Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
Жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
2 жыл бұрын
3 жыл бұрын
Пікірлер
@GabbarBaba-h3b 10 күн бұрын
It's may be more better when you it shows mc and prob image into it
@43-senthilnathan-g73 17 күн бұрын
Thank you sir , finally i have one question if possible to detect 1.5 mm discontinuity in 5 mhz ,tr probe with valuable sensitivity.sir i understand the sensitivity session,but i need this question in your side . please reply this one sir😊
@NDE40 17 күн бұрын
This entirely depends on the material and the sound path. If you have a forged and heat treated material and the sound path it should be possible to let's say 1/2 meter
@Devarajan_THIRUMALAI_KANDUR 2 ай бұрын
I have a doubt sir this is devarajan from Chennai india can we find out at x distance what's the curves amplitude is there any formula for it while using b2s
@AshishMokidi 2 ай бұрын
66db is required to bring indication echo to 80% of 600mm, whereas backwall echo required 14db to set 80% of 800mm. How it possible..Am in confusion..how 14db will taken to bring bwe to 80%
@AshishMokidi 2 ай бұрын
Hi, we need to use the DGS curves still if the UT instrument has inbuilt DGS curves. Secondly, if we set back wall echo to 80% the db will come at 60 to 70. How to corelate with the hardcopy of DGS to instrument DGS. In your presentation, how 14db is assumed to set BW echo to 80%.
@michaelm2308 3 ай бұрын
I'm from Canada but I'm doing my Ultrasonic 2 in German, you might have just saved my bacon, thank you.
@awesomemarvels 4 ай бұрын
Thanks sir
@NDE40 4 ай бұрын
You are very welcome ...
@saratoga1969 5 ай бұрын
You are a great persoanje
@NDE40 5 ай бұрын
Muchas Gracias
@Kof_Believer 6 ай бұрын
Very educative contents. Thanks
@Kof_Believer 6 ай бұрын
Very informative. Thanks for the detailed explanation. Much appreciated
@Kof_Believer 6 ай бұрын
I just subscribed. From Canada. Thanks
@MassimoPradetto 7 ай бұрын
very good video. I have a question. What is the dead zone of the phased array transducers? thank you Dr. Vrana!
@NDE40 7 ай бұрын
The sound is generated by your active element, travels through some couplant, and is partially reflected where your sound enters your actual part. This reflection goes back through the couplant and is reflected again by your probe. This continues and leads at the beginning of every A-scan to an increased noise level. This is the dead zone. It is the zone where you can not detect anything as the noise, caused by this bouncing back and forth between the active element and the entry surface, is too high. And it is the same effect for conventional and Phased Array probes. On the other hand, the near field is the natural focus point of your beam, which can be calculated. This video can help: kzbin.info/www/bejne/roi1cnWtnJaHeJosi=M8IclHFQWzDRgFhr
@MassimoPradetto 7 ай бұрын
@@NDE40Ok thank you very much. In other words the PA transducer has a dead zone like the conventional probes. We are talking about 3-6 mm of dead zone below the surface. From this point of view there are no advantages in using the PA instead of the conventional transducers. Correct? Thank you again. Best Regards. Massimo.
@NDE40 7 ай бұрын
@@MassimoPradetto Exactly - phased array and conventional probes with the same aperture also have a similar deadzone. Actually, I found that the deadzone of phased array probes is a tad longer. This is where TFM can help (but only if done correctly).
@laxmansureshmandalwar1499 8 ай бұрын
It’s very informative thank you
@NDE40 8 ай бұрын
You are very welcome
@omerengin3193 8 ай бұрын
So you lectured about ultrasonic testing?
@NDE40 8 ай бұрын
Not really - I am a consultant on UT and NDE 4.0
@sathurappandeepak2762 9 ай бұрын
A great video.. Why can not we use audible frequency range of sound waves for industrial inspection?
@NDE40 9 ай бұрын
The wavelength determines the minimal size of the objects you want to find - a wave with 10 kHz in steel (~6000m/s) allows you to find objects with ~0,5 METER (the lower limit would be something like 0,15m). With 2 MHz you can typically find indications of ~1 mm and larger.
@abrarsalekinraiyan3170 10 ай бұрын
Hello Dr. Vrana, could you do video/blog on nonlinear UT methods for early damage detection vs how they compare with the linear methods. I'm really new to NDE methods, and trying to do my masters thesis on identification & sizing of fatigue cracks. All the recent papers seems to favor nonlinear methods (e.g. frequency modulation, wave mixing, non-linear coefficient) for detecting early damage. I feel like, as someone like you who has been in this industry a long time can shed some light on the feasibility of these non-linear methods.
@NDE40 10 ай бұрын
Unfortunately, I do not have any experience in nonlinear UT. For crack detection and wall thickness measurements I would always use linear methods to do their ease of use. However, in the detection of early damage, we are most likely speaking about damages that are #1 clearly smaller than the wavelength and #2 still quite "integrated" into the material and therefore create weak signals. And this is where nonlinear UT or even nonlinear reconstruction could help. Also, take a look into some medical applications.
@abrarsalekinraiyan3170 10 ай бұрын
Thank you so much for the suggestion. And yes, by early damage I meant defects smaller than the wave length & producing weak signals.
@abrarsalekinraiyan3170 10 ай бұрын
again thank you for your videos. I've watched most of them to get a grasp on UT methods. Specially, integrating NDE and AI seems really promising, and I'm planning on looking into that field more.
@NDE40 10 ай бұрын
@@abrarsalekinraiyan3170 COmbination of nonlinear UT, reconstruction, and some AI could really be a fascinating topic ....
@rostykromanyshyn6616 Жыл бұрын
nice
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Thanks
@UnitedNDT2011 Жыл бұрын
Great Video! In most applications the scanning speed is very important. FMC/TFM is certainly much slower compared with "standard" PAUT. What is your view on this?
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Not necessarily. TFM Speed scales linearly with the number of elements and PAUT with the number of focal laws. Moreover, PAUT usually generates more ringing as the beam is directed. Therefore, the PRF of TFM could be higher. The third limiting factor is the speed of data transfer - so You need to be careful which instrument to buy.
@randalcurtis6667 Жыл бұрын
"Promo sm" 🙄
@tsatybel6554 Жыл бұрын
Can you explain how did you get the angles values on Shear case 3 and 4? I've recalculated it, based on snell's law using water(n1.5) and steel (n2.67) indexes on shear, the critical incident angle is 41.80degrees; pass that, TIR occurs(Total Internal Reflection). I wonder how in case 4, would you get 90 degrees with an incident angle of 56.5 degrees. I guarantee you, you wouldn't get any (r) refraction with an incident angle of 56.5 degrees based on this example. (r)Refraction line would completely bend away at those angles whether using rexolite or plexiglas given they have higher n values. Lots of techs in the industry missing proper shear calibration and end up being unable to pick up any defects.
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
You can find on the slide that my calculations are based on Plexiglas (2670 m/s) and Steel (5920 m/s / 3200 m/s). For immersion testing, you have to recalculate with 1500 m/s.
@westerncivilization Жыл бұрын
No video on 5.0 actually talks about 5.0.
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Because currently nobody knows what 5.0 will eventually be. However, at the end of the video you will find a short outlook of what I think it could become ...
@Growmetheus Жыл бұрын
Bro if people knew how much money you can make off this job, you would have 1 million views
@mth469 Жыл бұрын
Thanks so much for making your video series, sir.
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
You are very welcome...
@rostykromanyshyn6616 Жыл бұрын
hi is it possible to obtain a pdf version (or any other e-version) of "The World of NDE 4.0"?
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Sure - you can purchase through ASNT: source.asnt.org/1s8ivdm/
@phil107stein Жыл бұрын
Is not it dangerous sometimes to evaluate FBH size purely on an amplitude based technique? Like DGS or DAC basically. The reflector may be "equivalent" to a disk shape, but it might be much bigger than it appears! Because the indication could be irregular, and would scatter the sound rather than a specular reflector. I know, yes... the amplitude based technique is a core assessment method but sometimes I doubt its reliability.
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Yes, you are right. Amplitude-based techniques can be misleading. #1 The calibration needs to be performed accurately. #2 The check of the equipment needs to be done accurately (for example if the probe frequency is not the frequency stipulated by the manufacturer DGS can be off drastically). #3 Larger, angled, indications have a quite directed reflection. Therefore, if they are not perpendicular to the ultrasonic beam only a fraction of the beam is collected by the probe. However, once we get to indications that are in the order of magnitude of the wavelength this angle dependency is quite minimal - also the structure of such small defects is quite insignificant (as this structure is way smaller than the wavelength it is not "seen" by UT. Meaning those indications can be sized quite accurately. And if all the other factors are also controlled you can achieve a surprisingly good sizing accuracy. And in case you wanna do better: kzbin.info/www/bejne/Y5WznJqlq5p4Y68
@samajier2566 Жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
You are very welcome
@theomicottis3388 Жыл бұрын
Dear Mr.Vrana, many thanks for this lesson. There are a lot of variables that affect DGS correct sizing. This is one Iwas not aware of.
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
You are very welcome
@bacelismael8687 Жыл бұрын
Just what I was looking for, at a convenient time 😁
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Great !!!
@Mastery_mind_set Жыл бұрын
one mistake in video that given second critical angle is longitudinal 90 degree inspite of shear wave 90 degree
@dkaeioruio Жыл бұрын
Thanks for sharing those great news
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Any time!
@oogatech Жыл бұрын
Love your presentation style! Your excitement is contagious!
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Thanks so much!
@rostykromanyshyn6616 Жыл бұрын
great video I'd like to have more details about that U-Net process, but still the video is great
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Hi - just look for the work of Patrick Fuchs (www.ndt.net/search/docs.php3?showForm=OFF&MainSource=-1&AuthorID=38978). He has done some great work using U-Nets on Computed Tomography results.
@seaneastman6475 Жыл бұрын
Very insightful and a great overview of neural networks. The regulations and legislation around the use of AI in this regard are tricky though especially in highly regulated fields like aerospace, somewhat similar to problems with self driving cars. If the AI model fails to correctly identify a defect that ultimately leads to a failure who bears the responsibility? Or if it identifies a false positive that results in days of downtime and lost revenue. Is it the operator of the test set with AI implementation, the company that designed the AI model or was it the company that provided dubious training data? AI technology is currently advancing far faster than regulatory bodies can legislate for. We're certainly in for an interesting few years.
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
You are absolutely correct. AI does not eliminate human factors. With AI the human factors are shifted from the inspector to the programmer/trainer. The benefit: if done correctly this can bring a great boost in reliability but if it is done incorrectly the issue will be applied consistently and all results might become questionable.
@MrCaiccaic Жыл бұрын
full of knowledge, thank you so much for the video 🎉
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
You are very welcome
@aviationspecialist6644 Жыл бұрын
pls do not lower your voice at the end of sentence like you were whispering because i could not hear and and understand what you are talking about.
@mth469 Жыл бұрын
Bros 😊
@atzalwelzijn Жыл бұрын
Great video, but how can I measure the material specific attenuation due to damping (ACV) for transversal probes? For example, when we use a V1/K1 block radius for calibrating a 45°, the attenuation due to beam spread I can check in the diagram, but how do I measure the ACV in a given material? Can I just connect two angle beams and use through transmission and calculate damping based on the soundpath between single and double skip?
@andyliu2465 Жыл бұрын
very good idear
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Thank you
@corpseneck Жыл бұрын
Love your videos!! Im working on getting my ASNT Level III UT Certification, I just passed the Basic exam and found your videos looking up techniques for UT!!
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Thanks a lot
@barrbudo Жыл бұрын
I'm intrigued about why you describe as high frequency the A-scans from each capturing elements. I get that we're talking about ultrasonic waves, but shouldn't we reserve such description to frequencies above like 10MHz?
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
The High Frequency in the A-scans is not about the ultrasonic frequency. So-called HF (high frequency) A-scans are not rectified, are usually not compressed, and use a sampling rate that is at least 5 times the frequency of your ultrasonic frequency.
@barrbudo Жыл бұрын
@@NDE40, awesome! That makes perfect sense to me now. Thanks a bunch!
@PutinsMommyNeverHuggedHim Жыл бұрын
dang it i thought this was about near death experiences 😂
@thaboben1915 Жыл бұрын
Excellence... pls come to south Africa
@thaboben1915 Жыл бұрын
Today is a great day.
@sanoopsaji7680 Жыл бұрын
Good video❤️❤️
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Thank you
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
What do you think about email? What issues do you see? Is email a good or a bad system?
@mohamedsalih3279 Жыл бұрын
Thanks
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
You are welcome
@SimonausMünchen Жыл бұрын
Met this guy at the train. Amazing knowledge, amazing person! Keep up the good work 💪
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
Thank you so much. Was great chatting on the train.
@alexmenorca143 Жыл бұрын
Mi ídolo
@Kill3rdog48 Жыл бұрын
THANK YOU SO MUCH! I had trouble understanding the whole side lobe thing in a book of mine. Like I was already thinking that at some angles there would be no energy transfer. Even with normal acoustics. I wish that books would integrate "in practice" more with the theoretics.
@dianemason9092 Жыл бұрын
Great info 👍 thank you
@NDE40 Жыл бұрын
You are welcome ...