanical Engineering
School of Engineering
Blekinge Institute of Technology
SWEDEN
2008 Etienne Mfoumou
Department of Mechanical Engineering
School of Engineering
Publisher: Blekinge Institute of Technology
Printed by Printfabriken, Karlskrona, Sweden 2008
ISBN 978-91-7295-155-6

m
mm
K
c
6.25m

c
=
2
b

arccos

exp(
K
2
c
8a
0

2
b
)

c

b
2a
0

2
0

K
c

t
2
c
2

x
2
+

2

y
2

+d
2

2
x
2
+

2
y
2

2
=
p (x, y, t)
h

,
c =

T/(h), d
2
=
Eh
2
12 (1
2
)

mn
= c

m
a

2
+

n
b

1 +
d
2
2c
2

m
a

2
+

n
b

,
m, n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
x
y
O
a
b

2
mn
=
2
mn
1 +
d
2
c
4

2
mn
1 + 2
q
m

M
cos
2
(m
x
0
a
)sin
2
(n
y
0
b
)
M = hab
0
= 1
q
= 2 (q > 1)
2
mn
m

M
x
0
, y
0

1

2

1

2

2
= 2

2
b
2
c
2
1
c
2
2
c
2
1
+c
2
2
c
1
c
2
c
2
1
c
2
2
c
1
c c
2
c (1 ) << 1
=
1

1
c
1
c
2
2c
1

c
2
= c
1
=
1
c
2
c =

T/(h) =

d = 0
f
2
0n
=
E n
2
4 b
2

f
0n
f
2
0n
f
2
0n

y =
m

i=1
a
i
exp(t/
i
)
a
i

i

1

2
y = K
0
+a
1
exp(t/
1
) +a
2
exp(t/
2
)
a
1
a
2

1

2
K
0
= 0
K
0
= 6.4

1

2

2n

1
a
1

1n
C
0
a
2
1n
C
0
=

5
n=1

1n
/a
2
1n
/5 = 30.2
= a
1n
exp(t/(30.2 a
2
1n
)) +a
2n
exp(t/8639) .
K
f
2
= K
E
s

4 L
2

L = 0.25 = m
3
f
2
= K f
2
0
/
0
f
2
0
/
0
=
1
4L
2

K K
s2
=
K
r2
=
K
c
150mm15mm
0.3 0.35 0.4 0.45 0.5 0.55
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
x 10
5
Strain (%)
F
r
e
q
*
F
r
e
q

(
H
z
*
H
z
) y = 8.1e+005*x 1.5e+005
Experiment
Curve fit
f
2

strain
time
mm
mm
mm/s
mm
kS kS/s
mm mm
mm mm
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Normalized crack length
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

s
t
r
e
s
s
STRESS vs CRACK SIZE(Al foil)
Experimental
LEFM
Strip Yield Model
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
1
2
3
4
5
Normalized crack length
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

s
t
r
e
s
s
STRESS vs CRACK SIZE(LDPE)
Experimental
LEFM
Strip Yield Model
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Normalized crack length
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

s
t
r
e
s
s
STRESS vs CRACK SIZE(Paper)
Experimental
LEFM
Strip Yield Model
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Normalized crack length d/a
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

s
h
i
f
t

(
%
)
Defect severity analysis of paperboard 550 x 30
Theory
Experiment
mm mm mm N
2.25%
Theory of Laminates Tensile Test Acoustic Measurement Materials
Eth std Ett std Eac std
PPR/LDPE 5.60 - 5.36 0.436 4.2 0.04
PPR/LDPE/Al 3.60 - 3.20 0.68 2.00 0.21
LDPE/Al 5.44 - 5.35 1.95 3.30 0.17
0 50 100 150 200 250 300 350 400 450
150
200
250
300
350
Time (min)
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

(
H
z
)
Paperboard: Frequency change during successive conditionings ON and OFF
Relax upper strain level ON1
Relax lower strain level ON1
Recovery1
Relax upper strain level ON2
Relax lower strain level ON2
Recovery2
Relax upper strain level ON3
Relax lower strain level ON3
Recovery3
Cond. ON1
Cond. ON1 Cond. ON1
Cond.
OFF1
Cond.
OFF2
Cond.
OFF3
1.6 10
3
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Resonance
frequency
Strain
Stress
Time (s)
Cycle: 2 3 4 5 6
K
2s
= 1.017 K
2r
= 0.983
m

th
m
m
m
g/cm
3

c
=
K
c

a (
a
w
)
(
a
w
) =

sec(
a
2 w
)

1 0.025

a
w

2
+ 0.06

a
w

c
K
c

c
=
2
b

asec

exp

K
2
c
8 a
2

2
b

t
2
c
2

y
2
=
p (y, t)
h
m
d
2

b
2

dt
2
= p S = p 2w
c =

T
h
T

t
2
c
2

y
2
=
m
h 2 w

d
2

b
2

dt
2
= 1, if

b
2


2

< y <

b
2
+

2

0, otherwise
= A cos(w t) sin

b
y

sin

b
y

0
=
1

1 + 2
m
M
1
m
M
f f
0

1
m
M

f
0
kN
mm mm
mm mm
mm/min
mm
mm mm
mm/min N
mm
mm
mm
Kc = 3.12MPa.m
1/2
0 0.2 0.4 0.6 0.8 1
0
0.5
1
1.5
2
2.5
3
Normalized crack length
N
o
r
m
a
l
i
z
e
d

s
t
r
e
s
s
STRESS vs CRACK SIZE(Paper)
Experimental
LEFM
Strip Yield Model

mm
Kc = 3.12MPa.m
1/2

t
2
c
2

x
2
+

2

y
2

=
p (x, y, t)
h

c =

T/(h)
T
h
p (x, y, t)
=

m,n=0

mn
=

m,n=0
A
mn
cos

m
x
a

sin

n
y
b

sin (
mn
t +
mn
) .
A
mn
,
mn

mn

mn
= c

m
a

2
+

n
b

2
, m, n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
a, b

mn
(x, y = 0) = 0,
mn
(x, y = b) = 0,
d
dx
(x = 0, y) = 0,
d
dx
(x = a, y) = 0.
y = 0, y = b
x = 0, x = a
m

x = x
0
, y = y
0
m

d
2

dt
2
= Sp (x, y, t) ,
S = l
1
l
2

t
2
c
2

x
2
+

2

y
2

=
m

hS

t
2

x x
0
l
1

y y
0
l
2

x x
0
l
1

=
l
1
a
+ 2
l
1
a

m=1
cos

m
x
0
a

cos

m
x
a

y y
0
l
2

= 2
l
2
b

n=1
sin

n
y
0
b

sin

n
y
b

0n

2
0n
+c
2

n
b

2
=
2m

M

2
0n
sin
2

n
y
0
b

.
M = hab
0
n = nc/b
m

= 0

0n
=

0n

1 +
2m

M
sin
2

n
y
0
b

<< M

0n

0n

1
m

M
sin
2

n
y
0
b

(m

<< M)
m

mn
, m = 0

2
mn
+c
2

m
a

2
+

n
b

=
4m

M

2
mn
cos
2

m
x
0
a

sin
2

n
y
0
b

mn
=

mn

1 +
4m

M
cos
2

m
x
0
a

sin
2

n
y
0
b

<< M

mn

mn

1
2m

M
cos
2

m
x
0
a

sin
2

n
y
0
b

(y = b/2)
01

01

01

01
= 1
1

1 +
2m

M
m

<< M

01

01

01

(1,2)
t
2
c
2
1,2

(1,2)
x
2
+

2

(1,2)
y
2

= 0
1 2

m1

(1,2)
= A
(1,2)
(x) sin

y
b

cos

(1,2)
t

A
(1,2)
(x) = cos (mx/a)

(1,2)
m1
=

b
c
1,2

2
+

a
c
1,2

2
d
2
A
(1,2)
dx
2
+

(1,2)2
c
2
1,2

2
b
2

A
(1,2)
= 0
A
(1,2)
(x) = const
(1,2)
=
(/b) c
1,2
c
2
< c
1

2
<
1

2

1

2
< <
1

(1,2)
= A
(1,2)
(x) sin

y
b

cos (t)

d
2
A
(1)
dx
2
+

2
c
2
1

2
b
2

A
(1)
= 0
d
2
A
(2)
dx
2
+

2
c
2
2

2
b
2

A
(2)
= 0
A
(1,2)

2
c
2
1

2
b
2
=

2
c
2
1

2
1
c
2
1
< 0,

2
c
2
2

2
b
2
=

2
c
2
2

2
2
c
2
2
> 0
d
2
A
(1)
dx
2
k
2
1
A
(1)
= 0,
d
2
A
(2)
dx
2
+k
2
2
A
(2)
= 0

2
1
=

2
b
2


2
c
2
1
,
2
2
=

2
c
2
2

2
b
2
A
(1)
=
1
cosh (
1
x) +
1
sinh(
1
x)
A
(2)
=
2
cos (
2
x) +
2
sin(
2
x)

1
,
2
,
1

2
dA
(1)
dx
|
x=0
= 0
dA
(2)
dx
|
x=a
= 0
1

2
A
(1)
=
1
cosh (
1
x)
A
(2)
=
2
cos (
2
a x)
cos (
2
a)
A
(1)
(x = a/2) = A
(2)
(x = a/2)
1
cosh

1
a
2

=
2
cos

2
a
2

cos (
2
a)
dA
(1)
dx
|
x=a/2
=
dA
(2)
dx
|
x=a/2

1

1
sinh

1
a
2

=
2

2
sin

2
a
2

cos (
2
a)

1
tanh

1
a
2

=
2
tan

2
a
2

1
a
2
<< 1
2
a
2
<< 1 tanh

1
a
2

1
a
2
, tan

2
a
2

2
a
2
,

2
1
=
2
2

2
= 2

2
b
2
c
2
1
c
2
2
c
2
1
+c
2
2
c
2
1
c
2
2
c
1
c c
2
c (1 ) << 1
=
1

1
c
1
c
2
2c
1

c
2
< c
1

1

1
=
c
1
c
2
2c
1
a
0
a
0
= 3.5mm
a
0
= 4.6mm a
0
= 5.7mm
f/m

th

t
2
c
2

x
2
+

2

y
2

= 0

c =

T/(h)
T
h
=

m,n=0

mn
=

m,n=0
A
mn
cos

m
x
a

sin

n
y
b

sin(
mn
t +
mn
) .
A
mn

mn

mn

mn
= c

m
a

2
+

n
b

2
, m, n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
a, b

mn
(x, y = 0) = 0,
mn
(x, y = b) = 0
d
dx
(x = 0, y) = 0,
d
dx
(x = a, y) = 0.
y =
0, y = b x = 0, x = a

(1,2)
t
2
c
2
1,2

(1,2)
x
2
+

2

(1,2)
y
2

= 0
1 2

m1

2

1

2
< <
1

(1,2)
= A
(1,2)
(x) sin

y
b

cos (t)

=
1

1
c
1
c
2
2c
1

c
2
< c
1

1

1
=
c
1
c
2
2c
1
mm
mm mm
m
N
o
mm/min
V pp
0 0.1 0.2 0.3 0.4 0.5 0.6 0.7
0
2
4
6
8
10
12
14
Normalized crack length d/a
R
e
l
a
t
i
v
e

f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

s
h
i
f
t

(
%
)
Defect severity analysis of paperboard 550 x 30
Theory
Experiment
3
) m)
mm/min
mm/min

mn
= c =

F
ah
=

m
a

2
+

n
b

mn
=

m = 0, n = 2 =
2
b

mn
=
2
b

m m

t
2
c
2

x
2
+

2

y
2

+d
2

2
x
2
+

2
y
2

2
=
p (x, y, t)
h

z = 0

T/(h)

d
2
=
Eh
2
12(1
2
)

m,n=0

mn
=

m,n=0
A
mn
cos

m
x
a

sin

n
y
b

sin (
mn
t +
mn
) .
A
mn
,
mn

mn

mn
= c

m
a

2
+

n
b

1 +
d
2
2c
2

m
a

2
+

n
b

m = 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., n = 1, 2, 3, ...

mn
(x, y = 0) = 0,
mn
(x, y = b) = 0,
d
dx
(x = 0, y) = 0,
d
dx
(x = a, y) = 0.
y =
0, y = b x = 0, x = a
=

2
24
Eh
3
(1
2
)Ta
2
<< 1
mm
N
GPa
m
m

T/(h) =

mn
= 2f
mn
=

m
a

2
+

n
b

2
,
m = 0, 1, 2, 3, ..., n = 1, 2, 3...
f
2
0n
=
E n
2
4 b
2

mm mm
m mm
o
mm
mm mm mm mm mm
V pp
kHz
mm
E =
d
d
d d

GPa MPa
mm mm
N
th
E =

=
i
=

i
E
i
, i = 1, 2, 3, ...

i
E
i
i
F
L
=

i
F
i
A
i

L
=

i
F
i

i
A
i

L
=

i
t
i
t
E
L
=

i
E
i
t
i
t
E
L
E
i
S =

1
N
N

i=1
(E
i
E
av
)
2
N E
av
b
a h
y
z
F
y z

t
2
c
2

x
2
+

2

y
2

+d
2

2
x
2
+

2
y
2

2
=
p (x, y, t)
h
(x, y)
c
p
c d
c =

T/(h) d
2
=
Eh
2
12(1
2
)
E T

mn

mn
= c

m
a

2
+

n
b

1 +
d
2
2c
2

m
a

2
+

n
b

,
m, n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
m n

mn
= c

m
a

2
+

n
b

2
, m, n = 0, 1, 2, 3, ...
(m = 0) f
0n
f
2
0n
=
E n
2
4 b
2

f
2
0n

E
mm mm
o

N
mm/s
kHz
l(mm)
l(mm)
l(mm)
f
2

2
vs.
Theory of Laminates Tensile Test Acoustic Measurement Materials
Eth std Ett std Eac std
PPR/LDPE 5.60 - 5.36 0.436 4.2 0.04
PPR/LDPE/Al 3.60 - 3.20 0.68 2.00 0.21
LDPE/Al 5.44 - 5.35 1.95 3.30 0.17
m
m
o
Material Density (g/cm
3
) Length (cm) Width (cm) Thickness (m)
PPR 0.684 250 15 100
LDPE 0.91 250 15 27

Tensile machine
Loadcell
Pneumatic grip
Sample
Loudspeaker
Laser Dop. Vib.
Func. Gen.
Oscilloscope
PC control MTS
PC control DAQ
Tensile machine
Loadcell
Pneumatic grip
Sample
Loudspeaker
Laser Dop. Vib.
Func. Gen.
Oscilloscope
PC control MTS
PC control DAQ
mm
kS
mm/mm mm/mm
1.6 10
3
Data Min Max Std
Relax upper strain level ON-1 309.1 340.6 9.768
Relax upper strain level ON-2 306.8 312.8 1.897
Relax upper strain level ON-3 305.3 316.6 3.337
Relax lower strain level ON-1 169.5 187.5 5.987
Relax lower strain level ON-2 169.5 174 1.388
Relax lower strain level ON-3 167.3 171.8 1.611
Recovery 1 150.8 176.3 2.58
Recovery 2 154.5 180 2.243
Recovery 3 153 176.3 2.594
Min=Minimum Max=Maximum Std=standard deviation
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70
305
310
315
320
325
330
335
340
345
Time (min)
F
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

(
H
z
)
Paperboard: Frequency change at upper strain level during conditioning ON
Conditioning ON1
Conditioning ON2
Conditioning ON3
1.6 10
3
Data Min Max Std
Relax upper strain level ON-1 257.3 270.8 3.941
Relax upper strain level ON-2 257.1 264.8 2.383
Relax upper strain level ON-3 255.1 263.3 2.359
Relax lower strain level ON-1 142.5 163.5 6.796
Relax lower strain level ON-2 133.5 141 2.625
Relax lower strain level ON-3 132 138.8 1.883
Recovery 1 120.8 150.8 3.089
Recovery 2 114.8 144 3.331
Recovery 3 114.8 140.3 2.628
Comparison TenCate et. al. Mfoumou et. al.
Samples Regular solid materials (rocks,
metals, concrete, ...)
Thin sheets having no bending
stiffness (paperboard, LDPE, ...)
Conditioning Harmonic acoustic wave
incremented through the
fundamental longitudinal
resonance frequency
Harmonic mechanical loading and
unloading (not related to the
resonance frequency)
Conditioning
frequency range
High (1 to 10kHz) Low (0.0025Hz)
Conditioning
duration
About 1000 seconds About 4000 seconds
Offset pre-stressed
for conditioning
Not required Required in order to give bending
stiffness to the sample
Method of
investigation
Resonance method
(longitudinal)
Resonance method
(bending)
Resonance
frequency range
Several kilohertz Below 500Hz
Source PZT (contact method) Loudspeaker (non-contact
method)
Receiver (sensing) Accelerometer cemented on
the sample (contact method)
Laser beam (non-contact method)
Featuring
observation
Drop in Youngs modulus and
increase in material damping
Drop in Youngs modulus.
After stress
removal
The material properties
recover towards their original
values
The material properties recover
towards their original values
Process of
conditioning and
recovery
Assymetric Assymetric
Overall A retarded effect ressembling
creep appears, which cannot be
explained with equilibrium
elasticity theory
A similar effect appears here,
though much faster, which can
also not be explained with
equilibrium elasticity theory
mm
mm m

kHz
Tensile machine
Loadcell
Pneumatic grip
Sample
Loudspeaker
Laser Dop. Vib.
Func. Gen.
Oscilloscope
PC control MTS
PC control DAQ
Tensile machine
Loadcell
Pneumatic grip
Sample
Loudspeaker
Laser Dop. Vib.
Func. Gen.
Oscilloscope
PC control MTS
PC control DAQ
mm mm/s
mm
mm mm
Time (s)
Elongation (mm)
1.0
0.6
200 s
200 s
200 s
200 s
Loading level
Reverse loading level
Cycle 1 Cycle 2
kS kS/s
y =
m

i=1
a
i
exp(t/
i
)
a
i

i

1

2
y = K
0
+a
1
exp(t/
1
) +a
2
exp(t/
2
)
a
1
a
2

1

2
K
0
= 0
K
0
= 6.4
exp[(t/
s
)
p
f
1

f
2
1
=
E
d

4 L
2

,
E
d
L

1

2
mm
0 500 1000 1500 2000 2500 3000 3500
0
50
100
150
200
250
300
Resonance
frequency
Strain
Stress
Time (s)
Cycle: 2 3 4 5 6
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
18.8
19
19.2
19.4
19.6
19.8
20
20.2
20.4
20.6
Time (s)
S
t
r
e
s
s

(
M
P
a
)
Relaxation experimental data together with curve fitting for cycles 2 to 6
data cycle 2
curve fit 2
data cycle 3
curve fit 3
data cycle 4
curve fit 4
data cycle 5
curve fit 5
data cycle 6
curve fit 6
= 0.7221*exp(t/14.6349)+19.22*exp(t/8818.3)
= 0.7261*exp(t/16.2364)+19.26*exp(t/8396.3)
= 0.75*exp(t/17.6491)+19.31*exp(t/8733.6)
= 0.761*exp(t/19.1975)+19.38*exp(t/8190)
= 0.9527*exp(t/28.0426)+19.47*exp(t/9058)
1 2 3 4 5
10
11
12
13
14
15
16
17
18
19
20
Cycle number
a
2
20a
1
b
2
300b
1
Cycle number
1 2 3 4 5
3000
4000
5000
6000
7000
8000
9000
10000

2

2n
n =
2

1
a
1

1n
C
0
a
2
1n
C
0
=

5
n=1

1n
/a
2
1n
/5 = 30.2
= a
1n
exp(t/(30.2 a
2
1n
)) +a
2n
exp(t/8639) .
a
1
a
2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
4.4
4.6
4.8
5
5.2
5.4
5.6
5.8
6
Time (s)
S
t
r
e
s
s

(
M
P
a
)
Reverse relaxation experimental data together with curve fitting for cycles 2 to 6
data cycle 2
curve fit 1
data cycle 3
curve fit 2
data cycle 4
curve fit 3
data cycle 5
curve fit 4
data cycle 6
curve fit 5
= 6.40.7419*exp(t/16.8322)+5.791exp(t/3766.5)
=6.4 0.7435*exp(t/19.2160)+5.64*exp(t/3935.5)
= 6.40.7161*exp(t/20.0884)+5.585*exp(t/4478.3)
= 6.40.6992*exp(t/15.1930)+5.433*exp(t/3222.7)
= 6.40.6564*exp(t/16.3479)+5.151*exp(t/3204.1)
1 2 3 4 5
1000
1500
2000
2500
3000
3500
4000
4500
5000
b
1
b
2
7a
1
b
2
200b
1
Cycle number
1 2 3 4 5
4
4.2
4.4
4.6
4.8
5
5.2
5.4
5.6
5.8
6
Cycle number
a
2
K
f
2
= K
E
s

4 L
2

L = 0.25 = m
3
f
2
= K f
2
0
/
0
f
2
0
/
0
=
1
4L
2

K K
s2
=
K
r2
=
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
0.93
0.94
0.95
0.96
0.97
0.98
0.99
1.00
1.01
1.02
Time (s)
Cycle 2, relaxation
f /f
2
0
1.017 /
0
2
0 20 40 60 80 100 120 140 160 180 200
1.00
1.05
1.1
1.15
1.2
1.25
Time (s)
Cycle 2, reverse relaxation
f /f
2
0
/1.017
0
2
K
2s
= 1.017 K
2r
= 0.983
K
s2
=
K
s3
= K
s4
= K
s5
= K
s6
=
K
r2
= K
r3
= K
r4
=
K
r5
= K
r6
=
E
K
K
K =
K

2
8639

1
C
0
a
2
1
T = 400
1s
16

2s
8639

1r
16

2r
3800

Blekinge Institute of Technology
Doctoral Dissertation Series No. 2008:16
School of Engineering
low frequency acoustic excitation
and laser sensing of vibration as a
tool for remote characterization
of thin sheets
Etienne Mfoumou
ISSN 1653-2090
ISBN 978-91-7295-155-6
There is a need to monitor the existence and ef-
fects of damage in structural materials. Bulk com-
ponents provide a much publicized example, but
the need exists in a variety of other structures,
such as layered materials used in food packaging
industries. While several techniques and models
have been proposed for characterization and con-
dition monitoring of bulk materials, less attention
has been devoted to thin flms having no bending
rigidity. This study is therefore devoted to the de-
velopment of a new method for remote acoustic
non-destructive testing and characterization of
thin flms used in food packaging materials or si-
milar structures.
A method for assessing the strength in the presen-
ce of crack of thin layers used in food packaging is
frst presented using a modifed Strip Yield Model.
Resonance frequency measurement is then intro-
duced and it is shown, at low frequency range, less
than 2kHz, that a change in the physical properties
such as a reduction in stiffness causes detectable
changes in the modal properties, specifcally in
the resonance frequency. This observation leads
to the implementation of a method for damage
severity assessment on sheet materials, suppor-
ted by a new theory illustrating the feasibility of
the detection of inhomogeneity in form of ad-
ded mass, as well as damage severity assessment,
using a measurement of the resonance frequency
shift. A relationship is then established between
the resonance frequency and the materials elastic
property for single layers as well as for laminates,
which yields a new modality for sheet materials
remote characterization.
Further, the method has allowed demonstrating
that thin sheets having no bending stiffness exhi-
bit a slow non-equilibrium dynamics when slightly
loaded within their elastic region and monitored
at constant strain. We found that the resonance
frequency shifts downward in response to a con-
ditioning strain and to the number of cycles. This
is an indication of a long-time slow dynamics re-
laxation, similar to that observed on bulk materi-
als of many types. Differences and similarities in
the setup as well as features observed are poin-
ted out in this work. This type of measurement is
important for the fundamental understanding of
material dynamics and for further development of
theories on thin sheets dynamics.
The result of this study is the foundation of a
method, based on low-frequency acoustic exci-
tations and laser detection, for non-contact non-
destructive testing and characterization of sheet
materials.
Keywords: nondestructive testing, remote acous-
tics, slow dynamics, nonequilibrium dynamics,
resonance frequency, material characterization,
vibration-based technique, fracture toughness.
abstract
2008:16
l
o
w

f
r
e
q
u
e
n
c
y

a
c
o
u
s
t
i
c

e
x
c
i
t
a
t
i
o
n

a
n
d

l
a
s
e
r

s
e
n
s
i
n
g

o
f

v
i
b
r
a
t
i
o
n

a
s

a

t
o
o
l

f
o
r

r
e
m
o
t
e

c
h
a
r
a
c
t
e
r
i
z
a
t
i
o
n

o
f

t
h
i
n

s
h
e
e
t
s
E
t
i
e
n
n
e

M
f
o
u
m
o
u
2
0
0
8
:
1
6