Advances in Materials Science and Engineering
Volume 2015 (2015), Article ID 134090, 6 pages
http://dx.doi.org/10.1155/2015/134090

Research Article

Characteristic Evaluation on Bolt Stress by Ultrasonic Nondestructive Methods

Qinxue Pan,1,2 Shuai Liu,¹ Xiao Li,³ and Chunguang Xu1,2

¹School of Mechanical Engineering, Beijing Institute of Technology, Beijing 100081, China
²Key Laboratory of Fundamental Science for National Defense for Advanced Machining Technology, Beijing 100081, China
³BMW China Services Ltd., Beijing 101312, China

Received 15 May 2015; Revised 9 July 2015; Accepted 26 July 2015

Academic Editor: Rui Vilar

Copyright © 2015 Qinxue Pan et al. This is an open access article distributed under the Creative Commons Attribution License, which permits unrestricted use, distribution, and reproduction in any medium, provided the original work is properly cited.

Abstract.

Based on the acoustoelasticity theory, a certain relationship exists between ultrasonic velocity and stress. By combining shear and longitudinal waves, this paper provides a nondestructive method of evaluating axial stress in a tightened bolt. For measuring the bolt axial stress in different situations, such as under low or high loads, this paper provides guidelines for calculating the stress for a given load factor. Experimental and calculated results were compared for three bolt test samples: an austenitic stainless steel bolt (A2-70) and low-carbon steel 4.8 and 8.8 bolts. On average, the experimental results were in good agreement with those obtained through calculations, thus providing a nondestructive method for bolt stress measurements.

1. Introduction

Bolts, a key component in equipment joints, are used to join, clamp, reinforce, and seal various parts and are widely used throughout industry (e.g., aerospace, marine, construction, chemical, and energy industries). Due to their importance, bolt axial stress has received much attention in an attempt to improve the bolt’s performance and useful life. However, the complexities of the bolt structure and threaded part deformation with axial loading have prevented accurate measurement of the axial stress. In recent decades, the research community has actively explored solutions to this problem [1]. Williams et al. gave the ultrasonic analysis of bolt preload [2], Johnson et al. used time-of-flight measurements of both shear and longitudinal waves propagating along the axis of a bolt along with the material parameters to calculate the stress acting on the bolt [3], and Koshti developed the application to make ultrasonic measurement of preload in sleeve bolts [4]. At present, a torque wrench is commonly used to determine the degree of bolt axial stress in the industrial field. However, due to the reverse torque in the nut of the thread friction pair, as well as the elastic deformation, the torque used to produce the bolt axial stress is actually <20% of the torque wrench numerical value [5]. Ultrasonic nondestructive testing of the vertical screw bolt axial stress (e.g., the pulse echo reflection method, transit time method, and phase method) cannot measure the axial stress when the bolts are installed or buried to a depth at which the original length of the anchor bolt is unknown [6, 7].

Ultrasonic nondestructive testing with electromagnetic ultrasonic shock excitation shear waves has been used to measure the axial pretightening force of bolts, with some promising results; however, this approach fails to resolve the axial stress measurement when the bolt length is unknown [8]. According to the acoustoelasticity theory, the ultrasonic velocity and the magnitude of the stress in isotropic metal materials are related in such a way that the effect of the bolt axial length and temperature change are eliminated through simultaneous solving of the transverse and longitudinal wave equations [9–13]. However, in practice, the relationship between the acoustic time difference and the stress magnitude does not have a simple linear form under extremely low or high loading conditions. Thus, a more detailed stress measurement model is required to accurately resolve the bolt axial stress under various loading conditions.

2. Theory

From the sound theory of elasticity, the elastic wave propagation velocity in a solid material, the material itself (e.g., material density), and the second-order elastic constants are closely related to the stress state of the material. As such, the stress medium elastic wave equation for the initial coordinate system can be expressed as follows:

where is a parameter of the Kronecker delta function, is the material density, is the distance of propagation, is the vector particle of a point, is the equivalent stiffness, and is the Cauchy stress.

Elastic sound is nonlinear. Assuming a plane ultrasound wave and the initial coordinates, (1) can be simplified to the following form:

Taking into account the stress state in which the speed of sound and the elastic waves in the material have a quantitative mathematical relationship, and given the independent Lagrange variables , , and , and the particle displacement described by , , and , we have the following:

The stress in (3) is given below:

where are the Jacobian matrix elements, are the strain matrix elements, and is the elastic potential energy.

is determined using , , and . According to the acoustoelasticity theory, the transverse and longitudinal ultrasonic wave propagation direction and the polarization direction are related to the stress direction as follows [14]:

(1)The propagation of a longitudinal wave along the direction of stress is given by

(2)The stress direction along the propagation direction, with the polarization direction perpendicular to the shear stress, is given as

where for is the direction of wave propagation, is the wave polarization direction, and is the load direction. In (5) and (6), the constant is given by

is the density and and and , , and are second- and third-order elastic constants of the material, respectively. For the purposes of a semi-infinite plate,

According to the basic assumptions of elasticity, before the axial stress, less than the yield limit of the bolt, the material can be considered as a complete bolt steel elastomer. Thus, when measuring the temperature constant at room temperature, the second bolt material and the third-order elastic constants do not contribute to increases or changes in the axial stress. Under these conditions, the only factor that has an effect on the axial bolt stress and bolt length measurement is the measurement temperature. Considering that the effective stress which can tighten the nut bolt deputy district is not wrapped in the entire area, as shown in Figure 1, we can create a physical model of the axial stress during fastening of the bolt [8, 9]. The head of the bolt is placed in transverse and longitudinal wave transducers. The pulse echo method is used to measure the horizontal and vertical wave crossings in the screw. The bolt axial stress and length measurement can be obtained indirectly from these measurements.

Figure 1: Bolt axial stress measurement physical model.

Taking into account the measured temperature expansion of the overall impact of the bolt and the linear elastic deformation zone length for the bolt stress, the bolt length can be expressed as follows [15]:

is the length of the bolt and is the length of the stress region, is the length of the bolt and is the length of the stress region which is not influenced by temperature, and are the current temperature and standard temperature (26°C), and are the velocity of longitudinal wave and transverse wave at temperature of °C, is the linear thermal expansion coefficient, and are the sound velocity coefficient of longitudinal wave and transverse wave with the change of temperature, and is Young’s modulus.

The relationship between the axial shear stress on the bolt and the longitudinal wave propagation velocity can be expressed as

Considering that the transit time of longitudinal wave and transverse wave is very short, the experiment is performed at indoor temperature, and the order of magnitudes of and is 10⁻⁴, the change in temperature can be neglected. The original equation can be simplified to

To simplify further, we define as the left side of (11):

where is the time of propagation of longitudinal wave and is the time of propagation of shear wave.

The final expression for the stress is given by

The two coefficients in (14), and , can be obtained via an axial tensile test:

To facilitate the calculation, we define as the left side of

3. Experiments and Results

The experimental measurement system consisted of a symmetrical configuration of transverse and longitudinal wave transducers. The transverse and longitudinal wave transducer units operated independently and simultaneously produced transverse and longitudinal wave excitation signals (center frequency: 2.25 MHz). The broadband contact transducer produced a narrow pulse (diameter: 10 mm). The bolts whose models are M20 include A2-70, 4.8, and 8.8. In order to achieve stable coupling effects, nuts and flat tail had grinded the grips smooth, and the temperature is controlled at 26°C.

The system used an ultrasonic excitation pulse signal transceiver device. Oscilloscopes coupled to the transverse and longitudinal wave transducer units provided an accurate recording of the transit time. A stretching machine was used to quantify the tensile test results. The stress value was extrapolated from the time duration through the function relationship between the two. Due to the low yield strength of steel (maximum bolt strength: 320 MPa), the tensile test stress range for the A2-70 bolts was 0–360 MPa, using a step increment of 20 MPa; the axial stress range for the low-carbon steel 4.8 and 8.8 bolts was 0–260 MPa, in 20 MPa step increments. Tables 1–3 show the axial stress measurement results for the three bolt types.

Table 1: Austenitic stainless steel bolt (A2-70) axial tensile stress measurement results.

Stress
(μs)
(μs)

0
42.831
76.17
3.145160

20
42.8415
76.204
3.146601
−2.53 × 10¹⁴

40
42.8605
76.2265
3.145552
−1.27 × 10¹⁴

60
42.88
76.247
3.14423
−8.57 × 10¹³

80
42.897
76.266
3.143192
−6.47 × 10¹³

100
42.9155
76.2835
3.14176
−5.22 × 10¹³

120
42.9325
76.3025
3.140722
−4.38 × 10¹³

140
42.9515
76.318
3.13902
−3.80 × 10¹³

160
42.9685
76.338
3.13808
−3.34 × 10¹³

180
42.988
76.357
3.13663
−3.00 × 10¹³

200
43.0044
76.3775
3.13583
−2.71 × 10¹³

220
43.0245
76.3965
3.13429
−2.49 × 10¹³

240
43.042
76.4175
3.13336
−2.30 × 10¹³

260
43.062
76.439
3.13207
−2.14 × 10¹³

280
43.081
76.462
3.131084202

300
43.1025
76.486
3.129780475

320
43.124
76.512
3.128663993

340
43.148
76.5355
3.127547129

360
43.1755
76.5565
3.12635963

= 5638.499 m s⁻¹.

= 3105.499 m s⁻¹.

λ = 9.8160 × 10¹⁰.

μ = 7.5710 × 10¹⁰.

ρ = 7850 kg m⁻³.

Explanation:

Stress [MPa] bolt axial stress.

[s] time of propagation of longitudinal wave.

[s] time of propagation of shear wave.

  μ the second-order elastic constants of the material.

Table 2: Tensile stress measurement results for a low-carbon 4.8 steel bolt.

Stress
(μs)
(μs)

0
46.3535
84.2395
3.27610

20
46.369
84.256
3.27509
−5.27 × 10¹⁴

40
46.3865
84.274
3.273907
−2.65 × 10¹⁴

60
46.405
84.29
3.272383
−1.78 × 10¹³

80
46.424
84.3155
3.27161
−1.34 × 10¹³

100
46.44
84.3375
3.271006
−1.07 × 10¹³

120
46.458
84.358
3.26995
−8.96 × 10¹³

140
46.4755
84.382
3.26929
−7.70 × 10¹³

160
46.4945
84.3985
3.26774
−6.78 × 10¹³

180
46.513
84.417
3.26644
−6.05 × 10¹³

200
46.533
84.432
3.26460
−5.49 × 10¹³

220
46.555
84.456
3.2632
−5.01 × 10¹³

240
46.575
84.4745
3.26171
−4.68 × 10¹³

260
46.6
84.5
3.26001
−4.39 × 10¹³

= 5658.406 m s⁻¹.

= 3150.549 m s⁻¹.

λ = 12.087 × 10¹⁰.

μ = 7.8910 × 10¹⁰.

= 7850 kg m⁻³.

Table 3: Axial tensile stress measurement results for a low-carbon 8.8 steel bolt.

Stress
(μs)
(μs)

0
46.402
84.484
3.28979

20
46.412
84.4885
3.2886
−4.99 × 10¹⁴

40
46.427
84.495
3.286792
−2.51 × 10¹⁴

60
46.4405
84.505
3.285529
−1.69 × 10¹⁴

80
46.456
84.514
3.283863
−1.27 × 10¹⁴

100
46.47
84.524
3.282523
−1.02 × 10¹⁴

120
46.487
84.533
3.280624
−8.59 × 10¹³

140
46.5025
84.543
3.27905
−7.41 × 10¹³

160
46.519
84.552
3.277234
−6.53 × 10¹³

180
46.5335
84.562
3.275821
−5.84 × 10¹³

200
46.549
84.572
3.274252
−5.29 × 10¹³

220
46.57
84.582
3.27182
−4.85 × 10¹³

240
46.5825
84.59
3.270553
−4.47 × 10¹³

260
46.6
84.6
3.268675
−4.16 × 10¹³

= 5958.466 m s⁻¹.

= 3170.589 m s⁻¹.

λ = 12.087 × 10¹⁰.

μ = 7.8910 × 10¹⁰.

The trend curves and comparison results of the three materials, A2-70, 4.8, and 8.8, are shown in Figures 2–7, respectively.

Figure 2: The fitting curve of an A2-70 austenitic stainless steel bolt.

Figure 3: The comparison result of an A2-70 austenitic stainless steel bolt.

Figure 4: The fitting curve of a 4.8 low-carbon steel bolt.

Figure 5: The comparison result of a 4.8 low-carbon steel bolt.

Figure 6: The fitting curve of a 8.8 low-carbon steel bolt.

Figure 7: The comparison result of a 8.8 low-carbon steel bolt.

The distribution curves shown in Figures 2, 4, and 6 were used to determine the stress coefficients, and , from fitting of the data. From the graphs, two linear stress regions were identified: 0–100 and 100–360 MPa. This is mainly because the screw thread pair of bolts generates quoin, friction, and elastic deformation of screw thread pair at first (0–100 MPa) and then enters into the elastic stage (100–360 MPa). The corresponding and values of the three bolt types were determined from a least squares fit using Matlab software. Table 4 shows the and values for the three stress measurement regions. The average error of this new method is less than 20 MPa from Figures 3, 5, and 7.

Table 4: Matlab least squares fit of the stress measurement coefficients, and .

Material
Coefficient

0–100 MPa
100–360 MPa or 100–260 MPa

A2-70
3.7835 × 10¹⁶
1.1885 × 10¹⁷
2.813 × 10¹⁵
8.7741 × 10¹⁵

4.8
5.5036 × 10¹⁶
1.7992 × 10¹⁷
4.2938 × 10¹⁵
1.396 × 10¹⁶

8.8
3.3484 × 10¹⁶
1.0982 × 10¹⁷
3.543 × 10¹⁵
1.1544 × 10¹⁶

4. Conclusions

In this paper, an ultrasonic technique involving the combination of transverse and longitudinal waves provided a fast and effective way to measure bolt axial stress in three bolt materials: an austenitic stainless steel bolt (A2-70) and low-carbon steel 4.8 and 8.8 bolts. In the measurement process, the effect of temperature and elastic deformation was eliminated allowing the axial length of the bolt and the plug axial stress to be measured. The measurements were performed under various load conditions. The stress measurement coefficients, determined from least squares fitting of the stress data, were classified into two stress ranges, to provide a more accurate reading of the bolt axial stress. The average error of this new method is less than 20 MPa and can be applied to various industries, including aerospace, marine, turbines, bridge construction, chemical equipment, and energy systems.

Conflict of Interests

The authors declare that there is no conflict of interests regarding the publication of this paper.

Acknowledgments

This project is supported by the National Natural Science Foundation of China (Grant no. 51305028) and Beijing Higher Education Young Elite Teacher Work.

References

K. Maruyama, “Stress analysis of a bolt-nut joint by the finite element method and the copper-electroplating method,” Bulletin of JSME, vol. 17, no. 106, pp. 442–450, 1974.

H. D. Williams, D. Armstrong, and R. H. Robins, “Application of ultrasonic stress measurements to problems in the electricity supply industry,” Journal of Testing and Evaluation, vol. 10, no. 5, pp. 217–222, 1982.

G. C. Johnson, A. C. Holt, and B. Cunningham, “An ultrasonic method for determining axial stress in bolts,” Journal of Testing and Evaluation, vol. 14, no. 5, pp. 253–259, 1986.

A. J. Koshti, “Preload measurement in sleeve bolts using an ultrasonic technique,” Materials Evaluation, vol. 54, no. 2, pp. 308–313, 1996.

T. Guan, “Analysis of high-strength fasteners fastening,” Equipment Manufacturing Technology, vol. 4, pp. 163–171, 2009.

J. Deputat, “Ultrasonic technique for measuring stress in screw,” Solid State Technology, 1979

E. Tanala, G. Bourse, M. Fremiot, and J. F. De Belleval, “Determination of near surface residual stresses on welded joints using ultrasonic methods,” NDT & E International, vol. 28, no. 2, pp. 83–88, 1995.

J. L. Rose, Ultrasonic Waves in Solid Media, Cambridge University Press, 2004–2009.

G. Yang, F. Wang, J. Hong, and L. Zhu, “Theoretical analysis for bolted member stiffness,” Journal of Xi'an Jiaotong University, vol. 46, no. 7, pp. 50–56, 2012.

S. A. Nassar and A. Abboud, “An improved stiffness model for bolted joints,” Journal of Mechanical Design, vol. 131, no. 12, Article ID 121001, 11 pages, 2009.

J. C. Musto and N. R. Konkle, “Computation of member stiffness in the design of bolted joints,” Journal of Mechanical Design, vol. 128, no. 6, pp. 1357–1360, 2006.

N. Chandrasekaran and K. Salamu, Relationship Between Stress and Temperature Dependence of Ultrasonic Shear Velocity, Plenum Press, New York, NY, USA, 1984.

C. O. Ruud and R. E. Green Jr., Nondestructive Methods for Material Property Determination, Plenum Press, 1984.

J. L. Rose, Ultrasonic Waves in Solid Media, Cambridge University Press, Cambridge, UK, 1999.

Z. Jiang, “The influence of temperature on the ultrasonic wave velocity and stress measurement,” Nondestructive Testing, vol. 6, 1999.