Event Title

Electromagnetic Microscope Compared to a Conventional Probe

Presenter Information

Walter Podney, SQM Technology, Inc.

Location

Snowbird, UT, USA

Start Date

1-1-1999 12:00 AM

Description

The paper compares performance of conventional, pulsed, eddy current technology [1] to performance of superconductive technology [2], for identifying cracks at rivet holes in a multilayer joint. It compares area of the smallest crack detectable by a conventional, reflection type probe with that detectable by a superconductive, reflection type probe. The smallest crack detectable depends on noise resolution and radius of the pickup loop. A superconductive probe presently can detect a crack at a rivet hole that is two to three times smaller than the smallest crack detectable by a conventional probe.

Book Title

Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation

Volume

18A

Chapter

Chapter 4: UT Transducers and Fields, Sensors

Section

NDE Sensors

Pages

1185-1192

DOI

10.1007/978-1-4615-4791-4_151

Language

en

File Format

application/pdf

This document is currently not available here.

Share

COinS
 
Jan 1st, 12:00 AM

Electromagnetic Microscope Compared to a Conventional Probe

Snowbird, UT, USA

The paper compares performance of conventional, pulsed, eddy current technology [1] to performance of superconductive technology [2], for identifying cracks at rivet holes in a multilayer joint. It compares area of the smallest crack detectable by a conventional, reflection type probe with that detectable by a superconductive, reflection type probe. The smallest crack detectable depends on noise resolution and radius of the pickup loop. A superconductive probe presently can detect a crack at a rivet hole that is two to three times smaller than the smallest crack detectable by a conventional probe.