![]() You referred to a "vessel shell" so it seems you are not inspecting pipeline girth welds by AUT as most would associate the term AUT. You provided no details on the angles and targets used so it is difficult to provide accurate rationale. Phased-array systems are now usually used for AUT because a single PA probe can be used to direct the required beams at all the zonal targets. So do you mean that you compared a zonal system to a non-zonal system? The only "Raptor" ultrasonic system I could find referenced online was a small unit that addresses only 2 monoelement probes. Although AUT abbreviates Automated Ultrasonic Testing, in most pipeline applications AUT has come to mean the inspection of pipeline girthwelds (usually using zonal discrimination) using a line scan parallel to the weld axis with beams directed at specified angles to provide a maximum echo from a FBH angled at the bevel angle. You state that you compared detection from a Raptor AUT system and a phased array Omniscan MX2. Some clarification is required to adequately answer your question. R & D, Materials Research Institute, Canada, Joined Nov 1998, Both techniques can give you accurate and reliable data. "Question-02: By using which technic we can get the actual & reliable data ?" It is not possible to answer this without knowing the parameters of your inspection. ![]() "My question-01: which data is reliable AUT or PAUT ?" This is dependent on many variables and I beleive when PAUT is performed in optimal settings it has many advantages in comparison to traditional probes. Please note that I am not saying that traditional AUT is more sensitive or more likely to find small indication. Add to this the extra variable of focusing (in or out of focus ) and it may be even more difficult to see a point indication. The backwall of the part will give a much higher amplitude signal than a point indication, as the gain required for reference will be low. At 1mm pitch, this creates a 12mm X 7mm probe (84mm^2) or 594% larger square area than the duel element 6mm diameter probe. PAUT: A 64 channel probe is used with an aperture size of 12 elements. This will make the chances of finding small inclusions, pin holes, and other small indications likely. The gain required to set the first backwall at reference may be quiet high, as this is a small transducer. Now lets consider the following scenario:ĪUT: An inspection with a 6mm diameter Dual element transducer (14.13mm^2 active area) with no focusing is performed on a vessel with a nominal thickness of 22.5mm. PAUT: Variable transducer size, with focusing. Lets consider the differences in the two inspections:ĪUT: One transducer size, with flat focusing being most common. It is possible to see a defect with conventional AUT (single or duel element transducers) and miss it with PAUT. ![]() Re: AUT vs PAUT Hydroform In Reply to Md. R & D, Dacon Inspection Technologies, Thailand, Joined Jan 2017,
0 Comments
Leave a Reply. |
AuthorWrite something about yourself. No need to be fancy, just an overview. ArchivesCategories |