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 -

GE Inspection Technologies
Inspection Technologies, a business of the Baker Hughes, a GE company (BHGE IT), is one of the world's leading suppliers of nondestructive testin ...
298 views
Technical Discussions
Terry Oldberg
Engineering, Mechanical Electrical Nuclear Software
Consultant, USA, Joined Oct 1999, 42

Terry Oldberg

Engineering, Mechanical Electrical Nuclear Software
Consultant,
USA,
Joined Oct 1999
42
08:24 Sep-06-1999
Unit Measure violations in "The TOFD Method..."

The test described by A. Erhard and U.Ewert in "The TOFD Method..." (NDTnet, September 1999) is a flaw detector. Thus, it must violate the Unit Measure axiom of probability theory in relation to theories of its reliability (see "Erratic Measure," http://www.ndt.net/article/v04n05/oldberg/oldberg.htm ) Yet the authors of "The TOFD Method..." present the results of their research as a probabilistic theory of the test's reliability. It follows that this research was doomed before it was undertaken.

The inconsistency of the test with a probabilistic theory of its reliability would be revealed if the authors of "The TOFD Method..." were to provide details about the methodology of the reseach that are omitted from their paper. In particular, the inconsistency between the test and the theory of its reliability that is presented in "The TOFD Method..." would be revealed if the authors were to:
1. Describe the study's statistical population.
2. Describe the partition that divides this population into sampling units.
3. Describe the "frame" or list of sampling units from which the study's sample was drawn.
4. Describe the procedure by which the study's sample was selected from the frame.
5. Describe the rule under which each sampling unit in the sample was judged a positive or negative event by the TOFD test.
6. Describe the rule under which each event under item 5. was judged truly positive falsely positive, truly negative or falsely negative.
7. Describe the relationship between the set of (truly positive, falsely positive, truly negative and falsely negative) events that are generated byh the test and the set of sampling units. Is this relationship one-to-one? If so, Unit Measure is preserved. Otherwise, it is violated.
8. Describe how the probability of detection is computed.
9. Discuss the omission of a probability of false call from the paper's findings.




    
 
 Reply 
 

Product Spotlight

NDT Master Lecturer

In the program both university professors and practitioners will give lectures, which guarantees the
...
oretical depth and practical inside. Academic Director: Prof. Dr. Christian Boller
The following lecturers are not complete: Prof. Tadeusz Stepinski, Prof. Wieslaw Staszewski, Prof. Frank Walther, Prof. Giovanni Bruno, Prof. Gerd Dobmann, Prof. Philippe Guy
>

PROlineTOP Plug & Play Ultrasonic inspection device

As Plug & Play solution it units all control and operation elements in a small housing and therefo
...
re replaces the typical control cabinet...
>

MUSE Mobile Ultrasonic Equipment

The MUSE, a portable ultrasonic imaging system, was developed for in-field inspections of light-weig
...
ht structures. The MUSE consists of a motor-driven manipulator, a water circulation system for the acoustic coupling and a portable ultrasonic flaw detector (USPC 3010). The MUSE provides images of internal defects (A-, B-,C- and D-scan).
>

XRHRobotStar

In high volume industries like automotive the requirement for a hundred percent X-ray inspection c
...
reates a bottleneck in the production. The XRHRobotStar is a fully Automated Defect Recognition (ADR) capable robot-system that allows an ultra-fast in-line inspection.
>

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