Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation 1989
DOI: 10.1007/978-1-4613-0817-1_123
|View full text |Cite
|
Sign up to set email alerts
|

Standard Flaws for Eddy Current Probe Characterization

Help me understand this report

Search citation statements

Order By: Relevance

Paper Sections

Select...
1

Citation Types

0
1
0

Year Published

1992
1992
1995
1995

Publication Types

Select...
1
1

Relationship

0
2

Authors

Journals

citations
Cited by 2 publications
(1 citation statement)
references
References 3 publications
0
1
0
Order By: Relevance
“…Potential parameters or standards of comparison have included: a) probe responses to well characterized defects [2,3,4,5]; b) the decrease in defect response with probe lift-off and tilt [6]; c) the difference in probe impedance magnitude when the probe is in contact with aluminum and with titanium [7]; and d) the dimensions and strength of the probe field [7,8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%
“…Potential parameters or standards of comparison have included: a) probe responses to well characterized defects [2,3,4,5]; b) the decrease in defect response with probe lift-off and tilt [6]; c) the difference in probe impedance magnitude when the probe is in contact with aluminum and with titanium [7]; and d) the dimensions and strength of the probe field [7,8].…”
Section: Introductionmentioning
confidence: 99%