E07.10 - Specialized NDT Methods

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This guide can be used by an end user to specify infrared examinations of electrical and mechanical equipment and an infrared thermographer to perform them.  
4.2 This guide lists the joint responsibilities of the end user and the infrared thermographer when using infrared thermography.  
4.3 The purpose of an infrared examination is to identify and document exceptions in the end user's electrical or mechanical systems, or both.  
4.3.1 In electrical equipment, warm exceptions are usually created by an increase in resistance caused by loose or deteriorated connections, short circuits, overloads, load imbalances or faulty, mismatched or improperly installed components. Cool exceptions are usually caused by failed components.  
4.3.2 In mechanical equipment, warm exceptions are usually created by friction caused by improper lubrication, misalignment, worn components, or mechanical loading anomalies. Cool exceptions are usually caused by failed components.  
4.3.3 Exceptions in insulation systems are usually caused by missing or deteriorated materials, improper installation, or insufficient amounts of material.  
4.4 Providing opinions about the causes of exceptions, the integrity of the equipment, or recommendations for corrective actions require knowledge and skills beyond those of infrared thermography.  
4.5 Infrared examinations provide data about equipment at the time of examination only.  
4.6 Infrared examinations are not remedial.  
4.7 An infrared examination of electrical and mechanical equipment does not assure its proper operation. Other tests and proper maintenance are necessary to ensure their reliable performance.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide lists the responsibilities of the end user and the infrared thermographer when examining electrical and mechanical systems.  
1.2 This guide outlines the specific content required to document qualitative and quantitative infrared examinations of electrical and mechanical equipment.2  
1.3 This guide may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated, moving or all of these or electrically energized equipment.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The purpose of this practice is to outline a procedure for using GWT to locate areas in metal pipes in which wall loss has occurred due to corrosion or erosion.  
5.2 GWT does not provide a direct measurement of wall thickness, but is sensitive to a combination of the CSC and circumferential extent and axial extent of any metal loss. Based on this information, a classification of the severity can be assigned.  
5.3 The GWT method provides a screening tool to quickly identify any discontinuity along the pipe. Where a possible defect is found, follow-up inspection of suspected areas with ultrasonic testing or other NDT methods is normally required to obtain detailed thickness information, nature, and extent of damage.  
5.4 GWT also provides some information on the axial length of a discontinuity, provided that the axial length is longer than roughly a quarter of the wavelength of the excitation signal.  
5.5 The identification and severity assessment of any possible defects is qualitative only. An interpretation process to differentiate between relevant and non-relevant signals is necessary.  
5.6 This practice only covers the application specified in the scope. The GWT method has the capability and can be used for applications where the pipe is insulated, buried, in road crossings, and where access is limited.  
5.7 GWT shall be performed by qualified and certified personnel, as specified in the contract or purchase order. Qualifications shall include training specific to the use of the equipment employed, interpretation of the test results and guided wave technology.  
5.8 A documented program that includes training, examination and experience for the GWT personnel certification shall be maintained by the supplying party.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a procedure for the use of guided wave testing (GWT), also previously known as long range ultrasonic testing (LRUT) or guided wave ultrasonic testing (GWUT).  
1.2 GWT utilizes ultrasonic guided waves, sent in the axial direction of the pipe, to non-destructively test pipes for defects or other features by detecting changes in the cross-section or stiffness of the pipe, or both.  
1.3 GWT is a screening tool. The method does not provide a direct measurement of wall thickness or the exact dimensions of defects/defected area; an estimate of the defect severity however can be provided.  
1.4 This practice is intended for use with tubular carbon steel or low-alloy steel products having Nominal Pipe size (NPS) 2 to 48 corresponding to 60.3 mm to 1219.2 mm (2.375 in. to 48 in.) outer diameter, and wall thickness between 3.81 mm and 25.4 mm (0.15 in. and 1 in.).  
1.5 This practice covers GWT using piezoelectric transduction technology.  
1.6 This practice only applies to GWT of basic pipe configuration. This includes pipes that are straight, constructed of a single pipe size and schedules, fully accessible at the test location, jointed by girth welds, supported by simple contact supports and free of internal, or external coatings, or both; the pipe may be insulated or painted.  
1.7 This practice provides a general procedure for performing the examination and identifying various aspects of particular importance to ensure valid results, but actual interpretation of the data is excluded.  
1.8 This practice does not establish an acceptance criterion. Specific acceptance criteria shall be specified in the contractual agreement by the responsible system user or engineering entity.  
1.9 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and de...

ABSTRACT
This practice covers the procedure for sorting electrically conductive materials using the thermoelectric method, which is based on the seebeck effect. The procedure relates to the use of direct- and comparator-type thermoelectric instruments for distinguishing variations in materials which affect the thermoelectric properties of those materials. The two techniques that are primarily used in thermoelectric sorting are direct and comparative instrumentation. In the direct instruments, equipment is standardized by placing materials with known chemistry and metallurgical structure in the test system. In the comparative instruments, the thermoelectric response of the test piece is compared with that of a known standard(s) and the response indicates whether the piece is within the acceptance limits. The electronic apparatus shall be capable of maintaining a sufficient temperature differential across the electrodes to produce a suitable thermoelectric voltage. The different procedures for sorting electrically conductive materials are presented in details.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the procedure for sorting materials using the thermoelectric method, which is based on the Seebeck effect. The procedure relates to the use of direct- and comparator-type thermoelectric instruments for distinguishing variations in materials which affect the thermoelectric properties of those materials.  
1.2 While the practice is most commonly applied to the sorting of metals, it may be applied to other electrically conductive materials.  
1.3 Thermoelectric sorting may also be applied to the sorting of materials on the basis of plating thickness, case depth, and hardness.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Shearography is commonly used during product process design and optimization, process control, after manufacture inspection, and in service inspection, and can be used to measure static and dynamic axial (tensile and compressive) strain, as well as shearing, Poisson, bending, and torsional strains. The general types of defects detected by shearography include delamination, deformation under load, disbond/unbond, microcracks, and thickness variation.  
5.2 Additional information is given in Guide E2533 about the advantages and limitations of the shearography technique, use of related ASTM documents, specimen geometry and size considerations, calibration and standardization, and physical reference standards.  
5.3 For procedures for shearography of filament-wound pressure vessels, otherwise known as composite overwrapped pressure vessels, consult Guide E2982.  
5.4 Factors that influence shearography and therefore shall be reported include but are not limited to the following: laminate (matrix and fiber) material, lay-up geometry, fiber volume fraction (flat panels); facing material, core material, facing stack sequence, core geometry (cell size); core density, facing void content, and facing volume percent reinforcement (sandwich core materials); processing and fabrication methods, overall thickness, specimen alignment, specimen conditioning, specimen geometry, and test environment (flat panels and sandwich core materials). Shearography has been used with excellent results for composite and metal face sheet sandwich panels with both honeycomb and foam cores, solid monolithic composite laminates, foam cryogenic fuel tank insulation, bonded cork insulation, aircraft tires, elastomeric and plastic coatings. Frequently, defects at multiple and far side bond lines can be detected.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes procedures for shearography of polymer matrix composites and sandwich core materials made entirely or in part from fiber-reinforced polymer matrix composites. The composite materials under consideration typically contain continuous high modulus (greater than 20 GPa (3 × 106 psi)) fibers, but may also contain discontinuous fiber, fabric, or particulate reinforcement.  
1.2 This practice describes established shearography procedures that are currently used by industry and federal agencies that have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of polymer matrix composites and sandwich core materials during product process design and optimization, manufacturing process control, after manufacture inspection, and in service inspection.  
1.3 This practice has utility for testing of polymer matrix composites and sandwich core materials containing but not limited to bismaleimide, epoxy, phenolic, poly(amideimide), polybenzimidazole, polyester (thermosetting and thermoplas- tic), poly(ether ether ketone), poly(ether imide), polyimide (thermosetting and thermoplastic), poly(phenylene sulfide), or polysulfone matrices; and alumina, aramid, boron, carbon, glass, quartz, or silicon carbide fibers. Typical as-fabricated geometries include uniaxial, cross-ply and angle-ply laminates; as well as honeycomb and foam core sandwich materials and structures.  
1.4 This practice does not specify accept-reject criteria and is not intended to be used as a means for approving polymer matrix composites or sandwich core materials for service.  
1.5 To ensure proper use of the referenced standards, there are recognized nondestructive testing (NDT) specialists that are certified according to industry and company NDT specifications. It is recommended that an NDT specialist be a part of any composite component design, quality assurance, in-service maintenance, or damage examination activity.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The POD analysis method described herein is based on a well-known and well established statistical regression method. It shall be used to quantify the demonstrated POD for a specific set of examination parameters and known range of discontinuity sizes under the following conditions.  
5.1.1 The initial response from a nondestructive evaluation inspection system is ultimately binary in nature (that is, hit or miss).  
5.1.2 Discontinuity size is the predictor variable and can be accurately quantified.  
5.1.3 A relationship between discontinuity size and POD exists and is best described by a generalized linear model with the appropriate link function for binary outcomes.  
5.2 This practice does not limit the use of a generalized linear model with more than one predictor variable or other types of statistical models if justified as more appropriate for the hit/miss data.  
5.3 If the initial response from a nondestructive evaluation inspection system is measurable and can be classified as a continuous variable (for example, data collected from an Eddy Current inspection system), then Practice E3023 may be more appropriate.  
5.4 Prior to performing the analysis it is assumed that the discontinuity of interest is clearly defined; the number and distribution of induced discontinuity sizes in the POD specimen set is known and well-documented; discontinuities in the POD specimen set are unobstructed; and the POD examination administration procedure (including data collection method) is well-designed, well-defined, under control, and unbiased. The analysis results are only valid if convergence is achieved and the model adequately represents the data.  
5.5 The POD analysis method described herein is consistent with the analysis method for binary data described in MIL-HDBK-1823A, and is included in several widely utilized POD software packages to perform a POD analysis on hit/miss data. It is also found in statistical software packages that have generalized line...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the procedure for performing a statistical analysis on nondestructive testing hit/miss data to determine the demonstrated probability of detection (POD) for a specific set of examination parameters. Topics covered include the standard hit/miss POD curve formulation, validation techniques, and correct interpretation of results.  
1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The emissivity of a specimen can cause surface temperature measurement errors. Two procedures are provided for measuring and compensating for this error source.  
5.2 These procedures can be used in the field or laboratory, using commonly available materials.  
5.3 These procedures can be used with any infrared radiometers that have the required computer capabilities.  
5.4 The values of emissivity are defined only in terms of the procedure for the purpose of process control and nondestructive evaluation of materials.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for measuring and compensating for emissivity when measuring the surface temperature of a specimen with an infrared imaging radiometer.2  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.3 These procedures may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated or electrically-energized equipment, or both.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The infrared energy that is reflected by a specimen can cause measurement errors for an infrared thermographer measuring its surface temperature. Two procedures are provided for measuring and compensating for this reflected temperature error source, the Reflector Method and the Direct Method.  
5.2 These procedures can be used in the field or laboratory using commonly available materials.  
5.3 These procedures can be used with any infrared radiometers that have the required computer capabilities.  
5.4 Due to the nature of the specimens, the repeatability and reproducibility are subjective. However, a measure of the precision of the procedures can be inferred from the results of the replicate procedures specified in 8.1.6 and 8.2.7.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for measuring and compensating for reflected temperature when measuring the surface temperature of a specimen with an infrared imaging radiometer.2  
1.2 These procedures may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated or electrically energized equipment, or both.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice relates to a thermal imaging system's effectiveness for discerning details in a scene.  
5.2 MRTD values provide estimates of resolution capability and may be used to compare one system with another. (Lower MRTD values indicate better resolution.)  
5.3 Due to the partially subjective nature of the procedure, repeatability and reproducibility are apt to be poor and MRTD differences less than 0.2 °C are considered to be insignificant.
Note 1: Values obtained under idealized laboratory conditions may or may not correlate directly with service performance.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the determination of the minimum resolvable temperature difference (MRTD) capability of the compound observer-thermal imaging system as a function of spatial frequency.  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice gives a measure of a thermal imaging system's effectiveness for detecting a small spot within a large background. Thus, it relates to the detection of small material defects such as voids, pits, cracks, inclusions, and occlusions.  
5.2 MDTD values provide estimates of detection capability that may be used to compare one system with another. (Lower MDTD values indicate better detection capability.)  
5.3 Due to the partially subjective nature of the procedure, repeatability and reproducibility are apt to be poor and MDTD differences less than 0.2 °C are considered to be insignificant.
Note 2: Values obtained under idealized laboratory conditions may or may not correlate directly with service performance.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the determination of the minimum detectable temperature difference (MDTD) capability of a compound observer-thermal imaging system as a function of the angle subtended by the target.  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The transmittance of an attenuating medium can cause errors for an infrared thermographer using an infrared imaging radiometer to measure the temperature of a specimen through the medium. Three test methods are given for measuring and compensating for this error source.  
5.1.1 A procedure is given for measuring the transmittance of an attenuating medium.  
5.1.2 A procedure is given for compensating for errors when measuring the temperature of a specimen having a known emissivity through an attenuating medium with a known transmittance.  
5.1.3 A procedure is given for measuring and compensating for transmittance and emissivity errors when the specimen temperature is known.  
5.2 These procedures can be used in the field or laboratory using commonly available materials.  
5.3 These procedures can be used with any infrared radiometers that have the required computer capabilities.  
5.4 The values of transmittance are defined only in terms of the procedure for the purpose of process control and nondestructive evaluation of materials.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for measuring and compensating for transmittance when using an infrared imaging radiometer to measure the temperature of a specimen through an attenuating medium, such as a window, filter, or atmosphere.2  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.3 These procedures may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated or electrically-energized equipment, or both.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice gives an objective measure of the temperature sensitivity of a thermal imaging system (relative to a standard reference filter) exclusive of a monitor, with emphasis on the detector(s) and preamplifier.
Note 1: Test values obtained under idealized laboratory conditions may or may not correlate directly with service performance.  
5.2 This practice affords a convenient means for periodically monitoring the performance of a given thermal imaging system.  
5.3 NETD relates to minimum resolvable temperature difference as described in Practice E1213. Thus, an increase in NETD may be manifest as a loss of detail in imagery.  
5.4 Intercomparisons based solely on NETD figures may be misleading.
Note 2: NETD depends on various factors such as spectral bandwidth and background temperature.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the determination of the noise equivalent temperature difference (NETD; NEΔT) of thermal imaging systems of the conventional forward-looking infrared (FLIR) or other types that utilize an optical-mechanical scanner; it does not include charge-coupled devices or pyroelectric vidicons.  
1.2 Parts of this practice have been formulated under the assumption of a photonic detector(s) at a standard background temperature of 295 °K (22 °C). Besides nonuniformity, examinations made at other background temperatures may result in impairment of precision and bias.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 APR technology is used for detection, location and identification of internal diameter (ID) flaws-indications and blockages in tube bundles.  
5.2 Reliable and accurate examination of tube bundles is of great importance in different industries. On-time detection of flaws reduces a risk of catastrophic failure and minimizes unplanned shutdowns of plant equipment. Fast examination capability is of great importance due to reduction of maintenance time.  
5.3 APR examinations are performed for quality control of newly manufactured tube bundles as well as for in-service inspection.  
5.4 Performing an APR examination requires access to an open end of each tube to be examined.  
5.5 Flaws that can be readily detected and identified include but are not limited to through-wall holes, ID pitting, erosion, blockages, bulging due to creep and plastic deformation due to bending.  
5.6 APR can be applied to tube bundles made of metal, graphite, plastic or other solid materials with straight and curved sections. The APR technology has been found effective on tubes with diameters between 12.7 mm [1/2 in.] to 101.6 mm [4 in.] and lengths up to 18 metres [60 feet].  
5.7 Closed cracks on ID surface, without significant geometrical alternation on ID surface, may not be detected by APR.  
5.8 APR technology can be used for flaw sizing when special signal and data analysis methods are developed and applied.  
5.9 In addition to detection of flaws and blockages, APR technology can be applied for assessing tube ID surface cleanliness, providing valuable information for equipment maintenance and improving its performance.  
5.10 Other nondestructive test methods may be used to verify and evaluate the significance of APR indications, their exact position, depth, dimension and orientation. These include remote visual inspection, eddy current and ultrasonic testing.  
5.11 Procedures for using other NDT methods are beyond the scope of this practice.  
5.12 Acceptable flaw size...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes use of Acoustic Pulse Reflectometry (APR) technology for examination of the internal surface of typical tube bundles found in heat exchangers, boilers, tubular air heaters and reactors, during shutdown periods.  
1.2 The purpose of APR examination is to detect, locate and identify flaws such as through-wall holes, ID wall loss due to pitting and/or erosion as well as full or partial tube blockages. APR may not be effective in detecting cracks with tight boundaries.  
1.3 APR technology utilizes generation of sound waves through the air in the examined tube, then detecting reflections created by discontinuities and/or blockages. Analysis of the initial phase (positive or negative) and the shape of the reflected acoustic wave are used to identify the type of flaw causing the reflection.  
1.4 When proper methods of signal and data analysis are developed, APR technology can be applied for sizing of flaw/blockage indications.  
1.5 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standards.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 A major concern of metals producers, warehouses, and users is to establish and maintain the identity of metals from melting to their final application. This involves the use of standard quality assurance practices and procedures throughout the various stages of manufacturing and processing, at warehouses and materials receiving, and during fabrication and final installation of the product. These practices typically involve standard chemical analyses and physical tests to meet product acceptance standards, which are slow. Several pieces from a production run are usually destroyed or rendered unusable through mechanical and chemical testing, and the results are used to assess the entire lot using statistical methods. Statistical quality assurance methods are usually effective; however, mixed grades, off-chemistry, and nonstandard physical properties remain the primary causes for claims in the metals industry. A more comprehensive verification of product properties is necessary. Nondestructive means are available to supplement conventional metals grade verification techniques, and to monitor chemical and physical properties at selected production stages, in order to assist in maintaining the identities of metals and their consistency in mechanical properties.  
4.2 Nondestructive methods have the potential for monitoring grade during production on a continuous or statistical basis, for monitoring properties such as hardness and case depth, and for verifying the effectiveness of heat treatment, cold-working, and the like. They are quite often used in the field for solving problems involving off-grade and mixed-grade materials.  
4.3 The nondestructive methods covered in this guide provide both direct and indirect responses to the sample being evaluated. Spectrometric analysis instruments respond to the presence and percents of alloying constituents. The electromagnetic (eddy current) and thermoelectric methods, on the other hand, are among those that respond to pr...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide is intended for tutorial purposes only. It describes the general requirements, methods, and procedures for the nondestructive identification and sorting of metals.  
1.2 It provides guidelines for the selection and use of methods suited to the requirements of particular metals sorting or identification problems.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use. For specific precautionary statements, see Section 10.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The purpose of this practice is to outline a procedure for using GWT to locate areas in metal pipes in which wall loss has occurred due to corrosion or erosion.  
5.2 GWT does not provide a direct measurement of wall thickness, but is sensitive to a combination of the CSC (or reflection coefficient) and circumferential extent and axial extent of any metal loss. Based on this information, a classification of the severity can be assigned.  
5.3 The GWT method provides a screening tool to quickly identify any discontinuity along the pipe. Where a possible defect is found, a follow-up inspection of suspected areas with ultrasonic testing or other NDT methods is normally required to obtain detailed thickness information, nature, and extent of damage.  
5.4 GWT also provides some information on the axial length of a discontinuity, provided that the axial length is longer than roughly a quarter of the wavelength.  
5.5 The identification and severity assessment of any possible defects is qualitative only. An interpretation process to differentiate between relevant and non-relevant signals is necessary.  
5.6 This practice only covers the application specified in the scope. The GWT method has the capability and can be used for applications where the pipe is insulated, buried, in road crossings, and where access is limited.  
5.7 GWT shall be performed by qualified and certified personnel, as specified in the contract or purchase order. Qualifications shall include training specific to the use of the equipment employed, interpretation of the test results, and guided wave technology.  
5.8 A documented program which includes training, examination, and experience for the GWT personnel certification shall be maintained by the supplying party.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a guide for the use of waves generated using magnetostrictive transduction for guided wave testing (GWT) welded tubulars. Magnetostrictive materials transduce or convert time varying magnetic fields into mechanical energy. As a magnetostrictive material is magnetized, it strains. Conversely, if an external force produces a strain in a magnetostrictive material, the material’s magnetic state will change. This bi-directional coupling between the magnetic and mechanical states of a magnetostrictive material provides a transduction capability that can be used for both actuation and sensing devices.  
1.2 GWT utilizes ultrasonic guided waves in the 10 to approximately 250 kHz range, sent in the axial direction of the pipe, to non-destructively test pipes for discontinuities or other features by detecting changes in the cross-section or stiffness of the pipe, or both.  
1.3 GWT is a screening tool. The method does not provide a direct measurement of wall thickness or the exact dimensions of discontinuities. However, an estimate of the severity of the discontinuity can be obtained.  
1.4 This practice is intended for use with tubular carbon steel products having nominal pipe size (NPS) 2 to 48 corresponding to 60.3 to 1219.2 mm (2.375 to 48 in.) outer diameter, and wall thickness between 3.81 and 25.4 mm (0.15 and 1 in.).  
1.5 This practice only applies to GWT of basic pipe configuration. This includes pipes that are straight, constructed of a single pipe size and schedules, fully accessible at the test location, jointed by girth welds, supported by simple contact supports and free of internal, or external coatings, or both; the pipe may be insulated or painted.  
1.6 This practice provides a general practice for performing the examination. The interpretation of the guided wave data obtained is complex and training is required to properly perform data interpretation.  
1.7 This practice does not establish an acceptance criterion. Specific acceptance criteria shall be specified in the contractual agreement by the cognizant engineer.  
1.8 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Metal additive manufacturing has broadened design space, enabling production of more complex and customized products. Additive technology along with the broadened design space is pushing the limits of inspection capabilities and has led to challenges in process and product qualification, verification, certification, etc. In-process monitoring technologies have been developed to help address these challenges.  
4.2 In-process monitoring in AM is emerging from the realm of Research and Development (R&D). As such, there are not yet well-established procedures for incorporating AM process monitoring within a qualification or certification framework outside of a specific company or institution’s internal use. Practical application of in-process monitoring data spans multiple disciplines and parts of the production cycle, each with well-established practices, terminology, expectations, etc. This guide draws on these where appropriate.  
4.3 Inspection and Statistical Process Control (SPC)—A primary motivation for using in-process monitoring technologies is to aid in process and product qualification, verification, certification of AM components that are increasingly difficult to inspect. AM process monitoring functions can be broadly separated into two categories of application: in-process inspection and process control. In-process inspection refers to the identification of in-process signatures that correlate to the formation of physical flaws and defects in additively manufactured component. This is discussed further in 5.2 on Flaw Detection. Statistical Process Control (SPC) encompasses measurement or observation of process signatures or metrics associated with the stability or repeatability of the additive manufacturing process. This is discussed further in 5.3 on Statistical Process Control (SPC). Real-time feed-forward or feed-back control methods and techniques may be considered subcategories under process control, and can make use of the same in-process moni...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides information on emerging in-process monitoring sensors, sensor configurations, sensor data analysis, and sensor data uses for the laser powder bed fusion additive manufacturing process.  
1.2 The sensors covered produce data related to and affected by feedstock, processing parameters, build atmosphere, microstructure, part geometry, part complexity, surface finish, and the printing equipment being used.  
1.3 The parts monitored by the sensors covered in this guide are used in aerospace applications; therefore, their final inspection requirements for discontinuities are different and more stringent than for materials and components used in non-aerospace applications.  
1.4 The metal materials under consideration include, but are not limited to, aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-based alloys, cobalt-chromium alloys, and stainless steels.  
1.5 This guide discusses sensor observation of parts while they are being fabricated. Sensor data analysis may take place concurrently or after the manufacturing process has concluded.  
1.6 The sensors discussed in this guide may be used by cognizant engineering organizations to detect both surface and volumetric flaws.  
1.7 The sensors discussed in this guide may be used by cognizant engineering organizations to detect process stability or drift, or both.  
1.8 The sensors discussed in this guide are primarily configured in staring, co-axial, or mounted configurations.  
1.9 This guide does not recommend a specific course of action, sensor type, or configuration for application of in-process monitoring to additively manufactured (AM) parts. It is intended to increase the awareness of emerging in-process sensors, sensor configurations, data analysis, and data usage.  
1.10 Recommendations about the control of input materials, process equipment calibration, manufacturing processes, and post-processing are beyond the scope of this guide and are und...

SCOPE
1.1 Purpose—This practice covers procedures required to conduct an examination of components using vibroacoustic thermography.  
1.2 Application—The vibroacoustic thermography process has been used for component inspections in the aircraft, power generation, automotive, and other industries for testing new and serviced components, both coated and uncoated. Current applications are mostly targeting metallic components, but composite and ceramic component applications are under development (1).2  
1.3 Background—Vibroacoustic thermography is an active thermography technique that falls under the category of Infrared Thermography Testing (IRT). The technique was first published by Henneke, et al. in 1979 (2) and has been expanded on and popularized by Favro, et al. (3). During the test, a defect thermal response resulting from a short burst of ultrasonic energy typically in the range of 15 kHz to 40 kHz is detected by an infrared camera. The ultrasound coupled into the component being tested can activate a thermal response in defects with contact areas that can move against each other, that is, cracks and delamination. There are different energizing and coupling techniques that are commonly used depending on the needs and capabilities. These variations and the down selection process are not included in the procedure and should be developed/optimized by experimentation for each new component application.
Note 1: Vibroacoustic thermography is typically sensitive to tight planar defects (4). Volumetric defects such as porosity, inclusions, open ruptures, or cracks in wide-open areas, will not typically result in an indication. Therefore, an augmenting method should be conducted to detect volumetric defects. (See Terminology E1316.)
Note 2: Vibroacoustic thermography is a surface examination but has demonstrated detection sensitivity for subsurface defects including back wall defects for thin components (5), (6). Care should be taken when developing vibroacoustic thermography for the detection of subsurface defects.  
1.4 Warnings:  
1.4.1 Warning—Vibroacoustic thermography requires the energization of the test article with vibrational energy. During energization, the complete component may be excited with vibroacoustic (vibration) energy for as long as several seconds. The development of this test for a new application requires special measurements, precautions, and attention to component response. The component design engineer and the NDE engineering specialist knowledgeable of this technique should be satisfied that the test will not cause damage or reduction of service life.  
1.4.2 Warning—Vibroacoustic thermography, like any other NDT technology, requires thorough development and testing for each application, including clear definition of the inspection objective, as well as development of objective means to distinguish between rejectable indications and conditions that should not be cause for rejection. Incomplete development and application will result in high incidence of improper rejections and high incidence of defect "misses."  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The goal of the NDT is to detect defects that have been implicated in the failure of the COPV metal liner, or have led to leakage, loss of contents, injury, death, or mission, or a combination thereof. Liner defects detected by NDT that require special attention by the cognizant engineering organization include through cracks, part-through cracks, liner buckling, pitting, thinning, and corrosion under the influence of cyclic loading, sustained loading, temperature cycling, mechanical impact and other intended or unintended service conditions.
Note 3: Liners made from stainless steel and nickel-based alloys exhibit a higher damage resistance to impact than those made from aluminum.
Note 4: Safe life is the goal for any COPV so that a through crack in the liner will not develop during the service life.
Note 5: The use a material with good fatigue and slow crack growth characteristics is important. For example, nickel-based alloys are better than precipitation-hardened stainless steel. Aluminum also has good ductility and crack resistance.  
4.2 The COPVs covered in this guide consist of a metallic liner overwrapped with high-strength fibers embedded in polymeric matrix resin (typically a thermoset). Metallic liners may be spun formed from a deep drawn/extruded monolithic blank or may be fabricated by welding formed components. Designers often seek to minimize the liner thickness in the interest of weight reduction. COPV liner materials used can be aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-chromium alloys, and stainless steels, impermeable polymer liner such as high density polyethylene, or integrated composite materials. Fiber materials can be carbon, aramid, glass, PBO, metals, or hybrids (two or more types of fiber). Matrix resins include epoxies, cyanate esters, polyurethanes, phenolic resins, polyimides (including bismaleimides), polyamides and other high performance polymers. Common bond line adhesives are generally epoxies (FM-73, West 105, and Epon 86...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide discusses current and potential nondestructive testing (NDT) procedures for finding indications of discontinuities in thin-walled metallic liners in filament-wound pressure vessels, also known as composite overwrapped pressure vessels (COPVs). In general, these vessels have metallic liner thicknesses less than 2.3 mm (0.090 in.), and fiber loadings in the composite overwrap greater than 60 percent by weight. In COPVs, the composite overwrap thickness will be of the order of 2.0 mm (0.080 in.) for smaller vessels, and up to 20 mm (0.80 in.) for larger ones.  
1.2 This guide focuses on COPVs with nonload sharing metallic liners used at ambient temperature, which most closely represents a Compressed Gas Association (CGA) Type III metal-lined COPV. However, it also has relevance to (1) monolithic metallic pressure vessels (PVs) (CGA Type I), and (2) metal-lined hoop-wrapped COPVs (CGA Type II).  
1.3 The vessels covered by this guide are used in aerospace applications; therefore, examination requirements for discontinuities and inspection points will in general be different and more stringent than for vessels used in non-aerospace applications.  
1.4 This guide applies to (1) low pressure COPVs and PVs used for storing aerospace media at maximum allowable working pressures (MAWPs) up to 3.5 MPa (500 psia) and volumes up to 2000 L (70 ft3), and (2) high pressure COPVs used for storing compressed gases at MAWPs up to 70 MPa (10 000 psia) and volumes down to 8 L (500 in.3). Internal vacuum storage or exposure is not considered appropriate for any vessel size.
Note 1: Some vessels are evacuated during filling operations, requiring the tank to withstand external (atmospheric) pressure.  
1.5 The metallic liners under consideration include, but are not limited to, ones made from aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-based alloys, and stainless steels. In the case of COPVs, the composites through which the N...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The POD analysis method described herein is based on well-known and well-established statistical methods. It shall be used to quantify the demonstrated POD for a specific set of examination parameters and known range of discontinuity sizes under the following conditions.  
5.1.1 The initial response from a nondestructive evaluation inspection system is measurable and can be classified as a continuous variable.  
5.1.2 Discontinuity size is the predictor variable and can be accurately quantified.  
5.1.3 The relationship between discontinuity size (a) and measured signal response (â) exists and is best described by a linear regression model with an error structure that is normally distributed with mean zero and constant variance, σ2. (Note that in linear regression, “linear” means linear with respect to the model coefficients. Though a quadratic model  does not have a linear shape when plotted, for example, it is classified as a linear model in regression analysis since it is linear with respect to the model coefficients.)  
5.2 This practice does not limit the use of a linear regression model with more than one predictor variable or other statistical models if justified as more appropriate for the â versus a data.  
5.3 This practice is not appropriate for data resulting from a POD examination on nondestructive evaluation systems that generate an initial response that is binary in nature (for example, hit/miss). Practice E2862 is appropriate for systems that generate a hit/miss-type response (for example, fluorescent penetrant).  
5.4 Prior to performing the analysis, it is assumed that the discontinuity of interest is clearly defined; the number and distribution of induced discontinuity sizes in the POD specimen set is known and well documented; the POD examination administration procedure (including data collection method) is well designed, well defined, under control, and unbiased (see X1.2.2 for more detail); the initial inspection system response is m...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice defines the procedure for performing a statistical analysis on Nondestructive Testing (NDT) â versus a data to determine the demonstrated probability of detection (POD) for a specific set of examination parameters. Topics covered include the standard â versus a regression methodology, POD curve formulation, validation techniques, and correct interpretation of results.  
1.2 Units—The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Typically, FT is used to identify flaws that occur in the manufacture of composite structures, or to identify and track flaws that develop during the service lifetime of the structure. Flaws detected with FT include delamination, disbonds, voids, inclusions, foreign object debris, porosity, or the presence of fluid that is in contact with the backside of the inspection surface. For example, the effect of variable ply number (or thickness), bridging, and an insert simulating delamination on heat flow into a composite is shown in Fig. 1 (left). Bridging (Fig. 1, right) or delaminated areas show up as hot spots due to discontinuous heat flow, causing heating to be localized close to the inspection surface. With dedicated signal processing and the use of representative test samples, characterization of flaw depth and size, or measurement of component thickness and thermal diffusivity, may be performed.
FIG. 1 Variation of Heat Flow Into a Composite With Variable Ply Thickness (Scenarios 1, 3, and 4), Bridging (Scenario 2) And an Insert (Scenario 5) (Left), And a Post Layup Line Scan Showing Bright Spots Attributed to Bridging (Right) (Courtesy of NASA Langley Research Center)  
5.2 Since FT is based on the diffusion of thermal energy from the inspection surface of the specimen to the opposing surface (or the depth plane of interest), the practice requires that data acquisition allows sufficient time for this process to occur, and that at the completion of the acquisition process, the radiated surface temperature signal collected by the IR camera is strong enough to be distinguished from spurious IR contributions from background sources or system noise.  
5.3 This method is based on accurate detection of changes in the emitted IR energy emanating from the inspection surface during the cooling process. As the emissivity of the inspection surface falls below that of an ideal blackbody (blackbody emissivity = 1), the signal detected by the IR camera may include comp...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a procedure for detecting subsurface flaws in composite panels and repair patches using Flash Thermography (FT), in which an infrared (IR) camera is used to detect anomalous cooling behavior of a sample surface after it has been heated with a spatially uniform light pulse from a flash lamp array.  
1.2 This practice describes established FT test methods that are currently used by industry, and have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of composite structures during post-manufacturing and in-service examinations.  
1.3 This practice has utility for testing of polymer composite panels and repair patches containing, but not limited to, bismaleimide, epoxy, phenolic, poly(amide imide), polybenzimidazole, polyester (thermosetting and thermoplastic), poly(ether ether ketone), poly(ether imide), polyimide (thermosetting and thermoplastic), poly(phenylene sulfide), or polysulfone matrices; and alumina, aramid, boron, carbon, glass, quartz, or silicon carbide fibers. Typical as-fabricated geometries include uniaxial, cross ply, and angle ply laminates; as well as honeycomb core sandwich core materials.  
1.4 This practice has utility for testing of ceramic matrix composite panels containing, but not limited to, silicon carbide, silicon nitride, and carbon matrix and fibers.  
1.5 This practice applies to polymer or ceramic matrix composite structures with inspection surfaces that are sufficiently optically opaque to absorb incident light, and that have sufficient emissivity to allow monitoring of the surface temperature with an IR camera. Excessively thick samples, or samples with low thermal diffusivities, require long acquisition periods and yield weak signals approaching background and noise levels, and may be impractical for this technique.  
1.6 This practice applies to detection of flaws in a composite panel or repair patch, or at the bonded interface between the panel and a supporting ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The COPVs covered in this guide consist of a metallic liner overwrapped with high-strength fibers embedded in polymeric matrix resin (typically a thermoset) (Fig. 1). Metallic liners may be spun-formed from a deep drawn/extruded monolithic blank or may be fabricated by welding formed components. Designers often seek to minimize the liner thickness in the interest of weight reduction. COPV liner materials used can be aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-chromium alloys, and stainless steels, impermeable polymer liner such as high density polyethylene, or integrated composite materials. Fiber materials can be carbon, aramid, glass, PBO, metals, or hybrids (two or more types of fibers). Matrix resins include epoxies, cyanate esters, polyurethanes, phenolic resins, polyimides (including bismaleimides), polyamides, and other high performance polymers. Common bond line adhesives are FM-73, urethane, West 105, and Epon 862 with thicknesses ranging from 0.13 mm (0.005 in.) to 0.38 mm (0.015 in.). Metallic liner and composite overwrap materials requirements are found in ANSI/AIAA S-080 and ANSI/AIAA S-081, respectively.  
Note 6: When carbon fiber is used, galvanic protection should be provided for the metallic liner using a physical barrier such as glass cloth in a resin matrix, or similarly, a bond line adhesive.
Note 7: Per the discretion of the cognizant engineering organization, composite materials not developed and qualified in accordance with the guidelines in MIL-HDBK-17, Volumes 1 and 3 should have an approved material usage agreement.
FIG. 1 Typical Carbon Fiber Reinforced COPVs (NASA)  
4.2 The as-wound COPV is then cured and an autofrettage/proof cycle is performed to evaluate performance and increase fatigue characteristics.  
4.3 The strong drive to reduce weight and spatial needs in aerospace applications has pushed designers to adopt COPVs constructed with high modulus carbon fibers embedded in an epoxy matrix. Unfortunately, high modulus fiber...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide discusses current and potential nondestructive testing (NDT) procedures for finding indications of discontinuities and accumulated damage in the composite overwrap of filament wound pressure vessels, also known as composite overwrapped pressure vessels (COPVs). In general, these vessels have metallic liner thicknesses less than 2.3 mm (0.090 in.), and fiber loadings in the composite overwrap greater than 60 % by weight. In COPVs, the composite overwrap thickness will be of the order of 2.0 mm (0.080 in.) for smaller vessels and up to 20 mm (0.80 in.) for larger ones.  
1.2 This guide focuses on COPVs with nonload-sharing metallic liners used at ambient temperature, which most closely represents a Compressed Gas Association (CGA) Type III metal-lined composite tank. However, it also has relevance to (1) monolithic metallic pressure vessels (PVs) (CGA Type I), (2) metal-lined hoop-wrapped COPVs (CGA Type II), (3) plastic-lined composite pressure vessels (CPVs) with a nonload-sharing liner (CGA Type IV), and (4) an all-composite, linerless COPV (undefined Type). This guide also has relevance to COPVs used at cryogenic temperatures.  
1.3 The vessels covered by this guide are used in aerospace applications; therefore, the inspection requirements for discontinuities and inspection points will in general be different and more stringent than for vessels used in non aerospace applications.  
1.4 This guide applies to (1) low pressure COPVs used for storing aerospace media at maximum allowable working pressures (MAWPs) up to 3.5 MPa (500 psia) and volumes up to 2 L (70 ft3), and (2) high pressure COPVs used for storing compressed gases at MAWPs up to 70 MPa (10 000 psia) and volumes down to 8 L (500 in.3). Internal vacuum storage or exposure is not considered appropriate for any vessel size.
Note 1: Some vessels are evacuated during filling operations, requiring the tank to withstand external (atmospheric) pre...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide references requirements that are intended to control the quality of NDT data. The purpose of this guide, therefore, is not to establish acceptance criteria and therefore approve composite materials or components for aerospace service.  
5.2 Following the discretion of the cognizant engineering organization, NDT for fracture control of composite and bonded materials should follow additional guidance described in MIL-HDBK-6870, NASA-STD-(I)-5019, or MSFC-RQMT-3479, or a combination thereof, as appropriate (not covered in this guide).  
5.3 Certain procedures referenced in this guide are written so they can be specified on the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract, for example, Practice E1742/E1742M (Radiography).  
5.4 Acceptance Criteria—Determination about whether a composite material or component meets acceptance criteria and is suitable for aerospace service should be made by the cognizant engineering organization. When examinations are performed in accordance with the referenced documents in this guide, the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract should indicate the acceptance criteria.  
5.4.1 Accept/reject criteria should consist of a listing of the expected kinds of imperfections and the rejection level for each.  
5.4.2 The classification of the articles under test into zones for various accept/reject criteria should be determined from contractual documents.  
5.4.3 Rejection of Composite Articles—If the type, size, or quantities of defects are found to be outside the allowable limits specified by the drawing, purchase order, or contract, the composite article should be separated from acceptable articles, appropriately identified as discrepant, and submitted for material review by the cognizant engineering organization, and dispositioned as (1) acceptable as is, (2) subject to further rework or repair to make the materials or component acceptable, or (3) scrapped when required by contractu...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides information to help engineers select appropriate nondestructive testing (NDT) methods to characterize aerospace polymer matrix composites (PMCs). This guide does not intend to describe every inspection technology. Rather, emphasis is placed on established NDT methods that have been developed into consensus standards and that are currently used by industry. Specific practices and test methods are not described in detail, but are referenced. The referenced NDT practices and test methods have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of PMCs during process design and optimization, process control, after manufacture inspection, in-service inspection, and health monitoring.  
1.2 This guide does not specify accept-reject criteria and is not intended to be used as a means for approving composite materials or components for service.  
1.3 This guide covers the following established NDT methods as applied to PMCs: Acoustic Emission (AE, Section 7); Computed Tomography (CT, Section 8); Leak Testing (LT, Section 9); Radiographic Testing, Computed Radiography, Digital Radiography, and Radioscopy (RT, CR, DR, RTR, Section 10); Shearography (Section 11); Strain Measurement (Contact Methods, Section 12); Thermography (Section 13); Ultrasonic Testing (UT, Section 14); and Visual Testing (VT, Section 15).  
1.4 The value of this guide consists of the narrative descriptions of general procedures and significance and use sections for established NDT practices and test methods as applied to PMCs. Additional information is provided about the use of currently active standard documents (an emphasis is placed on applicable standard guides, practices, and test methods of ASTM Committee E07 on Nondestructive Testing), geometry and size considerations, safety and hazards considerations, and information about physical reference standards.  
1.5 To ensure proper use of the referenced standard documents, there are recogni...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Metal parts made by additive manufacturing differ from their traditional metal counterparts made by forging, casting, or welding. Additive manufacturing produces layers melted or sintered on top of each other. The part’s shape is controlled by a computer as well as by the layers. The computer directs energy from a laser or electron beam onto a powder bed or wire input material. These processing approaches have the potential of creating flaws that are undesirable in the as-built or finished part. In general, processing parameter anomalies and disruptions during a build may induce such “flaws.” Flaws can also be introduced because of contaminants present in the input material.  
4.2 Established NDT procedures such as those given in ASTM E07 standards are the basis for the NDT procedures discussed in this guide. These NDT procedures are used to inspect production parts before or after post-processing or finishing operations, or after receipt of finished parts by the end user prior to installation. The NDT procedures described in this guide are based on procedures developed for conventionally manufactured cast, wrought, or welded production parts.  
4.3 Application of the NDT procedures discussed in this guide is intended to reduce the likelihood of material or component failure, thus mitigating or eliminating the attendant risks associated with loss of function, and possibly, the loss of ground support personnel, crew, or mission.  
4.4 Input Materials—The input materials covered in this guide consist of, but are not limited to, ones made from aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-based alloys, cobalt-chromium alloys, and stainless steels. Input materials are either powders or wire.
Note 3: When electron beams are used, the beam couples effectively with any electrically conductive material, including aluminum and copper-based alloys.  
4.4.1 Powders—High-quality powders required for AM process are produced by (1) plasma atomization, (2) inert gas atomizati...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide discusses the use of established and emerging nondestructive testing (NDT) procedures used to inspect metal parts made by additive manufacturing (AM).  
1.2 The NDT procedures covered produce data related to and affected by microstructure, part geometry, part complexity, surface finish, and the different AM processes used.  
1.3 The parts tested by the procedures covered in this guide are used in aerospace applications; therefore, the inspection requirements for discontinuities and inspection points in general are different and more stringent than for materials and components used in non-aerospace applications.  
1.4 The metal materials under consideration include, but are not limited to, aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-based alloys, cobalt-chromium alloys, and stainless steels.  
1.5 The manufacturing processes considered use powder and wire feedstock, and laser or electron energy sources. Specific powder bed fusion (PBF) and directed energy deposition (DED) processes are discussed.  
1.6 This guide discusses NDT of parts after they have been fabricated. Parts will exist in one of three possible states: (1) raw, as-built parts before post-processing (heat treating, hot isostatic pressing, machining, etc.), (2) intermediately machined parts, or (3) finished parts after all post-processing is completed.  
1.7 The NDT procedures discussed in this guide are used by cognizant engineering organizations to detect both surface and volumetric flaws in as-built (raw) and post-processed (finished) parts.  
1.8 The NDT procedures discussed in this guide are computed tomography (CT, Section 7, including microfocus CT), eddy current testing (ET, Section 8), optical metrology (MET, Section 9), penetrant testing (PT, Section 10), process compensated resonance testing (PCRT, Section 11), radiographic testing (RT, Section 12), infrared thermography (IRT, Section 13), and ultrasonic testing (UT, Section 14)....

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Polyethylene piping has been used instead of steel alloys in the petrochemical, power, water, gas distribution, and mining industries due to its resistance to corrosion, erosion, and reliability. Recently, polyethylene pipe has also been used for nuclear safety related cooling water applications.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers microwave (MW) examination of butt fusion joints made entirely of polyethylene for the purpose of joining polyethylene piping or vessel parts.
Note 1: The notes in this practice are for information only and shall not be considered part of this practice.
Note 2: This practice references HDPE and MDPE for pipe applications as defined by Specification D3350.  
1.2 MW examination detects differences between the dielectric constant(s) of the materials being examined. These differences may be due to material construction (expected) or flaws such as voids, cracks, or foreign material intrusion (unexpected).  
1.3 The butt fusion joining process can be subject to a variety of flaws including, but not limited to, lack of fusion, particulate contamination, inclusions, and voids.  
1.4 This practice is intended for use on polyethylene butt fusion joints of pipe diameters of 4 in. to 65 in. (100 mm – 1650 mm) and wall thickness of 0.5 in. to 4 in. (12 mm – 100 mm). Greater and lesser thicknesses and smaller diameters may be tested using this standard practice if the technique can be demonstrated to provide adequate detection on mockups of the same wall thickness and geometry.  
1.5 This standard practice does not address microwave examination of electrofusion joints, socket joints, or saddles.  
1.6 This standard details inspection requirement only. Accept/reject criteria must be established contractually and is typically done using multiple samples with mechanical test (that is, tensile test) validation.  
1.7 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.8 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.9 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Polyethylene piping has been used instead of steel alloys in the petrochemical, power, water, gas distribution, and mining industries due to its resistance to corrosion and erosion and reliability. Recently, polyethylene pipe has also been used for nuclear safety related cooling water applications.  
5.2 MW examination is useful for detecting various flaws that are known to occur in polyethylene electrofused joints.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers microwave (MW) examination of electrofusion joints made entirely of polyethylene for the purpose of joining polyethylene piping.
Note 1: The notes in this practice are for information only and shall not be considered part of this practice.
Note 2: This practice references HDPE and MDPE for pipe applications as defined by Specification D3350.  
1.2 The electrofusion joining process can be subject to a variety of flaws including, but not limited to, lack of fusion, particulate contamination, inclusions, and voids.  
1.3 The practice is intended to be used on joint thicknesses of 0.5 in. to 4 in. (12 mm to 100 mm) and diameters 4 in. (100 mm) and greater. Greater and lesser thicknesses and lesser diameters may be tested using this standard practice if the technique can be demonstrated to provide adequate detection on mockups of the same wall thickness and geometry.  
1.4 This practice can be applied to post assembly inspection of polyethylene electrofusion joints.  
1.5 This practice does not specify acceptance criteria.  
1.6 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.7 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.8 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SCOPE
1.1 Purpose—This practice covers procedures required to conduct an examination of components using vibroacoustic thermography.  
1.2 Application—The vibroacoustic thermography process has been used for component inspections in the aircraft, power generation, automotive, and other industries for testing new and serviced components, both coated and uncoated. Current applications are mostly targeting metallic components, but composite and ceramic component applications are under development (1).2  
1.3 Background—Vibroacoustic thermography is a new technique within the area of active thermography. The technique was first published by Henneke, et al. in 1979 (2) and has been expanded on and popularized by Favro, et al. (3). During the test, a defect thermal response resulting from a short burst of ultrasonic energy typically in the range of 15 kHz to 40 kHz is detected by an infrared camera. The ultrasound coupled into the component being tested can activate a thermal response in defects with contact areas that can move against each other, that is, cracks and delamination. There are different energizing and coupling techniques that are commonly used depending on the needs and capabilities. These variations and the down selection process are not included in the procedure and should be developed/optimized by experimentation for each new component application.
Note 1: Vibroacoustic thermography is typically sensitive to tight planar defects (4). Volumetric defects such as porosity, inclusions, open ruptures, or cracks in wide-open areas, will not typically result in an indication. Therefore, an augmenting method should be conducted to detect volumetric defects. (See Terminology E1316.)
Note 2: Vibroacoustic thermography is a surface examination but has demonstrated detection sensitivity for subsurface defects including back wall defects for thin components (5), (6). Care should be taken when developing vibroacoustic thermography for the detection of subsurface defects.  
1.4 Warnings:  
1.4.1 Warning—Vibroacoustic thermography requires the energization of the test article with vibrational energy. During energization, the complete component may be excited with vibroacoustic (vibration) energy for as long as several seconds. The development of this test for a new application requires special measurements, precautions, and attention to component response. The component design engineer and the NDE engineering specialist knowledgeable of this technique should be satisfied that the test will not cause damage or reduction of service life.  
1.4.2 Warning—Vibroacoustic thermography, like any other NDT technology, requires thorough development and testing for each application, including clear definition of the inspection objective, as well as development of objective means to distinguish between rejectable indications and conditions that should not be cause for rejection. Incomplete development and application will result in high incidence of improper rejections and high incidence of defect "misses." The images produced by many vibroacoustic thermography inspections can otherwise lead to inspector fatigue and ineffective evaluations.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.6 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 Metal parts made by additive manufacturing differ from their traditional metal counterparts made by forging, casting, or welding. Additive manufacturing produces layers melted or sintered on top of each other. The part’s shape is controlled by a computer as well as by the layers. The computer directs energy from a laser or electron beam onto a powder bed or wire input material. These processing approaches have the potential of creating flaws that are undesirable in the as-built or finished part. In general, processing parameter anomalies and disruptions during a build may induce such “flaws.” Flaws can also be introduced because of contaminants present in the input material.  
4.2 Established NDT procedures such as those given in ASTM E07 standards are the basis for the NDT procedures discussed in this guide. These NDT procedures are used to inspect production parts before or after post-processing or finishing operations, or after receipt of finished parts by the end user prior to installation. The NDT procedures described in this guide are based on procedures developed for conventionally manufactured cast, wrought, or welded production parts.  
4.3 Application of the NDT procedures discussed in this guide is intended to reduce the likelihood of material or component failure, thus mitigating or eliminating the attendant risks associated with loss of function, and possibly, the loss of ground support personnel, crew, or mission.  
4.4 Input Materials—The input materials covered in this guide consist of, but are not limited to, ones made from aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-based alloys, cobalt-chromium alloys, and stainless steels. Input materials are either powders or wire.
Note 3: When electron beams are used, the beam couples effectively with any electrically conductive material, including aluminum and copper-based alloys.  
4.4.1 Powders—High-quality powders required for AM process are produced by (1) plasma atomization, (2) inert gas atomizati...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide discusses the use of established and emerging nondestructive testing (NDT) procedures used to inspect metal parts made by additive manufacturing (AM).  
1.2 The NDT procedures covered produce data related to and affected by microstructure, part geometry, part complexity, surface finish, and the different AM processes used.  
1.3 The parts tested by the procedures covered in this guide are used in aerospace applications; therefore, the inspection requirements for discontinuities and inspection points in general are different and more stringent than for materials and components used in non-aerospace applications.  
1.4 The metal materials under consideration include, but are not limited to, aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-based alloys, cobalt-chromium alloys, and stainless steels.  
1.5 The manufacturing processes considered use powder and wire feedstock, and laser or electron energy sources. Specific powder bed fusion (PBF) and directed energy deposition (DED) processes are discussed.  
1.6 This guide discusses NDT of parts after they have been fabricated. Parts will exist in one of three possible states: (1) raw, as-built parts before post-processing (heat treating, hot isostatic pressing, machining, etc.), (2) intermediately machined parts, or (3) finished parts after all post-processing is completed.  
1.7 The NDT procedures discussed in this guide are used by cognizant engineering organizations to detect both surface and volumetric flaws in as-built (raw) and post-processed (finished) parts.  
1.8 The NDT procedures discussed in this guide are computed tomography (CT, Section 7, including microfocus CT), eddy current testing (ET, Section 8), optical metrology (MET, Section 9), penetrant testing (PT, Section 10), process compensated resonance testing (PCRT, Section 11), radiographic testing (RT, Section 12), infrared thermography (IRT, Section 13), and ultrasonic testing (UT, Section 14)....

ABSTRACT
This practice covers the procedure for sorting electrically conductive materials using the thermoelectric method, which is based on the seebeck effect. The procedure relates to the use of direct- and comparator-type thermoelectric instruments for distinguishing variations in materials which affect the thermoelectric properties of those materials. The two techniques that are primarily used in thermoelectric sorting are direct and comparative instrumentation. In the direct instruments, equipment is standardized by placing materials with known chemistry and metallurgical structure in the test system. In the comparative instruments, the thermoelectric response of the test piece is compared with that of a known standard(s) and the response indicates whether the piece is within the acceptance limits. The electronic apparatus shall be capable of maintaining a sufficient temperature differential across the electrodes to produce a suitable thermoelectric voltage. The different procedures for sorting electrically conductive materials are presented in details.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the procedure for sorting materials using the thermoelectric method, which is based on the Seebeck effect. The procedure relates to the use of direct- and comparator-type thermoelectric instruments for distinguishing variations in materials which affect the thermoelectric properties of those materials.  
1.2 While the practice is most commonly applied to the sorting of metals, it may be applied to other electrically conductive materials.  
1.3 Thermoelectric sorting may also be applied to the sorting of materials on the basis of plating thickness, case depth, and hardness.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 Shearography is commonly used during product process design and optimization, process control, after manufacture inspection, and in service inspection, and can be used to measure static and dynamic axial (tensile and compressive) strain, as well as shearing, Poisson, bending, and torsional strains. The general types of defects detected by shearography include delamination, deformation under load, disbond/unbond, microcracks, and thickness variation.  
5.2 Additional information is given in Guide E2533 about the advantages and limitations of the shearography technique, use of related ASTM documents, specimen geometry and size considerations, calibration and standardization, and physical reference standards.  
5.3 For procedures for shearography of filament-wound pressure vessels, otherwise known as composite overwrapped pressure vessels, consult Guide E2982.  
5.4 Factors that influence shearography and therefore shall be reported include but are not limited to the following: laminate (matrix and fiber) material, lay-up geometry, fiber volume fraction (flat panels); facing material, core material, facing stack sequence, core geometry (cell size); core density, facing void content, and facing volume percent reinforcement (sandwich core materials); processing and fabrication methods, overall thickness, specimen alignment, specimen conditioning, specimen geometry, and test environment (flat panels and sandwich core materials). Shearography has been used with excellent results for composite and metal face sheet sandwich panels with both honeycomb and foam cores, solid monolithic composite laminates, foam cryogenic fuel tank insulation, bonded cork insulation, aircraft tires, elastomeric and plastic coatings. Frequently, defects at multiple and far side bond lines can be detected.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes procedures for shearography of polymer matrix composites and sandwich core materials made entirely or in part from fiber-reinforced polymer matrix composites. The composite materials under consideration typically contain continuous high modulus (greater than 20 GPa (3×106 psi)) fibers, but may also contain discontinuous fiber, fabric, or particulate reinforcement.  
1.2 This practice describes established shearography procedures that are currently used by industry and federal agencies that have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of polymer matrix composites and sandwich core materials during product process design and optimization, manufacturing process control, after manufacture inspection, and in service inspection.  
1.3 This practice has utility for testing of polymer matrix composites and sandwich core materials containing but not limited to bismaleimide, epoxy, phenolic, poly(amideimide), polybenzimidazole, polyester (thermosetting and thermoplastic), poly(ether ether ketone), poly(ether imide), polyimide (thermosetting and thermoplastic), poly(phenylene sulfide), or polysulfone matrices; and alumina, aramid, boron, carbon, glass, quartz, or silicon carbide fibers. Typical as-fabricated geometries include uniaxial, cross-ply and angle-ply laminates; as well as honeycomb and foam core sandwich materials and structures.  
1.4 This practice does not specify accept-reject criteria and is not intended to be used as a means for approving polymer matrix composites or sandwich core materials for service.  
1.5 To ensure proper use of the referenced standards, there are recognized nondestructive testing (NDT) specialists that are certified according to industry and company NDT specifications. It is recommended that an NDT specialist be a part of any composite component design, quality assurance, in-service maintenance, or damage examination activity.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental pra...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 FT is typically used to identify flaws that occur in the manufacture of composite structures, or to identify and track flaws that develop during the service lifetime of the structure. Flaws detected with FT include delamination, disbonds, voids, inclusions, foreign object debris, porosity, or the presence of fluid that is in contact with the back side of the inspection surface. With dedicated signal processing and the use of representative test samples, characterization of flaw depth and size, or measurement of component thickness and thermal diffusivity may be performed.  
5.2 Since FT is based on the diffusion of thermal energy from the inspection surface of the specimen to the opposing surface (or the depth plane of interest), the practice requires that data acquisition allows sufficient time for this process to occur, and that at the completion of the acquisition process, the radiated surface temperature signal collected by the IR camera is strong enough to be distinguished from spurious IR contributions from background sources or system noise.  
5.3 This method is based on accurate detection of changes in the emitted IR energy emanating from the inspection surface during the cooling process. As the emissivity of the inspection surface falls below that of an ideal blackbody (blackbody emissivity = 1), the signal detected by the IR camera may include components that are reflected from the inspection surface. Most composite materials can be examined without special surface preparation. However, it may be necessary to coat low-emissivity, optically translucent inspection surfaces with an optically opaque, high-emissivity water-washable paint.  
5.4 This practice applies to the detection of flaws with aspect ratio greater than one.  
5.5 This practice is based on the thermal response of a specimen to a light pulse that is uniformly distributed over the plane of the inspection surface. To ensure that 1- dimensional heat flow from the surface into the sample i...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes a procedure for detecting subsurface flaws in composite panels and repair patches using Flash Thermography (FT), in which an infrared (IR) camera is used to detect anomalous cooling behavior of a sample surface after it has been heated with a spatially uniform light pulse from a flash lamp array.  
1.2 This practice describes established FT test methods that are currently used by industry, and have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of composite structures during post-manufacturing and in-service examinations.  
1.3 This practice has utility for testing of polymer composite panels and repair patches containing, but not limited to, bismaleimide, epoxy, phenolic, poly(amide imide), polybenzimidazole, polyester (thermosetting and thermoplastic), poly(ether ether ketone), poly(ether imide), polyimide (thermosetting and thermoplastic), poly(phenylene sulfide), or polysulfone matrices; and alumina, aramid, boron, carbon, glass, quartz, or silicon carbide fibers. Typical as-fabricated geometries include uniaxial, cross ply, and angle ply laminates; as well as honeycomb core sandwich core materials.  
1.4 This practice has utility for testing of ceramic matrix composite panels containing, but not limited to, silicon carbide, silicon nitride, and carbon matrix and fibers.  
1.5 This practice applies to polymer or ceramic matrix composite structures with inspection surfaces that are sufficiently optically opaque to absorb incident light, and that have sufficient emissivity to allow monitoring of the surface temperature with an IR camera. Excessively thick samples, or samples with low thermal diffusivities, require long acquisition periods and yield weak signals approaching background and noise levels, and may be impractical for this technique.  
1.6 This practice applies to detection of flaws in a composite panel or repair patch, or at the bonded interface between the panel and a supporting ...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice relates to a thermal imaging system's effectiveness for discerning details in a scene.  
5.2 MRTD values provide estimates of resolution capability and may be used to compare one system with another. (Lower MRTD values indicate better resolution.)  
5.3 Due to the partially subjective nature of the procedure, repeatability and reproducibility are apt to be poor and MRTD differences less than 0.2 °C are considered to be insignificant.
Note 1: Values obtained under idealized laboratory conditions may or may not correlate directly with service performance.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the determination of the minimum resolvable temperature difference (MRTD) capability of the compound observer-thermal imaging system as a function of spatial frequency.  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice gives an objective measure of the temperature sensitivity of a thermal imaging system (relative to a standard reference filter) exclusive of a monitor, with emphasis on the detector(s) and preamplifier.
Note 1: Test values obtained under idealized laboratory conditions may or may not correlate directly with service performance.  
5.2 This practice affords a convenient means for periodically monitoring the performance of a given thermal imaging system.  
5.3 NETD relates to minimum resolvable temperature difference as described in Practice E1213. Thus, an increase in NETD may be manifest as a loss of detail in imagery.  
5.4 Intercomparisons based solely on NETD figures may be misleading.
Note 2: NETD depends on various factors such as spectral bandwidth and background temperature.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the determination of the noise equivalent temperature difference (NETD; NEΔT) of thermal imaging systems of the conventional forward-looking infrared (FLIR) or other types that utilize an optical-mechanical scanner; it does not include charge-coupled devices or pyroelectric vidicons.  
1.2 Parts of this practice have been formulated under the assumption of a photonic detector(s) at a standard background temperature of 295 °K (22 °C). Besides nonuniformity, examinations made at other background temperatures may result in impairment of precision and bias.  
1.3 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This practice gives a measure of a thermal imaging system's effectiveness for detecting a small spot within a large background. Thus, it relates to the detection of small material defects such as voids, pits, cracks, inclusions, and occlusions.  
5.2 MDTD values provide estimates of detection capability that may be used to compare one system with another. (Lower MDTD values indicate better detection capability.)  
5.3 Due to the partially subjective nature of the procedure, repeatability and reproducibility are apt to be poor and MDTD differences less than 0.2 °C are considered to be insignificant.
Note 2: Values obtained under idealized laboratory conditions may or may not correlate directly with service performance.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers the determination of the minimum detectable temperature difference (MDTD) capability of a compound observer-thermal imaging system as a function of the angle subtended by the target.  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The transmittance of an attenuating medium can cause errors for an infrared thermographer using an infrared imaging radiometer to measure the temperature of a specimen through the medium. Three test methods are given for measuring and compensating for this error source.  
5.1.1 A procedure is given for measuring the transmittance of an attenuating medium.  
5.1.2 A procedure is given for compensating for errors when measuring the temperature of a specimen having a known emissivity through an attenuating medium with a known transmittance.  
5.1.3 A procedure is given for measuring and compensating for transmittance and emissivity errors when the specimen temperature is known.  
5.2 These procedures can be used in the field or laboratory using commonly available materials.  
5.3 These procedures can be used with any infrared radiometers that have the required computer capabilities.  
5.4 The values of transmittance are defined only in terms of the procedure for the purpose of process control and nondestructive evaluation of materials.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for measuring and compensating for transmittance when using an infrared imaging radiometer to measure the temperature of a specimen through an attenuating medium, such as a window, filter, or atmosphere.2  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.3 These procedures may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated or electrically-energized equipment, or both.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The emissivity of a specimen can cause surface temperature measurement errors. Two procedures are provided for measuring and compensating for this error source.  
5.2 These procedures can be used in the field or laboratory, using commonly available materials.  
5.3 These procedures can be used with any infrared radiometers that have the required computer capabilities.  
5.4 The values of emissivity are defined only in terms of the procedure for the purpose of process control and nondestructive evaluation of materials.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for measuring and compensating for emissivity when measuring the surface temperature of a specimen with an infrared imaging radiometer.2  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. No other units of measurement are included in this standard.  
1.3 These procedures may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated or electrically-energized equipment, or both.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The infrared energy that is reflected by a specimen can cause measurement errors for an infrared thermographer measuring its surface temperature. Two procedures are provided for measuring and compensating for this reflected temperature error source, the Reflector Method and the Direct Method.  
5.2 These procedures can be used in the field or laboratory using commonly available materials.  
5.3 These procedures can be used with any infrared radiometers that have the required computer capabilities.  
5.4 Due to the nature of the specimens, the repeatability and reproducibility are subjective. However, a measure of the precision of the procedures can be inferred from the results of the replicate procedures specified in 8.1.6 and 8.2.7.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for measuring and compensating for reflected temperature when measuring the surface temperature of a specimen with an infrared imaging radiometer.2  
1.2 These procedures may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated or electrically energized equipment, or both.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 This guide can be used by an end user to specify infrared examinations of electrical and mechanical equipment and an infrared thermographer to perform them.  
4.2 This guide lists the joint responsibilities of the end user and the infrared thermographer when using infrared thermography.  
4.3 The purpose of an infrared examination is to identify and document exceptions in the end user's electrical or mechanical systems, or both.  
4.3.1 In electrical equipment, warm exceptions are usually created by an increase in resistance caused by loose or deteriorated connections, short circuits, overloads, load imbalances or faulty, mismatched or improperly installed components. Cool exceptions are usually caused by failed components.  
4.3.2 In mechanical equipment, warm exceptions are usually created by friction caused by improper lubrication, misalignment, worn components, or mechanical loading anomalies. Cool exceptions are usually caused by failed components.  
4.3.3 Exceptions in insulation systems are usually caused by missing or deteriorated materials, improper installation, or insufficient amounts of material.  
4.4 Providing opinions about the causes of exceptions, the integrity of the equipment, or recommendations for corrective actions require knowledge and skills beyond those of infrared thermography.  
4.5 Infrared examinations provide data about equipment at the time of examination only.  
4.6 Infrared examinations are not remedial.  
4.7 An infrared examination of electrical and mechanical equipment does not assure its proper operation. Other tests and proper maintenance are necessary to ensure their reliable performance.
SCOPE
1.1 This guide lists the responsibilities of the end user and the infrared thermographer when examining electrical and mechanical systems.  
1.2 This guide outlines the specific content required to document qualitative and quantitative infrared examinations of electrical and mechanical equipment.2  
1.3 This guide may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated, moving or all of these or electrically energized equipment.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.5 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 APR technology is used for detection, location and identification of internal diameter (ID) flaws-indications and blockages in tube bundles.  
5.2 Reliable and accurate examination of tube bundles is of great importance in different industries. On-time detection of flaws reduces a risk of catastrophic failure and minimizes unplanned shutdowns of plant equipment. Fast examination capability is of great importance due to reduction of maintenance time.  
5.3 APR examinations are performed for quality control of newly manufactured tube bundles as well as for in-service inspection.  
5.4 Performing an APR examination requires access to an open end of each tube to be examined.  
5.5 Flaws that can be readily detected and identified include but are not limited to through-wall holes, ID pitting, erosion, blockages, bulging due to creep and plastic deformation due to bending.  
5.6 APR can be applied to tube bundles made of metal, graphite, plastic or other solid materials with straight and curved sections. The APR technology has been found effective on tubes with diameters between 12.7 mm [1/2 in.] to 101.6 mm [4 in.] and lengths up to 18 metres [60 feet].  
5.7 Closed cracks on ID surface, without significant geometrical alternation on ID surface, may not be detected by APR.  
5.8 APR technology can be used for flaw sizing when special signal and data analysis methods are developed and applied.  
5.9 In addition to detection of flaws and blockages, APR technology can be applied for assessing tube ID surface cleanliness, providing valuable information for equipment maintenance and improving its performance.  
5.10 Other nondestructive test methods may be used to verify and evaluate the significance of APR indications, their exact position, depth, dimension and orientation. These include remote visual inspection, eddy current and ultrasonic testing.  
5.11 Procedures for using other NDT methods are beyond the scope of this practice.  
5.12 Acceptable flaw size...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice describes use of Acoustic Pulse Reflectometry (APR) technology for examination of the internal surface of typical tube bundles found in heat exchangers, boilers, tubular air heaters and reactors, during shutdown periods.  
1.2 The purpose of APR examination is to detect, locate and identify flaws such as through-wall holes, ID wall loss due to pitting and/or erosion as well as full or partial tube blockages. APR may not be effective in detecting cracks with tight boundaries.  
1.3 APR technology utilizes generation of sound waves through the air in the examined tube, then detecting reflections created by discontinuities and/or blockages. Analysis of the initial phase (positive or negative) and the shape of the reflected acoustic wave are used to identify the type of flaw causing the reflection.  
1.4 When proper methods of signal and data analysis are developed, APR technology can be applied for sizing of flaw/blockage indications.  
1.5 The values stated in either SI units or inch-pound units are to be regarded separately as standard. The values stated in each system may not be exact equivalents; therefore, each system shall be used independently of the other. Combining values from the two systems may result in non-conformance with the standards.  
1.6 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.7 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The purpose of this practice is to outline a procedure for using GWT to locate areas in metal pipes in which wall loss has occurred due to corrosion or erosion.  
5.2 GWT does not provide a direct measurement of wall thickness, but is sensitive to a combination of the CSC (or reflection coefficient) and circumferential extent and axial extent of any metal loss. Based on this information, a classification of the severity can be assigned.  
5.3 The GWT method provides a screening tool to quickly identify any discontinuity along the pipe. Where a possible defect is found, a follow-up inspection of suspected areas with ultrasonic testing or other NDT methods is normally required to obtain detailed thickness information, nature, and extent of damage.  
5.4 GWT also provides some information on the axial length of a discontinuity, provided that the axial length is longer than roughly a quarter of the wavelength.  
5.5 The identification and severity assessment of any possible defects is qualitative only. An interpretation process to differentiate between relevant and non-relevant signals is necessary.  
5.6 This practice only covers the application specified in the scope. The GWT method has the capability and can be used for applications where the pipe is insulated, buried, in road crossings, and where access is limited.  
5.7 GWT shall be performed by qualified and certified personnel, as specified in the contract or purchase order. Qualifications shall include training specific to the use of the equipment employed, interpretation of the test results, and guided wave technology.  
5.8 A documented program which includes training, examination, and experience for the GWT personnel certification shall be maintained by the supplying party.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a guide for the use of waves generated using magnetostrictive transduction for guided wave testing (GWT) welded tubulars. Magnetostrictive materials transduce or convert time varying magnetic fields into mechanical energy. As a magnetostrictive material is magnetized, it strains. Conversely, if an external force produces a strain in a magnetostrictive material, the material’s magnetic state will change. This bi-directional coupling between the magnetic and mechanical states of a magnetostrictive material provides a transduction capability that can be used for both actuation and sensing devices.  
1.2 GWT utilizes ultrasonic guided waves in the 10 to approximately 250 kHz range, sent in the axial direction of the pipe, to non-destructively test pipes for discontinuities or other features by detecting changes in the cross-section or stiffness of the pipe, or both.  
1.3 GWT is a screening tool. The method does not provide a direct measurement of wall thickness or the exact dimensions of discontinuities. However, an estimate of the severity of the discontinuity can be obtained.  
1.4 This practice is intended for use with tubular carbon steel products having nominal pipe size (NPS) 2 to 48 corresponding to 60.3 to 1219.2 mm (2.375 to 48 in.) outer diameter, and wall thickness between 3.81 and 25.4 mm (0.15 and 1 in.).  
1.5 This practice only applies to GWT of basic pipe configuration. This includes pipes that are straight, constructed of a single pipe size and schedules, fully accessible at the test location, jointed by girth welds, supported by simple contact supports and free of internal, or external coatings, or both; the pipe may be insulated or painted.  
1.6 This practice provides a general practice for performing the examination. The interpretation of the guided wave data obtained is complex and training is required to properly perform data interpretation.  
1.7 This practice does not establish an acceptance criterion. Specific acceptance criteria shall be specified in the contractual agreement by the cognizant engineer.  
1.8 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The POD analysis method described herein is based on a well-known and well established statistical method. It shall be used to quantify the demonstrated POD for a specific set of examination parameters and known range of discontinuity sizes under the following conditions.  
5.1.1 The initial response from a nondestructive evaluation inspection system is ultimately binary in nature (that is, hit or miss).  
5.1.2 Discontinuity size is the predictor variable and can be accurately quantified.  
5.1.3 A relationship between discontinuity size and POD exists and is best described by a generalized linear model with the appropriate link function for binary outcomes.  
5.2 This practice does not limit the use of a generalized linear model with more than one predictor variable or other types of statistical models if justified as more appropriate for the hit/miss data.  
5.3 If the initial response from a nondestructive evaluation inspection system is measurable and can be classified as a continuous variable (for example, data collected from an Eddy Current inspection system), then Practice E3023 may be more appropriate.  
5.4 Prior to performing the analysis it is assumed that the discontinuity of interest is clearly defined; the number and distribution of induced discontinuity sizes in the POD specimen set is known and well-documented; discontinuities in the POD specimen set are unobstructed; and the POD examination administration procedure (including data collection method) is well-designed, well-defined, under control, and unbiased. The analysis results are only valid if convergence is achieved and the model adequately represents the data.  
5.5 The POD analysis method described herein is consistent with the analysis method for binary data described in MIL-HDBK-1823A, and is included in several widely utilized POD software packages to perform a POD analysis on hit/miss data. It is also found in statistical software packages that have generalized linear modeling...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice defines the procedure for performing a statistical analysis on nondestructive testing hit/miss data to determine the demonstrated probability of detection (POD) for a specific set of examination parameters. Topics covered include the standard hit/miss POD curve formulation, validation techniques, and correct interpretation of results.  
1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety, health, and environmental practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.  
1.4 This international standard was developed in accordance with internationally recognized principles on standardization established in the Decision on Principles for the Development of International Standards, Guides and Recommendations issued by the World Trade Organization Technical Barriers to Trade (TBT) Committee.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide references requirements that are intended to control the quality of NDT data. The purpose of this guide, therefore, is not to establish acceptance criteria and therefore approve composite materials or components for aerospace service.  
5.2 Certain procedures referenced in the guide are written so they can be specified on the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract, for example, Practice E1742 (Radiography).  
5.3 Acceptance Criteria—Determination about whether a composite material or component meets acceptance criteria and is suitable for aerospace service must be made by the cognizant engineering organization. When examinations are performed in accordance with the referenced documents in this guide, the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract shall indicate the acceptance criteria.  
5.3.1 Accept/reject criteria shall consist of a listing of the expected kinds of imperfections and the rejection level for each.  
5.3.2 The classification of the articles under test into zones for various accept/reject criteria shall be determined from contractual documents.  
5.3.3 Rejection of Composite Articles—If the type, size, or quantities of defects are found to be outside the allowable limits specified by the drawing, purchase order, or contract, the composite article shall be separated from acceptable articles, appropriately identified as discrepant, and submitted for material review by the cognizant engineering organization, and dispositioned as (1) acceptable as is, (2) subject to further rework or repair to make the materials or component acceptable, or (3) scrapped when required by contractual documents.  
5.3.4 Acceptance criteria and interpretation of result shall be defined in requirements documents prior to performing the examination. Advance agreement should be reached between the purchaser and supplier regarding the interpretation of the results of the examinations. All discontinuities having sig...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides information to help engineers select appropriate nondestructive testing (NDT) methods to characterize aerospace polymer matrix composites (PMCs). This guide does not intend to describe every inspection technology. Rather, emphasis is placed on established NDT methods that have been developed into consensus standards and that are currently used by industry. Specific practices and test methods are not described in detail, but are referenced. The referenced NDT practices and test methods have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of PMCs during process design and optimization, process control, after manufacture inspection, in-service inspection, and health monitoring.  
1.2 This guide does not specify accept-reject criteria and is not intended to be used as a means for approving composite materials or components for service.  
1.3 This guide covers the following established NDT methods as applied to PMCs: Acoustic Emission (AE, 7), Computed Tomography (CT, 8), Leak Testing (LT, 9), Radiographic Testing, Computed Radiography, Digital Radiography, and Radioscopy (RT, CR, DR, RTR, 10), Shearography (11), Strain Measurement (contact methods, 12), Thermography (13), Ultrasonic Testing (UT, 14), and Visual Testing (VT, 15).  
1.4 The value of this guide consists of the narrative descriptions of general procedures and significance and use sections for established NDT practices and test methods as applied to PMCs. Additional information is provided about the use of currently active standard documents (an emphasis is placed on applicable standard guides, practices, and test methods of ASTM Committee E07 on Nondestructive Testing), geometry and size considerations, safety and hazards considerations, and information about physical reference standards.  
1.5 To ensure proper use of the referenced standard documents, there are recognized NDT specialists that are certified in accordance with industry and c...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide references requirements that are intended to control the quality of NDT data. The purpose of this guide, therefore, is not to establish acceptance criteria and therefore approve composite materials or components for aerospace service.  
5.2 Certain procedures referenced in the guide are written so they can be specified on the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract, for example, Practice E1742 (Radiography).  
5.3 Acceptance Criteria—Determination about whether a composite material or component meets acceptance criteria and is suitable for aerospace service must be made by the cognizant engineering organization. When examinations are performed in accordance with the referenced documents in this guide, the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract shall indicate the acceptance criteria.  
5.3.1 Accept/reject criteria shall consist of a listing of the expected kinds of imperfections and the rejection level for each.  
5.3.2 The classification of the articles under test into zones for various accept/reject criteria shall be determined from contractual documents.  
5.3.3 Rejection of Composite Articles—If the type, size, or quantities of defects are found to be outside the allowable limits specified by the drawing, purchase order, or contract, the composite article shall be separated from acceptable articles, appropriately identified as discrepant, and submitted for material review by the cognizant engineering organization, and dispositioned as (1) acceptable as is, (2) subject to further rework or repair to make the materials or component acceptable, or (3) scrapped when required by contractual documents.  
5.3.4 Acceptance criteria and interpretation of result shall be defined in requirements documents prior to performing the examination. Advance agreement should be reached between the purchaser and supplier regarding the interpretation of the results of the examinations. All discontinuities having sig...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides information to help engineers select appropriate nondestructive testing (NDT) methods to characterize aerospace polymer matrix composites (PMCs). This guide does not intend to describe every inspection technology. Rather, emphasis is placed on established NDT methods that have been developed into consensus standards and that are currently used by industry. Specific practices and test methods are not described in detail, but are referenced. The referenced NDT practices and test methods have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of PMCs during process design and optimization, process control, after manufacture inspection, in-service inspection, and health monitoring.  
1.2 This guide does not specify accept-reject criteria and is not intended to be used as a means for approving composite materials or components for service.  
1.3 This guide covers the following established NDT methods as applied to PMCs: Acoustic Emission (AE, 7), Computed Tomography (CT, 8), Leak Testing (LT, 9), Radiographic Testing, Computed Radiography, Digital Radiography, and Radioscopy (RT, CR, DR, RTR, 10), Shearography (11), Strain Measurement (contact methods, 12), Thermography (13), Ultrasonic Testing (UT, 14), and Visual Testing (VT, 15).  
1.4 The value of this guide consists of the narrative descriptions of general procedures and significance and use sections for established NDT practices and test methods as applied to PMCs. Additional information is provided about the use of currently active standard documents (an emphasis is placed on applicable standard guides, practices, and test methods of ASTM Committee E07 on Nondestructive Testing), geometry and size considerations, safety and hazards considerations, and information about physical reference standards.  
1.5 To ensure proper use of the referenced standard documents, there are recognized NDT specialists that are certified in accordance with industry and c...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The purpose of this practice is to outline a procedure for using GWT to locate areas in metal pipes in which wall loss has occurred due to corrosion or erosion.  
5.2 GWT does not provide a direct measurement of wall thickness, but is sensitive to a combination of the CSC and circumferential extent and axial extent of any metal loss. Based on this information, a classification of the severity can be assigned.  
5.3 The GWT method provides a screening tool to quickly identify any discontinuity along the pipe. Where a possible defect is found, follow-up inspection of suspected areas with ultrasonic testing or other NDT methods is normally required to obtain detailed thickness information, nature, and extent of damage.  
5.4 GWT also provides some information on the axial length of a discontinuity, provided that the axial length is longer than roughly a quarter of the wavelength of the excitation signal.  
5.5 The identification and severity assessment of any possible defects is qualitative only. An interpretation process to differentiate between relevant and non-relevant signals is necessary.  
5.6 This practice only covers the application specified in the scope. The GWT method has the capability and can be used for applications where the pipe is insulated, buried, in road crossings, and where access is limited.  
5.7 GWT shall be performed by qualified and certified personnel, as specified in the contract or purchase order. Qualifications shall include training specific to the use of the equipment employed, interpretation of the test results and guided wave technology.  
5.8 A documented program that includes training, examination and experience for the GWT personnel certification shall be maintained by the supplying party.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice provides a procedure for the use of guided wave testing (GWT), also previously known as long range ultrasonic testing (LRUT) or guided wave ultrasonic testing (GWUT).  
1.2 GWT utilizes ultrasonic guided waves, sent in the axial direction of the pipe, to non-destructively test pipes for defects or other features by detecting changes in the cross-section and/or stiffness of the pipe.  
1.3 GWT is a screening tool. The method does not provide a direct measurement of wall thickness or the exact dimensions of defects/defected area; an estimate of the defect severity however can be provided.  
1.4 This practice is intended for use with tubular carbon steel or low-alloy steel products having Nominal Pipe size (NPS) 2 to 48 corresponding to 60.3 to 1219.2 mm (2.375 to 48 in.) outer diameter, and wall thickness between 3.81 and 25.4 mm (0.15 and 1 in.).  
1.5 This practice covers GWT using piezoelectric transduction technology.  
1.6 This practice only applies to GWT of basic pipe configuration. This includes pipes that are straight, constructed of a single pipe size and schedules, fully accessible at the test location, jointed by girth welds, supported by simple contact supports and free of internal, or external coatings, or both; the pipe may be insulated or painted.  
1.7 This practice provides a general procedure for performing the examination and identifying various aspects of particular importance to ensure valid results, but actual interpretation of the data is excluded.  
1.8 This practice does not establish an acceptance criterion. Specific acceptance criteria shall be specified in the contractual agreement by the responsible system user or engineering entity.  
1.9 Units—The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.10 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regula...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide references requirements that are intended to control the quality of NDT data. The purpose of this guide, therefore, is not to establish acceptance criteria and therefore approve composite materials or components for aerospace service.  
5.2 Certain procedures referenced in the guide are written so they can be specified on the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract, for example, Practice E1742 (Radiography).  
5.3 Acceptance Criteria—Determination about whether a composite material or component meets acceptance criteria and is suitable for aerospace service must be made by the cognizant engineering organization. When examinations are performed in accordance with the referenced documents in this guide, the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract shall indicate the acceptance criteria.  
5.3.1 Accept/reject criteria shall consist of a listing of the expected kinds of imperfections and the rejection level for each.  
5.3.2 The classification of the articles under test into zones for various accept/reject criteria shall be determined from contractual documents.  
5.3.3 Rejection of Composite Articles—If the type, size, or quantities of defects are found to be outside the allowable limits specified by the drawing, purchase order, or contract, the composite article shall be separated from acceptable articles, appropriately identified as discrepant, and submitted for material review by the cognizant engineering organization, and dispositioned as (1) acceptable as is, (2) subject to further rework or repair to make the materials or component acceptable, or (3) scrapped when required by contractual documents.  
5.3.4 Acceptance criteria and interpretation of result shall be defined in requirements documents prior to performing the examination. Advance agreement should be reached between the purchaser and supplier regarding the interpretation of the results of the examinations. All discontinuities having sig...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides information to help engineers select appropriate nondestructive testing (NDT) methods to characterize aerospace polymer matrix composites (PMCs). This guide does not intend to describe every inspection technology. Rather, emphasis is placed on established NDT methods that have been developed into consensus standards and that are currently used by industry. Specific practices and test methods are not described in detail, but are referenced. The referenced NDT practices and test methods have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of PMCs during process design and optimization, process control, after manufacture inspection, in-service inspection, and health monitoring.  
1.2 This guide does not specify accept-reject criteria and is not intended to be used as a means for approving composite materials or components for service.  
1.3 This guide covers the following established NDT methods as applied to PMCs: Acoustic Emission (AE, 7), Computed Tomography (CT, 8), Leak Testing (LT, 9), Radiographic Testing, Computed Radiography, Digital Radiography, and Radioscopy (RT, CR, DR, RTR, 10), Shearography (11), Strain Measurement (contact methods, 12), Thermography (13), Ultrasonic Testing (UT, 14), and Visual Testing (VT, 15).  
1.4 The value of this guide consists of the narrative descriptions of general procedures and significance and use sections for established NDT practices and test methods as applied to PMCs. Additional information is provided about the use of currently active standard documents (an emphasis is placed on applicable standard guides, practices, and test methods of ASTM Committee E07 on Nondestructive Testing), geometry and size considerations, safety and hazards considerations, and information about physical reference standards.  
1.5 To ensure proper use of the referenced standard documents, there are recognized NDT specialists that are certified in accordance with industry and c...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 This guide references requirements that are intended to control the quality of NDT data. The purpose of this guide, therefore, is not to establish acceptance criteria and therefore approve composite materials or components for aerospace service.  
5.2 Certain procedures referenced in the guide are written so they can be specified on the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract, for example, Practice E1742 (Radiography).  
5.3 Acceptance Criteria—Determination about whether a composite material or component meets acceptance criteria and is suitable for aerospace service must be made by the cognizant engineering organization. When examinations are performed in accordance with the referenced documents in this guide, the engineering drawing, specification, purchase order, or contract shall indicate the acceptance criteria.  
5.3.1 Accept/reject criteria shall consist of a listing of the expected kinds of imperfections and the rejection level for each.  
5.3.2 The classification of the articles under test into zones for various accept/reject criteria shall be determined from contractual documents.  
5.3.3 Rejection of Composite Articles—If the type, size, or quantities of defects are found to be outside the allowable limits specified by the drawing, purchase order, or contract, the composite article shall be separated from acceptable articles, appropriately identified as discrepant, and submitted for material review by the cognizant engineering organization, and dispositioned as (1) acceptable as is, (2) subject to further rework or repair to make the materials or component acceptable, or (3) scrapped when required by contractual documents.  
5.3.4 Acceptance criteria and interpretation of result shall be defined in requirements documents prior to performing the examination. Advance agreement should be reached between the purchaser and supplier regarding the interpretation of the results of the examinations. All discontinuities having sig...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide provides information to help engineers select appropriate nondestructive testing (NDT) methods to characterize aerospace polymer matrix composites (PMCs). This guide does not intend to describe every inspection technology. Rather, emphasis is placed on established NDT methods that have been developed into consensus standards and that are currently used by industry. Specific practices and test methods are not described in detail, but are referenced. The referenced NDT practices and test methods have demonstrated utility in quality assurance of PMCs during process design and optimization, process control, after manufacture inspection, in-service inspection, and health monitoring.  
1.2 This guide does not specify accept-reject criteria and is not intended to be used as a means for approving composite materials or components for service.  
1.3 This guide covers the following established NDT methods as applied to PMCs: Acoustic Emission (AE, 7), Computed Tomography (CT, 8), Leak Testing (LT, 9), Radiographic Testing, Computed Radiography, Digital Radiography, and Radioscopy (RT, CR, DR, RTR, 10), Shearography (11), Strain Measurement (contact methods, 12), Thermography (13), Ultrasonic Testing (UT, 14), and Visual Testing (VT, 15).  
1.4 The value of this guide consists of the narrative descriptions of general procedures and significance and use sections for established NDT methods as applied to PMCs. Additional information is provided about the use of currently active standard documents (an emphasis is placed on applicable standard guides, practices, and test methods of ASTM Committee E07 on Nondestructive Testing), geometry and size considerations, safety and hazards considerations, and information about physical reference standards.  
1.5 To ensure proper use of the referenced standard documents, there are recognized NDT specialists who are certified in accordance with industry and company NDT specifica...

SCOPE
1.1 Purpose—This practice covers procedures required to conduct an examination of components using vibroacoustic thermography.  
1.2 Application—The vibroacoustic thermography process has been used for component inspections in the aircraft, power generation, automotive, and other industries for testing new and serviced components, both coated and uncoated. Current applications are mostly targeting metallic components, but composite and ceramic component applications are under development.  
1.3 Background—Vibroacoustic thermography is a new technique within the area of active thermography. The technique was first published by Henneke, et al. in 1979 (1)2 and has been expanded on and popularized by Favro, et al. (2). During the test a defect thermal response resulting from a short burst of ultrasonic energy typically in the range of 15 kHz to 40 kHz is detected by an infrared camera. The ultrasound coupled into the component being tested can activate a thermal response in defects with contact areas that can move against each other, that is, cracks and delamination. There are different energizing and coupling techniques that are commonly used depending on the needs and capabilities. These variations and the down selection process are not included in the procedure and should be developed/optimized by experimentation for each new component application.
Note 1: Vibroacoustic thermography is typically sensitive to tight planar defects (3). Volumetric defects such as porosity, inclusions, open ruptures or cracks in wide-open areas, will not typically result in an indication. Therefore, an augmenting method should be conducted to detect volumetric defects.
Note 2: Vibroacoustic thermography is a surface examination but has demonstrated detection sensitivity for subsurface defects including back wall defects for thin components (4), (5). Care should be taken when developing vibroacoustic thermography for the detection of subsurface defects.  
1.4 Warning—Vibroacoustic thermography requires the energization of the test article with vibrational energy. During energization, the complete component may be excited with vibroacoustic (vibration) energy for as long as several seconds. The development of this test for a new application requires special measurements, precautions and attention to component response. The component design engineer and the NDE engineering specialist, knowledgeable of this technique should be satisfied that the test will not cause damage or reduction of service life.  
1.5 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The COPVs covered in this guide consist of a metallic liner overwrapped with high-strength fibers embedded in polymeric matrix resin (typically a thermoset) (Fig. 1). Metallic liners may be spun-formed from a deep drawn/extruded monolithic blank or may be fabricated by welding formed components. Designers often seek to minimize the liner thickness in the interest of weight reduction. COPV liner materials used can be aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-chromium alloys, and stainless steels, impermeable polymer liner such as high density polyethylene, or integrated composite materials. Fiber materials can be carbon, aramid, glass, PBO, metals, or hybrids (two or more types of fibers). Matrix resins include epoxies, cyanate esters, polyurethanes, phenolic resins, polyimides (including bismaleimides), polyamides and other high performance polymers. Common bond line adhesives are FM-73, urethane, West 105, and Epon 862 with thicknesses ranging from 0.13 mm (0.005 in.) to 0.38 mm (0.015 in.). Metallic liner and composite overwrap materials requirements are found in ANSI/AIAA S-080 and ANSI/AIAA S-081, respectively.  
Note 5: When carbon fiber is used, galvanic protection must be provided for the metallic liner using a physical barrier such as glass cloth in a resin matrix, or similarly, a bond line adhesive.
Note 6: Per the discretion of the cognizant engineering organization, composite materials not developed and qualified in accordance with the guidelines in MIL-HDBK-17, Volumes 1 and 3 shall have an approved material usage agreement.
FIG. 1 Typical Carbon Fiber Reinforced COPVs (NASA)  
4.2 The as-wound COPV is then cured and an autofrettage/proof cycle is performed to evaluate performance and increase fatigue characteristics.  
4.3 The strong drive to reduce weight and spatial needs in aerospace applications has pushed designers to adopt COPVs constructed with high modulus carbon fibers embedded in an epoxy matrix. Unfortunately, high modulus fibers ar...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide discusses current and potential nondestructive testing (NDT) procedures for finding indications of discontinuities and accumulated damage in the composite overwrap of filament wound pressure vessels, also known as composite overwrapped pressure vessels (COPVs). In general, these vessels have metallic liner thicknesses less than 2.3 mm (0.090 in.), and fiber loadings in the composite overwrap greater than 60 percent by weight. In COPVs, the composite overwrap thickness will be of the order of 2.0 mm (0.080 in.) for smaller vessels and up to 20 mm (0.80 in.) for larger ones.  
1.2 This guide focuses on COPVs with nonload-sharing metallic liners used at ambient temperature, which most closely represents a Compressed Gas Association (CGA) Type III metal-lined composite tank. However, it also has relevance to 1) monolithic metallic pressure vessels (PVs) (CGA Type I), 2) metal-lined hoop-wrapped COPVs (CGA Type II), 3) plastic-lined composite pressure vessels (CPVs) with a nonload-sharing liner (CGA Type IV), and 4) an all-composite, linerless COPV (undefined Type). This guide also has relevance to COPVs used at cryogenic temperatures.  
1.3 The vessels covered by this guide are used in aerospace applications; therefore, the inspection requirements for discontinuities and inspection points will in general be different and more stringent than for vessels used in non aerospace applications.  
1.4 This guide applies to 1) low pressure COPVs used for storing aerospace media at maximum allowable working pressures (MAWPs) up to 3.5 MPa (500 psia) and volumes up to 2 m3 (70 ft3), and 2) high pressure COPVs used for storing compressed gases at MAWPs up to 70 MPa (10,000 psia) and volumes down to 8000 cm3 (500 in.3). Internal vacuum storage or exposure is not considered appropriate for any vessel size.  
1.5 The composite overwraps under consideration include but are not limited to ones made from various polymer mat...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
4.1 The COPVs covered in this guide consist of a metallic liner overwrapped with high-strength fibers embedded in polymeric matrix resin (typically a thermoset) (Fig. 1). Metallic liners may be spun-formed from a deep drawn/extruded monolithic blank or may be fabricated by welding formed components. Designers often seek to minimize the liner thickness in the interest of weight reduction. COPV liner materials used can be aluminum alloys, titanium alloys, nickel-chromium alloys, and stainless steels, impermeable polymer liner such as high density polyethylene, or integrated composite materials. Fiber materials can be carbon, aramid, glass, PBO, metals, or hybrids (two or more types of fibers). Matrix resins include epoxies, cyanate esters, polyurethanes, phenolic resins, polyimides (including bismaleimides), polyamides and other high performance polymers. Common bond line adhesives are FM-73, urethane, West 105, and Epon 862 with thicknesses ranging from 0.13 mm (0.005 in.) to 0.38 mm (0.015 in.). Metallic liner and composite overwrap materials requirements are found in ANSI/AIAA S-080 and ANSI/AIAA S-081, respectively.  
Note 5: When carbon fiber is used, galvanic protection must be provided for the metallic liner using a physical barrier such as glass cloth in a resin matrix, or similarly, a bond line adhesive.
Note 6: Per the discretion of the cognizant engineering organization, composite materials not developed and qualified in accordance with the guidelines in MIL-HDBK-17, Volumes 1 and 3 shall have an approved material usage agreement.
Note 1: POD(a), showing the location of the smallest detectable flaw and a90 (left). POD(a) with confidence bounds added and showing the location of a90/95 (right).  
4.11.1 Given that a90/95has become a de facto design criterion it is more important to estimate the 90th percentile of the POD (a) function more precisely than lower parts of the curve. This can be accomplished by placing more targets in the region of the a90 v...
SCOPE
1.1 This guide discusses current and potential nondestructive testing (NDT) procedures for finding indications of discontinuities and accumulated damage in the composite overwrap of filament wound pressure vessels, also known as composite overwrapped pressure vessels (COPVs). In general, these vessels have metallic liner thicknesses less than 2.3 mm (0.090 in.), and fiber loadings in the composite overwrap greater than 60 percent by weight. In COPVs, the composite overwrap thickness will be of the order of 2.0 mm (0.080 in.) for smaller vessels and up to 20 mm (0.80 in.) for larger ones.  
1.2 This guide focuses on COPVs with nonload-sharing metallic liners used at ambient temperature, which most closely represents a Compressed Gas Association (CGA) Type III metal-lined composite tank. However, it also has relevance to 1) monolithic metallic pressure vessels (PVs) (CGA Type I), 2) metal-lined hoop-wrapped COPVs (CGA Type II), 3) plastic-lined composite pressure vessels (CPVs) with a nonload-sharing liner (CGA Type IV), and 4) an all-composite, linerless COPV (undefined Type). This guide also has relevance to COPVs used at cryogenic temperatures.  
1.3 The vessels covered by this guide are used in aerospace applications; therefore, the inspection requirements for discontinuities and inspection points will in general be different and more stringent than for vessels used in non aerospace applications.  
1.4 This guide applies to 1) low pressure COPVs used for storing aerospace media at maximum allowable working pressures (MAWPs) up to 3.5 MPa (500 psia) and volumes up to 2 m3 (70 ft3), and 2) high pressure COPVs used for storing compressed gases at MAWPs up to 70 MPa (10,000 psia) and volumes down to 8000 cm3 (500 in.3). Internal vacuum storage or exposure is not considered appropriate for any vessel size.  
1.5 The composite overwraps under consideration include but are not limited to ones made from various polymer mat...

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The POD analysis method described herein is based on well-known and well-established statistical methods. It shall be used to quantify the demonstrated POD for a specific set of examination parameters and known range of discontinuity sizes under the following conditions.  
5.1.1 The initial response from a nondestructive evaluation inspection system is measurable and can be classified as a continuous variable.  
5.1.2 The relationship between discontinuity size (a) and measured signal response (â) exists and is best described by a linear regression model with an error structure that is normally distributed with mean zero and constant variance, σ2. (Note that “linear” refers to linear with respect to the model coefficients. For example, a quadratic model  is a linear model.)  
5.2 This practice does not limit the use of other statistical models if justified as more appropriate for the â versus a data.  
5.3 This practice is not appropriate for data resulting from a POD examination on nondestructive evaluation systems that generate an initial response that is binary in nature (for example, hit/miss). Practice E2862 is appropriate for systems that generate a hit/miss-type response (for example, fluorescent penetrant).  
5.4 Prior to performing the analysis it is assumed that the discontinuity of interest is clearly defined; the number and distribution of induced discontinuity sizes in the POD specimen set is known and well documented; the POD examination administration procedure (including data collection method) is well designed, well defined, under control, and unbiased; the initial inspection system response is measurable and continuous in nature; the inspection system is calibrated; and the measurement error has been evaluated and deemed acceptable. The analysis results are only valid if the â versus a data are accurate and precise and the linear model adequately represents the â versus a data.  
5.5 The POD analysis method described herein is consistent ...
SCOPE
1.1 This practice defines the procedure for performing a statistical analysis on Nondestructive Testing (NDT) â versus a data to determine the demonstrated probability of detection (POD) for a specific set of examination parameters. Topics covered include the standard â versus a regression methodology, POD curve formulation, validation techniques, and correct interpretation of results.  
1.2 The values stated in inch-pound units are to be regarded as standard. The values given in parentheses are mathematical conversions to SI units that are provided for information only and are not considered standard.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The transmittance of an attenuating medium can cause errors for an infrared thermographer using an infrared imaging radiometer to measure the temperature of a specimen through the medium. Three test methods are given for measuring and compensating for this error source.  
5.1.1 A procedure is given for measuring the transmittance of an attenuating medium.  
5.1.2 A procedure is given for compensating for errors when measuring the temperature of a specimen having a known emissivity through an attenuating medium with a known transmittance.  
5.1.3 A procedure is given for measuring and compensating for transmittance and emissivity errors when the specimen temperature is known.  
5.2 These procedures can be used in the field or laboratory using commonly available materials.  
5.3 These procedures can be used with any infrared radiometers that have the required computer capabilities.  
5.4 The values of transmittance are defined only in terms of the procedure for the purpose of process control and nondestructive evaluation of materials.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for measuring and compensating for transmittance when using an infrared imaging radiometer to measure the temperature of a specimen through an attenuating medium, such as a window, filter or atmosphere.2  
1.2 The values stated in SI units are to be regarded as the standard.  
1.3 These procedures may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated or electrically-energized equipment, or both.  
1.4 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.

SIGNIFICANCE AND USE
5.1 The infrared energy that is reflected by a specimen can cause measurement errors for an infrared thermographer measuring its surface temperature. Two procedures are provided for measuring and compensating for this reflected temperature error source, the Reflector Method and the Direct Method.  
5.2 These procedures can be used in the field or laboratory using commonly available materials.  
5.3 These procedures can be used with any infrared radiometers that have the required computer capabilities.  
5.4 Due to the nature of the specimens, the repeatability and reproducibility are subjective. However, a measure of the precision of the procedures can be inferred from the results of the replicate procedures specified in 8.1.6 and 8.2.7.
SCOPE
1.1 This practice covers procedures for measuring and compensating for reflected temperature when measuring the surface temperature of a specimen with an infrared imaging radiometer.2  
1.2 These procedures may involve use of equipment and materials in the presence of heated or electrically energized equipment, or both.  
1.3 This standard does not purport to address all of the safety concerns, if any, associated with its use. It is the responsibility of the user of this standard to establish appropriate safety and health practices and determine the applicability of regulatory limitations prior to use.