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 -

Technical Discussions
Terry Oldberg
Engineering, Mechanical Electrical Nuclear Software
Consultant, USA, Joined Oct 1999, 42

Terry Oldberg

Engineering, Mechanical Electrical Nuclear Software
Joined Oct 1999
00:33 Jun-20-1999
Ethics and Best-Case Analysis

In "Erratic Measure," (Republished in the May issue of NDTnet) Ronald Christensen and I point out that the flaw detection methods of today violate the Unit Measure axiom of probability theory. Ethical questions follow from this, for the violations invalidate value-free methods for estimating the probabilities of error, leaving only value-laden methods.

In designing things, engineers often employ the method of analysis which is worst, from the standpoint of cost but best, from the standpoint of safety. This is called "worst-case analysis." Engineers don't usually employ best-case analysis. However, in estimating the probability of detection (POD), the NDT community employs best-case analysis.

The question of whether to use best-case or worst-case analysis arises when a test is positive for a flaw and the positive relates to more than one flaw. That this relation is one-to-many violates Unit Measure and invalidates probability theory. However, Unit Measure can be preserved and probability theory restored by selecting a flaw and counting it as detected while counting all of the other flaws as not detected. A value judgement is made in selecting the flaw. Thus, this method of analysis is value-laden.

Under best-case analysis, the largest of the flaws is selected. Under worst-case analysis, the smallest of them is selected. Best-case analysis provides an upper bound on the POD of large flaws and a lower bound on the POD of small flaws, while worst-case analysis provides the opposite. Thus, best-case analysis makes NDT look better than it is while worst-case analysis makes it look worse.

The use of best-case analysis without warning is ethically striking under any circumstances but this is particularly true when the organization employing it is a safety regulator. Nonetheless, studies published by the U.S. Nuclear Regulator Commission ("Steam Generator Group Project. Task 13 Final Report: Nondestructive Examination Validation.," NUREG/CR-5185, 1988. U.S. Nuclear Regulatory Commission, Washington, DC.) and the U.S. Federal Aviation Administration ("Reliability Assessment at Airline Inspection Facilities, Violume III: Results of an Eddy Current Inspection Reliability Experiment." DOT/FAA/CT-92/12, III, Federal Aviation Administration, Washington, DC) use best case analysis. Neither agency warns the readers of its report that the POD estimates are the result of best case analysis.

For more than 14 years, I've observed that the NDT community displays no, discernable interest, in modifying its practices to preserve Unit Measure and have always wondered why this is. Here is a theory. If the NDT community were following custom in engineering, by using worst-case analysis in estimating the POD, it could make NDT look better by modifying it to preserve Unit Measure. However, in reality, the NDT community is using best-case analysis and failing to warn people of the departure from custom. It follows that the NDT community would make NDT look worse by modifying it to preserve Unit Measure. Is thiswhy I can't find an interest in preserving Unit Measure?


Product Spotlight


The Panther product range combines speed and performance of phased- array ultrasound technology in
a compact format. Targeted towards integrators for inline inspections and laboratories for R&D, Panter products offer a flexible and scalable solution for generic and custom NDT.

Exertus Dual 120

The Exertus Dual 120 Projector has the ability to accept Iridium 192 sources or Selenium 75 source
s. This projector incorporates design and safety features that make it flexible, compact and lightweight. The Projector is lighter than most of its competitors. It incorporates an improved source channel, based on a new helicoidal design, which makes maintenance easier. The helicoidal design also allows smoother movement of the source assembly inside the device, making it easier for the operator and improving safety. The Projector also has a unique safety feature not found in competitive products. The source assembly locking mechanism is triggered by the source holder capsule at the front of the source assembly, thereby always assuring the operator that the source has returned to the safe position. The Exertus Dual 120 is ISO3999:2004 compliant.

NovaScope 6000

The all-digital Novascope 6000 is a portable, ultra-high precision thickness gauge for high-speed
thickness measurement. Novascope 6000 has unmatched capabilities and unique features including: •Superior Resolution with high contrast, high-speed color RF display •High pulser voltage •Real-time video output •Increased internal/external data storage •Programmable SetUp features •Battery & AC Powered

FAAST-PA! OEM Patented phased Array for high speed UT inspection

Multiangle, Multifocus, Multifrequency, Multibeam. Instead of stacking UT electronics and having m
any PA probes, FAAST-PA is able to transmit all delay laws within ONE single shot in Real time.

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