where expertise comes together - since 1996 -

The Largest Open Access Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)

Conference Proceedings, Articles, News, Exhibition, Forum, Network and more

where expertise comes together
- since 1996 -

EKOSCAN
EKOSCAN is a French manufacturer specialized in equipment for ultrasonic Non Destructive Testing: Probes,UT boards & Scanners tailored for your needs
1465 views
Career Discussions
Larry Mullins
Consultant
NxtNdT, USA, Joined Apr 2006, 7

Larry Mullins

Consultant
NxtNdT,
USA,
Joined Apr 2006
7
00:00 Apr-13-2006
Calibration rule for digital UT instruments

Current ASME (and other) rules for UT scope calibration - e.g. linearity, cal. check frequency, duration etc. are out of date and (I judge) inadequate for current digital instruments with cal storage capabilites. The rules do not address the real issues - verification of cal when switching between, real need to fully re-cal etc.

Also I feel today's instruments stability is far greater than when the Codes were written, so . . . has anyone written or found a good set of practical "rules" that fit today's need. Are there any efforts to codify these rules?


 
 Reply 
 
Ed
Ed
09:34 Apr-13-2006
Re: Calibration rule for digital UT instruments
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Current ASME (and other) rules for UT scope calibration - e.g. linearity, cal. check frequency, duration etc. are out of date and (I judge) inadequate for current digital instruments with cal storage capabilites. The rules do not address the real issues - verification of cal when switching between, real need to fully re-cal etc.
: Also I feel today's instruments stability is far greater than when the Codes were written, so . . . has anyone written or found a good set of practical "rules" that fit today's need. Are there any efforts to codify these rules?
------------ End Original Message ------------

That's a very good question. One that the ASME V Code Committee should probably address. I wonder if anyone has submitted a Technical Inquiry.


 
 Reply 
 
LAWRENCE MULLINS
Consultant
NxtNdT, USA, Joined Apr 2006, 7

LAWRENCE MULLINS

Consultant
NxtNdT,
USA,
Joined Apr 2006
7
00:24 Apr-13-2006
Re: Calibration rule for digital UT instruments
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : Current ASME (and other) rules for UT scope calibration - e.g. linearity, cal. check frequency, duration etc. are out of date and (I judge) inadequate for current digital instruments with cal storage capabilites. The rules do not address the real issues - verification of cal when switching between, real need to fully re-cal etc.
: : Also I feel today's instruments stability is far greater than when the Codes were written, so . . . has anyone written or found a good set of practical "rules" that fit today's need. Are there any efforts to codify these rules?
: That's a very good question. One that the ASME V Code Committee should probably address. I wonder if anyone has submitted a Technical Inquiry.
------------ End Original Message ----------
I think not. I sat w/ SecV last month. I'm writing my own. Does anyone care to co-author and submit as a Code Case?


 
 Reply 
 
Ed Ginzel
R & D, -
Materials Research Institute, Canada, Joined Nov 1998, 1274

Ed Ginzel

R & D, -
Materials Research Institute,
Canada,
Joined Nov 1998
1274
03:25 Apr-13-2006
Re: Calibration rule for digital UT instruments
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : : Current ASME (and other) rules for UT scope calibration - e.g. linearity, cal. check frequency, duration etc. are out of date and (I judge) inadequate for current digital instruments with cal storage capabilites. The rules do not address the real issues - verification of cal when switching between, real need to fully re-cal etc.
: : : Also I feel today's instruments stability is far greater than when the Codes were written, so . . . has anyone written or found a good set of practical "rules" that fit today's need. Are there any efforts to codify these rules?
: : That's a very good question. One that the ASME V Code Committee should probably address. I wonder if anyone has submitted a Technical Inquiry.
: ------------ End Original Message ----------
: I think not. I sat w/ SecV last month. I'm writing my own. Does anyone care to co-author and submit as a Code Case?
------------ End Original Message ------------

ASTM E07-06 committee has already formed a working group on this and made some revisions to E-317. Similar tests can be run on analogue and digital units but old terminology often gets in the way. e.g. a CRT (cathode ray tube) is now rarely used and the A-scan display is usually on a computer-like monitor.
Larry's comments on stability of instruments is another matter and very valid! Most Codes have "required" calibration intervals that are quite short. For most digital units these could be longer.
Ed



 
 Reply 
 
Thomas E Pedersen
Thomas E Pedersen
01:57 Jun-02-2006
Re: Calibration rule for digital UT instruments
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : : : Current ASME (and other) rules for UT scope calibration - e.g. linearity, cal. check frequency, duration etc. are out of date and (I judge) inadequate for current digital instruments with cal storage capabilites. The rules do not address the real issues - verification of cal when switching between, real need to fully re-cal etc.
: : : : Also I feel today's instruments stability is far greater than when the Codes were written, so . . . has anyone written or found a good set of practical "rules" that fit today's need. Are there any efforts to codify these rules?
: : : That's a very good question. One that the ASME V Code Committee should probably address. I wonder if anyone has submitted a Technical Inquiry.
: : ------------ End Original Message ----------
: : I think not. I sat w/ SecV last month. I'm writing my own. Does anyone care to co-author and submit as a Code Case?
: ASTM E07-06 committee has already formed a working group on this and made some revisions to E-317. Similar tests can be run on analogue and digital units but old terminology often gets in the way. e.g. a CRT (cathode ray tube) is now rarely used and the A-scan display is usually on a computer-like monitor.
: Larry's comments on stability of instruments is another matter and very valid! Most Codes have "required" calibration intervals that are quite short. For most digital units these could be longer.
: Ed
-T----------- End Original Message ------------




 
 Reply 
 
Thomas E Pedersen
Thomas E Pedersen
02:03 Jun-02-2006
Re: Calibration rule for digital UT instruments
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : : : Current ASME (and other) rules for UT scope calibration - e.g. linearity, cal. check frequency, duration etc. are out of date and (I judge) inadequate for current digital instruments with cal storage capabilites. The rules do not address the real issues - verification of cal when switching between, real need to fully re-cal etc.
: : : : Also I feel today's instruments stability is far greater than when the Codes were written, so . . . has anyone written or found a good set of practical "rules" that fit today's need. Are there any efforts to codify these rules?
: : : That's a very good question. One that the ASME V Code Committee should probably address. I wonder if anyone has submitted a Technical Inquiry.
: : ------------ End Original Message ----------
: : I think not. I sat w/ SecV last month. I'm writing my own. Does anyone care to co-author and submit as a Code Case?
: ASTM E07-06 committee has already formed a working group on this and made some revisions to E-317. Similar tests can be run on analogue and digital units but old terminology often gets in the way. e.g. a CRT (cathode ray tube) is now rarely used and the A-scan display is usually on a computer-like monitor.
: Larry's comments on stability of instruments is another matter and very valid! Most Codes have "required" calibration intervals that are quite short. For most digital units these could be longer.
: Ed
-T----------- End Original Message ------------
There is one major factor I see often with the use of digital calibrations,mainly with thickness measurements,People take for granted that the computer goes to "0" digitally but Hardware used cannot resolve the rejectable measurement due to nearfield of the transducer.



 
 Reply 
 
Martyn
Martyn
02:08 Jul-28-2006
Re: Calibration rule for digital UT instruments
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : : : : Current ASME (and other) rules for UT scope calibration - e.g. linearity, cal. check frequency, duration etc. are out of date and (I judge) inadequate for current digital instruments with cal storage capabilites. The rules do not address the real issues - verification of cal when switching between, real need to fully re-cal etc.
: : : : : Also I feel today's instruments stability is far greater than when the Codes were written, so . . . has anyone written or found a good set of practical "rules" that fit today's need. Are there any efforts to codify these rules?
: : : : That's a very good question. One that the ASME V Code Committee should probably address. I wonder if anyone has submitted a Technical Inquiry.
: : : ------------ End Original Message ----------
: : : I think not. I sat w/ SecV last month. I'm writing my own. Does anyone care to co-author and submit as a Code Case?
: : ASTM E07-06 committee has already formed a working group on this and made some revisions to E-317. Similar tests can be run on analogue and digital units but old terminology often gets in the way. e.g. a CRT (cathode ray tube) is now rarely used and the A-scan display is usually on a computer-like monitor.
: : Larry's comments on stability of instruments is another matter and very valid! Most Codes have "required" calibration intervals that are quite short. For most digital units these could be longer.
: : Ed
: -T----------- End Original Message ------------
: There is one major factor I see often with the use of digital calibrations,mainly with thickness measurements,People take for granted that the computer goes to "0" digitally but Hardware used cannot resolve the rejectable measurement due to nearfield of the transducer.
------------ End Original Message ------------

I believe the current code does indeed address the need to verify the calibration when switching from one probe to another, as would be the case when changing cals via the digital scope. One should be very weary of assuming that a stored calibration is still valid, without a reverification. Items such as wear face deterioration, temperature, probe/wedge coupling etc. can all lead to a small, yet significant, variation in calibration. better to just perform the quick and dirty verification as called out in the code, in my opinion.



 
 Reply 
 
Csaba Hollo
Csaba Hollo
01:13 Dec-15-2006
Re: Calibration rule for digital UT instruments
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : : : : : Current ASME (and other) rules for UT scope calibration - e.g. linearity, cal. check frequency, duration etc. are out of date and (I judge) inadequate for current digital instruments with cal storage capabilites. The rules do not address the real issues - verification of cal when switching between, real need to fully re-cal etc.
: : : : : : Also I feel today's instruments stability is far greater than when the Codes were written, so . . . has anyone written or found a good set of practical "rules" that fit today's need. Are there any efforts to codify these rules?
: : : : : That's a very good question. One that the ASME V Code Committee should probably address. I wonder if anyone has submitted a Technical Inquiry.
: : : : ------------ End Original Message ----------
: : : : I think not. I sat w/ SecV last month. I'm writing my own. Does anyone care to co-author and submit as a Code Case?
: : : ASTM E07-06 committee has alreadyformed a working group on this and made some revisions to E-317. Similar tests can be run on analogue and digital units but old terminology often gets in the way. e.g. a CRT (cathode ray tube) is now rarely used and the A-scan display is usually on a computer-like monitor.
: : : Larry's comments on stability of instruments is another matter and very valid! Most Codes have "required" calibration intervals that are quite short. For most digital units these could be longer.
: : : Ed
: : -T----------- End Original Message ------------
: : There is one major factor I see often with the use of digital calibrations,mainly with thickness measurements,People take for granted that the computer goes to "0" digitally but Hardware used cannot resolve the rejectable measurement due to nearfield of the transducer.
: I believe the current code does indeed address the need to verify the calibration when switching from one probe to another, as would be the case when changing cals via the digital scope. One should be very weary of assuming that a stored calibration is still valid, without a reverification. Items such as wear face deterioration, temperature, probe/wedge coupling etc. can all lead to a small, yet significant, variation in calibration. better to just perform the quick and dirty verification as called out in the code, in my opinion.
------------ End Original Message ------------

Martyn,

I believe the discussion involved the instrument performance calibration methods and intervals, such as the 3 monthly requirement in ASME, or the annual or bi-annual outlined in other codes and internal QC documentation.
The inspection calibrations dealing with specific testing parameters including transducers, cables, etc. are most certainly a requirement each and every time the test is performed, or when an inspection variable such as probe wear, different operator, reset from another calibration, etc. occurs. I hope that anyone simply recalling a stored instrument setting and proceeding to test prior to verifying the parameters with the appropriate blocks has thier insurance paid up.

Csaba


 
 Reply 
 

Product Spotlight

Lyft™: Pulsed Eddy Current Reinvented

PEC Reinvented—CUI Programs Redefined Corrosion under insulation (CUI) is possibly the greatest u
...
nresolved asset integrity problem in the industry. Current methods for measuring wall thickness with liftoff, without removing insulation, all have severe limitations. Eddyfi introduces Lyft — a reinvented, high-performance pulsed eddy current (PEC) solution. The patent- pending system features a state-of-the-art portable instrument, real- time C-scan imaging, fast data acquisition with grid-mapping and dynamic scanning modes, and flexibility with long cables. It can also scan through thick metal and insulation, as well as aluminum, stainless steel, and galvanized steel weather jackets. Who else but Eddyfi to reinvent an eddy current technique and redefine CUI programs. Got Lyft?
>

CIVA 2017 UT Module

CIVA NDE Simulation Software is the world leader of NDT Simulation. The UT simulation Module incl
...
udes: - "Beam computation": Beam propagation simulation - "Inspection Simulation": Beam interaction with flaws or specimens The user can simulate a whole inspection process (pulse echo, tandem or TOFD) with a wide range of probes (conventional, Phased- arrays or EMAT), components, and flaws.
>

NEW! The PragmaPro Instrument Platform

The PragmaPro is based on a modular cartridge technology and supports various NDT instrument modal
...
ities such as UT, PAUT, ECT and many more. This new platform is based on a machined, powder-coated aluminum frame for shock-proofness, best sealing qualities and maximum heat dissipation. This is practical to extend the outdoor temperature range and/or to extend the power injected in the transducers. The PragmaPro is aiming at a very wide range of applications, such as weld scanning, corrosion mapping and composite testing.
>

GEKKO - Portable Phased Array Testing with TFM in Real-Time

The portable phased array testing system GEKKO provides 64 parallel test channels. On creating testi
...
ng parameters the operator is assisted by the CIVA software. Due to its modular set-up the GEKKO instrument is suitable for operators of all skill levels.
>

Share...
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
Accept
top
this is debug window