automated dimensioning and ultrasonic inspection capability for … · 2011. 3. 1. · cleared for...
Post on 05-Feb-2021
0 Views
Preview:
TRANSCRIPT
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Automated Dimensioning and Ultrasonic
Inspection Capability within the TESI
Robotic Inspection System
James Sebastian, Victoria A. Kramb and Robert Olding
University of Dayton Research Institute
Under United States Air Force Contract F42620-00-D-0039
(RZ02)
The 53rd Annual ATA NDT Forum
Albuquerque, New Mexico
September 21, 2010
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Inspection system requirements: – Embedded defect inspection system goal: life extension
of turbine engine components
– Depot/production environment
– Fully automated execution—including part pass/fail
decisions
– Demonstrate OEM mandated ultrasonic coverage and
sensitivity
– Satisfy reliability and repeatability requirements of USAF
TESI System Background—
Design Requirements
Build on lessons learned from previously
designed automated inspection systems!
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
System Requirements for Automated
Ultrasonic Inspections
Previous design experience with
fully automated depot level inspections—
Fully automated!
Operator/station independent!
Conventional industrial
ultrasonic inspection technology—
NOT automated!
NOT operator independent!
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
System Requirements for Automated
Ultrasonic Inspections
Learn from industrial successes—
Robotic manipulator, rotational water tank,
phased array ultrasound
Opportunities for improvement—
Operator making
defect decisions
Part loading
awkward
No modularity = Difficult to expand
Expensive, semi-custom mechanics
Submersible turntable = Maintainability problems
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
TESI Ultrasonic Inspection System
Design Highlights
• Designed with COTS components
• Six-axis Industrial Robotic Manipulator
• Open Architecture Robotic Controller
• Rotating Water Tank
• Integrated Vision System
• Phased Array Ultrasonics
• Windows XP Operating System
• Scan Plan Language (C++)
• Fully Automated
2001 2005
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Design Requirements Implementation
• Reliability and repeatability—Use automation – All inspection commands contained within a single executable program
– All inspections run from a centralized server location
– All results stored on a centralized database
• Defect locating and sizing requirements—Inspections are part
specific – Inspections designed as a part specific ―scan plan‖
– Accounts for part-to-part dimensional variability
– Software displays/locates defects within actual component
• Inspection repeatability—verify probe performance – Verify probe positional accuracy
– Verify performance repeatability
• Detection sensitivity and coverage validation— – Verify coverage with geometrically correct specimens
– Conduct POD analysis with standardized targets
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Design Requirements Implementation
• Reliability and repeatability—Use automation – All inspection commands contained within a single executable program
– All inspections run from a centralized server location
– All results stored on a centralized database
• Defect locating and sizing requirements—Inspections are part
specific – Inspections designed as a part specific ―scan plan‖
– Accounts for part-to-part dimensional variability
– Software displays/locates defects within actual component
• Inspection repeatability—verify probe performance – Verify probe positional accuracy
– Verify performance repeatability
• Detection sensitivity and coverage validation— – Verify coverage with geometrically correct specimens
– Conduct POD analysis with standardized targets
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Reliability and Repeatability—
Through Automation
Off-line Scan plan creation:
• Same software package used to create all executable scan plans
• Tested through robotic motion simulation
• Based on part CAD drawings
Scan plan downloaded from database
• Station, probe S/N independent
• Results reviewed on-line or remotely
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Design Requirements Implementation
• Reliability and repeatability—Use automation – All inspection commands contained within a single executable program
– All inspections run from a centralized server location
– All results stored on a centralized database
• Defect locating and sizing requirements—Inspections are part
specific – Inspections designed as a part specific ―scan plan‖
– Accounts for part-to-part dimensional variability
– Software displays/locates defects within actual component
• Inspection repeatability—verify probe performance – Verify probe positional accuracy
– Verify performance repeatability
• Detection sensitivity and coverage validation— – Verify coverage with geometrically correct specimens
– Conduct POD analysis with standardized targets
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Defect Location and Sizing—
Account for Part and Probe Variability
Part dimensional variability due to service
• Scan plan created from CAD drawing—Adapt to part warpage
Measure current part dimensions
Recalculate robot motion
Stage Deviation from
CAD position
Rotational
Deviation
top
surface
bottom
surface
top
surface
bottom
surface
(mm) (mm) (mm) (mm)
1 -- -0.965 -- -0.279
2 0.508 0.9906 0.2794 0.1524
3 1.143 1.1176 0.127 0.1524
max.
allowed
3.81 3.81 1.905 1.905
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Machined defects within actual component
• Used to demonstrate inspection Coverage, Repeatability, and
Reliability
Inspection results
Defect Location and Sizing—
Demonstrate with Actual Parts
1 2
3
5
6 7 8
Cross section
inspection surfaces
inspection
surface
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Defect Location and Sizing—
Defect Position Variability
Inspection results Defects located within part geometry • Adapted for specific part dimensions
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Design Requirements Implementation
• Reliability and repeatability—Use automation – All inspection commands contained within a single executable program
– All inspections run from a centralized server location
– All results stored on a centralized database
• Defect locating and sizing requirements—Inspections are part
specific – Inspections designed as a part specific ―scan plan‖
– Accounts for part-to-part dimensional variability
– Software displays/locates defects within actual component
• Inspection repeatability—verify probe performance – Verify probe positional accuracy
– Verify performance repeatability
• Detection sensitivity and coverage validation— – Verify coverage with geometrically correct specimens
– Conduct POD analysis with standardized targets
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Inspection Repeatability— Probe Position Accuracy
Robotic positional accuracy:
– Highly accurate probe positioning:
turntable: 0.001 deg., robotic
repeatability: ±0.04 mm.
Probes positioned based on tool
offsets
– Allows for probe construction variability
– Daily checks allow for performance
verification
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Inspection Repeatability—
Phased Array Implementation
Array Probe Features
• linear arrays provide beam
forming and steering capability
thus reducing the number of
transducer changes
• electronic scanning capability
provides for rapid inspection
execution
• flexible probe tool designs can
be customized for complicated
part geometries
electronic
scanning
electronic
scanning
5MHz linear array
z
y
x
10MHz
linear array
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Inspection Repeatability—
Verify Probe Performance
Routine System and Probe Alignment Check
– Ultrasonic probe positioning checked in all 6 degrees of freedom: x, y, z, yaw, pitch, roll
– prior to gain calibration, and after inspection
– alignment check the same for all ultrasonic
probes, and all inspection systems
– verifies probe offsets and robot accuracy
System and Probe Alignment Check:
Verifies Tool Offsets and Robot Accuracy
– independent of inspection application
– defining the inspection location based on
transducer face position
– positional accuracy checks done routinely,
not as periodic maintenance
roll
z, roll
x, pitch y, yaw
alignment block
electronic
scanning
z
y
x
10MHz
linear array
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Inspection Repeatability—
Verify Probe Performance
Probe Alignment Check • verify probe orientation
• yaw, pitch, roll
• verify probe positional accuracy
• values saved with inspections to monitor system performance
• monitor probe tool offsets or robot accuracy
Alignment check block
FBH
roll
pitchyaw
setup specimen
roll
pitchyaw
setup specimen
ultrasonic transducer
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
• Calibration repeatable
– ±1.1dB over 24 months with same probe
– Variability independent of inspection mode
• Monitor by channel, SDH, probe, station, TOF, mode
Phased Array Calibration Variability
Inspection Repeatability—
Verify Probe Performance
Gain±1.1dB
TOF±2.4us
6/2006 through 6/2008
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Design Requirements Implementation
• Reliability and repeatability—Use automation – All inspection commands contained within a single executable program
– All inspections run from a centralized server location
– All results stored on a centralized database
• Defect locating and sizing requirements—Inspections are part
specific – Inspections designed as a part specific ―scan plan‖
– Accounts for part-to-part dimensional variability
– Software displays/locates defects within actual component
• Inspection repeatability—verify probe performance – Verify probe positional accuracy
– Verify performance repeatability
• Detection sensitivity and coverage validation— – Verify coverage with geometrically correct specimens
– Conduct POD analysis with standardized targets
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Inspection Coverage Verification
• Coverage confirmed with machined
targets
– embedded defects used to verify depth
coverage (#3RBH, #3FBH)
– notches used to verify surface area
coverage (0.003” X 0.003” X 0.028”)
• Sensitivity measured for different
inspection modes
– results compared to conventional
transducer response
• Defect locating capability checked
using known target locations turbine engine
component cross section
notches
drilled holes
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
• Inspection requirements include defect correlations
– Multi-mode interrogation approach requires amplitude
comparisons between multiple look angles
– RBHs provide multiple reflective surfaces for longitudinal and
shear modes
+45 shear
-45 shear
offset angle
Inspection Coverage Verification
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Inspection Coverage Verification
1 2
3
5
6 7 8
Cross section
inspection surfaces
inspection
surface
RBH #1, 2, 3
RBH #5
RBH #6, 7, 8
EDM notches
Forward view
Longitudinal Scan
60 Shear Scan
Radial/Axial Scan
45 Shear Scan
Scan Segments Overlap
Area 1 Coverage
Area 4A Coverage
Longitudinal Scan
60 Shear Scan
Radial/Axial Scan
45 Shear Scan
Scan Segments Overlap
Coverage maps show actual inspection volume
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
• Comparisons show that phased array sensitivity is equal or
better than single element – no clear dependence on part geometry or depth
• Sensitivity measured for different inspection modes – no dependence observed
Hole
depth longitudinal +45 shear -45 shear +60 shear -60 shear
Hole # (inches) (amp., %) (amp., %) (amp., %) (amp., %) (amp., %)
1 0.25 63/51 85/52 78/44 40/31 62/21
2 0.5 63/34 58/24 26/-- -- --
3 0.75 39/31 42/43 23/28 -- --
4 N/A -- -- -- -- --
5 0.25 83/46 56/50 59/67 85/36 54/26
6 0.25 57/37 35/20 49/49 100/52 100/32
7 0.5 83/30 45/20 49/24 -- --
8 0.65 40/-- -- -- -- --
Phased Array / Conventional Single Element
Ultrasonic Mode
Detection sensitivity and coverage
validation—
Inspection Coverage and Sensitivity Comparison
with Single Element Probe
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
• POD Specimen 1
• Design addresses normal
incidence across Bore ID
and Conical.
• Design also addresses
oblique incidence across
Conical.
POD specimen 1
Fixture
• 2nd POD Specimen
• Design addresses oblique
incidence across Bore ID.
POD specimen 2
1. Machined targets in representative specimen—POD analysis
Inspection Sensitivity Verification
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
1. Machined targets in representative specimen—POD analysis
Inspection Sensitivity Verification
POD of TESI UT 45 Shear Inspection on Conical Surface for 0.25 Inch Depth FBHs
Combination of T1, A, P3; T4,A,P2; T5,B,P3; T8,B,P2, 05/11/2006
0
5
10
15
20
25
30
35
40
0 10 20 30 40 50 60 70 80 90
Decision Threshold (%)
Fla
w,
Dia
m o
f F
BH
(M
ils
)
a50/50
a90/50
a90/95
Thresholds (% full scale)
Fla
w d
iam
ete
r (m
m)
a50/50
a90/50
a90/95
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Inspection Sensitivity Verification
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
• Detection Sensitivity—Ultrasonic inspections verified with POD
analysis – POD for specific reflectivity and sphere diameter can be correlated with actual
embedded defect behavior
Inspection Sensitivity Verification
Sphere Diameter (mm)
Am
plit
ude
-
Cleared for Public Release Case No. 88ABW-10-2237
Summary
• Reliability and repeatability—Use automation – Software application used to automatically generate robot motion commands
– All probe calibration, positioning and performance checks automated
– Demonstrated with minimal long term performance variability
• Defect locating and sizing requirements—Inspections are part
specific – System modular architecture allows for flexibility in incorporating part specific
inspection requirements
– Account for part-to-part dimensional variability for probe positioning and defect
location
• Inspection repeatability—verify probe performance – Verify probe positional accuracy each time it is used—demonstrated accuracy
repeatability with long term results
• Detection sensitivity and coverage validation— – Distinguished between coverage and sensitivity testing
– Verify coverage with geometrically correct specimens
– Conduct POD analysis with standardized targets
top related