Abstract

Previous research (Li et al., Understanding the disharmony between dropout and batch normalization by variance shift. CoRR abs/1801.05134 (2018). http://arxiv.org/abs/1801.05134arXiv:1801.05134) has shown the plausibility of using a modern deep convolutional neural network to detect flaws from phased-array ultrasonic data. This brings the repeatability and effectiveness of automated systems to complex ultrasonic signal evaluation, previously done exclusively by human inspectors. The major breakthrough was to use virtual flaws to generate ample flaw data for the teaching of the algorithm. This enabled the use of raw ultrasonic scan data for detection and to leverage some of the approaches used in machine learning for image recognition. Unlike traditional image recognition, training data for ultrasonic inspection is scarce. While virtual flaws allow us to broaden the data considerably, original flaws with proper flaw-size distribution are still required. This is of course the same for training human inspectors. The training of human inspectors is usually done with easily manufacturable flaws such as side-drilled holes and EDM notches. While the difference between these easily manufactured artificial flaws and real flaws is obvious, human inspectors still manage to train with them and perform well in real inspection scenarios. In the present work, we use a modern, deep convolutional neural network to detect flaws from phased-array ultrasonic data and compare the results achieved from different training data obtained from various artificial flaws. The model demonstrated good generalization capability toward flaw sizes larger than the original training data, and the effect of the minimum flaw size in the data set affects the a_{90/95} value. This work also demonstrates how different artificial flaws, solidification cracks, EDM notch and simple simulated flaws generalize differently.

Highlights

  • Ultrasonic inspectors are commonly trained using simple artificial flaws, such as EDM notches and side-drilled holes

  • For probability of detection (POD) hit/miss evaluation, all the indications scoring higher than 50% was considered as hits, and false calls when no flaw was in the data

  • The POD was tested with a data set containing all the flaw types and 1000 samples

Read more

Summary

Introduction

Ultrasonic inspectors are commonly trained using simple artificial flaws, such as EDM notches and side-drilled holes. These two types offer a quick and cost-effective way of demonstrating where the flaw indication should appear, but their signal shape differs from a real service-induced crack, like a mechanical or thermal fatigue crack. An EDM notch might be found much more than a thermal fatigue crack in a dissimilar metal weld (DMW) inspection While their signals can be distinguished from each other, a human inspector is looking for a specific reflector or thermal fatigue crack and for an explanation for any unusual reflector. A human inspector can intuitively ignore possible artefacts in the artificial flaws and still successfully find real flaws in the inspection data

Objectives
Methods
Results
Discussion
Conclusion
Full Text
Paper version not known

Talk to us

Join us for a 30 min session where you can share your feedback and ask us any queries you have

Schedule a call

Disclaimer: All third-party content on this website/platform is and will remain the property of their respective owners and is provided on "as is" basis without any warranties, express or implied. Use of third-party content does not indicate any affiliation, sponsorship with or endorsement by them. Any references to third-party content is to identify the corresponding services and shall be considered fair use under The CopyrightLaw.