|  |
 894 views |
 Technical Discussions | |  Philippe Rubbers
Engineering
SCM, South Africa, Joined Nov 1998,  21   | |  09:18 Jun-12-2008
Ultrasonic A-Scan interpretation Dear colleagues There are 2 approaches for setting the range on an A-Scan:
1) at the position of the peak amplitude.
2) at 10% of the peak amplitude on the leading edge (flank). Historically (for very narrow bandwidth probes) with long ring down times, this 10% story makes a bit of sence, as the peak is not always evident. However in this day and age, this is no longer an issue, and the peak is the correct mathematical location of the reflector (can be proven with broadband probes and CSSP, as all frequencies are in phase at the peak). Since beam skew will give longer measured ranges, an error in the shorter direction is also beneficial (statistically) if the operator does not have the correct wedge angle or does not maximise as he should.
If the gain is then changed, the range for the '10%' setting will change as the leading edge will come closer. Now comes the question:
In phased array images, the overlay is nearly always placed at the 10% location. To me this is incorrect...
Why isthis done? Best regards
| |
| | | |  Ed Ginzel
R & D, -
Materials Research Institute, Canada, Joined Nov 1998, 1219  |
Ed Ginzel
R & D, -
Materials Research Institute,
Canada,
Joined Nov 1998
1219
| 00:09 Jun-12-2008
Re: Ultrasonic A-Scan interpretation Philippe:
Good question. I suspect that the assessment of phased array pulses is a carry-over from the tradition of manual single element A-scan assessments. It might be imagined that the "leading edge" of the pulse is the first point of contact and this rationalised the use of "flank". But some of the blame must be put on our trend (over the past 40-50 years) for a preference for rectified A-scans. I suspect that if we were to revert to the real data (unrectified waveforms) we would be more inclined to look for the first well defined peak. On a broadband pulse this will be easier to locate than on a "ringy" narrowband pulse. In fact we seem to have rediscovered the advantage of unrectified waveforms and most of us use a peak for TOFD assessments (phased array generated or single element TOFD is treated the same).
Cheers, Ed
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Dear colleagues
: There are 2 approaches for setting the range on an A-Scan:
: 1) at the position of the peakamplitude.
: 2) at 10% of the peak amplitude on the leading edge (flank).
: Historically (for very narrow bandwidth probes) with long ring down times, this 10% story makes a bit of sence, as the peak is not always evident. However in this day and age, this is no longer an issue, and the peak is the correct mathematical location of the reflector (can be proven with broadband probes and CSSP, as all frequencies are in phase at the peak). Since beam skew will give longer measured ranges, an error in the shorter direction is also beneficial (statistically) if the operator does not have the correct wedge angle or does not maximise as he should.
: If the gain is then changed, the range for the '10%' setting will change as the leading edge will come closer.
: Now comes the question:
: In phased array images, the overlay is nearly always placed at the 10% location. To me this is incorrect...
: Why is this done?
: Best regards
------------ End Original Message ------------
| |
| | | | mustafa GONULAL
Engineering,
CIMTAS / ENKA, Turkey, Joined Jun 2008, 8 | | 01:10 Jun-12-2008
Re: Ultrasonic A-Scan interpretation ----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Philippe:
: Good question. I suspect that the assessment of phased array pulses is a carry-over from the tradition of manual single element A-scan assessments. It might be imagined that the "leading edge" of the pulse is the first point of contact and this rationalised the use of "flank". But some of the blame must be put on our trend (over the past 40-50 years) for a preference for rectified A-scans. I suspect that if we were to revert to the real data (unrectified waveforms) we would be more inclined to look for the first well defined peak. On a broadband pulse this will be easier to locate than on a "ringy" narrowband pulse. In fact we seem to have rediscovered the advantage of unrectified waveforms and most of us use a peak for TOFD assessments (phased array generated or single element TOFD is treated the same).
: Cheers, Ed
:
: : Dear colleagues
: : There are 2 approaches for setting the range on an A-Scan:
: : 1) at the position of the peak amplitude.
: : 2) at 10% of the peak amplitude on the leading edge (flank).
: : Historically (for very narrow bandwidth probes) with long ring down times, this 10% story makes a bit of sence, as the peak is not always evident. However in this day and age, this is no longer an issue, and the peak is the correct mathematical location of the reflector (can be proven with broadband probes and CSSP, as all frequencies are in phase at the peak). Since beam skew will give longer measured ranges, an error in the shorter direction is also beneficial (statistically) if the operator does not have the correct wedge angle or does not maximise as he should.
: : If the gain is then changed, the range for the '10%' setting will change as the leading edge will come closer.
: : Now comes the question:
: : In phased array images, the overlay is nearly always placed at the 10% location. To me this is incorrect...
: : Why is this done?
: : Best regards
------------ End Original Message ------------First of all I would like to thank you for such a discussion,
My concern is mostly for sizing of defects in Phased Array.
For planar defects like crak, interpreting the Phased Array tomographic view resembles to the TOFD image and you can use tip diffraction signals.
However for other type of defects standards saying 6dB drop method for flaw sizing.
For Phased Array my opinion is different because, you are using a fan of beams coming in different angles with different metal paths. So using 6dB method is too old fashion.
| |
| | |  GEKKO, Standard and Advanced phased-array for Easier inspectionWith a 64-channel parallel architecture, GEKKO is a flaw detector
offering at the same time conven ... tional UT, standard PAUT, TOFD and
real-time Total Focusing Method (TFM). GEKKO improves the
detection, with better defects characterization
and sizing as well as for misoriented defects.
Some procedures require standard UT, others TOFD or PA. GEKKO
includes all these techniques to offer a versatile and field-ready
equipment.
- 64:64 parallel channels
- + 4 additional TOFD
- Conventional UT channels
- International code compliance: ASME, AWS, API, ASTM, ISO-EN
Watch the video: https://youtu.be/kuEY_RwWS3Q >  Aerospace Systems - Automated Ultrasonic InspectionUSL are specialists in the design and manufacture of turnkey
ultrasonic inspection systems for aer ... ospace applications. From
monolithic composites to complex honeycomb structures. This video
shows just a few examples of what is possible, find out more at:
www.ultrasonic-sciences.co.uk >  IntraPhase Athena Phased Array SystemThe Athena Phased Array system, manufactured by WesDyne NDE Products & Technology, consists of a pha ... sed array acquisition system and PC running IntraSpect software. A PC is used to perform acquisition, analysis and storage of the data. System hardware is capable of operating up to four data sets with any combination of phased array or conventional UT probes. NOW AVAILABLE IN 64-64 CONFIGURATION. >  IRIS 9000Plus - Introducing the next generation of heat exchanger inspection.Representing the seventh generation of the IRIS system, the IRIS 9000 Plus has nearly 200 years of c ... ombined field inspection experience incorporated in its design. This experience combined with a strong commitment to quality and a history of innovation has made Iris Inspection Services® the undisputed leader in IRIS technology. > |
|
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
s
|
|
