FIFTH CANADIAN CONFERENCE ON NONDESTRUCTIVE ... - IAEA

- 100 -
1. Planar transducer:
l.a. Signals from plate #3 and plate
representative of a 3 mm flaw.
lmm vs 2mm
lmm vs 3mm
2mm vs 3mm
45 C
91.67
100.00
75.00
#5 are taken together as signals
60 c
83.33
91.67
91.67
75°
91.67
91.67
83.33
l.b. The classifier was trained on signals from plate #3 and then tested
with signals from plate #5.
lmm vs 3mm
2mm vs 3mm
45° 60 c
100.00
100.00
2. Focused transducer: (same tests as above)
2.a Signals from plate #3 and plate #5
representative of a 3mm flaw.
lmm vs 2mm
lmm vs 3mm
2mm vs 3mm
45°
90.00
93.75
81.25
80.00
80.00
75°
80.00
80.00
are taken together as signals
60 c
80.00
93.75
75.00
75 C
85.00
93.75
81.25
2.b The classifier was trained on signals from plate #3 and then tested
with signals from plate #5.
lmm vs 3mm
2mm vs 3mm
45° 60° 75°
100.00
78.57
83.33
83.33
87.50
71.43
These classification results show that 100% recognition rates can be
obtained in some cases. Also, they show that a resolution of lram in size
which is required by fracture mechanics analysis is possible. Worse
recognition rates are likely to be caused by a variation of the flaw size at
the location where the data is taken. This problem will be resolved later
when the samples will be sectioned. Also work is required to elucidate what
are the most significant features for the planar transducer data as well as
the focused one.