Determination of Groove Filling Levels of Pressed Pipe-Fitting Connections Using Phased Array Ultrasound Evaluated by a CNN
Source abstract
Abstract
In this paper, a method for determining the filling level of grooves (1 mm (W) × 0.25 mm (H)) in pressed titanium pipe-fitting joints is presented. The joints are inspected in a water bath using a 20 MHz phased array ultrasound, and the acquired raw B-scans are evaluated by a convolutional neural network that performs per-groove regression. Reference filling levels are obtained destructively from micrographs. Compared to X-ray computed tomography and destructive sectioning, the proposed approach overcomes the low material contrast between pipe and fitting, avoids long scan times, and enables a nondestructive, potentially inline-capable quantitative assessment of sub-millimeter grooves. A manual high-frequency ultrasound evaluation with a single probe and conceivable rule-based time-of-flight pipelines with hand-crafted echo picking and thresholds both show only moderate agreement with CT references and require substantial feature engineering for multiple echoes. In contrast, the PAUT-CNN method exploits the full raw B-scan without explicit feature design and achieves a root mean square error of about 7% of the groove filling levels on a held-out test set, corresponding to an absolute error on the order of a few tens of micrometers in groove height. This demonstrates that high-frequency phased array ultrasound combined with data-driven evaluation can quantitatively assess the filling of sub-millimeter grooves in aerospace-relevant press-fit connections.
Source: crossref · Quality: baseline
Research context
OpenAlex topics: Ultrasonics and Acoustic Wave Propagation · Flow Measurement and Analysis · Ultrasound Imaging and Elastography
SciVX discovery tags are terminology-based. OpenAlex topics are source-provided classifications.
Affiliations
Chair of Cognitive Sensor Systems, Saarland University, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany
Fraunhofer Institute for Nondestructive Testing IZFP, 66123 Saarbrücken, Germany
Funding
Bundesministerium für Wirtschaft und Energie
References (30)
Show source-provided references
1. Jacob, K., and Straß, B. (2024). Hauptarbeitspaket 2–NDT-Verfahren (Einrollen), Technische Informationsbibliothek.
2. Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (VDI) (2009). Computertomografie in der Dimensionellen Messtechnik–Grundlagen und Definitionen, Verein Deutscher Ingenieure (VDI). VDI/VDE 2630 Blatt 1.1.
3. Beine, C., Boller, C., Netzelmann, U., Porsch, F., Venkat, R., Schulze, M., Bulavinov, A., and Heuer, H. (2010, January 22–24). NDT for CFRP Aeronautical Components a Comparative Study. Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on NDT in Aerospace, Hamburg, Germany.
4. Maisl, M., Schorr, C., Porsch, F., and Haßler, U. (2010, January 27–29). Computerlaminographie, Grundlagen und technische Umsetzung. Proceedings of the Industrielle Computertomografie: Zerstörungsfreie Bauteilprüfung, 3D-Materialcharakterisierung und Geometriebestimmung, Wels, Austria.
5. Production integrated nondestructive testing of composite materials and material compounds—An overview
6. Netzelmann, U. (1993, January 17–19). Nondestructive testing of ceramic-metal joints by high-frequency ultrasound techniques. Proceedings of the Joining Ceramics, Glass and Metal, Königswinter, Germany.
7. Ramanan, S.V., Bulavinov, A., Pudovikov, S., Boller, C., and Wenzel, T. (2010, January 22–24). Quantitative non-destructive evaluation of CFRP components by sampling phased array. Proceedings of the 2nd International Symposium on NDT in Aerospace, Hamburg, Germany.
8. Automated flaw detection in multi-channel phased array ultrasonic data using machine learning10.1007/s10921-021-00796-4 ↗
9. Augmented ultrasonic data for machine learning10.1007/s10921-020-00739-5 ↗
10. Jia, Y., and Rakhmatov, D. (2024, January 22–26). Crack Defect Characterization Using Raw Channel Data and DNN-Based Classifier. Proceedings of the 2024 IEEE Ultrasonics, Ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control Joint Symposium (UFFC-JS), Taipei, Taiwan.10.1109/UFFC-JS60046.2024.10793891 ↗
11. Deep learning for ultrasonic crack characterization in NDE10.1109/TUFFC.2020.3045847 ↗
12. Ultrasonic defect characterization using the scattering matrix: A performance comparison study of Bayesian inversion and machine learning schemas10.1109/TUFFC.2021.3084798 ↗
13. Shi, Y., Xu, W., Zhang, J., and Li, X. (2022). Automated classification of ultrasonic signal via a convolutional neural network. Appl. Sci., 12.10.3390/app12094179 ↗
14. Towards using convolutional neural network to locate, identify and size defects in phased array ultrasonic testing10.1016/j.ultras.2021.106436 ↗
15. Automated Weld defect detection in industrial ultrasonic B-scan images using deep learning10.3390/ndt2020007 ↗
16. Krautkrämer, J., and Krautkrämer, H. (1990). Ultrasonic Testing of Materials, Springer.10.1007/978-3-662-10680-8 ↗
17. Ultrasonic arrays for non destructive evaluation—A review10.1016/j.ndteint.2006.03.006 ↗
18. Deep learning10.1038/nature14539 ↗
19. ImageNet Classification with Deep Convolutional Neural Networks10.1145/3065386 ↗
20. He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., and Sun, J. (2015, January 7–13). Delving Deep into Rectifiers: Surpassing Human-Level Performance on ImageNet Classification. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision (ICCV), Santiago, Chile.10.1109/ICCV.2015.123 ↗
21. Ruder, S. (2017). An Overview of Multi-Task Learning in Deep Neural Networks. arXiv.
22. Keskar, N.S., Mudigere, D., Nocedal, J., Smelyanskiy, M., and Tang, P.T.P. (2017, January 24–26). On Large-Batch Training for Deep Learning: Generalization Gap and Sharp Minima. Proceedings of the 5th International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), Toulon, France.
23. Gal, Y., and Ghahramani, Z. (2016, January 19–24). Dropout as a Bayesian Approximation: Representing Model Uncertainty in Deep Learning. Proceedings of the 33rd International Conference on Machine Learning, PMLR 48, New York, NY, USA.
24. Kingma, D.P., and Ba, J. (2015, January 7–9). Adam: A Method for Stochastic Optimization. Proceedings of the 3rd International Conference on Learning Representations (ICLR), San Diego, CA, USA.
25. A survey on Image Data Augmentation for Deep Learning10.1186/s40537-019-0197-0 ↗
26. Ioffe, S., and Szegedy, C. (2015, January 7–9). Batch Normalization: Accelerating Deep Network Training by Reducing Internal Covariate Shift. Proceedings of the 32nd International Conference on Machine Learning (ICML), PMLR 37, Lille, France.
27. He, K., Zhang, X., Ren, S., and Sun, J. (2016, January 27–30). Deep Residual Learning for Image Recognition. Proceedings of the IEEE Conference on Computer Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR), Las Vegas, NV, USA.10.1109/CVPR.2016.90 ↗
28. Selvaraju, R.R., Cogswell, M., Das, A., Vedantam, R., Parikh, D., and Batra, D. (2017, January 22–29). Grad-cam: Visual explanations from deep networks via gradient-based localization. Proceedings of the IEEE International Conference on Computer Vision, Venice, Italy.10.1109/ICCV.2017.74 ↗
29. Lakshminarayanan, B., Pritzel, A., and Blundell, C. (2017, January 4–9). Simple and Scalable Predictive Uncertainty Estimation using Deep Ensembles. Proceedings of the Advances in Neural Information Processing Systems 30 (NIPS 2017), Long Beach, CA, USA.
30. Physics-informed neural networks: A deep learning framework for solving forward and inverse problems involving nonlinear partial differential equations10.1016/j.jcp.2018.10.045 ↗