Method for detecting faults in plates

Abstract

A method for detecting faults in plates includes the steps of: transmitting an acoustic signal towards the plate from a transmitting transducer, and receiving the acoustical signal from the plate in a receiving transducer. The receiving transducer is mounted at a distance from the transmitting transducer. The method includes the further steps of identifying zones of the plate wherein energy levels of the received signals are attenuated compared to other zones of the plate, and comparing the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes in the received signals in the identified zones.

Claims

1. A method for detecting faults in a plate, comprising: transmitting an acoustic signal towards the plate from a transmitting transducer; receiving the acoustical signal from the plate in a receiving transducer, the receiving transducer being mounted at a distance from the transmitting transducer; repeating the steps of transmitting and receiving in a plurality of test points covering at least a part of the plate; identifying zones of the plate wherein energy levels of the received signals are attenuated compared to other zones of the plate; and comparing the energy levels of an A.sub.2 guided Lamb mode to an S.sub.3 guided Lamb mode in the received signals in the identified zones to determine whether a fault in the plate exists.

2. The method of claim 1, wherein the transmitted signal is a swept pulsetrain, the received signal is an unfiltered received signal, the unfiltered received signal is filtered into two separate frequency bands representing the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes, respectively, a time window is applied to the filtered signals, wherein the time window is located at a predetermined time offset after a peak in a signal energy of the unfiltered received signal, and an energy level difference between the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 mode signals is determined within the window.

3. A method according to claim 2, wherein the compared energy levels are mean energy levels within the identified zones.

4. A method according to claim 2, wherein frequency ranges used to filter out the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 modes are scaled to various wall thicknesses by keeping a product of F and D (F×D) constant, wherein “F” is any mentioned frequency and “D” is a thickness of the plate.

5. A method according to claim 4, wherein the compared energy levels are mean energy levels within the identified zones.

6. A method according to claim 1, wherein the compared energy levels are mean energy levels within the identified zones.

7. The method according to claim 6, wherein the plate is part of an oil pipeline, a gas pipeline, or a pipeline carrying lightweight hydrocarbon products such as diesel, condensate, or liquefied natural gas.

8. The method according to claim 1, wherein the plate is part of an oil pipeline, a gas pipeline, or a pipeline carrying lightweight hydrocarbon products such as diesel, condensate, or liquefied natural gas.

9. The method according to claim 1, wherein the detected faults in the plate include corrosive pitting and cracks, wherein the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes for corrosive pitting are different from the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes for cracks.

10. The method according to claim 9, further including identifying a type of fault in the zone of the plate as being corrosive pitting or cracks based on the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes that are received.

11. A method for detecting faults in a plate, comprising: transmitting an acoustic signal towards the plate from a transmitting transducer; receiving the acoustical signal from the plate in a receiving transducer, the receiving transducer being mounted at a distance from the transmitting transducer; repeating the steps of transmitting and receiving in a plurality of zones along the plate; and identifying a zone within the plurality of zones that has a fault by comparing energy levels of A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes in the received signals within the identified zone and energy levels of A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes in the received signals in another one of the plurality of zones.

12. The method of claim 11, where the transmitted signal is a swept pulsetrain, the received signal is an unfiltered received signal, the unfiltered received signal is filtered into two separate frequency bands representing the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes, respectively, a time window is applied to the filtered signals, wherein the time window is located at a predetermined time offset after a peak in the signal energy of the unfiltered received signal, and an energy difference between the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 mode signals is determined within the window.

13. A method according to claim 11, where frequency ranges used to filter out the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 modes are scaled to various wall thicknesses by keeping a product of F and D (F×D) constant, wherein “F” is any mentioned frequency and “D” is the plate thickness.

14. A method according to claim 11, wherein the energy levels are mean energy levels.

15. The method according to claim 11, wherein the detected faults in the plate include corrosive pitting and cracks, wherein the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes for corrosive pitting are different from the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes for cracks.

16. The method according to claim 15, further including identifying a type of fault in the zone of the plate as being corrosive pitting or cracks based on the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes that are received.

17. The method according to claim 11, wherein the plate is part of an oil pipeline, a gas pipeline, or a pipeline carrying lightweight hydrocarbon products such as diesel, condensate, or liquefied natural gas.

18. A method for detecting faults in a plate, comprising: transmitting an acoustic signal towards the plate from a transmitting transducer; receiving the acoustical signal from the plate in a receiving transducer, the receiving transducer being mounted at a distance from the transmitting transducer; comparing energy levels of an A.sub.2 guided Lamb mode to an S.sub.3 guided Lamb mode in the received signals in an identified zone of the plate; and based on the comparing of the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes in the received signals within the identified zone of the plate, determining whether a fault is present in the identified zone.

19. A method according to claim 18, wherein the energy levels of A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes are mean energy levels within the identified zone.

20. The method according to claim 18, further including identifying a type of fault in the identified zone as being a corrosive-pitting fault or a crack fault based on the energy levels of the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 guided Lamb modes in the received signals.

Description

BRIEF DESCRIPTION OF THE DRAWINGS

(1) The invention will now be described in detail in reference to the appended drawings, in which:

(2) FIG. 1 is a view of the tool used for obtaining the measurements.

(3) FIG. 2 is a diagram showing the energy of the received signal versus time for a clean wall without any fault.

(4) FIG. 3 is a corresponding diagram wherein the wall is pitted (corrosion).

(5) FIG. 4 is a corresponding diagram in the case of a wall with a large crack.

DETAILED DESCRIPTION

(6) FIG. 1 shows the setup used in the present invention. The setup includes a cylindrical tool adapted for translatory movement inside a pipeline with wall 2. A number of transducers are mounted around the body of the tool. The transducers operate in pairs with an acoustical transmitting transducer 1 adapted to emit a pulsed signal towards the wall/plate 2 to be investigated. The signal from the transducer 1 will hit the wall at incident angles close to normal incidence and excite an acoustical signal in the wall. This signal will create waves that will be guided by the wall and that will propagate along the wall (Lamb waves). A part of this signal will leave the wall to be collected by a receiving transducer 3.

(7) The signal emitted by the transmitting transducer 1 is a chirp (swept pulsetrain) covering a frequency range from 400 kHz to 1200 kHz.

(8) This mean signal received from the wall is filtered into specific frequency bands each corresponding to a guided Lamb-mode. The specific modes of interest are the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 modes, which correspond to the frequency ranges of 425-525 kHz and 650-750 kHz, respectively, in the present case where the wall thickness is 12.7 mm. It is important to note that the presented numbers for the frequency ranges are illustrative for the implementation of the method in the chosen case of a 12.7-mm thick steel wall. When applying the method to walls of different thicknesses the frequency numbers should be scaled so that the procut of the frequency and thickness is kept constant.

(9) The energy of the signal received along the wall is estimated in each chosen frequency band and low energy zones are identified. Within these low energy zones characteristic of a fault, an area is defined in which the mean signal energy is computed as a function of time.

(10) The analysis of the resulting signals involves first the identification of low energy zones, then the comparison of the mean energies for the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 modes within a time window to indicate the state of the wall. The time window is located at a fixed time offset after the signal energy in the (total) received signal reaches its peak. The location of this window is chosen to maximize the absolute energy difference between the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 modes in presence of a fault within a 50 μs time interval.

(11) FIG. 2 shows the resulting diagram from an analysis of a zone of the wall without any faults. The diagram shows the received energy of the unfiltered signal and for the A.sub.2 and S.sub.3 modes. The unfiltered signal peaks its energy at about 30 μs, and the comparison window is located between 205 and 255 μs, i.e. the window is located 175 μs behind the energy peak and is 50 μs wide, as indicated with the stippled vertical lines. The diagram shows that the unfiltered signal (marked “All fr” in the figure) received in the comparison window is attenuated about 20-25 dB from the peak, and that the energy received in the A.sub.2 band is more attenuated than in the S.sub.3 band. The energy difference is typically about 5 dB.

(12) FIG. 3 shows a corresponding diagram from a measurement taken from an area of pitting corresponding to an area of corrosion. In the comparison window, the total signal is attenuated further 4-5 dB compared with the signal from the fault-free zone in FIG. 2, and with the A.sub.2 signal still about 5-8 dB lower than the S.sub.3 signal.

(13) FIG. 4 shows a diagram obtained in a zone of the pipeline including a crack. The total signal is attenuated from the fault-free case in FIG. 2. However, in contrast with the case of a pitting, the diagram shows that energy of the S.sub.3 mode in this case is lower than that of the A.sub.2 mode in the comparison window. The S.sub.3 mode is substantially more attenuated than the A.sub.2 mode which is the opposite behaviour from what was observed in the two previous cases. Typically, the energy difference will vary between about 3 dB to 14 dB, dependent on the size of the crack.

(14) Experience has shown that the size of the energy difference is dependent on the size of the crack (larger cracks mean larger energy difference), and also that clusters of cracks yield a large energy difference.

(15) Thus, by using the inventive method, one may identify zones of cracking and corrosion/pitting, and clearly identify the nature of the fault.

(16) While the description only relates to testing of pipelines, the same technique may be adapted for testing flat plates, although then with another tool setup.