UT Porosity Thru Wall Sizing

This video demonstrates using ultrasonic testing to perform through wall sizing of cluster porosity in a weld.
Equipment: Olympus EPOCH1000i UT tester, GE 5MHZ, 0.25" diameter transducer with a 60 degree screw on wedge.
I work at Central Piedmont Community College in Charlotte, NC. Please visit our website to explore your NDE training needs.
Central Piedmont Community College NonDestructive Examination Technology Program
www.cpcc.edu/programs/nondest...
Central Piedmont Community College NonDestructive Examination Technology Program College Catalog
catalog.cpcc.edu/programsofstu...

[@pk143realvoice]

Very nice video of ut indication detected

[@gerardomorfin5432]

Awesome information for us the not so experienced with defects characterization

[@maneeshmishra6441]

Sir your video guidance me.thanks to create this video's 👍

[@dudeabc100]

Sir, it was a nice video. However i have a question,
Is there a possibility that the technique that you just demonstrated to size the through wall height would give
more accurate results in case of planar flaws as compared to such volumetric flaws?
I noticed that there were a bunch of trailing signals of varying amplitudes (which was mentioned as broad signal envelope) as you were
moving the probe back and forth towards the weld center line and also while orbiting. These signals are possibly coming in due to some mode
converted signal set, for instance one component of the wave would have possibly hit the face of the flaw, there would have been some mode
conversion to L-waves and after some reverberations L wave converting back to shear waves and back to the probe, so here the overall time of flight
or the path taken by the waves would be longer giving rise to a bunch of trailing signals. Based on the geometry many such mode converted paths are
possible. In the scenario as shown above there is a high possibility that while moving back and forth we are possibly hitting the same spot of the flaw
but we are getting different depths possibly due to the change in path length or time of flight variation caused due to mode conversion. The through wall
height measurements could possibly have some variations if you hit this same flaw from the other side of the weld due to some subtle changes in the
geometry. Having said that sometimes we may get lucky that the through wall height measurements of such clustered porosity would tally quite well
with the measurements as given by the manufacturer (Sonaspection, flaw tech, Ph tool etc.) but this may not happen always. If we take say about 5 to 6
samples of clustered porosity with some varying overall geometry, definitely there would be some samples where the overall through wall measurements
wont tally with the measurements (based on radiography and which would be quite accurate for such volumetric flaws) as given by the manufacturer.
The reason is purely due to the mode converted paths taken by the beam and which is very difficult to trace using a conventional single crystal approach. In order to
accurately gauge the through wall height irregardless of the geometry we need to go on a tomographic approach where multiple mode converted paths are captured by the probe using an array of elements and each of this raw A-scans are evaluated for there individual time of flights.
Please note a conventional phased array approach will also give similar results to the one as shown above.
Lastly was this sample radio graphed?

[@allwinthivan6795]

Sir tell me 1:1 diagram beam profile how to

[@rodstephens742]

Very nice!

[@hlehrlich]

Who manufactures that plate?

[@johnnyb28227]

Hello Hayden. That plate was manufactured by Sonaspection, sonaspection.com/ I also have plates manufactured by FlawTech, www.flawtech.com/
Both suppliers provide world class products.

[@hlehrlich]

john burke very cool, thanks for the reply.