Sound Wave Inspection Systems

Technical Whitepaper
Sonic V – Acoustic Pulse Reflectometry
(APR) Inspection System

Aleksandar Hiršl, CTO

Sound Wave Inspection Systems

Contents
1. SCOPE ................................................................................................................................................ 2
2. APR Technology Overview................................................................................................................. 2
3. Physical Principles of the APR ........................................................................................................... 3
4. Attenuation of Acoustic Waves in Tubes........................................................................................... 3
5. Effect of Tube Defects on APR ........................................................................................................... 4
Measurement ............................................................................................................................................ 4
6. Effect of Impinging Impulse Bandwidth ............................................................................................ 5
on System Resolution ................................................................................................................................ 5
7. Optimization of the Excitation Impulse ............................................................................................. 6
8. Analysis of APR Signals...................................................................................................................... 7
8.1 Detection ......................................................................................................................................... 7
8.2. Classification .................................................................................................................................. 8
8.3. Sizing ......................................................................................................................................... 9
9. APR Capabilities in Tubes Inspection............................................................................................... 10
Reference ............................................................................................................................................ 11

©All rights reserved to Sound Tube Testing B.V.

 1. SCOPE
This document will provide insight into Acoustic Pulse Reflectometry (APR) technology used in
Sound Wave Inspection System’s SONIC V, and it’s application on inspecting Heat Exchangers (HEX) and
boiler tubes.

2. APR Technology Overview

In order to perform inspection of HEX or boiler tubes utilizing APR, we need 3 components: Source
of acoustic pulses (loudspeaker), receiver of acoustic waves (microphones), and the object of inspection
(tube). Principle behind the APR is to inject an acoustic pulse into the air enclosed by the tube, which will
propagate down the tube axis. Any change in the cross section in the path of the pulse will create reflected
waves, which will propagate back up the tube. These changes of inner diameter (ID) cross section can be
caused by obstacles inside the tube, wall loss on the ID of the tube, through wall holes (TWH), but also
structural events on the tube such as U-bend, rolling of the tube to tube sheet, end of tube (EOT). Some
of these structural changes can be seen in Figure 1.

Figure 1: Schematic description of typical blockage and ID wall loss in a tube

Reflections that are created can be measured and analyzed, and from signal interpretation we
can understand if there are any discontinuities in the tube ID cross section uniformity, and we can
understand their type, position and size.

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 2|Page

 3. Physical Principles of the APR
Acoustic waves in air are longitudinal waves: particle velocity is parallel to the direction of
wave propagation. In free space, acoustic waves can propagate in all directions. However, in a confined
space, such as a tube whose transverse dimensions are small with respect to the minimal wavelength,
such waves will propagate solely along the tube axis.
Up to a certain "cut-on frequency", a wave propagating in a tube can be considered a plane
wave, i.e. wave fronts are flat and the pressure fluctuations are uniform over the cross section of the
tube. This kind of wave is the most convenient wave to measure, since it suffices to measure it at
one point in the cross section. Most commonly this is performed by a microphone embedded in the
tube wall so as not to create a disturbance in the tube. Above the cut-on frequency, higher order
modes of propagation are excited. These modes have different wave velocities, and in addition when
they occur the pressure is no longer uniform over the cross section. It is difficult both to excite
these modes in a controllable manner and also to measure them, therefore they are usually avoided
in APR systems. The plane wave mode of propagation is also referred to as the lowest order mode.
The cut-on frequency of the first higher order mode is given by the equation:

1.84∗𝑐𝑐
(1)
𝜋𝜋∗𝑑𝑑

where c is the speed of sound in air, and d is the inner diameter of the tube. This frequency is
determined by tube diameter and the speed of sound, becoming lower as the tube becomes wider.
To avoid the complications created by higher order modes, APR systems are usually designed to
create an excitation signal that is limited to a maximal frequency that is below this cut-on.

4. Attenuation of Acoustic Waves in Tubes

Acoustic waves propagating in a tube will experience attenuation due to friction at the tube wall.
The equations governing attenuation as discovered by Kirchoff and later formulated in more
mathematically tractable approximations by Keefe (1984), show attenuation to be dependent mainly on
the ratio of wavelength to tube diameter. Attenuation increases with frequency, therefore a wideband
pulse excited at one end of the tube will gradually lose its high frequency content, becoming gradually
more smeared in the time domain.

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 3|Page

 5. Effect of Tube Defects on APR
Measurement
Acoustic waves within a uniform tube will propagate down the tube, experiencing only the gradual
attenuation described above. However, any internal change in cross section of the tube will split the wave
into two components: a reflected and a transmitted component. Several types of cross-sectional change
can occur: an increase in cross section due to wall loss, a through wall hole, and a reduction in cross section
due to full or partial blockage. When dealing with the lowest order mode, only the change in overall cross
section has an influence on the reflected and transmitted wave, regardless of the particular shape. In the
case of a hole, for instance, the area of the hole determines the reflection, whether it is round or
elongated. The same holds for reduction in cross section – whether it is localized or uniformly distributed
over the circumference of the tube has no importance.

The reflection and transmission caused by an abrupt change in cross section can be modeled easily
through the reflection and transmission coefficients. Given a wave propagating down a tube with cross
section S1, which then encounters a tube with cross section S2, the reflection coefficient R is given by:

S1−S2
(2) R=
S1+S2

And the transmission coefficient T by:

2∗S1
(3) T=
S1+S2

From (2) it can be seen that an increase in cross section (S2>S1) causes a negative reflection,
whereas a decrease in cross section (S2<S1) causes a positive reflection. In heat exchanger tubes, typical
defects such as blockages and wall loss cause local changes in cross section. A typical blockage will be
composed of two successive discontinuities: a reduction of cross section at the beginning of the blockage,
and an increase back to the nominal cross section where the blockage ends. A wall loss defect is the
opposite: an increase in cross section followed by a decrease. Furthermore, the amplitude of a reflected
pulse is determined by the value of the reflection coefficient R, thus it can be used to determine S2 if S1
is known. Theoretical signatures of these defects can be seen in Figure 2.

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 4|Page

 Figure 2: Theoretical signatures of most common defects

From equation (2) it can be inferred, that the reflections from blockage and wall loss defects will
have typical signatures. Assuming a positive pulse is sent down the tube, when it encounters a blockage
it will cause first a positive reflection followed by a negative one, whereas a wall loss defect will cause the
opposite: a negative pulse followed by a positive one.

6. Effect of Impinging Impulse Bandwidth

on System Resolution
The pulses in the above figures represent a schematic picture of the excitation impulse. To
enhance axial resolution of an APR system, an ideal pulse would be as narrow as possible. This is because
it is necessary to distinguish reflections from closely spaced defect. If for example the pulse is too wide,
the positive reflection from the beginning of a blockage might merge with the negative reflection from
the end of a blockage, in effect cancelling each other to a large degree. Basic Fourier theory tells us that
to obtain a narrow pulse in the time domain, its spectrum must be as wide as possible. The effective limit
on the bandwidth is determined both by the loudspeaker creating the pulse and on the first cut-on
frequency in equation (1). In the Sonic V system, the spectrum of the pulse extends to about 8 kHz,
corresponding to the inability to distinguish between defects separated by less than 2cm. In addition,
resolution gradually decreases down the tube due to attenuation, since higher frequencies decay more
rapidly than lower frequencies. Thus the reflections from further defects become smeared in the time
domain.

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 5|Page

 7. Optimization of the Excitation Impulse

In a practical APR system, as in any physical system, background noise will always be
present. The common measure for quantifying the disturbance caused by noise is SNR – Signal to Noise
Ratio, which is simply the RMS of the signal divided by the RMS of the noise. SNR is usually quantified
in decibels, or dB:
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴
(4) 𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆𝑆[𝑑𝑑𝑑𝑑] = 20 ∗ log( )
𝐴𝐴𝐴𝐴

To improve SNR, the average signal amplitude must be increased as far as possible, though there
are practical constraints on the attainable value. Increasing pulse width is one option, though as seen
above, this has a detrimental effect on resolution. Another option is to increase pulse height, though the
amplifier and loudspeaker capabilities limit this option too.

Sonic V APR implementation employs another method that combines the advantages of repeating
a measurement multiple times, yet nevertheless keeps measurement time down to a few seconds. This
method is based on the use of a signal called a "Maximal Length Sequence" (MLS), a form of pseudo-noise
composed exclusively of the values +1 or -1. The theory behind MLS sequences is well known and used
also in other applications. An MLS sequence is always of length 2N-1, where N is an integer. For example,
if N=10, the sequence will be 1023 samples long, taking up only 23 thousands of a second to transmit, at
a typical sampling rate of 48 kHz. For N=14 the sequence will by 16,384 samples long, taking about 1/3 of
a second to transmit. The value of N can be selected in software in the Sonic V system. Typically it is set
to 13, and the measurement repeated several times, giving a total measurement time of approximately
10 seconds.

Extracting the pulse response from the measured MLS signal requires a correlation computation.
Mathematically, it is a linear operation, and thus any nonlinear distortions in the system will create
spurious peaks in the resultant signal, which could be misinterpreted as defects. Evidently it is very
important to keep nonlinear distortions to a minimum. The component most susceptible to such
distortions is the loudspeaker, which becomes nonlinear when driven at high amplitudes. Therefore there
are two conflicting demands on the excitation signal: on the one hand, it is beneficial to increase signal
amplitude in order to increase SNR, yet on the other hand, increasing it too much leads to nonlinear
distortions. The optimal amplitude is the one at which the nonlinear noise and background noise balance
to achieve the highest overall SNR.

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 6|Page

 8. Analysis of APR Signals
After acquiring the measurements it is necessary to analyze them carefully in order to extract all
the available information regarding defects and tube condition. Three main stages in the analysis of APR
measurement are Detection, Classification and Sizing.

8.1 Detection

It is important to stress that the single most important goal of the detection phase is to ensure
that any possible defect is flagged. The main challenge in the detection phase is to decide which features
of a given signal represent actual defects, as opposed to random fluctuations due to ever-present
background noise. Several factors can contribute to this noise: ambient noise, internal noise and
fluctuations caused by reflections off residual fouling and tube surface roughness. Regardless of the
source, it is necessary to determine the actual background noise level and use it to determine a threshold
of defect detectability, which we term here the "noise threshold", seen in red lines in Figure 3.

Figure 3: Blockage on tube R[1]C[1] seen against reference signal and neighbor tube signal

Calculating this threshold is performed by carrying out a statistical analysis over the entire
ensemble of measurements. Any reflections crossing this threshold are considered to represent defects.
It is noteworthy that the noise threshold varies with distance along the tube, mainly due to reflections
from residual fouling which is not necessarily uniform. Finally, the statistical analysis used to determine
the noise threshold can be carried out in several ways. The simplest is to calculate the standard deviation

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 7|Page

 across the ensemble of measurements at each point along the tube, however more complex methods can
be used.

8.2. Classification

The second stage of the analysis is defect classification. Peaks that extend beyond the noise
threshold are classified by comparing them to signature templates derived from the schematic examples
shown in Figure 2. This procedure is complicated by the fact that there still remains a large degree of
variability in reflection shape due to variations in axial length of the defects, for example, or irregularity
in defect morphology.

Figure 4: A Through Wall Hole seen in Sonic V analysis software

The difficulties encountered in this phase are usually related to the degree of cleanliness of the
tubes being detected. Excessive debris and fouling can create a multitude of spurious reflections that can
interfere with the reflections off defects, especially small ones.

In applying APR, as in any NDT technology, tough calls can occur. As long as the number of such
cases can be kept marginal, the best policy for dealing with them is to flag them and bring them to the
operator's attention, rather than forcing them to fit into one of the existing categories.

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 8|Page

 8.3. Sizing

Acoustic theory enables accurate simulation of all defect types detectable by an APR system. Wall
loss and blockage signatures can be calculated based on equation (2), while through wall holes can be
simulated based on the works of Sharp et al. (1997). The idea behind sizing is therefore straightforward:
after defect signatures are detected and classified, they are matched to signatures derived from the
theoretical simulations.

Figure 5: End-Of-Tube Erosion seen in Sonic V sizing software module

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 9|Page

 9. APR Capabilities in Tubes Inspection
Ideally, a tube inspection technique should provide several key properties: high sensitivity and
accuracy are extremely important, at the same time providing a high level of consistency regardless of the
operator. System design should facilitate short inspection time while providing objective and highly
consistent data interpretation criteria, and be applicable to a wide variety of tube materials and
dimensions. Finally, it should require minimal technical knowledge and experience to implement properly
and consistently, and should require minimal pre-inspection preparation of the tubes.

Figure 6: Quick automated map preparation using on-site digital photo

In this light, several core principles governed all the technological decisions in developing the
Sonic V APR system:

1. Non traversing inspection

2. Short inspection time per tube

3. Detection of all ID faults relevant to the industry.

4. Minimal sensitivity to tube material, dimensions and configurations

5. Minimal dependence on operator judgment.

Sound Wave Inspection Systems 10 |

Page
 The following Table 1 describes the most important characteristics and capabilities of Sonic V
system.

APR Advantages APR Limitations

High speed measurement: 10 seconds per tube Doesn’t detect any pure OD defects
Automated measurement process, not Overall inspection results depend on the
dependent on the operator cleanliness level of the tubes.
Highly sensitive to holes and blockages (holes Lower precision on sizing of small wall loss
and wall loss defects have separate signatures) defects (pitting)
Not dependent on the material: APR can test Can’t detect cracks of any orientation
any material
Non dependent on the shape of the tube: Can Provides no circumferential resolution
test U-tubes (only one pass required), spiral, fin
fan tubes, etc.
Sound waves are used as a “virtual probe” for
non-traversing inspection. No parts that can get
stuck, damaged, or possibility of damaging the
equipment that is being inspected
Only tool apart videoscope that can quantify
blockages
Table 1: APR advantages and limitations

Reference
• Amir, N., (2010), “Technical Whitepaper – Acoustical Pulse Reflectometry Tube Inspection
System”
• Amir, N., Shimony, U., Rosenhouse, G. (1996), "Losses in tubular acoustic systems – theory and
experiment in the sampled time and frequency domains," Acustica – Acta Acustica, Vol. 82, 1-8
• Sharp, D. B., Campbell, D.M., (1997), "Leak detection in pipes using Acoustic Pulse Reflectometry,"
Acustica, Vol. 83(3), 560-566.
• Keefe, D. H. (1984), "Acoustical wave propagation in cylindrical ducts: transmission line parameter
approximations for isothermal and nonisothermal boundary conditions", J. Acoust. Soc. Amer.,
Vol. 75, 58
• ASTM International, (2015), Designation: E2906/E2906M – 13, “Standard Practice for
Acoustic Pulse Reflectometry Examination of Tube Bundles”

©All rights reserved to Sound Tube Testing B.V.

©All rights reserved to Sound Tube Testing B.V.