where expertise comes together - since 1996

Web's Largest Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)
Open Access Database (Conference Proceedings, Articles, News), Exhibition, Forum, Network

All Forum Boards
Technical Discussions
Career Discussions >
Equipment for probes verification
Job Offers
Job Seeks
Classified Ads
About NDT.net
Articles & News

4131 views
15:42 Jan-13-2010

Bazulin Andrey

R & D, -
Scientific Center ECHO+,
Russia,
Joined Sep 2006
57
Equipment for probes verification

Greetings all!

Could anybody refer me to view information about UT probes verification appications?
I mean - what is the most popular hardware to perform the probes verification task in industry?

 
15:54 Jan-13-2010

Godfrey Hands

Engineering,
PRI Nadcap,
United Kingdom,
Joined Nov 1998
284
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Bazulin Andrey at 15:42 Jan-13-2010 (Opening).

Hi Andrey,
The European Standard EN 12668 is what we use in Europe to verify our probes on a day-to-day basis.
It is in three parts, and part three defines periodic checks to be made (that you can perform in-house), to ensure the continuing correct operation of the probes combined with the instruments.

However if you mean a full analysis of the probe characteristics, that is different, and requires a lot more equipment. This is defined in EN12668 Part 2

Hoping this helps

godfrey

 
16:13 Jan-13-2010

Carlos Correia

R & D, - -
UCV & EGROUP,
Venezuela,
Joined Oct 2008
120
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Godfrey Hands at 15:54 Jan-13-2010 .

Hello Guys!

Bazulin, You can also check:

ASTM E1065 - 08 Standard Guide for Evaluating Characteristics of Ultrasonic Search Units

Regards

 
13:41 Jan-14-2010

Andrey Bazulin

R & D, -
Scientific Center ECHO+,
Russia,
Joined Sep 2006
57
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Godfrey Hands at 15:54 Jan-13-2010 .

Thank you Godfrey and Carlos!

I am familiar with EN 12668 and studied it well.
What for ASTM E1065 so I could not get it for free =( but I know the main workflow.

I am looking for information about _practical realization_ of this codes in hardware solutions at the manufacturer side.
I am trying to make review of such implementations for my PhD work which devote to development of automated system for in-house probes verification (completing russian and european codes on probes verification).

For example knows anybody the reference to desctiption of universal complexes appilation at Krautkremer (GE) or other main probes manufacturers.

Thank you again...

 
22:46 Jan-15-2010

Tom Nelligan

Engineering,
retired,
USA,
Joined Nov 1998
390
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Andrey Bazulin at 13:41 Jan-14-2010 .

You ask about manufacturer's practices. With respect to Panametrics-NDT and Harisonic transducers from Olympus NDT, we test designated functional parameters in accordance with ASTM E1065, using our own commercial instruments along with custom software that we generated internally for data collection and analysis.

 
09:32 Jan-16-2010

Andrey Bazulin

R & D, -
Scientific Center ECHO+,
Russia,
Joined Sep 2006
57
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Tom Nelligan at 22:46 Jan-15-2010 .

Thank you Tom.
Did I understood properly that you use your _conventional_ flaw detectors to verify probes?
Or if you use spectial instruments could you give me a reference to some descriptions or scientific papers devoted to this activity?

 
13:52 Jan-16-2010

Rick Cahill

Engineering,
GE Inspection Technologies,
USA,
Joined Dec 2008
40
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Andrey Bazulin at 09:32 Jan-16-2010 .

You need hardware that has a pulser to drive the probe, a receiver to amplify the ultrasonic signal, and a computer to control the equipment and collect the appropriate data. A commercially available flaw detector can be used as the pulser/receiver but it will need an "RF output" so you can extract the RF signal from the amplifier for analysis. The set-up I use has a pulser/receiver, a Tektronix oscilloscope, a computer, and homegrown software. Instead of using all this hardware, you can buy a pulser/receiver PC board that fits into a computer PCI slot and software to extract the measurement data you need. The reason I use descrete hardware components is it provides more flexibility to meet special customer certification requirements, when needed. There may also a perfomance advantage to using discrete components as PC board pulser/receivers have bandwidth limitations that other high performance pulser/receivers do not. My system allows the pulser/receiver to be changed-out according to the requirements of the testing application. I test probes to specifications ASTM 1065 or EN 12668. I am the transducer engineering manager at GE Inspection Technologies in Lewistown, PA. USA.

 
20:49 Jan-16-2010

Andrey Bazulin

R & D, -
Scientific Center ECHO+,
Russia,
Joined Sep 2006
57
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Rick Cahill at 13:52 Jan-16-2010 .

Thank you, Rick.
Do you need to have a certificate of conformance with ASTM 1065, EN 12668 or it is at the discretion of your customers?
And what do you think about the purport of existence of universal automated system for contact and immersion probes verification? Does industry need at least 3-5 of such systems?

 
12:51 Jan-17-2010

Ingo Witzel

Engineering, - - quality control
Germany,
Joined Sep 2009
3
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Bazulin Andrey at 15:42 Jan-13-2010 (Opening).

A good way is to use a UT System with A and C Scan Capabilities. An A scan picture would be enough for the start. (Use in immersion tank with water in a stable temperature)
Then you need a ruby ball (measuring tip 3D measuring system) with 2,5 mm dia. for a 5 MHz /6" /0,75" SPH Focus Probe for Example. Then you move the probe in the focal area (6") horizontally across the ball to maintain the 6/3/2 db Drops. Make a graph to display (excell is good to use).
Then make a vertical scan - move the probe from 5mm to 220mm(-18dB) away from the ruby ball to maintain the dB Drop Ranges in the Near/Focal/Far field. You have to optimise/angulate the probe before starting, to "stay in the middle of the beam".
(Make 5 mm Steps for example or a constant movement)

A vertical movement at the found focal point will give you information on the beam width. You can repeat this on testblock with a flat bottom hole in the calculated depth(fom your meaurements in water with the ruby ball- usually 0,2-0,4" with focusing on surface) to maintain your optmimum index step size.

This data should be excepted by any auditor.

Best regards

 
15:33 Jan-17-2010

Ed Ginzel

R & D, -
Materials Research Institute,
Canada,
Joined Nov 1998
1196
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Ingo Witzel at 12:51 Jan-17-2010 .

Andrey:
The ability to mechanise a probe charaterisation has numerous advantateges. One that I thought particularly useful was the ability to show beam skew relative to the probe housing. This is almost impossible to do accurately by manual methods. As for a commercial system, several have been avaialble in the past. In the late 1980s/early 1990s Sonotek (USA) had a system with three axis motion and a dedicated software for probe characterisation. Around the same time I think I recall similar systems available from Sofratest and Matec. More recently I am aware that Eclipse designed a custom unit for probe characterisation.
An -in-house option could be a good tool for some companies. Manufacturers have well-established protocols for probe quality. However, unless you have the exact pulser characteristics, targets and all other details of the test, it may not be possible to replicate their results. If monitoring probe condition is important to internal uses then a company should have its own baseline and compare changes based on its own results using its own equipment.

 
19:04 Jan-18-2010

Tom Nelligan

Engineering,
retired,
USA,
Joined Nov 1998
390
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Andrey Bazulin at 09:32 Jan-16-2010 .

Mr. Bazulin, with respect to the specific instrumentation that we use, we do not use flaw detectors but rather Panametrics-NDT pulser/receivers that have been integrated into a custom test system. The pulser/receiver provides an RF waveform output only. That waveform is then digitized and analyzed by the software to generate the test form.

 
20:55 Jan-31-2010

Andrey Bazulin

R & D, -
Scientific Center ECHO+,
Russia,
Joined Sep 2006
57
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Tom Nelligan at 19:04 Jan-18-2010 .

Hello All!

Thank you Godfrey, Ed, Carlos, Tom, Rick, Ingo

I hope that I am not bothering you =)
But I read the ASTM-E 1065 and have some practival questions

1. Do you really use both shock pulse and sinusoidal burst to evaluate frequency spectrum and pulse-echo sensitivity agreeably?

2. Do you use mechanical devices for Measurement of Sound Beam Patterns in Metal from Ultrasonic Straight-Beam? And how can you combine the probe`s sound beam pattern measured in mechanical way with practical manual inspection with this probe? I mean the variation of spring-load pressure and coupling variation.

3. Is there any procedure in the ASTM for Measurement of Sound Beam Patterns in Metal from Ultrasonic Angle-Beam (!), Contact Search Units???


Ed
What is about the ability to show beam skew relative to the probe housing... We invented the interesting technique to evaluate the skew angle. It needs a hemispherical block and scanning in pulse-echo mode with probe. Then the processing of all data with spatial Fourier transform allows to calculate the 3D beam profile including skew angle.

 
14:49 Feb-01-2010

Ed Ginzel

R & D, -
Materials Research Institute,
Canada,
Joined Nov 1998
1196
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Andrey Bazulin at 20:55 Jan-31-2010 .

Andrey:
E-1065 is intended to be a probe assessment guide. In the scope (1.3) it describes how the procedures can be applicable to manufacturers or for for incoming or periodic verification of performance. Since it is intended to assess the probes (instead of the probe/instrument combination) the guide also indicates that typical lab instruments (such as pulsers, waveform or signal generators and analysers) may be used. Of course, this means that for comparison the same equipment setups must be used.
Although most NDT UT seems to be using pulse-echo and the spike or short-burst square wave excitation is common, it is not the only option. In through transmission and for materials characterisation chopped sinusoidal excitation can provide narrow bandwidth and even allow tuning of a probe off its centre frequency (common in assessment of attenuation factor). But overtones and undertones can occur and the mechanical damping of the probe can limit the range that the off-centre excitation is useful for. E1065 indicates a minimum of 15 cycles required but I found almost no change in FFT after about 8 cycles.
Figure A6.1 and A6.2 in E1065 shows options for assessing sound filed patterns (remarkably similar to figures 12a and 12b in EN12668!). These use mechnical holders with encoded positioning devices.
Measuring beam patterns in steel by contact has always been a concern but also problematic. The main issue is coupling, since coupling variation may be the source of amplitude variation instead of the actual field variation in the solid. Figure A8.1 in E1065 is an example of a method that might overcome the concerns for coupling variation (in fact A8.4 recommends that manual options not be used).
Beam skew assessment would normally be made relative to the probe housing. This would need mechanical mountings that hold the probe housing perpendicular to the target. Then, the results of the field assessment provide information about skew. For round elements in round housings (immersion probes) I had a goniometer-style mounting in a lab I worked in that provided a quick and easy means to assess skew.

When the information in E1065 is compared with EN12668 there are a few different tests that may be carried out but mostly we see many similarities. A significant difference between the ASTM E1065 and EN12668 is that E1065 is a "Guide" with no required tolerances. EN 12668 imposes limits.

 
18:06 Feb-01-2010

Tom Nelligan

Engineering,
retired,
USA,
Joined Nov 1998
390
Re: Equipment for probes verification In Reply to Andrey Bazulin at 20:55 Jan-31-2010 .

Andrey --

To answer your questions with respect to my company's standard practices...

1. We document the frequency spectrum in pulse excitation mode only. That is how at least 99% of our customers use our transducers, and as far as I know all major transducer manufacturers do the same thing.

2. We document sound beam profiles in an immersion mode, using appropriate ball or point targets in water. Again, that is standard industry practice. The results from water measurement can easily be converted to steel or any other material based on the velocity ratio.

3. We verify the refracted angle and beam index points of our angle beams using a simple manual test on an IIW block. We also verify transducer performance separately. While we have done both beam modeling and experimental verification using a variety of custom test blocks, that is not part of our standard test procedure for commercial wedges. Again, this is consistent with standard industry practice.

 


© NDT.net - The Web's Largest Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT) ISSN 1435-4934

Open Access Database, |Conference Proceedings| |Articles| |News| |Exhibition| |Forum| |Professional Network|