Reliability considerations of NDT by probability of detection (POD) determination using ultrasound phased array
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract Reliable assessment procedures are an important aspect of maintenance concepts. Non-destructive testing (NDT) methods are an essential part of a variety of maintenance plans. Reliability aspects of NDT methods are of importance if quantitative information is required. Different design concepts e.g. the damage tolerance approach in aerospace already include reliability criteria of NDT methods. NDT is also an essential part during construction and maintenance of nuclear power plants. This paper will show the results of a research project designed for POD determination of ultrasound phased array inspections of real cracks. The continuative objective of this project is to generate quantitative POD results and to integrate these results in a probabilistic damage assessment concept. The distribution of the crack sizes of the specimens and the designed inspection instruction will be discussed, and results of the ultrasound inspections will be presented. Furthermore, additional considerations for POD determination of phased array inspections of real cracks will be discussed. In the context of the results, the remaining uncertainty of the inspections has to be taken into consideration for failure analysis.
Source: openaire · Quality: candidate unverified · Source record ↗
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Fatigue and fracture mechanics
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (31)
Show source-provided references
1. Innovative ultrasonic testing (UT) of nuclear components by sampling phased array with3D visualization of inspection results
2. Wall thickness measurement sensor for pipeline inspection using EMAT technology in combination with pulsed eddy current and MFL
3. Nondestructive testing, 2. Radiography
4. Early detection of damage in thermo-cyclically loaded austenitic materials
5. Dobmann G, Altpeter I, Wolter B. Materials characterization a challenge in NDT for quality management. In: UCTEA chamber of metallurgical engineers: international non-destructive testing symposium and exhibition. Istanbul; 2008, 214–23.
6. Micro-magnetic evaluation of micro residual stresses of the IInd and IIIrd order10.1016/j.ndteint.2008.11.007 ↗
7. Gallagher · 1984
8. Defects and their effects on the integrity in nickel based aeroengine discs
9. Grandt · 2003
10. Assessment of ROC curves for inspection of random fields10.1016/j.strusafe.2009.01.004 ↗
11. Annis · 2009
12. Georgiou GA. Probability of detection (PoD) curves. Derivation, application and limitations, Jacobi Consulting Limited, Research, Report; 2006, p. 454.
13. On the ROC score of probability forecasts10.1175/1520-0442(2003)016<4145:OTRSOP>2.0.CO;2 ↗
14. Probability of real-time detection versus probability of infection for aerosolized biowarfare agents: a model study10.1016/j.bios.2005.10.011 ↗
15. Probability of detection of salmonella using different analytical procedures, with emphasis on subspecies diarizonae serovar 61:k:1,5, (7) [S. IIIb 61:k:1,5, (7)]10.1016/S0168-1605(00)00261-0 ↗
16. NDE reliability data analysis
17. POD test – It takes more than a statistician to do probability of detection
18. Evaluation of ECT reliability for axial ODSCC in steam generator tubes10.1016/j.ijpvp.2009.11.005 ↗
19. Synthetic aperture focusing of ultrasonic inspection data to enhance the probability of detection of defects in strongly attenuating materials10.1016/j.ndteint.2010.04.002 ↗
20. Carboni M, Cantini S. A “Model Assisted Probability of Detection” approach for ultrasonic inspection of railway axles. In: Soth-African institute for non-destructive testing: world conference on nondestructive testing, vol. 18, WCNDT 2012; paper 200.
21. Rummel · 1997
22. On the accuracy of A. C. flux leakage, eddy current, EMAT and ultrasonic methods of measuring surface connecting flaws in seamless steel tubing
23. A unified approach to the model-assisted determination of probability of detection
24. 2007
25. sampling phased array a new technique for signal processing and ultrasonic imaging10.1784/insi.2006.48.9.545 ↗
26. Mletzko U, Zickler S. Verbesserte Bewertung der Aussagefähigkeit von zerstörungsfreien Prüfungen an Komponenten aus Nickelbasislegierungen oder austenitischen Werkstoffen. In: BMU Vorhaben SR 2501, Technical Report (in German) 1.2, Stuttgart; 2007.
27. Mletzko U, Zickler S. Erste Bewertung der Aussagesicherheit von zerstörungsfreien Prüfungen an Mischschweißverbindungen auf Querrisse. In: BMU Vorhaben SR 2501, Technical Report (in German) 1.1, Stuttgart; 2007.
28. Waidele H. Bewertung der Aussagefähigkeit von Ultraschall-und Wirbelstromprüfung austenitischer Plattierungen von Reaktordruckbehältern. In: BMU Vorhaben SR2318, 2. Technical Report (in German) 8892 01 001, Stuttgart; 2003.
29. Kurz JH, Jüngert A, Dugan S, Dobmann G. Probability of detection (POD) determination using ultrasound phased array for considering NDT in probabilistic damage assessments. In: Soth-African institute for non-destructive testing: world conference on nondestructive testing, vol. 18. WCNDT; 2012, paper 329.
30. Feistkorn S. Gütebewertung qualitativer Prüfaufgaben in der zerstörungsfreien Prüfung im Bauwesen am Beispiel des Impulsradars. PhD Thesis (in German), TU Berlin; 2011.10.1002/best.201290057 ↗
31. Annis C. Statistical best-practices for building probability of detection (POD) models. R package mh1823, Version 2.5.4.4 http://StatisticalEngineering.com/mh1823/; 2010.