Performance Evaluation of Austenitic Stainless Steel Weld by Ultrasonic Phased Array Inspection Based on Probability of Detection
Source abstract
Abstract
Abstract To evaluation capability of ultrasonic phased array (PHA) in industrial austenitic stainless steel (ASS) weld quantitatively, the 304 ASS butted weld specimen with various depth and side-drilled holes (SDH) was drilled to analyze reliability of PHA testing. Based on phased array probes, the ultrasonic waveform data are processed by in traditional dynamic depth focusing and total focusing method (TFM). The welding zone defects imaging results are compared. The probability of detection (POD) curves of ultrasonic response data were used for estimation the detection capability and reliability of ultrasonic PHA.
Source: openalex_inverted_index · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Non-Destructive Testing Techniques · Welding Techniques and Residual Stresses
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
References (19)
Show source-provided references
1. Bolotina, I., Dyakina, M., Kröning, M., Mohr, F., Reddy, K.M., Soldatov, A., and Zhantlessov, Y., Ultrasonic arrays for quantitative nondestructive testing an engineering approach, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test., 2013, vol. 49, no. 3, pp. 145–158.10.1134/S1061830913030030 ↗
2. Wafik Harara and Ahmad Altahan, Attempt towards the replacement of radiography with phased array ultrasonic testing of steel plate welded joints performed on bridges and other applications, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test., 2018, vol. 54, no. 5, pp. 335–344.10.1134/S1061830918050054 ↗
3. Qingbao Wang, Zhuoxin Li, Yaowu Shi, Lizhi Wang, and Fei Liu, Interior crack and its formation mechanism in overlaying weld of back-up rolls, Eng. Failure Anal., 2013, vol. 34, pp. 268–277.10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.08.012 ↗
4. Chassignole, B., Duwig, V., Ploix, M.-A., Guy, P., and El Guerjouma, R., Modelling the attenuation in the ATHENA finite elements code for the ultrasonic testing of austenitic stainless steel welds, Ultrasonics, 2009, vol. 49, no. 8, pp. 653–658.10.1016/j.ultras.2009.04.001 ↗
5. Nowers, O., Duxbury, D.J., and Drinkwater, B.W., Ultrasonic array imaging through an anisotropic austenitic steel weld using an efficient ray-tracing algorithm, NDT&E Int., 2016, vol. 79, pp. 98–108.10.1016/j.ndteint.2015.12.009 ↗
6. Casalta, S., Daquino, G.G., Metten, L., Oudaert, J., and Van de Sande, A., Digital image analysis of X-ray and neutron radiography for the inspection and the monitoring of nuclear materials, NDT&E Int., 2003, vol. 36, no. 5, pp. 349–355.10.1016/S0963-8695(03)00008-2 ↗
7. Sung-Jin Song, Hyeon Jae Shin, and You Hyun Jang, Development of an ultrasonic phased array system for nondestructive tests of nuclear power plant components, Nucl. Eng. Des., 2002, vol. 214, pp. 151–161.10.1016/S0029-5493(02)00024-9 ↗
8. Shahjahan, S., Rupin, F., Aubry, A., Chassignole, B., Fouquet, T., and Derode, A., Comparison between experimental and 2-D numerical studies of multiple scattering in Inconel600® by means of array probes, Ultrasonics, 2014, vol. 54, no. 1, pp. 358–367.10.1016/j.ultras.2013.06.012 ↗
9. Wirdelius, H. and Persson, G., Simulation based validation of the detection capacity of an ultrasonic inspection procedure, Int. J. Fatigue, 2012, vol. 41, pp. 23–29.10.1016/j.ijfatigue.2011.09.002 ↗
10. Pilyugin, S.O. and Lunin, V.P., Determining the probability of detecting flaws in weld joints by phased-array ultrasonic testing, Russ. J. Nondestr. Test., 2016, vol. 52, no. 6, pp. 332–338.10.1134/S1061830916060085 ↗
11. Berens, A.P., NDE reliability data analysis quantitative nondestructive evaluation, in ASM Metals Handbook, 1976, vol. 17, pp. 689–701, 8th ed.
12. Spies, M. and Rieder, H., Synthetic aperture focusing of ultrasonic inspection data to enhance the probability of detection of defects in strongly attenuating materials, NDT&E Int., 2010, vol. 43, no. 5, pp. 425–431.10.1016/j.ndteint.2010.04.002 ↗
13. Van Pamel, A., Brett, C.R., and Lowe, M.J.S., A methodology for evaluating detection performance of ultrasonic array imaging algorithms for coarse-grained materials, IEEE Trans. Ultrason. Eng., 2014, vol. 61, no. 12, pp. 2042–2053.10.1109/TUFFC.2014.006429 ↗
14. Yusa, N., Chen, W., and Hashizume, H., Demonstration of probability of detection takingconsideration of both the length and the depth of a flaw explicitly, NDT&E Int., 2016, vol. 81, pp. 1–8.10.1016/j.ndteint.2016.03.001 ↗
15. Holmes, C., Drinkwater, B.W., and Wilcox, P.D., Post-processing of the full matrix of ultrasonic transmit–receive array data for non-destructive evaluation, NDT&E Int., 2005, vol. 38, no. 8, pp. 701–711.10.1016/j.ndteint.2005.04.002 ↗
16. Kurz, J.H., Jüngert, A., Dugan, S., et al., Reliability considerations of NDT by probability of detection (POD) determination using ultrasound phased array, Eng. Failure Anal., 2013, vol. 35, no. 26, pp. 609–617.10.1016/j.engfailanal.2013.06.008 ↗
17. Nageswaran, C., Carpentier, C., and Tse, Y.Y., Microstructural quantification, modelling and array ultrasonics to improve the inspection of austenitic welds, Insight, 2009, vol. 51, no. 12, pp. 660–666.10.1784/insi.2009.51.12.660 ↗
18. Demeyer, S., Jenson, F., Dominguez, N., and Iakovleva, E., Transfer function approachbased on simulation results for the determination of pod curves, in Rev. Progr. Quant. Nondestr. Eval.AIP Conf. Proc., Thompson, D.O. and Chimenti, D.E., Eds., Burlington, VT, 2012, pp. 1757–1764.
19. Annis, C., MIL-HDBK-1823A. Nondestructive Evaluation System Reliability Assessment. Department of Defense Handbook, USA: Wright-Patterson AFB, 2009.