Location

Williamsburg, VA

Start Date

1-1-1988 12:00 AM

Description

Inspection of aircraft composite structures at field site facilities (air bases) is routinely performed using manual ultrasonic testing (UT) techniques. Using these techniques, the examiner detects and sizes defects such as disbonds and delaminations by monitoring and interpreting A-scan waveform signals on a UT instrument display screen. Manual probe manipula- tion permits maximum scanning flexibility and optimization of the ultrasonic signal response by the examiner using manual motions not possible with mechanized scanners. However, the examiner also must be responsible for instrument calibration, signal interpretation, documentation of inspection results, and completeness of coverage. The data reviewer must be able to validate instrument calibration and completeness of coverage, confirm signal interpretation, and compare current UT results to those obtained during previous inspections.

Book Title

Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation

Volume

7B

Chapter

Chapter 8: NDE Systems and Reliability

Section

Systems—Ultrasonic

Pages

1653-1660

DOI

10.1007/978-1-4613-0979-6_94

Language

en

File Format

application/pdf

Share

COinS
 
Jan 1st, 12:00 AM

A Real-Time Ultrasonic Imaging System (ARIS) for Manual Inspection of Aircraft Composite Structures

Williamsburg, VA

Inspection of aircraft composite structures at field site facilities (air bases) is routinely performed using manual ultrasonic testing (UT) techniques. Using these techniques, the examiner detects and sizes defects such as disbonds and delaminations by monitoring and interpreting A-scan waveform signals on a UT instrument display screen. Manual probe manipula- tion permits maximum scanning flexibility and optimization of the ultrasonic signal response by the examiner using manual motions not possible with mechanized scanners. However, the examiner also must be responsible for instrument calibration, signal interpretation, documentation of inspection results, and completeness of coverage. The data reviewer must be able to validate instrument calibration and completeness of coverage, confirm signal interpretation, and compare current UT results to those obtained during previous inspections.