Comparison in detect the defects sizing using conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor
This project gives a review for the comparison of Conventional Ultrasonic Testing and Phase Array Ultrasonic Testing methods in detecting and sizing defects in V-butt joint welds. The instrument used in this project is Omniscan MX2 for both techniques. For the probe, the criteria of selection for...
| Main Author: | |
|---|---|
| Format: | Student Project |
| Language: | English |
| Published: |
Faculty Of Applied Sciences
2017
|
| Subjects: | |
| Online Access: | https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/23682/ |
| _version_ | 1848805801924231168 |
|---|---|
| author | Md Nor, Nur Umairah |
| author_facet | Md Nor, Nur Umairah |
| author_sort | Md Nor, Nur Umairah |
| building | UiTM Institutional Repository |
| collection | Online Access |
| description | This project gives a review for the comparison of Conventional Ultrasonic Testing and Phase
Array Ultrasonic Testing methods in detecting and sizing defects in V-butt joint welds. The
instrument used in this project is Omniscan MX2 for both techniques. For the probe, the
criteria of selection for Phased Array technique are frequency and the number of elements.
Normally, the frequency is 5 MHz and the number of element used 32 elements. For
Conventional technique, the addition of criteria is the angle used, which. is the angle set to
60°. The test samples used in this project are PL14960, PL14962 and PL14971. The types of
these samples are V-butt weld plate and each sample has different type of artificial defect that
are central line crack, slag inclusion and lack of side wall fusion (LOSWF). The results were
evaluated based on the value of percentage error. This study proved that the percentage error
for the slag inclusion using conventional techniques is 20% while using phased array
technique is 36%. For LOSWF, the percentage error using conventional technique is 7.14%
while using phased array technique is 17.9%. For central line crack, percentage error using
conventional is 6.67%, while using phased array is 3.33%. It was proven that for slag
inclusion and LOSWF, conventional technique provides a better sizing result compared with
phased array technique. However for central line crack, phased array gives a better result
compared with conventional. This may be influenced by the thickness of the plate and the
way the inspector interpreted the data. |
| first_indexed | 2025-11-14T22:16:49Z |
| format | Student Project |
| id | uitm-23682 |
| institution | Universiti Teknologi MARA |
| institution_category | Local University |
| language | English |
| last_indexed | 2025-11-14T22:16:49Z |
| publishDate | 2017 |
| publisher | Faculty Of Applied Sciences |
| recordtype | eprints |
| repository_type | Digital Repository |
| spelling | uitm-236822020-04-17T09:41:19Z https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/23682/ Comparison in detect the defects sizing using conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor Md Nor, Nur Umairah Composite materials Acoustics. Sound This project gives a review for the comparison of Conventional Ultrasonic Testing and Phase Array Ultrasonic Testing methods in detecting and sizing defects in V-butt joint welds. The instrument used in this project is Omniscan MX2 for both techniques. For the probe, the criteria of selection for Phased Array technique are frequency and the number of elements. Normally, the frequency is 5 MHz and the number of element used 32 elements. For Conventional technique, the addition of criteria is the angle used, which. is the angle set to 60°. The test samples used in this project are PL14960, PL14962 and PL14971. The types of these samples are V-butt weld plate and each sample has different type of artificial defect that are central line crack, slag inclusion and lack of side wall fusion (LOSWF). The results were evaluated based on the value of percentage error. This study proved that the percentage error for the slag inclusion using conventional techniques is 20% while using phased array technique is 36%. For LOSWF, the percentage error using conventional technique is 7.14% while using phased array technique is 17.9%. For central line crack, percentage error using conventional is 6.67%, while using phased array is 3.33%. It was proven that for slag inclusion and LOSWF, conventional technique provides a better sizing result compared with phased array technique. However for central line crack, phased array gives a better result compared with conventional. This may be influenced by the thickness of the plate and the way the inspector interpreted the data. Faculty Of Applied Sciences 2017 Student Project NonPeerReviewed text en https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/23682/1/PPb_NUR%20UMAIRAH%20MD%20NOR%20AS%20C%2017_5.PDF Md Nor, Nur Umairah (2017) Comparison in detect the defects sizing using conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor. (2017) [Student Project] <http://terminalib.uitm.edu.my/23682.pdf> (Unpublished) |
| spellingShingle | Composite materials Acoustics. Sound Md Nor, Nur Umairah Comparison in detect the defects sizing using conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor |
| title | Comparison in detect the defects sizing using
conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array
ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor |
| title_full | Comparison in detect the defects sizing using
conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array
ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor |
| title_fullStr | Comparison in detect the defects sizing using
conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array
ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor |
| title_full_unstemmed | Comparison in detect the defects sizing using
conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array
ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor |
| title_short | Comparison in detect the defects sizing using
conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array
ultrasonic testing (PAUT) / Nur Umairah Md Nor |
| title_sort | comparison in detect the defects sizing using
conventional ultrasonic testing and phased array
ultrasonic testing (paut) / nur umairah md nor |
| topic | Composite materials Acoustics. Sound |
| url | https://ir.uitm.edu.my/id/eprint/23682/ |