Non-destructive testing of welds. Ultrasonic testing. Use of automated phased array technology for thin-walled steel components

2019 ◽  
Keyword(s):  
Ultrasonic Testing ◽  
Phased Array ◽  
Non Destructive Testing ◽  
Destructive Testing ◽  
Array Technology ◽  
Thin Walled ◽  
Non Destructive

Ultrasonic phased array technology for the non-destructive testing of marble sculptures

2016 ◽  
Vol 62 (1) ◽  
pp. 55-60 ◽  
Author(s):  
Frank Tiefensee ◽  
Peter Weber ◽  
Simon Kunz ◽  
Marisa Pamplona ◽  
Stefan Simon
Keyword(s):  
Phased Array ◽  
Non Destructive Testing ◽  
Destructive Testing ◽  
Array Technology ◽  
Marble Sculptures ◽  
Ultrasonic Phased Array ◽  
Non Destructive

Productivity and Reliability Study of Non Destructive Testing Techniques for Inspection of Structural Welds in Construction Industry

NDT World ◽  
2016 ◽  
Vol 19 (3) ◽  
pp. 35-39
Author(s):  
Чан ◽  
Alan Chan ◽  
Бабу ◽  
Sajeesh Kumar Babu ◽  
Чан ◽  
...  
Keyword(s):  
Construction Industry ◽  
Ultrasonic Testing ◽  
Phased Array ◽  
Flaw Detection ◽  
Slag Inclusion ◽  
Non Destructive Testing ◽  
Destructive Testing ◽  
Ultrasonic Techniques ◽  
Testing Techniques ◽  
Non Destructive

Introduction. The aim of this study is to evaluate the productivity and reliability of non-destructive testing techniques for the inspection of structural welds employed in the Hong Kong construction industry. Method. Manual ultrasonic pulse echo method and semi-automatic ultrasonic techniques using phased array (PAUT) as well as radiographic testing were employed. Five classes of defects were analyzed: lack of penetration, lack of fusion, crack, porosity and slag inclusion. The tests were carried out on the specimen made from structural plate, on which artefacts were inserted on the weld metal. The results were being studied to compare the defect detection reliability by both ultrasonic techniques. The flaw detection productivity using phased array is also compared with conventional ultrasonic testing at a determined rate. Results. The reliability of PAUT was 100% compared to 96.7% with manual ultrasonic testing, however with the inclusion of defect sizing and tolerance the reliability of manual UT is dropped to 57.4%, which implies there is a chance of 42.6% of improper sizing). PAUT exhibits the reliability of 87.5%. The research will be continued with the aim of determining the most appropriate and reliable NDT methods in each case.

Sign in / Sign up

Export Citation Format

Share Document