2019
DOI: 10.1784/insi.2019.61.7.373
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Non-destructive measurement of artificial near-surface cracks for railhead inspection

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
4
1

Citation Types

0
7
0

Year Published

2020
2020
2024
2024

Publication Types

Select...
4
1

Relationship

0
5

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 5 publications
(7 citation statements)
references
References 0 publications
0
7
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Therefore, as the tests within this investigation were performed using a frequency between 4 MHz and 5 MHz, this could have been a plausible explanation for increased wave scattering, thereby resulting in poor data-capture performance. However, previous studies have demonstrated that using a wedged probe compensates for increased scattering by providing a delay line and an angled incident wave [31]. Although wedged probes were used within this study, the results demonstrate that the both the automated robotic and manual systems are not appropriate for surface crack detection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
See 1 more Smart Citation
“…Therefore, as the tests within this investigation were performed using a frequency between 4 MHz and 5 MHz, this could have been a plausible explanation for increased wave scattering, thereby resulting in poor data-capture performance. However, previous studies have demonstrated that using a wedged probe compensates for increased scattering by providing a delay line and an angled incident wave [31]. Although wedged probes were used within this study, the results demonstrate that the both the automated robotic and manual systems are not appropriate for surface crack detection.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 76%
“…Defect-deflected echoes located a few millimetres in front of the transducer were found to be overshadowed by disturbing signals caused by the piezoelectric element ringing inside the transducer [32]. Anandika mitigated this issue by adopting a wedged phased-array technique [31]. Unlike a conventional ultrasound's single fixed-angle element (determined by the wedge), the advantage associated with the array phase system is that it utilises beam steering to create beams at multiple angles, allowing multi-angular defect testing via a single probe [33].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Defect de ected echoes located a few millimetres in front of the transducer were found be overshadowed by disturbing signals caused by the piezoelectric element ringing inside the transducer [33]. Anandika., mitigated this issue by adopting a wedged phased array technique [32]. Unlike the conventional ultrasound single xed angle element (determined by the wedge), the advantage associated with the array phase system is that it utilises beam steering to create beams at multiple angles, allowing multi-angular defect testing via a single probe [34].…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…In this way, the location of the noise signals with respect to the surface defect position shifts, thereby increasing the probability of detection of the surface anomalies. Furthermore, it offers the advantage of a far more effective spatial sampling frequency, thereby increasing the scanning e ciency [32]. Considering these ndings, repeating the investigation with a 90 ° wedged probe might result in a different outcome.…”
Section: Discussionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…From the perspective of signal analysis, it is difficult to find an accurate correspondence between the signal and the defect, and to use the information from the signals to evaluate the defect. In recent years, there have been some relevant studies on eddy current signal processing and analysis [ 8 , 45 , 46 ].…”
Section: Etmentioning
confidence: 99%