Love your videos mate! Just about to jump into PAUT, super excited! Would love a video on your preferences for encoders, wire vs wheel encoders etc, how to use different encoders, what’s most practical for real world non test plate jobs? You’re doing gods work mate, keep this gold mine of a channel going!
I started UT in the late 70's with a USM2 /USK 6 ,you soon pick up the trigonometry ratios to determine flaw location. What has changed is the lost art of echo dynamics. Which was much easier with an analogue set. Determining a root pattern from LORF or hydrogen flake from N.M.I.s in a heavy forging. Having been a PCN examiner it is possible to get a distinction whilst failing to recognise and correctly identify any of the flaws in the exam samples. Which should be a concern, similar to radiography without Rad interpretation. I obtained my PAUT /Tofd qualification 10 years ago (not recertified it) PAUT will definatley take over from manual UT as the price of it drops and it becomes standard on UT sets. I have to admit after years of manual UT I found PAUT / Tofd in practise very boring. Last week I took part in corrosion mapping an oil processing spooling an 8 hour shift felt like two weeks.
Absolutely excellent training. I’m not out in the field doing the UT two step anymore, but I really could have benefited from these videos back when I was out in the field, I would find SOMETHING and didn’t know how to interpret, and I would facetime a friend who is a jedi master of UT so he could watch my screen.
I always teach my students the 10/8 V-path in my UT classes. Love the Carolinas connections in this video: Adam Daniels at Sonaspection, FlawTech, and Vermon NDT.
I'm not surprised your sizing was inaccurate. You should only use 6db drop method on reflectors larger than the beam (Inverse Laws). Using it on a through thickness reflector like this would over size by 2-3 times. Max amp would have been very accurate if applied correctly.
I agree with it being used only on flaws larger than the beam, but I would also extend that to only large, purely planar flaws, which essentially limits it only to laminations. Alas, there is a lot of misunderstanding around it, and it continues to be taught as some sort of viable tool when in most cases it's just misleadingly simple.
Love your videos mate! Just about to jump into PAUT, super excited! Would love a video on your preferences for encoders, wire vs wheel encoders etc, how to use different encoders, what’s most practical for real world non test plate jobs?
You’re doing gods work mate, keep this gold mine of a channel going!
Thank you for the shout out x
Thanks sir🙏
I started UT in the late 70's with a USM2 /USK 6 ,you soon pick up the trigonometry ratios to determine flaw location.
What has changed is the lost art of echo dynamics. Which was much easier with an analogue set. Determining a root pattern from LORF or hydrogen flake from N.M.I.s in a heavy forging.
Having been a PCN examiner it is possible to get a distinction whilst failing to recognise and correctly identify any of the flaws in the exam samples. Which should be a concern, similar to radiography without Rad interpretation.
I obtained my PAUT /Tofd qualification 10 years ago (not recertified it) PAUT will definatley take over from manual UT as the price of it drops and it becomes standard on UT sets.
I have to admit after years of manual UT I found PAUT / Tofd in practise very boring. Last week I took part in corrosion mapping an oil processing spooling an 8 hour shift felt like two weeks.
Absolutely excellent training. I’m not out in the field doing the UT two step anymore, but I really could have benefited from these videos back when I was out in the field, I would find SOMETHING and didn’t know how to interpret, and I would facetime a friend who is a jedi master of UT so he could watch my screen.
I always teach my students the 10/8 V-path in my UT classes. Love the Carolinas connections in this video: Adam Daniels at Sonaspection, FlawTech, and Vermon NDT.
I'm not surprised your sizing was inaccurate. You should only use 6db drop method on reflectors larger than the beam (Inverse Laws). Using it on a through thickness reflector like this would over size by 2-3 times. Max amp would have been very accurate if applied correctly.
I agree with it being used only on flaws larger than the beam, but I would also extend that to only large, purely planar flaws, which essentially limits it only to laminations. Alas, there is a lot of misunderstanding around it, and it continues to be taught as some sort of viable tool when in most cases it's just misleadingly simple.
1st again!