Applications of fibre reinforced plastic (FRP) composites in modern industries are increasing due to their considerable advantages such as light weight and excellent mechanical properties. Accordingly, importance of operational safety of modern structures made of advanced composites by ensuring the material quality has led to increasing demands for development of non-destructive evaluation (NDE) systems. In the context of a European project entitled “Validated Inspection Techniques for Composites in Energy Applications” (VITCEA), the aim is to develop and validate traceable procedures for novel NDE techniques with contrasting damage detection capabilities in energy related applications such as wind and marine turbine blades, nacelles, oil and gas flexible risers. Accordingly, VITCEA focuses on optimization of ultrasonic tests (UTs) for quantitative defect detection and quality characterization of FRP structures. In this context, the present study describes the ultrasound field in heterogeneous composite materials. The theoretical predictions are compared with simulation results obtained from CIVA a software package dedicated to NDT simulations based on the asymptotic ray theory.
Analytical and numerical methods are used to estimate the temperature field due to the heat effects of welding. Numerical techniques are more adapted for industrial complex applications where analytical solutions do not exist yet. However, computational time is much lower with analytical models and a combination of both methods is investigated. Therefore, the two approaches are introduced and confronted in this paper. The finite-element software Ansys has been used for numerical simulations and Scilab for analytical simulations. In order to get a similar result quality, both methods have to be analysed and compared with respect to boundary conditions. These configurations are presented in this paper. Before starting any analysis, the analytical and numerical models have to be comparable. For the numerical simulation, every in- or output is given in discrete form and, for the analytical simulation, in continuous form. Thus, an analysis of the energy input distribution in both models is compulsory to ensure that the same amount of energy is applied. After this first study, a comparison of the analytical and numerical temperature field simulation is done from a fix point source in an infinite volume in steady state to a moving point source in a finite dimension in a transient state. A good agreement between the analytical and the numerical simulation results is found. However, some techniques, like a consideration of an image heat source for the analytical model or the selection of boundary conditions for the numerical model, need to be taken into consideration when the degree of complexity of the study (finite dimension or cooling time) increases. The limit of the comparison is reached when the geometry becomes too complex and when the effect of variable thermal properties with temperature cannot be neglected.