ME OFCJUL16.

qxp_Layout 1 6/20/16 2:37 PM Page 1

JULY 2016
VOL. 74 • NO. 7
ASNT… CREATING A SAFER WORLD!™

TECHNICAL FOCUS

COMPUTED
TOMOGRAPHY
Back to Basics
3D Printing
Scatter Correction
Volumetric CT
Comparison
Helical Scanning

ALSO INSIDE
75th ASNT
Anniversary
Special 1980s
Retrospective

THE AMERICAN SOCIETY FOR NONDESTRUCTIVE TESTING

JULY 2016
VOLUME 74 • NUMBER 7

TECH FOCUS ISSUE: COMPUTED TOMOGRAPHY

FOCUS LETTER

953 Inside Computed Tomography

“we looked for practical examples and ‘case studies,’ which demonstrate the wide
spectrum of applications”
John Chen

BACK TO BASICS
974 X-ray Scan 974
Industrial X-ray Volumetric Computed Tomography
Don J. Roth

FEATURES
984 3D Printed Parts
Testing 3D Printed Parts during the Preproduction Stages
using Industrial Computed Tomography
Andrew Good

991 Cone Beam

Scattering The Problem: A Solution for Scatter Correction
in Industrial Cone Beam Computed Tomography
Oliver Brunke
991
999 Turbine Airfoils
Analysis Techniques for Volumetric Computed
Tomography Inspection of Turbine Airfoils
Patrick Howard, Joseph Portaz, and Peter Wassenaar

TECHNICAL PAPERS

1037 A Comparative Study on the Characteristics

Between Different Computed Tomographic
Acquisition Techniques
Stephan Zuber

1055 Computed Tomography Helical Scanning for

Dimensional Metrology: Evaluation of
Measurement Errors
Valentina Aloisi, Simone Carmignato, Joseph Schlecht, and Eric Ferley

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 943
 departments
PERSPECTIVE
ASNT SCOPE
949 President’s Letter
954 Section News “please continue to let us know
where we can add value to your
955 Society Notes
career”
962 Awards and Honors
951 Director’s Letter
968 New ASNT Certificate “I can confidently say that this is
Holders already proving to be an
exceptionally valuable event.” 1007

WHAT’S NEW
RESOURCES
1006 Product Gallery 972 Exam Schedule
1007 Spotlight: Computed
Tomography 1011 Contact ASNT
1008 Web Sightings 1014 Ask the President
1013 New Media 1020 Corporate Partners
Structural Health Monitoring of
Composite Structures using Fiber 1025 Calendar
Optic Methods, Fraunhofer IZFP
954 Annual Report, Strategic Analysis
1061 Employment Service
of the Global Gamma Sources 1061 Service Directory
Market, ASTM International
Standard for Structural Defects 1072 Coming Attractions
1016 Industry News 1072 Ad Index
Tecnatom Signs Contracts for
Inspection, Hexagon Acquires
AICON, Physik Instrumente
Invests in Technology Center
1019 NDT Pics

Digital Materials Evaluation content is also available online at

www.asnt.org/materialsevaluation/access.

IN THIS ISSUE Subscription Questions?
ASNT membership includes a one-year
Computed subscription to Materials Evaluation.
Tomography Institutions, or others who wish to have
a subscription without becoming an
Cover photo credit: ASNT member, may simply subscribe to
GE Sensing & the journal through ASNT. To become a
Inspection Technology member or subscribe to the journal,
contact ASNT at (800) 222-2768 or
see www.asnt.org/membershipoptions.
Back Issues & Article Copies
Back issues of Materials Evaluation
are available for purchase. See
www.asnt.org/shop/periodicals.ihtml
for details, or call (800) 222-2768.
Copies of individual articles may also
be obtained through ASNT: contact the
librarian at (800) 222-2768 for more
information.
Comments & Suggestions
Letters to the editor are welcome at any
time. Letters that are timely and signifi-
cant may be published in an issue of
Materials Evaluation. Not all letters are
suitable for publication, and ASNT
makes no claim regarding publication
of a given letter. Letters should be
sent to Editor Nathaniel Moes at
nmoes@asnt.org.

944 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6

VOLUME 74 • NUMBER 7
JOURNAL STAFF
PUBLISHER: Dr. Arnold Bereson
PUBLICATIONS MANAGER: Timothy E. Jones
EDITOR: Nathaniel Moes
ASSOCIATE EDITOR: Toni Kervina
ADVERTISING SUPERVISOR: Jessica Miller
PRODUCTION/LAYOUT: Joy Grimm
REVIEW BOARD
TECHNICAL EDITOR
Richard H. Bossi, The Boeing Company
(retired)
TECHNICAL EDITOR (emeritus)
Emmanuel P. Papadakis, Quality Systems
Concepts
ASSOCIATE TECHNICAL EDITORS
John C. Aldrin, Computational Tools
Ali Abdul-Aziz, NASA Glenn Research Center
Narendra K. Batra, Naval Research
Laboratory (retired)
William C. Chedister, Chedister Associates
John Chen, Schlumberger
John C. Duke, Jr., Virginia Polytechnic
Trey Gordon, The Boeing Company
Dietmar Henning, Level III Service, LLC
Mani Mina, Iowa State University
William E. Mooz, Met-L-Chek Company
Yicheng Peter Pan, Therm-O-Disc/Emerson, Inc.
William H. Prosser, NASA Langley Research
Center
S.I. Rokhlin, The Ohio State University
Donald J. Roth, GE Aviation
Ram P. Samy, NDE Information Consultants
Robert E. Shannon, Siemens Energy, Inc.
Steven M. Shepard, Thermal Wave Imaging
Roderic K. Stanley, NDE Information
Consultants
Mike C. Tsao, University of Connecticut –
Avery Point
Lalita Udpa, Michigan State University
Glenn A. Washer, University of Missouri
Lianxiang Yang, Oakland University
Reza Zoughi, Missouri University of Science
and Technology
CONTRIBUTING EDITORS
Bruce G. Crouse, Inspection Services
Frank A. Iddings, Louisiana State University
(emeritus)
Robert E. Shannon, Siemens Energy, Inc.
Ripudaman Singh, Pratt & Whitney
Materials Evaluation (ISSN 0025-5327) is
published monthly by the American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Inc. Periodical postage
paid at Columbus, Ohio, and additional mailing
offices. Posted under Canadian IPM #0312819.
POSTMASTER: Send address changes to
Materials Evaluation, 1711 Arlingate Lane,
PO Box 28518, Columbus, OH 43228-0518.
946 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
The American Society for Nondestructive Testing
www.asnt.org
A S N T M I SS I O N STAT E M E N T
ASNT exists to create a safer world by advancing scientific, engineering, and
technical knowledge in the field of nondestructive testing.
S O C I E TY O F F I CE R S
CHAIR: L. Terry Clausing, Drysdale & Associates, Inc., 2016
PRESIDENT: Kevin D. Smith, Pratt & Whitney, 2016
VICE PRESIDENT: David R. Bajula, Acuren Group, Inc., 2016
SECRETARY/TREASURER: David A. Mandina, Mandina’s Inspection Services, Inc., 2016
D I R EC TOR S
Mohammed A. Abufour, Saudi Aramco, 2018
Marwan Basrawi, Saudi Aramco, 2016
Tsuchin “Philip” Chu, Southern Illinois University, 2016
Brenda L. Collins, Magnaflux, 2016
B. Boro Djordjevic, Materials and Sensors Technologies, Inc., 2018
Cindy Finley, UTEX Scientific Instruments, Inc., 2016
David O. Hall, ETM, Inc., 2016
Michael V. McGloin, NDT Enterprises, 2018
William Plumstead, Jr., PQT Services, 2016
Robert L. Saunders, Ellwood City Forge Co., 2017
David E. Savoy, Versa Integrity Group, 2016
Flynn Spears, Laser Technology, 2017
John Turner, FlawTech, Inc., 2017
Materials Evaluation is an archival journal in nondestructive testing/evaluation/inspection. The journal’s
technical articles are refereed by experts in their fields and the papers are abstracted by major technical
abstracting services, including: Acoustic Abstracts; Alloys Index; Aluminum Industry Abstracts; Applied Mechanics
Review; Applied Science and Technology Index; Cadscan; Corrosion Abstracts; Current Contents; Energy Science &
Technology; Engineered Materials Abstracts; Engineering Index; Exploration and Production Health, Safety and
Environment; Gas Processing and Pipelining; Highway Research Info Service; INIS Atomindex; INSPEC, Institution of
Electrical Engineers; ISMEC, Mechanical Engineering Abstracts; Index to Scientific Reviews; International Aerospace
Abstracts; Leadscan; Metals Abstracts; Metals Information; Nondestructive Testing Information Analysis Center;
Nonferrous Metals Alert; Offshore Technology; PASCAL; PIRA; Petroleum Abstracts; Polymers, Ceramics, Composites
Alert; Science Abstracts (Physics Abstracts, Electrical and Electronics Abstracts and Computer and Control
Abstracts); Science Citation Index; Solid State and Superconductivity Abstracts; Steels Alert; and Zincscan.
Subscriptions to Materials Evaluation (noncommissionable) to other than members of the Society: $135 per
year domestic; $245 (prepaid) per year international, which includes special handling outside the USA. Single
copy price: $9 for members ($12 for nonmembers), except for Buyers Guide issue in June ($21.25 for members,
$26.50 for nonmembers). Claims for replacement of lost or damaged copies must be made in writing, received
within 60 days of the date of publication. No more than two claims for replacement copies will be honored in a
single year. Printed in the United States of America. Copyright © 2016 by the American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Inc.
The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. (ASNT) is not responsible for the authenticity or accuracy of
the information herein. Published opinions and statements do not necessarily reflect the opinions of ASNT.
Products or services that are advertised or mentioned do not carry the endorsement or recommendation of ASNT.
IRRSP, NDT Handbook, The NDT Technician and www.asnt.org are trademarks of the American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ACCP, ASNT, Level III Study Guide, Materials Evaluation, Nondestructive Testing
Handbook, Research in Nondestructive Evaluation and RNDE are registered trademarks of the American Society
for Nondestructive Testing, Inc.
Authorization to photocopy fee-coded items for internal or personal use or the internal or personal use of
specific clients, is granted by the American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc., for libraries and other users
registered with the Copyright Clearance Center (CCC) Transactional Reporting Service, provided that the base fee
of $2.50 per copy plus $1.00 per page is paid directly to CCC, 27 Congress St., Salem, MA 01970; website
www.copyright.com. A fee code (0025-5327/97/$2.50/0) should be used in transactions with CCC and covers
all material to be photocopied beyond that photocopying permitted by Section 107 or 108 of the US Copyright
Law. This consent does not extend to other kinds of copying, such as copying for general distribution, for adver-
tising or promotional purposes, for creating new collective works or for resale.
948 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 PRESIDENT’S
Developing and Maintaining Relationships
A THEME IN THE PRESIDENT’S ADDRESS that I
delivered in October 2015 was the importance of
working together to accomplish goals that require
listening to and trusting your teammates. I related this
to my experience with mountaineering, where failures
in listening and trust can lead to severe personal
consequences. The consequences of ASNT failing to
listen to its members and sister organizations around
the world are severe as well, though less immediately
obvious than getting buried alive in an avalanche or
being blown off a mountain. To that end, we have
spent considerable effort listening to our members
and sister organizations such that the direction of the
Society will provide more meaningful benefits to our
members and contribute to the safety of world on a
larger scale.
I have had the privilege of talking with some of you
at the Annual Conference, Research Symposium, and
section meetings. Of course these opportunities have
brought me in contact with only a small fraction of our
more than 16 000 members. The framework for the
most of the discussions has been the Strategic Plan,
which defines the most important directions the
Society needs to move in. Your feedback and ideas on
specific directions is making its way into actions that
you will soon be able to see.
For example, there has been feedback that we
need to provide additional participation opportunities
for members who cannot attend the two big U.S.
meetings. To that end, we will be recording the presen-
tations at the Annual Conference this October in Long
Beach, California, such that they will be accessible on
the ASNT website. Being the first time we have done
this, it may need some improvements, but it should
provide technical content. Also, we are energizing
committee chairs to contact their members and other
potentially interested contributors who cannot come
to the Conference to participate via web meeting. It
is critical that you—as a member—engage in and
communicate what you need to make the Society
more beneficial to you.
Our relationships with related societies are
important as we extend our reach throughout the
worldwide NDT community. While it is important that
we are members of the International Committee for
Non-Destructive Testing (ICNDT) and the regional NDT
federations, it is also important that we engage with
letter
please continue to let
us know where we can add
value to your career
the NDT societies in meaningful, mutually beneficial
areas. For example, we are working with ABENDI, the
Brazilian Association of NDT and Inspection, on
specific areas, including organizing tracks at our
conferences: ASNT is organizing an aerospace track at
ABENDI’s conference this year, and ABENDI is organ-
izing a track at the 2016 ASNT Annual Conference. The
Indian Society for Non-Destructive Testing (ISNT) has
been an important partner of ASNT for a long time.
In addition to continuing to promote and administer
ASNT exams as they have for many years, as we move
to computer-based testing, ASNT and ISNT are
exploring joint conferences and sharing lessons
learned in various areas, including science, tech-
nology, engineering, and math (STEM) education
outreach. ISNT has a very active and effective program
in STEM that ASNT can leverage. We, along with ICNDT,
are also now actively engaged with the shaping of
future versions of ISO 9712, which will provide addi-
tional value and flexibility to our members. Societies
whose primary mission is not NDT, but that have
strong ties to NDT, are also important to ASNT. We
have met with many of these societies, discussed
areas of mutual benefit, and are deepening the
relationships.
As we move forward, it will continue to be critically
important that we listen to each other and nurture rela-
tionships of trust within ASNT and with sister societies
that have influence on our members and our profes-
sion. I am committed to serving you and moving the
Society forward, as are the rest of the Board and the
staff. We are listening—please continue to let us know
where we can add value to your career.
KEVIN D. SMITH
2015–2016 ASNT President
president@asnt.org
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 949
 DIRECTOR’S letter
Report from Germany
GUTEN TAG! As I write (in June for the July issue) I am in the heart of Munich, Germany with
the ASNT Executive Committee and senior staff, attending the 19th World Conference on
Non-Destructive Testing (WCNDT). This year’s event was organized by the German Society
for Non-Destructive Testing, DGZfP, in conjunction with the International Committee on Non-
Destructive Testing (ICNDT). Though we are only settling in on the first official day, we have
been in preliminary conference meetings and meeting with ICNDT for three days.
I can confidently say that this is already proving to be an exceptionally valuable event.
Many of our sister societies from around the world are here this week. We’ve been
fortunate to have the opportunity to meet with a number of representatives and officers I can
from these organizations to further our mutual understanding and strengthen our common
commitment to create a safer world. confidently say
As ASNT President Kevin Smith explains in his letter this month, and as I noted within my
first letter in January 2016, listening and engaging are critical to our success and effective- that this is already
ness at achieving our goals. The WCNDT has afforded the officers of the Executive Committee
and the senior staff the chance to gather and share concepts and programs that, after the
proving to be an
conference is over, we can utilize to better serve ASNT and its members. exceptionally
One meeting of particular importance was a gathering of societies in the Pan-American
Conference for Nondestructive Testing on the first day of the conference. At this meeting, we valuable event.
engaged in an open dialogue about the ways to best serve the global NDT community
through a close collaborative spirit and action in harmonizing our efforts in the Americas. I
look forward to our growing partnerships and, in the future, implementing ideas we’ve
shared.
Another meeting that I believe will have a positive impact was a gathering of the societies
of ICNDT, also prior to the beginning of the event. Here, we had opportunities to offer sugges-
tions and ideas germane to building relationships and governance and how these elements
can be integrated into global programming. It has been exciting to see ASNT’s level of engage-
ment grow in the last year to where we can be active in working with our partners and sister
societies to determine directions that affect the global direction of NDT.
In parting, I’d like to commend the DGZfP and the ICNDT for organizing and delivering an
exceptional conference. As the week continues, I’m eager to continue engaging in meeting
room and hallway conversations with old and new friends. I wish I could share more with you
now, but my deadline for this letter is fast approaching. For the August issue of Materials
Evaluation, I promise I will have a full report!
As always, I welcome your thoughts and ideas for how ASNT can best serve the global
NDT community. Please feel free to e-mail, call, or visit us here at the International Service
Center.
Beste Grüsse aus München!

DR. ARNOLD “ARNY” BERESON

ASNT Executive Director
abereson@asnt.org

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 951
 FOCUS letter
Inside Computed Tomography
ONE COULD ARGUE that the most amazing nondestructive
testing (NDT) technique out there is computed tomography. This
is because of the ability of computed tomography to reveal the
inside of an object. By no means has this been achieved easily,
either; so much has been researched and published on this
topic that it is hard to cover in a Technical Focus Issue.
However, Dr. Trey Gordon and I hope you find the subjects in
this issue interesting and the papers easy to read. We worked
together to solicit authors and manuscripts to show a new
Trey Gordon angle of computed tomography. We did not focus on the mathe- we looked
matics behind the technology; instead, we looked for practical
examples and “case studies,” which demonstrate the wide spectrum of applications that for practical
this NDT technique is being used for on a daily basis.
Starting our list of papers with four features, Dr. Don Roth presents the fundamentals
examples and
of computed tomography with a Back to Basics, looking at how different parameters will “case studies,”
change the output of a computed tomography scan. With additive manufacturing on the
rise, Andrew Good looks at NDT of 3D printed parts using industrial computed tomog- which demonstrate
raphy. Dr. Oliver Brunke tackles one of the challenges of computed tomography,
examining software that can help with scatter correction in cone beam 3D scans. And in the wide spectrum
aerospace manufacturing, Patrick Howard, Joseph Portaz, and Peter Wassenaar look at
another challenge, using volumetric computed tomography on turbine airfoils.
of applications
Our two technical papers both look at helical scanning computed technology. First,
Stephan Zuber compares step, continuous, and helical scanning processes and their
results, looking at the advantages of each for accuracy, time, and cost. Then, Valentina
Aloisi, Dr. Simone Camignato, Dr. Joseph Schlecht, and Dr. Eric Ferley evaluate measure-
ment errors, using helical scanning computed tomography in dimensional metrology.
We appreciate all those involved to make these papers ready to appear here. What’s
more, if anything presented here intrigues new or renews ideas, interests, passion, or
energy towards this fascinating NDT technique of computed tomography, that would be
gratifying to us all!

JOHN CHEN
Technical Focus Issue Technical Editor

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 953
 ASNT Scope
provides readers with
updates on ASNT
members, sections and
section news
activities. We depend on
member contributions
for this section. Send
updates, announce-
ments and photos
regarding your Section,
people, awardees, Air Capital than 160 attendees, with Jay Amos and
obituaries, etc., to WICHITA, KANSAS
Joe Clasen representing the Section.
presaward@asnt.org. For the month of February, the Air Capital
Please include Scope
News in the subject line,
Section members and guest gathered Arizona
in Wichita, Kansas at the Rusty Eck Ford PHOENIX, ARIZONA
and your name and
conference room on 22 February for a Thanks to everyone who made it out to the
contact information.
presentation by guest speaker Jeff Arizona Section’s 17 March meeting. A few
Methe. The Section also participated attendees dressed the part by wearing
in National Engineers Week by spon- kilts in celebration of St. Patrick’s Day. The
soring and attending the Wichita Council Section continues to have strong turnouts
of Engineering Societies annual banquet and new faces each month. There were
on 18 February. The banquet had more 31 attendees in total. Vendor’s Night was
SECTION HIGHLIGHT

The March meeting

of the Shanghai
Section included
multiple presentations,
one on radiographic
testing of pipeline,
and two others on the
state of ASNT and its
certification programs.

From left: Shanghai Section Secretary Wang Lu, ASNT Executive Director Arny Bereson, and
Section Director Xu Yongchang.

954 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6

The Arizona Section held a Vendor’s Night in March.
a success again this year, with 12 vendors
in attendance and many guests walking
though. The Section thanks the vendors
for their generous donations of door
prizes, which included wine, spiced
whiskey, and cordless power tools, to
name a few.
Central Ohio
COLUMBUS, OHIO
The Central Ohio Section held a meeting at
the Hobart Institute of Welding Technology
(HIWT) in Troy, Ohio, on 23 February.
Members from the Dayton and Columbus
American Welding Society (AWS) sections
were also present. Collectively, there were
16 members, guests, and students in
attendance.
The group was welcomed by four
members of HIWT and Hobart Brothers
staff. The meeting included an interesting
overview of the school’s mission, training,
and services presented by Business
The Central Ohio Section held a meeting at the Hobart Institute of Welding Technology in
February.
Society
Notes
Development Manager Lindsey Magee,
followed by an informative tour of the
production facility of the adjoining Hobart
Filler Metals plant guided by Kevin Trick, of
Hobart Filler Metals. Immediately after that
the group was treated to a walking tour of
the laboratory areas of the HIWT and a
stop back in time in the Hobart Historical
Welding Gallery, the latter being a
thoughtful display of exhibits and informa-
tion related to the chronological history of
welding technologies and general metal
working. The gallery is not open to the
general public. The last part of the tour
was guided by Magee and Fred Henman,
HIWT technical instructor.
The Section would like to thank HIWT
and Hobart Brothers Filler Metal for an
informative and enjoyable evening
learning about advanced weld training and
weld filler metal production. Speaker
awards unique to the Section were given
to the presenters at a later date.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N
ASNT Elections
ASNT voting members can vote
electronically through a secure
website in the upcoming ASNT elec-
tions. All eligible members will be
able to vote at their convenience
online anytime and from anywhere
during the seven-week balloting
period. By 1 July 2016, all members
for whom ASNT has an e-mail ad-
dress will receive a balloting notifi-
cation e-mail that will include
voting instructions, a voter login
identification, and a link to the
election web page. Paper ballots
will be mailed to all voting mem-
bers for whom ASNT has no e-mail
address, as well as by request. The
completed ballots must be received
on or before Friday, 19 August. Can-
didate information appears in the
June issue of Materials Evaluation
on pp. 702–707. See the ASNT
website at www.asnt.org/election
for more information.
Digital Materials
Evaluation App
Materials Evaluation is available
through the Apple App Store and
Google Play, making ASNT’s journal
available free to members through
their mobile devices. ASNT mem-
bers can read Society news and
technical information on the
go, wherever they have a data
connection.
Members can find the apps by
clicking the Materials Evaluation
link on the ASNT homepage or by
searching for “materials evalua-
tion” in their device’s store. Once
the app is downloaded and in-
stalled, members can access issues
using their MyASNT username and
password in the sign in menu in the
upper-left corner. Web-browser ac-
cess to digital Materials Evaluation
is now available through www.flick
read.com/edition/digitalme, also
using members’ MyASNT informa-
tion for login.
Any users who experience trou-
ble or have questions regarding the
new Digital M.E. are encouraged
to contact nmoes@asnt.org for
assistance.
955
section news
The Section held a meeting at the
Manufacturing and Materials Directorate of
the Air Force Research Laboratory at
Wright-Patterson Air Force Base (AFB) near
Dayton, Ohio on 24 March. There were
nine members and guests in attendance.
The group was welcomed by several
members of the nondestructive evaluation
(NDE) team of the Systems Support
Division. Throughout the event the group
was guided by a well-staffed team of Air
Force civilian and contractor personnel
through an interesting look at how tradi-
tional and advanced NDE techniques are
used to support the Air Force mission at
Wright-Patterson AFB.
The first stop was touring the NDE
areas of the Materials Integrity Branch,
where rapid reaction to Air Force structural
failure analysis needs are supported. The
NDE Systems Support Division currently
956 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
uses eight different techniques of NDE.
This is also the laboratory where liquid
penetrant materials are tested in accor-
dance with SAE AMS 2644 and approved
for use by the Department of Defense and
industry in general.
Following this was a walking tour of
the NDE Research Branch in the electro-
magnetic testing and ultrasonic testing
focus areas, where advanced NDE tech-
niques are developed for future use by the
Air Force. It was a fascinating look and rare
opportunity for insight into the applied
scope of NDE techniques used.
After the meeting, members and
guests adjourned for a delicious meal at
City Barbeque in nearby Beavercreek. The
Section would like to thank the members of
the NDE community at Wright-Patterson AFB
for a wonderful tour. Speaker awards were
given to the presenters at a later date.
Charlotte
CHARLOTTE, NORTH CAROLINA
The Charlotte Section hosted 28 members
and guests at its 11 April meeting at the
American Airlines maintenance hangar
located near Charlotte Douglas
International Airport in Charlotte, North
Carolina. The tour of the maintenance
hangar was led by Don Duncan, American
Airlines Level III and past Section chair.
The group viewed passenger jets in
various stages of inspection and mainte-
nance. The tour ended in the nondestruc-
tive testing lab, where eddy current,
ultrasonic, liquid penetrant, magnetic
particle, and radiography testing is
performed. One of the main areas of
focus presented to the group was phased
array ultrasonic testing of composite
components and engine turbine
blades.
ASNT Charlotte Section members and guests at the American Airlines maintenance hangar.
Special thanks go to Richard Woodward,
with Magnaflux, for sponsoring the meeting.
Woodward demonstrated the new EV6000
light-emitting diode ultraviolet lamp from
Magnaflux. The lamp is light, cool, and offers
uniform intensity without bright center
beam or weak edges.
Chicago
CHICAGO, ILLINOIS
The Chicago Section met on 14 March,
with 20 guests and members in atten-
dance at Mack’s Golden Pheasant
Restaurant in Elmhurst, Illinois. The guest
speaker, Amanda Young, of McNDT
Pipeline, Ltd., discussed the use of nonde-
structive testing (NDT) for pipeline inspec-
tion. The use of liquid penetrant, magnetic
particle, radiographic, and ultrasonic
testing are all employed at various times.
After reviewing the need for qualifications,
Young described the typical inspections
conducted, primarily on gas pipelines
under API 1104. Some specialty work is
often required to view areas of pipeline
that may need ultrasonic wall thickness
checks or digital computed tangential radi-
ographic exposures to show corrosion or
to identify areas that were highlighted by a
pig that traveled through the line. Next,
she displayed a variety of indications or
discontinuities from various pipeline
inspections and characterized the difficul-
ties in making adequate decisions. Some
of the more difficult indications to rate
were lack of fusion, incomplete root pene-
tration, internal undercut, and high-low
conditions where the pipe has a great deal
of mismatch. Areas with cracks are
typically identified with magnetic particle
testing. The presentation was well received
and a number of interesting questions
about American Petroleum Institute code
requirements were asked.
The Section met on 11 April, with
21 guests and members in attendance for
a catered dinner and a tour of the Scot
Forge plant in Spring Grove, Illinois. The
Scot Forge responsible Level III, Joseph
Meyers, played a number of videos that
highlighted the forge shop’s capacity and
then explained the process used to train
and qualify the NDT personnel at the three
plants that are part of the Scot Forge family
(Chicago and Spring Grove, Illinois, and
Clinton, Wisconsin). He highlighted how
SNT-TC-1A, NAS-410, and other qualifica-
tion schemes and specifications in
Amanda Young (left), of McNDT Pipeline,
Ltd., received a plaque of appreciation from
Chicago Section Chair Chuck Johnson, of
Karden Sales, at the March meeting.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N
industry are met by Scot Forge. The tour
through the forge shop included the forge
presses, ring rollers, heat treat depart-
ment, sawing equipment, machine shop,
NDT department, and metallurgical labora-
tory. In the metallurgy lab the attendees
were able to witness a tensile test being
performed. The Section is grateful to Scot
Forge for providing this extremely educa-
tional and insightful opportunity. Meyers,
Carl Schulz (NDT Level III floor leader at
Spring Grove), Derek Coleman (NDT Level III
floor leader at Clinton, Wisconsin), and
Zach Ford (apprentice and intern coordi-
nator) were gracious hosts, exhibiting true
excitement for and dedication to their craft
and pride in being part of the Scot Forge
family.
Cleveland
CLEVELAND, OHIO
The Cleveland Section held its monthly
meeting on 21 March, at J Bella restaurant
in Strongsville, Ohio, with 29 members
and guests in attendance. The Section
board of directors is extremely pleased
with the increased attendance, which it
attributed to the change in venue and
quality of guest speakers.
The March speaker was Betty Cheng,
sales manager for Spectronics Corp. in the
U.S. and Canada. Cheng gave an informa-
tive talk regarding the current state of light-
emitting diode ultraviolet A (LED UV-A)
lamps, and their certification per Rolls-
Royce specifications. She shared some
interesting facts regarding the process of
getting LED UV-A lamps accepted by the
nondestructive testing industries. Cheng
also informed attendees that in future
957
 section news
The Hampton Roads Section met in April for a presentation on the U.S. Coast Guard
nondestructive inspection program.
publications, the term “black light” would
no longer be used and will be replaced by
LED UV-A lights, something the European
community has requested for years.
Hampton Roads
NEWPORT NEWS, VIRGINIA
On 12 April, the Hampton Roads Section
held its monthly meeting at Buffet City
restaurant in Portsmouth, Virginia, with
10 members and guests in attendance.
Rusty Waldrop was the guest speaker.
He presented on the “Coast Guard
Qualification and Certification Program.”
Waldrop’s presentation included pictures
of flawed specimens as well as an expla-
nation of the competence training the
Coast Guard inspectors go through and the
techniques they use and have developed
to find the discontinuities that could cost
both Coast Guard personnel and civilians
their lives.
Miami Valley
C I N C I N N AT I , O H I O
Two Miami Valley Section members
participated in the Montgomery County
Science Fair, held 5 March at the Dayton
Convention Center. Approximately
900 people attended the fair, including
304 participating students presenting
projects from 26 schools; 120 judges
representing education, industry, and
958 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
military; committee members; and a
number of parents and siblings. More
than 50 awards (which included several
monetary awards up to $500) were
presented to students.
Section Chair Vicki Kramb helped with
pre-fair setup as well as Thursday and
Saturday judging. Section member Norm
Schell helped with setup and directing
judges, parents, and students to where
they needed to be. Fair Director Gloria
Hardy thanked everyone involved for
their help and support.
The Section met on 6 April at Trinity
Gastro Pub in West Chester, Ohio. Six
people came out to discuss the Section
and its future.
Minnesota
MINNEAPOLIS, MINNESOTA
The Minnesota Section thanks those
who attended the 18 February meeting
at the Green Mill restaurant in Plymouth,
Minnesota. The meeting had an excellent
turnout, with 33 members, nonmembers,
and students attending the event, which
featured a presentation on “Bridge
Inspection in Minnesota and the I-35W
Bridge Collapse.” The Section also thanks
speaker Bill Nelson, of the Minnesota
Department of Transportation, for an
extremely interesting and informative
presentation.
The Mohawk Hudson Section met in April to hear a presentation on remote visual
measurement technology.

Mohawk Hudson
S C H E N E C T A D Y, N E W Y O R K

The Mohawk Hudson Section’s 19 April

dinner meeting at the Van Dyck Restaurant
& Lounge included a presentation on
remote measurement technologies using
3D visualization. Tom Britton, of GE
Inspection Technologies (GEIT), presented
a summary of the latest advancements in
remote visual measurement technology.
Through the use of projected structured
light pattern optical metrology and full
surface mapping of stereographically
captured images, GEIT was able to improve Jeff Siegel kicked off the evening at the
the accuracy and precision of remote Pacific Northwest Section meeting.
visual measurements. The user interface
was also greatly enhanced by providing
true 3D visualization of the measurement
surface topography. which was held at the DoubleTree Hilton
There were 13 members and guests in Suites at Southcenter, in Tukwila,
attendance. Washington.

Pacific Northwest Pittsburgh

SE ATT L E , WA S H I N GTO N
Michael Zittle, radioactive materials
compliance manager from the University of
Washington, provided an engaging presen-
tation, titled “Radiation Protection: Beyond
Time, Distance, and Shielding,” at the
7 April technical meeting of the Pacific
Northwest Section. After Zittle presented
the “10 Commandments of Radiation
Protection” he was met by more questions
from the audience than had been asked in
previous meetings. Zittle was also a
speaker at this year’s Radiation Safety
Refresher seminar. Dinner preceded the
presentation. There were 20 members and
students in attendance at the meeting,
P I T T S B U R G H , P E N N S Y LV A N I A
Thanks to Patrick Sansieri and Carol
Sansieri, from Odyssey Technology,
for their 17 March presentation at the
Springfield Grille. The talk was titled
“Level III Responsibilities, Nadcap, and
NAS-410.” The Section appreciates their
insight into this subject and the entire
certification process. Interpreting and
administering training and certification is a
challenge to all Level IIIs. The emphasis of
the presentation and ensuing discussions
was on the leadership role that must be
taken by the Level III in the entire produc-
tion and quality control process. There
were 19 attendees at the meeting.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 959
section news

San Diego
SAN DIEGO, CALIFORNIA
The San Diego Section hosted its seventh
technical meeting of the 2015–2016 year
on 5 April at the Best Western Seven Seas
hotel in San Diego, California. There were
27 members and guests in attendance, as
well as two speakers. The first speaker was
Denico Nieves-Ellis, one of three Greater
San Diego Science Engineering Fair award Guest speaker Denico Nieves-Ellis (left) received a certificate and scholarship check from San
winners selected by the Section. Nieves-Ellis Diego Section Chair John Morris.
is an eighth grade student at the Rhoades
School. His project was “Experimenting with
Ferrofluids’ Magnetic Properties: Searching Hofer’s presentation was titled “Typical discussed included using phased array
for Novel Applications.” The project was well MAUS Applications on Aircraft Structures.” ultrasonics, resonance inspection,
presented and met with numerous The talk centered on how the MAUS is composite inspection, and system limita-
questions. Nieves-Ellis received a certificate used, both with ultrasonic and eddy tions. This system/technique is used on
of achievement and scholarship check current applications, and its evolution from commercial aircraft, business jets, military
from the Section. its beginning to the current MAUS 5 system aircraft, and helicopters. Hofer’s talk
The second speaker was James Hofer, used today, which can be equipped with was well received and led to questions
of Aerohoff Inspection Services, Inc. position tracking capabilities. Other areas concerning applications. Section Chair

960 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
Southern Africa Section speakers Hans Beukes (left) and Philippe Rubbers.
John Morris thanked Hofer for his informa-
tive talk and presented him with a certifi-
cation of appreciation and speaker gift.
To close the meeting, Morris acknowl-
edged the Section sponsors in attendance.
The evening concluded with raffles, prizes
for which were sponsored by the Section
and Larry Olsen.
Shanghai
SHANGHAI, CHINA
The Shanghai Section organized a meeting
on 30 March, with 59 members and
guests. Section Director Xu Yongchang
welcomed everyone in attendance and
gave a brief speech on how to recruit more
members. Section Chair John Kinsey
encouraged members to prepare a lecture
and participate in Section operations.
Duan Kaiyang gave a technical presenta-
tion titled “Wrong Material in Pressure
Pipe During Radiographic Interpretation.”
Kaiyang’s presentation included how to
interpret pipe films and he encouraged
members to keep learning.
It was a pleasure to welcome ASNT
Executive Director Arny Bereson and ASNT
Chair of the Board L. Terry Clausing to the
Section meeting. Bereson presented the
Section charter to Yongchang and also gave
a speech on “The Current State of ASNT.”
Later, Clausing gave a lecture on the “Future
of ASNT’s Certification and Examination.”
Both Bereson and Clausing opened up the
floor to questions at the end of their presen-
tations; many members had questions
about how to renew their certifications and
also exchanged ideas that they thought
ASNT should look into. The Section appreci-
ates Bereson’s and Clausing’s time.
Southern Africa
JOHANNESBURG, AFRICA
The Southern Africa Section held a
technical evening on 19 April at the School
of Applied Non-Destructive Examination, in
Impala Park, South Africa. There were two
short but informative presentations given
by members, both of whom are ASNT NDT
Level IIIs. The presentations were
“Removal of Penetrant from Waste Rinse
Water,” by Hans Beukes, and “Advanced
Ultrasonics (Including TFM and SAUL),” by
Philippe Rubbers. w x
Write Us
We Want to Hear from You
ASNT Scope covers events, celebra-
tions and achievements in our NDT
community. Materials Evaluation
welcomes your news and photos.
(Please use the high quality setting
on your digital camera!) Send contri-
butions to nmoes@asnt.org.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 961
awards & honors
Marybeth Miceli
Charles N. Sherlock
Meritorious Service Award
2016 winner Marybeth Miceli is the
president and founder of Miceli
Infrastructure Consulting Los Angeles,
California and cofounder of the We-NDT
Marketing Network (NV). Miceli has 20 years
experience in nondestructive testing (NDT)
and evaluation. She is a materials science
engineer with a background in civil infra-
structure, technology transfer, failure
analysis, quality assurance, advanced
sensors, and structural monitoring. Miceli
works with asset owners to determine
which NDT and structural health moni-
toring (SHM) technologies should be
used on their structures to get actionable
data. Miceli is a consultant for the
Department of Homeland Security on
aging infrastructure and on the Federal
Highway Administration Long-term Bridge
Performance SHM and NDT advisory group.
962 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
Samuel Bullard Antionette Bailey
Miceli has previously served a three-
year term on the Board of Directors for
ASNT, served a two-year term as the
Section Operations Council chair, and
five years as the chair of the Technical
and Education Council Infrastructure
Committee. She is ASNT’s youngest Fellow
and has served on the Governance
Committee for 10 years. Miceli has been
the recipient of an ASNT Research
Fellowship, the Young NDT Professional
Award, and the Mentoring Award and is
the 2016 recipient of the Charles N.
Sherlock Meritorious Service Award.
Miceli is a member of the British
Institute of Non-Destructive Testing, an
invited member of the International
Society for Structural Health Monitoring of
Intelligent Infrastructure, and currently
serves on the ASTM E07.10 committee
and the editorial board of the Journal of
Civil Engineering. Miceli has worked on
various projects, from the antenna of the
Empire State Building and Ground Zero
following 9/11, to multiple baseball
stadiums, military assets, and well over
100 bridges. Miceli obtained her M.S. from
Virginia Tech and her B.S. from Johns
Hopkins University. Miceli has appeared
on the History Channel, Fox Networks,
NBC, ABC, and CBS as well as in USA
Today, CNN Money, and the Wall Street
Journal, among others.
About the Charles N. Sherlock
Meritorious Service Award
The Charles N. Sherlock Meritorious
Service Award provides recognition for an
individual’s outstanding voluntary service
to the Society, through single or aggregate
activities, though not necessarily in any
single year. Activities performed as a
function of an elected office or paid
position shall not be considered. In 2004,
the award was renamed in honor of its first
recipient, Charles N. Sherlock. Except in
extreme extenuating circumstances, no
more than one award shall be made in any
calendar year. Nominations for this award
may be made by members of the ASNT
staff, Board of Directors, councils, the
Awards Committee, local sections, or by
any ASNT member.
Award for the Advancement of
Active Military and Veterans in
NDT
2016 winner Samuel Bullard was intro-
duced to nondestructive testing (NDT)
while serving in the U.S. Navy. There,
he helped prepare parts for inspection,
entering the Joint Branch Nondestructive
Inspection (NDI) School at Chanute Air
Force Base, in Rantoul, Illinois in 1974.
He was assigned to Naval Air Station
Whiting Field in Florida where he
expanded his skills—earning the position
of NDI specialist for naval aviation—and
provided inspection, training, and certifi-
cation to aircraft component inspectors.
In 1989, Bullard began work as a
materials engineering technician, later
transferring to the Naval Air Technical
Data and Engineering Service Command
as an NDI specialist, certifying Navy and
Marine NDI personnel in several methods
and techniques. He worked with the
Naval Aviation Maintenance Program and
naval NDI instruction practices, bringing
them closer to civilian standards like
NAS-410, and making certified military
technicians more competitive in the
commercial marketplace after leaving
the service. He estimates that he has
trained and certified 1800 service
technicians.
Bullard joined ASNT in 1989 and
has been recognized for his work
promoting the Society during member-
ship campaigns. He has also presented
papers at various conferences and served
as chair of the Department of Defense
NDI working group in 2004.
About the Award for the
Advancement of Active Military and
Veterans in NDT
The Award for the Advancement of Active
Military and Veterans in NDT recognizes
individuals or organizations who
encourage active military and veterans to
enter and thrive in the field of NDT, either
through creation and/or implementation of
programs that provide educational or
career advancement opportunities in NDT
that may not otherwise be available to
active military and veterans or through
leading by example of how active military
and veterans can not only have a career in
NDT but also contribute greatly to NDT,
ASNT, and creating a safer world.
Award for the Advancement of
Women in NDT
2016 winner Antionette Bailey is an
associate instructor for Hellier and a
Level III outside agency for her own
company, TB3 NDT Consulting. She has
been providing nondestructive testing
(NDT) services in the northeast region for
the past 16 years for numerous airframe,
landing gear, and jet engine manufac-
turers, as well as providing services for
several inspection laboratories. She is
certified Level III in RT, ET, UT, PT, and MT,
as well as IRRSP. She is also qualified in
nital acid etch, spectrometric oil analysis,
and visual testing (VT).
Bailey joined the U.S. Air Force (USAF)
in 1989. She received Level II certification
in PT, MT, ET, UT, RT, VT, and OA from
Chanute Air Force Base (AFB), where she
earned top grades. Between 1990 and
1997, Bailey was stationed and performed
NDT at Bitburg AFB (Germany) on F-15
fighter jets, Castle AFB (California) on B-52
bombers and KC-135 air refuelers, and
finally Tyndall AFB (Florida) on F-15 fighter
jets. During her tenure at Bitburg AFB, she
was deployed with her squadron’s F-15
aircraft to Saudi Arabia and fought in the
Gulf War during the Desert Shield and
Desert Storm military campaigns and was
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N
awarded many medals for her service as a
Gulf War veteran. After achieving the rank
of staff sergeant, in 1997 Bailey received
an honorable discharge from the USAF to
pursue NDT employment in the civilian
sector.
In 1997, as a transition, Bailey
accepted a position as NDT manager for
Honeywell Wheels and Brakes in Houston,
Texas, where she managed the NDT opera-
tions and processes of 19 NDT inspectors.
While at Honeywell, she received her first
ASNT certification, in MT.
In 1999, she accepted a position with
the Gulfstream/General Dynamics NDT
department in Dallas, Texas. There, Bailey
was introduced to the NDT business for
corporate jets and was able to develop the
skills she needed for her future in the
corporate jet business.
Bailey went on to accept a partnership
in 2000 with Structural Testing Systems,
Inc. (STS), located in Ronkonkoma,
New York. During her time at STS, she
helped the company grow as general
manager/vice president.
About the Award for the
Advancement of Women in NDT
The Award for the Advancement of Women
in NDT recognizes individuals or organiza-
tions who encourage women to enter and
thrive in the field of NDT, either through
creation and/or implementation of
programs that provide educational or
career advancement opportunities in NDT
that may not otherwise be available to
women or through leading by example of
how women can not only have a career in
NDT but also contribute greatly to NDT,
ASNT, and creating a safer world.
Each month, M.E. highlights selected
honorees from the most recent ASNT
award programs. The department also
features background on the high-
lighted award, plus announcements of
award applications, award winners and
deadline information.
963
awards & honors
ASNT Award Winners
The American Society for
Nondestructive Testing is
pleased to announce the
following award winners. These
award winners will be recognized
at the ASNT Annual Conference
2016 in Long Beach, California.
ASNT Announces Award Winners
The American Society for Nondestructive
Testing is pleased to announce the
following award winners. These award
winners will be recognized at the ASNT
Annual Conference 2016 in Long Beach,
California.
50-year Member Recognition
The 50-year Member Recognition
acknowledges individuals who have
dedicated their careers to ASNT and its
mission of making the world a safer
place. This recognition was established
to honor loyal members with 50 or
more years of membership who have
contributed to the nondestructive
testing (NDT) industry and the Society
through their knowledge and dedica-
tion decade upon decade. Recognitions
are presented at the awards banquet at
the ASNT Annual Conference.
The recipients of the 2016 50-year
Member Recognition are Robert Dunn,
William Gould III, William E. Mooz, Fred
Padilla, Frank Sattler, and James Lutz.
ASNT Fellow
A Fellow of ASNT is an individual
member of the Society who has demon-
strated outstanding professional
distinction and who has made
continued significant contributions
to the advancement of NDT in areas
such as management, engineering,
science, education, administration or
planning.
964 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
The 2016 class of ASNT Fellows is
John Chen, Gary Georgeson, Surendra
Singh, Francisco Lanza di Scalea, John
Moran, David Savoy, and Vladimir
Genis.
Award for the Advancement of
Active Military and Veterans in
NDT
The Award for the Advancement of
Active Military and Veterans in NDT
recognizes individuals or organizations
who encourage active military and
veterans to enter and thrive in the field
of NDT, either through creation and/or
implementation of programs that
provide educational or career advance-
ment opportunities in NDT that may not
otherwise be available to active military
and veterans or through leading by
example of how active military and
veterans can not only have a career in
NDT but also contribute greatly to NDT,
ASNT, and creating a safer world.
The winner of the 2016 Award for
the Advancement of Active Military and
Veterans in NDT is Samuel Bullard.
Award for the Advancement of
Women in NDT
The Award for the Advancement of
Women in NDT recognizes individuals or
organizations who encourage women to
enter and thrive in the field of NDT,
either through creation and/or imple-
mentation of programs that provide
educational or career advancement
opportunities in NDT that may not
otherwise be available to women or
through leading by example of how
women can not only have a career in
NDT but also contribute greatly to NDT,
ASNT, and creating a safer world.
The winner of the 2016 Award for
the Advancement of Women in NDT is
Antionette Bailey.
Charles N. Sherlock Meritorious
Service Award
The Charles N. Sherlock Meritorious
Service Award provides recognition for
an individual’s outstanding voluntary
service to the Society, through single or
aggregate activities, though not neces-
sarily in any single year. In 2004, the
award was renamed in honor of its first
recipient, Charles N. Sherlock.
The winner of the 2016 Charles N.
Sherlock Meritorious Service Award is
Marybeth Miceli.
Engineering Undergraduate
Award
The Engineering Undergraduate Award
was created to provide an incentive to
engineering undergraduate students
enrolled in engineering programs
accredited by ABET or its equivalent
to choose NDT as their field of
specialization.
The winners of the 2016 Engineering
Undergraduate Award are Chengyan Mo,
John Gallion, and Runyu Zhang.
Faculty Grant
The Faculty Grant is awarded to engi-
neering faculty to be used to fund the
revision or development of the NDT
curriculum in an accredited engineering
program.
The winners of the 2016 ASNT
Faculty Grant are Ahmed Abdel-Mohti,
Hui Shen and J. Blake Hylton, of Ohio
Northern University, based on their
proposal for “An Interdisciplinary
Approach: The Use of Nondestructive
Testing and Evaluation in Engineering
Applications”; and Paul J. Schafbuch, of
Iowa State University, based on his
proposal for “Introductory NDT for Core
Mechanics and Aerospace Structures
Courses.”
Fellowship Award
The ASNT Fellowship is a cash award
granted to an educational institution to
fund specific research in NDT at the post-
graduate level (M.S. or Ph.D.). Academic
institutions with graduate educational
research programs are invited to submit
proposals each year.
The winners of the 2016 ASNT
Fellowship Award are University of Illinois
at Urbana-Champaign (Henrique Reis,
advisor; Zhe Sun, student); Pennsylvania
State University (Cliff J. Lissenden and
Sungho Choi, advisors; Mostafa Hasanian,
student); Iowa State University (Timothy
A. Bigelow and Leonard J. Bond, advisors;
Hossein Taheri, student); Iowa State
University (Simon Laflamme and Kejin
Wang, advisors; Irvin Pinto, student); and
Michigan State University (Mahmoodul
Haq, advisor; Oleksii Karpenko, student).
George L. Pherigo Tutorial Citation
In view of the important role of education
in advancing the purpose of ASNT, the
George L. Pherigo Tutorial Citation gives
recognition to outstanding contributors to
the field of NDT education. Recipients of
the citation are selected for their accom-
plishments in, or furtherance of, educa-
tional activities designed to increase the
depth and breadth of scientific, engi-
neering and technical knowledge in the
field of NDT. In 2010, the award was
renamed in honor of George L. Pherigo,
who dedicated his life to NDT education.
Selection is based on originality,
organization, technical content, methods
and practical usefulness of educational
activities during the period of January
through December of the preceding year.
No more than one such award may be
made in a single year. If, in the opinion of
the Awards Committee, no one qualifies
for the award, the committee has the
privilege of not conferring the citation for
that year. The citation is presented to the
recipient at the ASNT Annual Conference.
The winner of the 2016 George L.
Pherigo Tutorial Citation is Hussein Sadek.
Lester Honor Lecture
ASNT established the Lester Honor
Lecture in honor of the outstanding
research in the science of NDT. This honor
is presented every even-numbered year by
the Board of Directors to outstanding
persons in the field of NDT. The lecture is
traditionally presented during the ASNT
Annual Conference.
The recipient of the 2016 Lester Honor
Lecture is Steven Shepard.
Lou DiValerio Technician of the Year
Award
The Lou DiValerio Technician of the Year
Award gives recognition to ASNT members
who are deserving technicians, encour-
aging their continued participation in the
Society. Nominees for the award must
hold a position of employment that corre-
sponds to general guidelines similar to
those described by Recommended
Practice No. SNT-TC-1A for defining the
primary duties and responsibilities of
Level I and Level II technicians. The award
recipient is an individual who has distin-
guished himself or herself by showing
exceptional merit either as an NDT techni-
cian or through service to the Society.
Nominations for the award are made
jointly by the technician’s employer and
the local sponsoring section, and must
include supporting documentation
attesting to the fact that the nominee is a
practicing NDT technician. A nominee’s
application is evaluated by the Technician
of the Year Award Subcommittee and
approved by the Section Operations
Council Awards Division. Presentation of
the award is made at the ASNT Annual
Conference.
The winner of the 2016 Lou DiValerio
Technician of the Year Award is Gian
Suazo.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N
Mentoring Award
The award for outstanding mentor was
established to recognize those people in
the Society working to encourage others
to reach goals they may have otherwise
not sought and to offer the rest of the
membership an example of what they
could be accomplishing by acting as
mentors. With the understanding that
mentoring may take many forms, the
following eligibility categories have been
established:
Individual – Assisting one or more
individuals to reach goals in the NDT
industry that they may have not otherwise
attained.
Group – Providing positive guidance
to a group such that a goal of significant
value to ASNT or to the NDT industry is
achieved by that group.
Indirect – Providing mentoring oppor-
tunities for others by creating an environ-
ment that fosters and encourages such
relationships with positive outcome.
The winners of the 2016 Mentoring
Award are David Bajula, Yicheng (Peter)
Pan, Robert J. Potter, Claudia Kropas-
Hughes, and John Morris.
Outstanding Paper Award,
Materials Evaluation
The purpose of the Outstanding Paper
Award is to encourage a high degree of
effort toward technical, educational or
managerial achievement in NDT through
publication in Materials Evaluation.
Recipients of the award are selected on
the merit of written contributions
published by the Society during the
previous calendar year. Selection is based
equally on the material’s originality,
usefulness and clarity, and on the appro-
priateness and accuracy of its supporting
material. The Awards Committee has the
option of not conferring an award if it
decides that no papers qualify in a given
year. The award is presented during the
Annual Conference.
965
awards & honors
ASNT Award Winners
The winners of the 2016
Outstanding Paper Award for Materials
Evaluation are Megan E. McGovern,
Nicholas Farace, William G. Buttlar, and
Henrique Reis for their paper, titled
“Effectiveness of Rejuvenators on Aged
Asphalt Concrete using Ultrasonic Non-
collinear Subsurface Wave Mixing,”
published in Materials Evaluation,
Vol. 73, No. 10, October 2015,
pp. 1365–1376.
Outstanding Paper Award, RNDE
The purpose of the Outstanding Paper
Award is to encourage a high degree of
effort toward technical, educational or
managerial achievement in NDT through
publication in RNDE. Recipients of the
award are selected on the merit of
written contributions published by the
Society during the previous calendar
year. Selection is based equally on the
material’s originality, usefulness and
clarity, and on the appropriateness and
accuracy of its supporting material. The
Awards Committee has the option of
not conferring an award if it decides
that no papers qualify in a given year.
The award is presented during the
Annual Conference.
The winners of the 2016 Outstanding
Paper Award for RNDE are A. Wydra,
A.M. Chertov, Roman Maev, C.M. Kube,
H. Du, and J.A. Turner for their paper,
titled “Grain size measurement of
Copper Welding Caps Via Ultrasonic
Attenuation and Scattering
Experiments,” published in RNDE,
Vol. 26, No. 4, 2015, pp. 225–243.
Philip D. Johnson Honorary
Member Award
An honorary member is a person of
acknowledged eminence in the domain
966 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
covered by the Society or is one who
has been recognized as a benefactor to
the Society through services such as
being a national officer. In 1990, this
award was renamed in honor of Philip
D. Johnson, who co-founded ASNT and
nurtured it through its first three
decades. This award is the highest that
the Society bestows.
The winner of the 2016 Philip D.
Johnson Honorary Member Award is
Ricky Morgan.
Robert B. Oliver Scholarship
This award honors and assists students
who have chosen NDT as a career. It
memorializes ASNT Past President,
Honorary Member and Fellow Robert B.
Oliver. An annual scholarship is
awarded to the student who submits
the most outstanding paper about NDT
research, investigation or development.
The winner of the 2016 Robert B.
Oliver Scholarship is Mohammad
Rashid Mohammad Shoaib, of Iowa
State University, for his paper “Review
on the Progress of Porosity Detection
and its Effect on Mechanical Properties
of Additive Manufacturing Components.”
Robert C. McMaster Gold Medal
The Robert C. McMaster Gold Medal
was established by ASNT to provide
recognition to a person who has made
an outstanding contribution, or who
has rendered meritorious service, to
any area in the field of nondestructive
testing or to the Society. Beginning in
1990, the award has been given in
honor of the eminent ASNT Past
President Robert C. McMaster,
professor emeritus of the Ohio State
University. The award is presented to
the recipient during the ASNT Annual
Conference. The Awards Committee has
the privilege of not conferring the
award.
The winners of the 2016 Robert C.
McMaster Gold Medal are David
Culbertson and Gary Georgeson.
William Via Bridge NDT Lifetime
Service Award
The William Via Bridge NDT Lifetime
Service Award recognizes outstanding
voluntary service to the bridge and
highway nondestructive testing and
evaluation industry.
The recipient of the 2016 William
Via Bridge NDT Lifetime Service Award
is William F. Via, Jr.
Young NDT Professional Award
The purpose of the Young NDT
Professional Award is to recognize indi-
viduals whose initial career contribu-
tions exemplify high standards of
excellence in the areas of professional
achievement and meritorious service.
The award is given to supervisors,
educators, managers, researchers,
consultants, developers and others who
are ASNT members with five to ten
years of involvement in the NDT
industry. Award applicants must be
sponsored by a local ASNT section,
council or national committee.
The winner of the 2016 Young NDT
Professional Award is Steven Brady. w x
Complete information on all awards is
on pp. 266–281 of the February 2016
issue of Materials Evaluation. Other
2016 ASNT award winners may be
announced at a later date in the
Awards & Honors pages.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 967
New ASNT Certificate Holders
Below are personnel who have recently obtained their initial ASNT certifications. This list includes new certificate holders that
were added to the ASNT database through 1 June 2016. Each certificate holder’s current certification information can be found
on the ASNT website at www.asnt.org/certlist.

ACCP Level II James Radtke ASNT NDT Level II Aboozar Nabipour

Michael J. Brogcinski Dilipkumar Shah Chad Brundidge Muhammad Atif Naeem
Calvin Burkhalter Mike Shannon Francisco Alfredo Call Antonio Navarro Polo, Sr.
Cory L. Bushong Adam C. Shetter Rob Nelson
Kevin Cargile Tomonori Shiiba ASNT NDT Level III Vernon L. O’Neal III
Jorge L. DeLeon Matthew Simon Kivanc Akdogu John P. Ostaff
Albert Dobson Rui Sugimura Georgy Batov Steven Pyontek
Aubrey Wayne Dumas Cesar M. Vicente Cody Bennett Muhammad Raza Malik
Tu Vu Duy John D. Weaver Mubashir Bashir Bhutta Stevan Rueda
Darren Farris David Yonko Zachery D. Doering Mustafa Sabah
Robert Gilbert Loren R. Field Ali Sadooghi
Jason Hawkins ACCP Professional Level III Dominador C. Fonacier Seyedeh Sanaz Shirinbar
Pedro Hinojosa Jacob A. Blaylock Adam Gardner Gian A. Suazo
David Jimenez Jiro Isemura Joaquin Pablo Gutierrez Vinodth Kumar Vijendra
Ryan Koehler Takashi Kibiki Robert Gutierrez Eric Jason Williams
Benioto Luna, Jr. Sadao Okihara Will M. Huff
Refugio Marquez Keiichiro Sone Chi Won In
Shigeo Morioka Masaaki Sugiura Anders Erik Fabian Jakobsson
Brennan Nelson Shoji Yamanaka Mohan Kalimuthu
John Nucatola Han-Chung Lee

968 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 shape
your EXAM SCHEDULE
future
Trust the leader in NDT certification—the American Society for Nondestructive Testing. Shape your future with ASNT's
ANSI/ISO 17024 Accredited Certification Programs. Be certified by ASNT and carry one of the most globally recognized NDT certificates.

INTERNATIONAL EXAMS ASNT NDT Level II, ASNT NDT Level III, ACCP Level II, and ACCP Professional Level III

Exam Locations Sponsor, Exam Location Exam Date(s) Application Deadline

ATS ___________________________________________________________________________________
1049 Triad Ct., Marietta, GA 30062
Phone: (888) 287-5227 or (678) 444-2897
Fax: (770) 514-3299, E-mail: training@atslab.com
Web: www.atslab.com/training/asnt-exam-center.php QCCO, Bangkok, Thailand 10 – 11 July 2016 8 April 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________
Bajio Section
Av. 539 No. 142, Col. San Juan de Aragon, Mexico D.F., Mexico
Contact: Joaquín Gutiérrez, Phone: 52 55 57513787 SAS, Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia 15 – 16 July 2016 8 April 2016
Cell phone: 52 55 5413 5904, Fax: 52 55 57513291 ___________________________________________________________________________________
E-mail: joaquin_gutierrez@correoalestra.com

ChSNDT QCCO, Hong Kong 18 – 19 July 2016 15 April 2016

The Chinese Society for Nondestructive Testing
100 Hui He Rd., Shanghai, 200437, China ___________________________________________________________________________________
Contact: Ji Jingyuan, Fax: 86 21 6555 0277
E-mail: mib8888@163.com, chsndt2008@163.com
QCCO, Shenzhen, China 22 – 23 July 2016 22 April 2016
ISNT ___________________________________________________________________________________
Module No. 60 & 61, Garment Complex,
Sidco Tiru-Vi-Ka Industrial Estate, Guindy, Chennai 600 032, India
Contact: M.T. Shyamsunder SETSCO, Singapore 1 – 2 August 2016 9 May 2016
Phone: 91 44 42038175, Fax: 91 44 52038176
E-mail: mt.shyamsunder@ge.com, ncbisnt@gmail.com ___________________________________________________________________________________

KS Reinhart &
c/o S.S. Murugan, NDT Integral Services Co. W.L.L.
Shuaiba Industrial Area, Western Sector, Kuwait Associates, Inc., Lima, Peru 4 – 5 August 2016 25 April 2016
Mob. 66019351 ___________________________________________________________________________________
Contact: Nayef Al-Enezi
Phone: 965 9927 1338 or 965 66019351, Fax: 965 2391 0306
E-mail: ksasnt@gmail.com or nayef@kasasnt.org, Web: www.ksasnt.com ChSNDT, Shanghai, China 9 – 12 August 2016 8 June 2016
KSNT ___________________________________________________________________________________
635-4, Yeoksam-dong, Gangnam-gu
Seoul, 135-703, South Korea
Contact: Hong Joo Chung Reinhart &
Phone: 82 2 5837564, Fax: 82 2 5822743, E-mail: ksnt@unitel.co.kr Associates, Inc., Bogota, Colombia 18 – 19 August 2016 9 May 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________
NATL
c/o Eddie Harper, Paradigm Precision, 1 Bentley Wood Way,
Hapton Burnley, BB11 5TG, U.K. Bajio Section, Queretaro, Mexico 29 – 30 August 2016 6 June 2016
Contact: Eddie Harper, Phone: 44 0 782 813 8295
E-mail: eddie.harper@paradigmprecision.com, edharper31@aol.com ___________________________________________________________________________________
PIC-QCCO Bahrain* TWI-SEA, Istanbul, Turkey 3 – 4 September 2016 4 June 2016
Road 1910, Block 319, Building 322,
Al Hoora District, Manama, Bahrain ___________________________________________________________________________________
Contact: Mohsen Hassanein, Phone: 973 3637 8450
E-mail: mohsen@picbh.com, info@picbh.com
QCCO, Port Harcourt, Nigeria 5 – 6 September 2016 2 June 2016
QCCO* ___________________________________________________________________________________
3 Nablous St., Mohandsein, Cairo, Egypt
Contact: Mohsen Hassanein
Phone: 202 33456809 or 2 010 900 60 40, Fax: 202 33456037 ISNT, Chennai, India 12 – 14 September 2016 20 June 2016
E-mail: info@qualitycontrol-egypt.com,
mohsen.hassanein@qualitycontrol-egypt.com ___________________________________________________________________________________
Web: www.qualitycontrol-egypt.com

Reinhart & Associates, Inc. ISNT, Chennai, India (Level II) 15 - 17 September 2016 20 June 2016
13419 Immanuel Rd. ___________________________________________________________________________________
Pflugerville, TX 78660
Phone: (512) 834-8911, Fax: (512) 834-1266
E-mail: mail@reinhartassoc.com QCCO, Cairo, Egypt 18 – 19 September 2016 17 June 2016
SAS ___________________________________________________________________________________
P.O. Box 75597, Al Khobar 31952, Saudi Arabia
Contact: Fathi Al-Qadeeb or Mohammad J. Anjum PIC-QCCO, Al Khobar, Saudi Arabia 24 – 25 September 2016 24 June 2016
Phone: 966 505 801 957 or 966 559 734 648, Fax: 966 13 865 1318
E-mail: fathi.alqadeeb@gmail.com, anjummj83@gmail.com ___________________________________________________________________________________
The Singapore Welding Society
Setsco Services Pte., Ltd.,18 Teban Gardens Crescent, Singapore 608925 Bajio Section, Cd del Carmen, Mexico 26 – 27 September 2016 4 July 2016
Contact: Sze Thiam Siong, Phone: 65 6566777 ___________________________________________________________________________________
Fax: 65 65667718, E-mail: szets@setsco.com

TÜV NORD Systems, GmbH & Co. KG* PIC-QCCO, Abu Dhabi, UAE 28 – 29 September 2016 23 June 2016
Am Technologiepark 1, Building A6, 45307 Essen, Germany
Contact: Bettina Musiol, Phone: 49 201 825 2688, Fax: 49201 825 2861 ___________________________________________________________________________________
E-mail: bmusiol@tuev-nord.de, Web: www.tuv-nord.com

TWI Technology (S.E. Asia) Sdn. Bhd.* QCCO, Istanbul, Turkey 9 – 10 October 2016 8 July 2016
No. 1, Jalan Utarid U5 13, Section U5 Shah Alam ___________________________________________________________________________________
Selangor Dural Ehsan, 40150, Malaysia 40150
Contact: Dietmar Kok, Phone: 603 7848 1000, Fax: 603 7848 1010
E-mail: dietmar.kok@twisea.com QCCO, Boksburg, South Africa 17 – 18 October 2016 14 July 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________
TWI – The Welding Institute*
Granta Park, Great Abington, Cambridge CB21 6AL, U.K.
Contact: Jane Orchard, Phone: 44 0 1223 891162, Fax: 44 0 1223 891630 KS, Fahaheel, Kuwait 21 – 22 October 2016 22 July 2016
E-mail: trainexam@twi.co.uk, Web: www.twi.co.uk
ACCP exams only in U.K. ___________________________________________________________________________________

continued next page

972 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
maintain a competitive edge, qualify for the next career opportunity, increase your earning potential

INTERNATIONAL EXAMScontinued from previous page DOMESTIC EXAMS

ASNT NDT Level II, ASNT NDT Level III, ACCP Level II, and ACCP Professional Level III ASNT NDT Level II, ASNT NDT Level III, ACCP Level II, and ACCP Professional Level III

Sponsor, Exam Location Exam Date(s) Application Deadline

St. Paul, MN, IRRSP Only
QCCO, Lahore, Pakistan 29 – 30 October 2016 1 August 2016 7 July 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________ APPLICATION DEADLINE: 26 May 2016
__________________________________
KSNT, Changwon, Korea 8 – 10 November 2016 16 August 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________
Anderson, IN, IRRSP Only
QCCO, Kaohsiung City, Taiwan 11 – 12 November 2016 12 August 2016
16 July 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________
APPLICATION DEADLINE: 3 June 2016
QCCO, Chengdu, China 15 – 16 November 2016 15 August 2016 __________________________________
___________________________________________________________________________________

QCCO, Bangkok, Thailand 23 – 24 November 2016 24 August 2016 St. Paul, MN, IRRSP Only
___________________________________________________________________________________ 1 September 2016
APPLICATION DEADLINE: 21 July 2016
PIC-QCCO, Manama, Bahrain 26 – 27 November 2016 26 August 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________ __________________________________

SAS, Al-Khobar, Saudi Arabia 2 – 3 December 2016 5 September 2016

Anderson, IN, IRRSP Only
___________________________________________________________________________________
8 October 2016
SETSCO, Singapore 5 – 6 December 2016 12 September 2016 APPLICATION DEADLINE: 26 August 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________
__________________________________
Reinhart &
Associates, Inc., Cochabamba, Bolivia 8 – 9 December 2016 29 August 2016 St. Paul, MN, IRRSP Only
___________________________________________________________________________________
3 November 2016
QCCO, Genoa, Italy 12 – 13 December 2016 12 September 2016 APPLICATION DEADLINE: 22 September 2016
___________________________________________________________________________________

TWI-SEA, Istanbul, Turkey 17 – 18 December 2016 17 September 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________

PIC-QCCO, Erbil, Iraq 28 – 29 December 2016 28 September 2016

___________________________________________________________________________________

Applications must be postmarked by deadline. Deadlines are firm. No exceptions are made. Log onto www.asnt.org for a list of
Authorized Exam Centers. For information and applications, contact the sponsor for the exam sessions listed. It is mandatory that all
persons applying for international examinations at a National Sponsoring Organization have applications processed through the NSO or
SES. Do not send your application or fees to ASNT International Service Center for processing. They will be returned to you.

can’ t wait
to take an
Schedule ASNT NDT Level III, ACCP Level II, ACCP
Professional Level III, or IRRSP exams any time at
DOMESTIC EXAMS: All applications for domestic exams are available only
from ASNT. For examination application packages at U.S. sites, contact the
Technical Services Department, ASNT, 1711 Arlingate Lane, P.O. Box
one of ASNT’s Authorized Exam Centers (AECs).
ASNT exam?
28518, Columbus, OH 43228-0518; (800) 222-2768 or (614) 274-6003;
fax (614) 274-6899; visit our website at www.asnt.org and click the
For applications, go to the certification section of the ASNT website at www.asnt.org. “Certification” tab at the top of the page.

DOMESTIC AECs (Applications on ASNT website.) Computer Exams Available.

California
Hellier—Pacific
2051 E. Cerritos Ave.
Suite 8A
Anaheim, CA 92806
Phone: (714) 956-2274
Fax: (714) 956-2277
E-mail: infoanaheim
@hellierndt.com
Web: www.hellierndt.com
Connecticut
Hellier—Northeast
1 Spar Yard St.
New London, CT 06320
Phone: (860) 437-1003
Fax: (860) 437-1014
E-mail: infonewlondon
@hellierndt.com
Web: www.hellierndt.com
Georgia
Applied Technical
Services
1049 Triad Ct.
Marietta, GA 30062
Phone: (888) 287-5227
(678) 444-2897
Fax: (770) 514-3299
E-mail: training@atslab.com
Web: www.atslab.com
Missouri Texas Texas
Quality Testing Services, Inc. Reinhart & Associates, Inc. Hellier—South Central
2305 Millpark Dr. 13419A Immanuel Rd. 16631 West Hardy St.
Maryland Heights, MO 63043 Pflugerville, TX 78660 Houston, TX 77060-6239
Phone: (314) 770-0607 Phone: (512) 834-8911 Phone: (281) 873-0980
Fax: (314) 770-0103 Fax: (512) 834-1266 Fax: (281) 873-0981
E-mail: training@quality E-mail: mail@reinhartassoc.com E-mail: infohouston
testing.com Web: www.reinhartassoc.com @hellierndt.com
Web: www.qualitytesting.com Web: www.hellierndt.com

INTERNATIONAL AECs (Contact the international AEC for applications, see * contact information on left side bar of opposite page)
Bahrain Egypt Germany Malaysia United Kingdom
PIC–QCCO Bahrain QCCO TÜV NORD Systems, TWI Technology (S.E. Asia) The Welding Institute
Quality Control Co. GmbH & Co. KG Sdn. Bhd. TWI
ACCP exams only in U.K.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 973
X-RAY
 w
x ME BACK TO BASICS

SCAN
Industrial X-ray Volumetric
Computed Tomography
by Don J. Roth

Editor’s Note: This paper was an invited submission for the Technical Focus Issue
and is printed with permission from the copyright holder, GE Aviation,
Cincinnati, Ohio.

I
ndustrial X-ray computed tomography has become a critical nondestructive
testing technique in the last decade because of advances in detector, tube,
and computational technology. These advancements have led to a range of
applications for computed tomography, from its ability to scan and recon-
struct practically-sized (on the scale of tens of centimeters and even meters)
components at sufficient resolutions and speeds in the production environment
as well as to perform materials characterization at the submicron level. The
computed tomography modality considered here is attenuation-based volumetric
computed tomography as it relates to characterization of object quality (ASM,
1989; ASNT, 2002; ASTM, 2005; Roth and Rauser, 2015). The use of computed

Industrial X-ray computed

tomography has become a
critical nondestructive testing
technique in the last decade
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 975
ME BACK TO BASICS w
x industrial computed tomography

tomography in metrology is outside the scope of this Volumetric computed tomography (VCT) utilizes a
paper although many of the topics discussed here are cone beam of polychromatic X-ray radiation to interro-
applicable for computed tomography metrology. gate an object (Figure 1a). The resulting energy
through the object is received by an area detector. The
object (or X-ray source and detector system) is rotated
through an angular range to obtain multiple projection
X-ray detector images. A simulated projection image is shown on the
detector in Figure 1a. The projection images are math-
ematically processed to obtain cross-sectional images
of the object, which can be viewed individually and,
Part when stacked, can be used to create a volume
rendering of the object (Figure 1b). This paper summa-
rizes important computed tomography-related termi-
nology and information, and provides strategy related
Cone beam
to computed tomography scanning of any object.

Computed Tomography Modalities

Table 1 provides a description of the different computed
Rotary table
tomography modalities available (ASM, 1989; ASNT,
(a) X-ray source Rotation 2002; Blake and Fogelman, 1997; Weon et al., 2013).
The remainder of the paper applies to attenuation-
based VCT.

Volumetric Computed Tomography Resolution

Regimes
Table 2 approximately summarizes the different resolu-
tion regimes available for computed tomography today
in terms of focal spot size.

TABLE 2
Computed tomography resolution regimes
Computed tomography Resolution (µm)
resolution regime
(b)
Nanofocus ≤3
Microfocus 3–50
Figure 1. X-ray computed tomography schematic: (a) setup showing projection Minifocus 50–400
image of example tube on detector; and (b) resulting volume rendering of Macrofocus ≥ 400
computed tomography slice stack of one section of example tube.

TABLE 1
Computed tomography modalities

Modality Description Typical resolution regime Current industrial uses

Attenuation (the X-ray attenuation through the object provides Nano through macrofocus All industrial and materials research
subject of this contrast between sections of different thickness applications
paper) (X-ray path length) and density
Phase contrast X-ray phase shifts through the object provide Nano and microfocus Materials research
contrast for materials of low atomic number and
materials that might have similar density but
different composition
Dark field Excludes unscattered beam from image Nano and microfocus Materials research
Dual energy Information acquired at two distinct energies, Nano and microfocus Materials research
allowing improvement of image contrast

976 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
Computed Tomography Parameters
Parameters that need to be considered when
conducting a computed tomography scan, and
effects/issues related to them, are listed in
Table 3 (GE, 2014; NSI, 2013; Roth and Rauser,
2015).
TABLE 3
Computed tomography parameters
Computed tomography parameter
Effective spot size
Detector pixel pitch
Day-to-day system reproducibility
Energy/voltage (kV) level
Current (mA)
Power (W) (kV × mA)
Integration time (ms)
Filter type and thickness
Number of frame averages
Number of projection views
Geometric magnification (source-to-object
and source-to-detector distances)
Detector binning (summing photon counts
of neighboring pixels)
Gain/sensitivity
Object orientation
Acquisition angle range (0–360°)
X-ray beam collimation
Scatter correction
Reconstruction algorithm
Volumetric Computed Tomography Artifacts
Table 4 lists common artifacts (inaccuracies in the final
images that affect image analysis), their appearance,
their causes, and possible solutions for minimizing
(Boas and Fleischmann, 2012; Davis and Elliott, 2006;
GE, 2014; NSI, 2013).
Some important equations governing computed
tomography performance are listed as follows (ASM,
1989; ASNT, 2002; ASTM 2005; Roth and Rauser, 2015).
Primary effect or issue
Smaller spot size leads to finer resolution of features.
Finer pixel pitch leads to finer resolution of features.
Photon flux received at detector can vary based on target condition, detector aging, and other
factors.
Increased kV results in increased penetration capability of X-ray beam but can reduce contrast
between indications and background. Decreased kV can result in increased internal object scatter.
Increased kV will increase focal spot size for microfocus computed tomography.
Increased mA results in increased photon count at detector and increased scan dynamic range
(photon count difference between background and material peaks in histogram, can be considered
contrast). Increased mA will increase focal spot size for microfocus computed tomography.
Increased power by increased kV or mA can improve penetration capability (kV) and photon flux
(kV and mA), but will also increase focal spot size for microfocus computed tomography.
Increased integration time is generally expected to have the same impact as increased mA.
Copper, tin, and aluminum filters are commonly used to harden the beam (remove lower energy
X-rays). Tin is most absorptive, and aluminum is least absorptive of the three. Increased filter
thicknesses or more absorptive filters provide more beam hardening (and a reduction in beam
hardening artifacts). Greater kV and greater filtering lead to increased latitude (greater range of
thickness variation) for scans. Lesser kV and lesser filtering lead to improved contrast between
indication and background.
Increased frame averaging improves signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).
It is required to have the correct number of projection views according to the nyquist (sampling)
theorem to avoid aliasing (lines, streaks in cross-sectional images). Increased number of
projection views increases SNR.
Increased magnification leads to finer resolution of features but will have a limit based on focal
spot size, geometric unsharpness effects, and detector resolution.
Reduced detector binning leads to finer resolution of features. Increased detector binning leads to
increased SNR.
Lower gain setting generally is better providing lower noise. Higher gain setting allows higher
photon counts.
It is good computed tomography practice to angle objects to have object surfaces non-parallel
and non-tangential to X-ray beam resulting in reduction of artifacts. Also, it is advantageous to
provide the reconstruction algorithm different plane angles for better resolution of indications.
Greater acquisition range generally leads to higher quality images using common reconstruction
(feldkamp) techniques.
Collimation can lead to reduced scatter.
Hardware (beyond collimation) and software-based scatter correction techniques can significantly
improve image quality.
Feldkamp (filtered back projection) is commonly used, but other iterative reconstruction
algorithms can provide higher quality images for limited angle (≤180°) and limited view
computed tomography scans.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 977
ME BACK TO BASICS w
x industrial computed tomography

TABLE 4
Computed tomography artifacts*
Artifact Appearance in final Example appearance Cause Solution(s)
cross-section images

Scatter/noise Dark, blurry, noisy images Inner wall of cylinder Photon count at detector Use appropriate kV level
not resolved due to too low (photon starvation) and adjust other settings
lack of penetration/scatter as needed to obtain
sufficient photon count

Ghosting (image Possibly blurred image Previous image still in Long acquisition per scan Reduce kV and/or
persistence) in FOV at new scan point point, high energy, and/or integration time;
projection image from (projection image) not enough time between increase delay
scan point to scan acquisitions for subsequent between acquisitions
point. Can also scan points
occur scan-to-scan.

Double edges Double edges/indication Double wall edge Improper source-object Proper source-object
/indication doublets doublets stage-detector alignment stage-detector alignment

Indication doublet

Blur Major blurriness Blurred edge Part moves during scan Properly fixture part

Center of rotation Small circles at image Rings Object rotating during scan Detector shifting; move
center part off center

Feldkamp/partial beam Outer surface appears blurry Surface not resolved Object surface parallel to Mount sample at angle
volume effect in image beam

* Images are computed tomography slice images except where noted otherwise; FOV = field of view.

(Continued on next page)

978 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
TABLE 4 (CONTINUED FROM PREVIOUS PAGE)
Computed tomography artifacts*
Artifact Appearance in final
cross-section images
Ring Prominent circular streaks
Region of interest Full or partial double ring
Aliasing Lines emanating from surfaces.
Most obvious at sharp features.
Cone beam V-shaped streaks at top and
bottom of object
Beam hardening Darker center versus outer
regions
Metal streaking Streaks from metal area into
artifact lower density regions
Example appearance Cause
Circular ring Bad or insensitive detector
pixel
Bad pixel corrected
Partial ring artifact as Object rotates outside of FOV.
object rotates outside FOV Production of bright pixels
at the edge of the FOV when
the object being scanned
extends outside FOV.
Lines emanating from Insufficient number of
surfaces projection views
V-shaped artifact at top X-rays hit object surfaces at
surface too large of an angle
Use of polychromatic
radiation combined with
variable object path lengths
that X-ray beam traverses
(variable thicknesses and/or
densities). Lower X-ray energies
are attenuated as beam travels
through longer path lengths as
compared to shorter path lengths
Streaks emanating Can be from combination of
from metallic surface beam hardening and scatter
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N
Solution(s)
Demarcate bad pixel in
software and average with
nearest neighbor pixels
(pixel mask); detector
shifting; proper detector
calibration (gain and offset)
Sample should be in FOV;
software correction if object
travels outside of FOV
Use nyquist criterion to
calculate correct number
of views
Place sample in portion of
beam most parallel to top
and bottom of sample;
mount sample at angle
Use greater kV and more
filtering
Use metal artifact reduction
software or use iterative
reconstruction techniques
979
ME BACK TO BASICS w
x industrial computed tomography

X-ray Attenuation q is the photon intensity rate at the detector,

Δp is the ray spacing,

X-ray attenuation is calculated using Equation 1: t is the integration time of the detectors,

(1) I = I0 e−µx R is the radius of the object,

n is the number of frame averages.
where
I is X-ray intensity after traveling through the part, SNR is experimentally measured in a computed
I0 is initial X-ray intensity, tomography slice image by dividing the mean gray
µ is the material- and energy-dependent linear level by the standard deviation (σ).
attenuation coefficient,
mean
x is X-ray path length in the part. (6) SNR =
σ

Magnification Resolution, Beam Width, or Effective Spot Size

Magnification (M) is equal to: The beam width (BW) at the exit point of an object
(effective spot size), which provides a measure of
SDD
(2) M= resolution, can be approximated by Equation 7.
SOD
2
d 2 + ( f  M − 1)
where
SDD is the source-to-detector distance, (7) BW =
SOD is the source-to-object distance. M

Modulation Transfer Function

Voxel Dimension The modulation transfer function (MTF) gives the
Voxel dimension (Vx) is equal to: spatial frequency response of a system in terms of
normalized amplitude (percent modulation) versus
d
(3) Vx = resolution (lp/mm). The percent modulation itself is
M essentially a measure of contrast between a feature
where and the background. MTF can be calculated by:
d = detector pixel pitch. l Obtaining line trace data across the edge of a
phantom, which gives the edge spread function;
l Differentiating the edge spread function to obtain
Geometric Unsharpness or Blur the line spread function;
Geometric unsharpness (Ug) or blur is equal to: l Taking the fourier transfer function of the line
spread function to obtain the MTF.
ODD
(4) Ug = f
SOD Contrast-to-noise Ratio
where The contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) is experimentally
f is the source focal spot size, measured in computed tomography images using:
ODD is the object-to-detector distance. Mean B − Mean I
(8) CNR =
SDB
Signal-to-noise Ratio (Estimate and Practice) where
The signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) can be estimated from MeanB is the mean gray value of a representative
the following equation, which also predicts the effect background region,
of the variables on SNR: MeanI is the mean gray value of an indication,
nvqt SDB is the standard deviation of a representative
(5) SNR = 0.665µw1.5 exp (−2πR) background region.
∆p

μ is the linear attenuation coefficient,

where
w is the X-ray beam width,
v is the number of projection views,
n is the number of frame averages,
Percent Beam Hardening Artifact
The percent beam hardening artifact (%BHA) can be
measured from the center computed tomography slice
of a sphere of material according to:

980 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 GLc − GLe
(9) %BHA = × 100
GLe
where
GLc and GLe are image gray levels at center and
edge of circular slice, respectively.
Number of Projection Views Required (Nyquist
Criterion)
π × w, where w = width in number of pixels that the
Theoretically, the correct number of views is equal to
part rotates through.
In practice:
l the minimum number of views is w;
l the practical number of views providing improved
results is 1.6 × w.
Step-by-step Procedure
The following procedure can be followed step-by-step
to set up a computed tomography scan and get
proper results (ASTM 2005; GE, 2014; Mayer, 2015;
NSI, 2013).
Requirements
The first step in any computed tomography scan is to
obtain requirements for the scan and address the
following factors (at a minimum) related to requirements.
l Is the computed tomography scan part of the critical
production loop or for engineering evaluation,
manufacturing feedback, or testing feedback only?
l What are the object size, thickness, and density?
l What is the resolution requirement or regime?
l What is the minimum image quality in terms of SNR
and CNR?
l What is the maximum allowable scan time?
l Can the object be angled or must it be scanned
completely upright?
l Can the object be mounted off-center?
l Must all artifacts be minimized or can the evaluator
garner required information with some artifacts
present?
l Is uniform background absolutely required
throughout the part to aid assisted discontinuity
recognition algorithms?
Tradeoffs
It is likely that the answers to the preceding questions
will require that tradeoffs be made in computed
tomography parameters. Examples of tradeoffs
include:
l Scan time versus image quality (in terms of integra-
tion time, number of frame averages, or number of
projection views);
l Indication contrast versus object latitude (the range
of object thicknesses that can be visualized without
image saturation) when adjusting kilovoltage and
filtering;
l Power versus resolution. For microfocus computed
tomography, spot size is proportional to power—for
example, spot size increases 1 µm/W. This is not
an issue for minifocus and larger spots;
l Magnification versus geometric unsharpness
(a concern primarily for minifocus and larger spots);
l
Magnification versus minimization of center of
rotation artifacts (mounting off-center to reduce
center-of-rotation artifacts will reduce ultimate
magnification that can be achieved);
l Detector recovery time versus scan time (detector
recovery time reduces detector lag);
l Kilovolt level versus detector life.
Scan Strategy
A number of scenarios can be considered. For this
paper, in general for all scenarios, consider:
l The detector is 41 × 41 cm (1.35 × 1.35 ft),
2000 × 2000 pixels, with a 200 µm pixel pitch; is
a fixed distance from the tube; and has 16 384 gray
levels (14-bits) available for photon counting.
l The object is rotated the full angular range of 360°
during the scan.
l Always perform detector offset and gain calibration
before initial scans at a specified kilovolt level. New
detector calibration is required when kilovolt level
is changed.
l Follow vendor instructions for correct axes
positions. For example, for proper reconstructions,
one axis may have to be at the detector center.
l For lengthy scans, consider setting an observation
region of interest (ROI)—where part will not rotate
through—to track X-ray tube performance. This infor-
mation will be utilized during reconstruction to
compensate for tube performance changes during
the scan.
l The photon count through the thickest portion of
the object should have a gray level greater than
approximately 400 out of 16 384 gray levels
(14-bits).
l Have the photon count ratio (measured via image
of the object be ≤10:1.
gray level) through the thinnest and thickest parts
l If available, consider detector shifting and jitter at
each scan point or mounting the object slightly off-
center to minimize center-of-rotation artifacts.
l If the part is to travel outside of the field of view
(FOV) of the detector, utilize a filter to remove
artifacts caused by rotation outside of the FOV
during reconstruction.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 981
ME BACK TO BASICS w
x industrial computed tomography
l Specify a software setting to allow positional
(geometry) correction between first and last projec-
tion image acquired during reconstruction.
l Utilize beam hardening artifact correction setting as
needed to minimize beam hardening artifacts
during reconstruction.
Scenario 1
Consider a computed tomography scan scenario
whereby:
l the scan is on a microfocus system with focal spot
size proportional to power;
l the object is made of a relatively low density metal;
l it is desired to detect and size voids, cracks, and
inclusions as small as 1 mm (0.04 in.);
l the longest X-ray path length through the object is
5 mm (0.2 in.),
l the full object must stay within the detector FOV;
l the full object width is 1000 pixels out of 2000 pixel
width detector at 2× magnification;
l the scan must be completed in 30 min;
l feldkamp and cone beam artifacts are unacceptable.
The following can be considered a basic step-by-step
strategy for setting up the computed tomography scan
for indication detection and characterization for
scenario 1.
l Mount the object using a double angle tilt to
provide the reconstruction software with many
different angular views, to avoid the longest beam
paths and feldkamp and cone beam artifacts.
l Adjust source-to-object distance (SOD) to obtain
2× magnification. Rotate the part 360° to make
sure that part stays in the FOV. For this scan, the
object (height) is completely in the FOV at 2×,
and the object width spans 1000 pixels of the
2000 pixel width detector.
l Select X-ray parameters kilovolt, milliampere, and
filtering at the source to optimize contrast, latitude,
system dynamic range, and resolution. (For example,
1 W decrease in power reduces spot size 1 µm for
microfocus computed tomography.) Consider the
tradeoffs discussed previously; for this scan, one
might select a 200 kV, 150 µA, 0.5 mm (0.02 in.)
copper filter to achieve approximately a 30 µm focal
spot size.
l Select integration time, number of projection views,
detector recovery time, and number of frame
averages to meet the 30 min scan time. For this
scan, one might select 333 ms integration time,
three frame averages, a slight delay between
scan points to reduce detector lag effect, and
1800 projection views.
l Select 1 × 1 binning (record photon count for each
detector pixel) since indications need to be sized.
982 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
Scenario 2
Consider a computed tomography scan scenario whereby:
l the scan is on a minifocus system with fixed focal
spot size of 400 µm;
l the object is made of polymer matrix composite
and is 52 cm (20.4 in.) total length and 10 cm
(3.9 in.) wide in the area of concern;
l the part has some natural curvature and angling;
l it is desired to detect and characterize missing
composite material and undesirable resin pools;
l the longest X-ray path length through the object is
150 mm (5.9 in.);
l a 20 cm (7.9 in.) length of the part must stay within
the FOV;
l the object width for the 20 cm (7.9 in.) length
region stays within FOV at 2× magnification,
l the scan must be completed in 10 min.
The following can be considered a basic
step-by-step strategy for setting up the computed
tomography scan for indication detection and
characterization for scenario 2.
l Mount the object without tilt to allow the 20 cm
(7.9 in.) length required to be interrogated and stay
within the FOV at 2× magnification. Artifacts will be
minimized because of the object’s natural geometry.
l Adjust SOD to obtain 2× magnification. Rotate the
part 360° to make sure that part stays in the FOV.
For this scan, the object’s 20 cm (7.9 in.) length
requirement just fits into the FOV, and the object’s
10 cm (3.9. in.) width of interest spans 1800 pixels
of a 2000 pixel width detector.
l Select X-ray parameters kilovolt, milliampere, and
filtering at the source to optimize contrast, latitude,
and system dynamic range. Consider the tradeoffs
discussed previously; for this scan, one might select
200 kV, 1000 µA, 0.5 mm (0.02 in.) copper filter.
l Select integration time, number of projection views,
detector recovery time, and number of frame
averages to meet the 10 min scan time. For this
scan, one might select 250 ms integration time,
two frame averages, a slight delay between
scan points to reduce detector lag effect, and
1200 projection views. The number of views
violates the nyquist sampling criterion but is
required to meet the scan time requirement. If
aliasing artifacts are minimal, this number of views
is acceptable. If aliasing artifacts prove to be severe
enough to affect evaluation, the integration time or
the number of averages can be reduced to compen-
sate for having to increase the number of views.
l Select 2 × 2 binning (photons from 2 × 2 block of
pixels are added together) since only gross
anomalies need detection, and this reduces recon-
struction time and image size by a factor of four.
Scenario 3
Consider a computed tomography scan scenario
whereby:
l the scan is on a microfocus system with focal spot
size proportional to power;
l the object is made of a ceramic material substrate
with one side having a 1 mm (0.04 in.) thick
coating with rare earth metals;
l it is desired to detect delamination between
substrate and coating in one specific region
6 mm (0.2 in.) in height;
l the longest X-ray path length through the object
is 25 mm (1 in.);
l the object ROI width fills the FOV at 3× magnifica-
tion;
l the scan must be completed in 60 min;
l the entire object rotates outside of the FOV and
artifacts related to the part rotating outside of
the FOV are unacceptable.
The following can be considered a basic
step-by-step strategy for setting up the computed
tomography scan for indication detection and
characterization for scenario 3.
l Mount the object without tilt. Feldkamp and cone
beam artifacts may be present but are acceptable
for the purposes of this scan.
l Adjust SOD to obtain 3× magnification. Rotate the
part 360° to make sure that the selected ROI stays
within the FOV. For this scan, the object (height) is
completely within the FOV at 3× magnification,
and the object width spans 2000 pixels of the
2000 pixel width detector.
l Select X-ray parameters kilovolt, milliampere, and
filtering at the source to optimize contrast, latitude,
system dynamic range, and resolution. (For
example, 1 W decrease in power reduces spot size
1 µm for microfocus computed tomography.)
Consider the tradeoffs discussed previously; for this
scan, one might select 260 kV, 180 µA, 1.5 mm
(0.6 in.) copper filter to achieve enough latitude,
good penetration through the rare earth metal
coating, and approximately a 50 µm focal spot size.
l Select integration time, number of projection views,
detector recovery time, and number of frame
averages to meet the 60 min scan time. For this
scan, one might select 333 ms integration time,
three frame averages, a slight delay between
scan points to reduce detector lag effect, and
3200 projection views.
l Select 1 × 1 binning (record photon count for
each detector pixel) since thin delaminations
need to be detected.
l Utilize a software filter to remove artifacts caused
by rotation of object outside of the FOV during
reconstruction.
Conclusion
This Back to Basics paper on industrial X-ray
computed tomography was written to help the reader
understand basic concepts, tradeoffs, artifacts, and
scan setups for a variety of scenarios. w
x
AUTHOR
Don J. Roth: Ph.D., ASNT NDT Level III; GE Aviation, Cincin-
nati, Ohio.
REFERENCES
NSI, “Advanced CT,” training course, North Star Imaging,
Rogers, Minnesota, June 2013.
ASM, “Industrial Computed Tomography,” ASM Handbook,
Vol. 17: Nondestructive Evaluation and Quality Control, ASM
International, Materials Park, Ohio, 1989, pp. 358–386.
ASNT, Nondestructive Testing Handbook, third edition:
Vol. 4: Radiographic Testing, Chapter 12, American
Society for Nondestructive Testing, Columbus, Ohio, 2002,
pp. 303–343.
ASTM, ASTM E 1441-11:00, Standard Guide for Computed
Tomography (CT) Imaging, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2005.
Blake, G.M., and I. Fogelman, “Technical Principles of Dual
Energy X ray Absorptiometry,” Seminars in Nuclear
Medicine, Vol. 27, No. 3, 1997, pp. 197–209.
Boas, F.E., and D. Fleischmann, “CT Artifacts: Causes and
Reduction Techniques,” Imaging in Medicine, Vol. 4, No. 2,
2012, pp. 229–240.
Davis, G.R., and J.C. Elliott, “Artefacts in X-ray Microtomog-
raphy of Materials,” Materials Science and Technology,
Vol. 22, No. 9, 2006, pp. 1011–1018.
GE, “Radiographic Testing (RT): X-ray Computed Tomography
(CT) – Advanced Scan Operator/Intermediate Data Analyst,”
training course, GE Inspection Academy, State College,
Pennsylvania, April 2014.
Mayer, T., “CT Setup Steps for Acquisition and Reconstruc-
tion,” 2015 GE Industrial X-ray and CT Conference at Penn
State University, State College, Pennsylvania, 12–14 May
2015.
Roth, D.J., and R.W. Rauser, “The Effect of Experiment Vari-
ables on Industrial X-ray Micro-computed Tomography
Sensitivity,” Materials Evaluation, Vol. 73, No. 12, 2015,
pp. 1577–1584.
Weon, B.M., J.H. Je, Y. Jwu, and G. Margaritondo, “Phase
Contrast X-ray Imaging,” International Journal of Nanotech-
nology, Vol. 3, Nos. 2–3, 2006, pp. 280–297.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 983
ME FEATURE w
x

3DPrinted by Andrew Good

M
anufacturers of functional additive
manufactured or 3D printed parts
understand how crucial it is to control
the quality of their parts during the
manufacturing process. Today’s parts are becoming
more complex. For example, lighter component parts
are resulting in smaller wall thicknesses, and elements
that were once designed separately are now being

Testing 3D integrated into one component part. That means

it is no longer only a matter of controlling quality
throughout the manufacturing process that is

Printed Parts important, but also ensuring the quality of those

component parts early in the preproduction process
as well. Thus, the role of inspection and the accuracy

during the in inspection techniques cannot be dismissed.

Today, a variety of different technologies are being
used in order to control quality in the preproduction

Preproduction stages. However, there is one technology that has

emerged in recent years that affords a seamless
inspection process to measure a part quickly and
accurately. Together with the designers, manufacturers

Stages using are turning to a nondestructive testing (NDT) technique

called industrial computed tomography to quickly
Photo credit: Jesse Garant Metrology Center

and accurately validate the internal geometry of

Industrial parts in 3D.

Additive Manufacturing and Computed

Computed Tomography
During this important time of technological advance-
ment, NDT techniques such as computed tomography

Tomography offer a viable means of inspection for accurate meas-

urement during the preproduction stages of manufac-
turing for additive manufactured parts.

984 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
PartsThere is significant evidence that 3D printing can
disrupt manufacturing processes with the introduction
of direct part manufacturing. However, to sustain such
growth, there must be a validation process that truly
exemplifies 3D printing’s ability to not only meet the
quality standards currently found in current conven-
tional techniques of manufacturing, but to ensure that
it can produce that quality on a continuous basis.
Industrial computed tomography is able to identify a
part’s true internal characteristics in 3D for visual and
precise measurement purposes. It is its ability to
qualify and validate those internal geometries and
features that makes industrial computed tomography
scanning ideal for testing additive manufactured parts.
“We saw no difference in performance of the 3D
printed injectors compared to the traditionally manu-
factured injectors,” said Chris Singer, director of the
National Aeronautics and Space Administration (NASA)
Marshall Space Flight Center’s Engineering Directorate.
According to Singer, “The additive manufacturing
process has the potential to reduce the time and cost
associated with making complex parts by an order of
magnitude.”
NASA was able to take traditional subscale rocket
injectors that took six months to fabricate—consisting
of four parts, five welds, and detailed machining at a
cost of $10 000 each—and was able to build the
same injector in one piece, completing machining and
inspection (using computed tomography) in only three
weeks. The new injectors cost only $5000 to manufac-
ture using additive manufacturing (NASA, 2013).
Creating a quality control plan that will integrate
industrial computed tomography scanning during the
preproduction stages allows the designer and manu-
facturer to manage the quality of the first run in a
timely and cost-effective manner. Documenting this
preproduction quality control procedure will provide a
complete picture of the measures that will need to be
taken at each step to ensure that a production run can
proceed with full confidence.
For the purpose of this paper and to provide an
easy-to-conceptualize application, different types of
3D printed parts were scanned using industrial
computed tomography systems for internal part
analysis. Before moving forward with an overview of
the specifications of parts and quantitative measures,
it is important to understand the basic principles of
computed tomography technology.
Computed Tomography Inspection
With computed tomography, users are able to access
internal and external part geometry and volumetric
detail. These can be used for inspection and quality
control purposes of additive manufactured compo-
nents. Industrial computed tomography provides a
route for inspection in the preproduction stage,
enabling users to access internal features. This is done
to ensure there are no part failures and that the manu-
facturing process is producing a part within project
tolerances while ensuring consistency with initial
design intent.
It supports and qualifies dimensional require-
ments with accuracy and decreases the amount of
time required for the initial stages before production.
Since industrial computed tomography is an NDT
technique based on X-rays, it can be applied to
various metallic and nonmetallic specimens, solid and
fibrous materials as well as smooth and irregularly
faced objects, often produced by additive manufac-
turing processes (Good, 2015).
Industrial computed tomography works by
releasing ionizing radiation (X-rays) to capture quanti-
tative density and geometrical representations of
cross-sections through a part. A digital detector is
utilized to capture all the projections and software is
required to translate all the data into 3D.
Computed Tomography Setup
Industrial computed tomography is based on X-ray
technology, which enables users to access internal
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 985
ME FEATURE w
x testing 3d printed parts
Several hundred to thousands of 2D X-ray
projections are captured to evaluate the
quantitative densities of the component.
volumetric data by evaluating fluctuating densities. An
X-ray source produces a form of electromagnetic
radiation, where radiant energy is released and trans-
mitted into waves or particles at altering frequencies
and wavelengths. For the purpose of industrial part
inspection, hard X-rays must be utilized within indus-
trial computed tomography systems to be able to
penetrate through various densities. The X-ray source
must be placed directly across from a digital detector
panel. Figure 1 illustrates part placement: the
placement of the part relative to the source and
detector determines the resolution of the part.
Placement closer to the X-ray source will magnify the
part across multiple pixels, and placement closer to
the detector will capture more of the part but reduces
the number of pixels capturing the part.
In the past, film radiography was commonly
utilized for industrial part inspection, although it has
become obsolete for industrial applications because
of the technological advancements in digital detectors
Detector
X-ray source
Figure 1. Illustration showing traditional cone beam
computed tomography.
986 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
and recording media. Between the digital detector and
X-ray source is a rotary table upon which an additively
manufactured part can be placed for scanning purposes.
Once the system has been calibrated according to the
part requirements, and the number of frames for the
scanning process has been determined, a part is placed
on the rotary table or similar fixture to begin the
scanning process. Once the enclosed system has been
turned on, the part rotates, while the X-ray source exerts
ionizing radiation through the part, which is captured by
the digital detector panel at predetermined intervals.
Several hundred to thousands of 2D X-ray projections
are captured to evaluate the quantitative densities of the
component. Using specialized software, the projection
data are interpreted into a 3D format, providing internal
and external volumetric and geometric data of the 3D
printed part.
Cone Beam Computed Tomography versus
Fan/Line Beam Computed Tomography
There are multiple types of computed tomography
systems available that offer results through various
distinct processes. The two most common types of
computed tomography systems are cone beam and
fan/line beam. Although the results are evaluated for
similar purposes and are displayed in similar format,
the process of accessing this data differs (ASTM,
2011).
A cone beam computed tomography system
consists of an X-ray source that is collimated to an
entire or selected active area, and projections are
captured as the object rotates. Using a fan-beam
system, the X-ray source is collimated to a fan, and a
linear detector array is exposed such that the pixel
size is determined by the width of the fan beam
(vertical) and by the detector’s element pitch (hori-
zontal). Figure 2 illustrates how line or fan beam
computed tomography is performed by taking several
thousand 2D digital cross-sectional X-ray images as
the part rotates 360°. After the first slice is taken, both
the source and line detector move up and the process
is repeated again and again until the object or
selected area is fully scanned. Sinograms are captured
as the object rotates, and the beam or detector
elevates to capture multiple sinograms to provide an
X-ray line detector
encompassing 3D result (ASTM, 2012).
Part

Movement
For the purpose of this study, to evaluate the
geometric data of 3D printed parts, a cone beam
computed tomography system was utilized, as it X-ray
provides accurate volumetric detail in 3D more quickly source

Movement
than a fan/line beam computed tomography system.
The 3D printed parts can be placed closer to the X-ray Rotary table
source for magnifying results in a certain area or
closer to the detector panel for an encompassing Rotation
overall result of the part. One major factor to consider
for cone beam computed tomography scanning is that Figure 2. Illustration showing line beam computed tomography.
the part being scanned must fit within the horizontal
view of the detector panel to ensure accurate recon-
struction data can be captured, as shown in Figure 3. Detector

Computed Tomography Scanning Process and

Results
Three different types of materials with various sizes
and densities were scanned using two different energy
sources: a 225 keV source and a 450 keV source.
Each of the corresponding parts were evaluated for
specific reasons such as identifying and locating
internal porosity, comparison to the computer aided Source
design (CAD) model to ensure consistency with initial
part design, and dimensional analysis to confirm part Figure 3. Illustration showing computed tomography scanning setup and how the
geometry was within tolerance. part must fit within the detector to capture full viewing of the part.

Stainless Steel l Resolution: 250 µm

The first material (Figures 4, 5, and 6) had the
following listed properties:
l Type of material: American Iron and Steel Institute
316L stainless steel
l Part size: 140 mm (5.5 in.) length × 15.88 mm
(0.625 in.) width × 140 mm (5.5 in.) height
l 450 keV source: 450 kV
l Analysis: porosity/inclusion
l Discontinuity size: 300 µm found
This analysis was performed to validate a 3D
printing process with interest in finding porosity of
300 µm or less. The scan results show that nothing
was found under 300 µm, thus validating the 3D
printing process to produce the part. Figures 4 and 5

Figure 4. Porosity analysis on heat-treated part. Figure 5. Porosity analysis on heat-treated part.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 987
ME FEATURE w
x testing 3d printed parts

present different viewing angles to show exactly where

the porosity was found and to measure the size of the
porosity. Figure 6 is a screenshot of the viewing
software that is provided with the scan results,
showing three different angle side views, top view,
and image in 3D. With the viewing software provided,
it was possible to move the view through the part slice
by slice from top to bottom in real time to get a better
visual understanding of the part.

Aluminum Alloy
The second material (Figure 7) had the following listed
properties:
l Type of material: aluminum alloy 2024
l Part size: 140 mm (5.5 in.) length × 25.4 mm (1 in.)
Figure 6. Looking for excess build material.
width × 38.1 mm (1.5 in.) height
l 225 keV source: 180 kV
l Resolution: 75 µm
l Analysis: geometric dimensioning and tolerancing
(GD&T) programming (dimensional inspection)
Figure 7 shows what a user would see with the
viewing software for dimensional analysis, specifically
GD&T programming for first article inspection
purposes. Before a part is scanned using computed
tomography, a measurement program is developed
around a supplied CAD model from a GD&T part print.
The measurement plan developed can include all of
the GD&T part print points or predetermined points
selected by the client. Once a part has been scanned,
a part-to-CAD comparison is first performed and
aligned by the part print data. The developed
measurement plan is then executed. Results for
every programmed GD&T point are provided in an
Figure 7. First article inspection.
easy-to-read chart or in spreadsheet format. The first
article inspection results show the listed dimension,
tolerance, deviation from actual, and value out of
tolerance. Within the program, the user is also able
to go to any dimensioned feature and see how the
dimension was taken.

Thermoplastic Resin
The third material (Figure 8) had the following listed
properties:
l Type of material: commercial high-performance
thermoplastic resin
l Part size: 50.8 mm (2 in.) diameter × 101.6 mm
(4 in.) length
l 225 keV source: 80 kV
l Resolution: 90 µm
l Analysis: part-to-CAD
l Tolerances: ±203 µm
Figure 8. Part-to-computer aided design comparison. Figure 8 takes the CAD model of the part and
overlays it on the actual scan of the part. The different
colors represent deviations from the CAD model.

988 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
Conclusion
Upon review of the quantitative measures displayed in
the preceding section, it is certain that manufacturers
of various 3D printed parts can utilize industrial
computed tomography as the primary inspection
technique for quality control purposes, as it provides
exceptional accuracy and results necessary to make a
qualified decision. The advantages presented in this
NDT technique are clear. Computed tomography
scanning can reduce potential operational costs by
minimizing time allocated toward preproduction. This
technique of inspection aims to enhance product
quality and provides a high level of accuracy.
Industrial computed tomography scanning is
setting a new standard for qualifying preproduction
parts quickly and accurately while reducing inspection
costs. The accuracy, efficiency, and reduced turn-
around times provided by industrial computed tomog-
raphy scanning ensures that it can provide the insight
needed to support 3D printing’s growth, recognizing
both its utility as an inspection standard and the cost
and time benefits it offers. wx
AUTHOR
Andrew Good: Jesse Garant Metrology Center; (519) 962-
5300 X112; e-mail andrewg@jgarantmc.com.
REFERENCES
ASTM, ASTM E 1672-12, Standard Guide for Computed
Tomography (CT) System Selection, ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2012.
ASTM, ASTM E 1441-11, Standard Guide for Computed
Tomography (CT) Imaging, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2011.
Good, A., “Industrial Computed Tomography – 3D Printing’s
Biggest Ally?” GrabCAD Blog, 22 July 2015, blog.grabcad
.com/blog/2015/07/22/industrial-computed-tomography.
NASA, “Hot-fire Tests Show 3-D Printed Rocket Parts Rival
Traditionally Manufactured Parts,” National Aeronautics and
Space Administration, 24 July 2013, www.nasa.gov.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 989
 w
x ME FEATURE

CONEbeam
Scattering The
Problem: A Solution
for Scatter
Correction in
U
sers of industrial high-energy minifocus computed tomography are
often faced with the problem of whether to use fan beam

Industrial Cone scanning, with its high data quality but slow speed, or cone beam
scanning, which is much quicker but offers images that are not as
Beam Computed precise. This lack of clarity is mainly caused by scattering of the X-radiation
producing unwanted artifacts in the displayed image or creating blurring of
Tomography the image. A solution, involving both hardware and software, is now available
to reduce or eliminate scatter effects and allow cone beam computed tomog-
by Oliver Brunke raphy users to achieve the clarity of fan beam scanning without sacrificing the
speed associated with the cone beam technique. As the latest evaluations
show, this new scatter correction technology also provides significant
computed tomography data quality improvements for high-energy microfocus
computed tomography scans.

Introduction
Today’s industrial radiography has evolved from work done in the medical
sector. First, there was wet radiography using film, and this was followed by
the rise of digital radiography. All of this early work was 2D radiography, but a
Photo credit: GE Sensing &
Inspection Technologies paradigm shift occurred with the development of computed tomography.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 991
ME FEATURE w
x scatter correction

Computed tomography uses the same basic
hardware elements as 2D radiography, in terms of an
X-ray source and a detector. The difference is in the
software and the algorithms, which are used to recon-
struct 2D images to produce a 3D volume dataset
(De Chiffre et al., 2014).
The Basics of Industrial Computed Tomography
Just like medical computed tomography, industrial
computed tomography relies on the acquisition of a
large number of 2D X-ray images and then the recon-
struction of these to produce a 3D image (Hsieh,
2009; Kak and Slaney, 1988; Neuser et al., 2011). In
operation, this is achieved by placing the object to be
scanned on a precision turntable or manipulator
within a closed cabinet and then subjecting the object
to radiation from a high-power source of radiation. The
object is rotated 360° in small increments during this
process. Radiation energy is absorbed by the object so
that discrete 2D images are captured by a suitable
detector. These 2D data are then volumetrically recon-
structed, mathematically, to produce the computed
tomography volume.
Sample Flat panel detector
Step-by-step
rotation
e beam
X-ray con
Y reflected from objects such as walls or within the work
Scattered radiation
Z X
X-ray source
(a) Rotation table
Sample Collimated line detector
Step-by-step rotation
and slice-by-slice shift
Fan Beam versus Cone Beam
As Figure 1 shows, there are traditionally two techniques
used industrially to carry out high-energy minifocus
computed tomography on difficult to penetrate samples
such as automotive large light metal castings or
aerospace turbine blades. Both use the principles
described in the preceding paragraph, but they differ in
the way the beam of radiation is directed at the work
piece and the way that the data are detected.
Fan beam computed tomography uses a thin, colli-
mated fan beam, which radiographs thin slices of the
work piece as it is rotated and moved linearly in
discrete steps through the beam. The 2D radiography
slices are detected by a collimated line detector and
the individual slices are then reconstructed and
combined to provide the full 3D volume.
Cone beam computed tomography uses a cone-
shaped beam that completely captures the work piece
as it is rotated. The radiographic data are detected by
a flat panel array detector and the data are again
reconstructed and combined to provide the 3D image.
There is no need to step the radiographic source
through many discrete steps; all data are collected in
just one rotation. As a result cone beam radiography is
much faster than fan beam computed tomography.
However, as in all physics, there is a tradeoff between
operational speed and quality of result. Fan beam
computed tomography (also known as 2D computed
tomography) gathers the required projections line by line,
compared to just one rotation in cone beam (often
termed 3D computed tomography), and consequently is
much slower. In addition, cone beam radiography is
subject to X-ray scatter. This is caused by spurious X-rays,
piece, meeting the detector array from directions not
along the X-ray source-detector path. These spurious
X-rays are captured by the detector, detrimentally affecting
the computed tomography quality by introducing scatter
artifacts (Kak and Slaney, 1988).
Scatter fundamentals are as follows:
I = I0 e ( ) + Is
− σ+τ x
(1)

e beam where
X-ray con
I is the X-ray intensity behind the object at the
Scattered radiation detector,
Y
I0 is the X-ray intensity at the detector without
object,
Z X x is the penetration length in the object in the
X-ray source
(b) Rotation table X-ray beam direction (m),
τ describes the contribution of the photo effect to
the total attenuation coefficient along the beam
Figure 1. Scatter radiation in: (a) cone beam computed tomography; and (b) fan path through the specimen (absorption),
beam computed tomography.

992 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 σ is the attenuation coefficient due to scattering
for a specific beam path (pixel), which causes
an additional attenuation along this beam path.
However, in cone beam computed tomography,
sigma also creates a collateral scattered intensity
signal, Is, onto other detector pixels. This affects the
minimizes this from the computed tomography result
for every individual voxel.
In operation, two scans are performed using
proprietary scatter correction hardware. The software
compares the two computed tomography volumes and
automatically removes the artifacts caused by scatter
radiation. In a production environment, inspecting a

(σ + τ) from the measured ratio (I / I0), producing

reconstruction of the tomographic volume, µ(x, y, x) =
image artifacts. Scatter correction technology allows Is
to be measured and eliminated.
To date, industrial users have often had to
sacrifice quality to enjoy the fast analysis of cone
beam computed tomography or, alternatively, they
could use higher X-ray energies to minimize the
negative scatter radiation quality impact. Advanced
scatter correction technologies are also currently in
use.
batch of machined or cast parts, the process flow
would be as shown on the diagram in Figure 2.
As can be seen, this involves taking a first scan of
the first part in the batch. Then, a scan is taken to
measure the scatter portion and, based on these
comparison results, the scatter correction is applied
to allow the corrected dataset to be reconstructed
(Figure 3). All subsequent scans of same-type parts in
the batch then require just the simple two-step scan.

First computed tomography scan All further scans of the same sample type
Advanced Scatter Correction Technology
Scatter correction technology is a proprietary combina-
Step 1 Acquire projection data Step 1 Acquire projection data
tion of hardware and software advances. Currently, it
can be applied with the hardware offered by commer-
cial industrial microfocus and minifocus computed Step 2a Acquire correction data Step 2 Reconstruction of
(only once per part type) corrected dataset
tomography systems. (With low-power nanocomputed
tomography, the negative effect of scattered radiation
Step 2b Apply correction
is minimal.) Current scatter reduction technology
simulates scatter based on computer aided design
data or the material properties of a work piece (Baer et Step 3 Reconstruction of
corrected dataset
al., 2012). The scatter correction technology described
here actually measures the scatter portion of the
specific work piece in the scanner and then digitally Figure 2. Scatter correction process flow.

I = I ↓ 0e ↑−(σ + τ )x + I ↓ s 1

0.8

0.6
Gray value

0.4

0.2

I = I ↓ 0e ↑−(σ + τ )x 0
Distance (mm)
Without scatter correction
With scatter correction

Figure 3. Comparison of the scatter correction effect on the computed tomography quality of a scanned turbine blade. Applied scatter correction
allows the measurement of the scatter part of I.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 993
ME FEATURE w
x scatter correction

Benefits of Scatter Correction

Scatter correction technology provides benefits to both
industrial nondestructive testing (NDT) of complex and Fan beam
expensive components and in metrology, improving computed tomography

Computed tomography quality

speed and quality of inspection and accuracy of
surface measurement. A typical fan beam scan of
1000 slices requires 1 min per slice, hence, 1000 min. Scatter corrected
computed tomography
The cone beam scan takes 10 min or even less.
Moreover, scatter correction also allows these
inspections to be carried out using relatively low
energy scanners, typically, 300 kV as opposed to
up to 450 kV, reducing investment and running
costs. This is especially important when scanning Cone beam
difficult-to-penetrate samples of relatively high atomic computed tomography
number, such as metals, as well as for composites
Acquisition time
and multi-material work pieces.

Figure 4. Graph of computed tomography quality versus

Benefits on the Production Line
Computed tomography has moved on from being
purely a laboratory technology to becoming a process
control tool, especially in the manufacture of compo-
nents in aerospace and the automotive and power
generation sectors (Brunke et al., 2012; De Chiffre,
2014). In manufacturing, speed of results is often very
important and this is why cone beam computed
tomography is the preferred technology. However, as
has been explained, this speed is obtained at the
expense of quality.
Advanced scatter correction now allows scanning
to take place with cone beam computed tomography
at speeds up to 100 times faster than fan beam
computed tomography but at comparable quality of
results (Figure 4).
Gray value
acquisition speed.
Typical Scatter Correction Examples
To evaluate the effects of applying advanced scatter
correction technology, several samples were scanned
that are typical for the most common tasks using
industrial high-energy computed tomography with
micro- and minifocus sources.
Turbine Blades
As aircraft engine performance requirements become
more stringent, turbine blade cooling designs require
complex multi-wall castings that introduce inspection
challenges. Whereas before, it was enough to measure

Gray value

Distance Distance
(a) (b)

Figure 5. Cone beam computed tomography of a turbine blade at the same scan parameters: (a) conventional versus
(b) scatter corrected.

994 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 Gray value

Gray value
Distance Distance
(a) (b)

Figure 6. Computed tomography scans, both with applied beam-hardening correction: (a) conventional 450 kV versus
(b) 300 kV with advanced scatter correction.

wall thickness by ultrasound, there is now a need for better signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and a better gray
computed tomography technology to measure the value homogeneity compared to a conventional
new structures. 450 kV cone beam computed tomography scan.
The illustration and line profile in Figure 5 shows
the significant quality difference between scans Aluminum Castings
carried out without and with the new scatter correction The comparison in Figure 7 demonstrates the differ-
technique. ence between fan beam computed tomography and
As Figure 6 demonstrates, the inspection scatter corrected cone beam computed tomography
technique can now be performed for many applica- (Figures 7a and 7b) against uncorrected conventional
tions with 300 kV computed tomography scans, cone beam computed tomography in blur and streaks,
obviating the investment in more expensive 450 kV the improved discontinuity detection potential with
high-energy computed tomography equipment that the correction technique, and the much higher gray
would normally be required. In this specific case, the value homogeneity. The line profile comparison empha-
scatter corrected 300 kV scan even offers ~20 to 30% sizes the advantage of minimizing scatter. Relevant for

60 000 60 000 60 000

Gray value

Gray value

Gray value

50 000 50 000 50 000

40 000 40 000 40 000
30 000 30 000 30 000 A: 26 107
20 000 A: 11 557 20 000 A: 13 298 20 000
10 000 10 000 10 000
0 0 0
–70 –56 –42 –28 –14 0 14 28 42 56 –70 –56 –42 –28 –14 0 14 28 42 56 –70 –56 –42 –28 –14 0 14 28 42 56
Distance (mm) Distance (mm) Distance (mm)
(a) (b) (c)

Figure 7. Computed tomography slice and gray value line profile of a scanned cylinder head: (a) fan beam computed tomography; (b) cone
beam computed tomography with scatter correct; and (c) cone beam computed tomography without scatter correct.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 995
ME FEATURE w
x scatter correction

production process control are the scanning times:

the fan beam scan took 2 h, the cone beam scans just
9 min. In this example, scatter correction technology
allowed 13 times faster computed tomography scans at
considerably adequate inspection quality compared to
fan beam computed tomography.
As advanced scatter correction technology
minimizes intensity in the images created by scattered
photons, it also reveals the true SNR level in cone
beam computed tomography images at a given
exposure time, as only the pure absorption data are
reconstructed. In the conventional (non-corrected)
(a)
dataset the reconstruction is based on absorption and
scatter-based intensity and thus has a higher SNR
(as is shown in Figures 7 and 8). However, the gray
value homogeneity in the non-corrected dataset is
highly disturbed by the scatter component in the
images, which makes quantitative and qualitative
data analysis very difficult. In order to further
improve SNR for scatter corrected data, it is possible
to increase the X-ray flux or apply conventional 3D
image processing techniques like median or
(b) adaptive gauss filters.

Figure 8. Microfocus computed tomography comparison of scans of a: (a) multi- Multi-material Sample Scan (Aluminum, Steel, and
material sample showing the left without and right with scatter correction Plastic)
technology; and (b) steel screw in plastic and aluminum showing tomography
slices left and extracted screw surface right. Similar to a technique presented in outside literature,
the multi-material sample comparison in Figure 8
illustrates that less blur and fewer streaks, sharper
8 cm
edges, better homogeneity, improved surface
2 cm segmentation, and reduced artifacts are achieved
450 kV 450 kV when scatter correction technology is applied to a
microcomputed tomography volume, as in Figure 8b
(Verburg and Seco, 2012). Because there are fewer
artifacts, only in the corrected volume could the
real surface be determined automatically for
better qualitative and quantitative analysis and
Without scatter metrology.
correction
5.5 cm
Benefits in Metrology
Computed tomography is now widely used in
metrology, frequently displacing “touch” metrology
With scatter
correction using coordinate measuring machines especially to
7.0 cm measure complex parts with hidden surfaces
(a) (b) (Bartscher et al., 2008; Carmignato et al., 2012; Hiller
17 cm et al., 2012; Kruth et al, 2011; VDI, 2010). Currently,
automated computed tomography measuring
Figure 9. Computed tomography slice and surface extraction comparison of a programs try to determine and precisely identify the
stepped aluminum cylinder with a central 2 cm (0.79 in.) drilling inside: (a) surface of a work piece by analyzing the gray values of
without scatter correction technology; and (b) with scatter correction technology. each voxel. When a large difference in gray values is
At the same high-energy scan parameters (450 kV), the corrected, high quality found, the software determines the surface line
volume shows a more homogenous gray value distribution allowing a much more
between the material and air. However, scatter
precise surface segmentation. Hence, even at up to ~27% more material
penetration length of 14 versus 11 cm (5.51 versus 4.33 in.), the scatter corrected radiation artifacts disrupt this frontier, giving the
surface can still be automatically extracted. illusion that material is present when in fact it is air

996 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
the scatter correction technique allows for
more precise surface detection at the same
penetration length and energy
disguised by an artifact. Consequently, the software
8 cm
is unable to precisely determine the exact surface of
the sample. The scatter correction technique reduces 2 cm
these artifacts. Hence, it is possible to scan even 450 kV 350 kV
thicker samples.
This effect is demonstrated on the stepped test
phantom cylinder: compared with conventional high-
energy cone beam computed tomography, scanning
with scatter correction technology allows up to ~27%
more material penetration at the same scan parame- Without scatter With scatter
correction correction
ters to still determine the exact material surface 5.5 cm 5.5 cm
(Figure 9). On the other hand, at the same material
penetration length, a comparable measurement
performance can be reached by applying just 77.7%
(350 kV instead of 450 kV) scan energy (Figure 10).
This also means that the scatter correction technique
allows for more precise surface detection at the same (a) (b)
penetration length and energy due to fewer artifacts 17 cm
negatively affecting the metrology results.
As Figure 11 shows, also at medium-energy cone Figure 10. Computed tomography slice and surface extraction comparison of a
beam computed tomography, using scatter correction stepped aluminum cylinder: (a) without scatter correction technology (450 kV
leads to comparable precise measurement results at scan); and (b) with scatter correction technology scanned at 350 kV. Exact surface
9 cm (3.54 in.) aluminum penetration length with only segmentation is possible in both cases until 11 cm (4.33 in.) aluminum
penetration length, but to reach a comparable measurement performance with
250 kV instead of 300 kV (required to scan the applied scatter correction, 100 kV less energy is required.
cylinder without scatter correction).

Conclusions
Industrial NDT and metrology are continually driven by 9 cm
three demands: high quality, speed, and affordability.
2 cm
The new scatter correction technique helps to achieve
these three, often mutually exclusive goals by using 300 kV 250 kV
cone beam computed tomography to provide the high
quality computed tomography scanning delivered by Without scatter With scatter
correction correction
fan beam computed tomography. The technique works 4.5 cm 4.5 cm
at speeds up to 100 times faster, while using
hardware that offers cost savings, and improved (a) (b)
image quality is provided at moderate energies 12 cm
compared to conventional 3D computed tomography.
w
x Figure 11. Computed tomography slice and surface extraction comparison of a
stepped aluminum cylinder for medium energy scans: (a) 300 kV scan without
AUTHOR scatter correction; and (b) 250 kV with scatter correction technology. To reach the
same measurement performance, only 250 kV were needed with applied scatter
Dr. Ing. Oliver Brunke, Dipl. Phys.: GE Inspection Technolo-
correction technology to penetrate 9 cm (3.54 in.) of aluminum.
gies; 49 5031 172 142; e-mail oliver.brunke@ge.com;
website www.gemeasurement.com/ct.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 997
ME FEATURE w
x scatter correction
NOTE
NLR-EAR99 export classification for the blade images:
108010956.
REFERENCES
Baer, M., M. Hammer, M. Knaup, I. Schmidt, R. Christoph,
and M. Kachelrieß, “Scatter Correction Methods in Dimen-
sional CT,” Conference on Industrial Computed Tomography,
Wels, Austria, 19–21 September 2012.
Bartscher, M., U. Hilpert, and D. Fiedler, “Determination of the
Measurement Uncertainty of Computed Tomography Measure-
ments using a Cylinder Head as an Example,” Technisches
Messen, Vol. 75, No. 3, 2008, pp. 178–186 (in German).
Brunke, O., F. Hansen, I. Stuke, and F.F. Butz, “A New
Concept for High-speed Atline and InlineCT for up to
100% Mass Production Process Control,” 18th World
Conference on Nondestructive Testing, Durban, South
Africa, 16–20 April 2012.
Carmignato, S., A. Pierobon, P. Rampazzo, M. Parisatto,
and E. Savio, “CT for Industrial Metrology—Accuracy and
Structural Resolution of CT Dimensional Measurements,”
Conference on Industrial Computed Tomography, Wels,
Austria, 19–21 September 2012.
De Chiffre, L., S. Carmignato, J.-P. Kruth, R. Schmitt, and
A. Weckenmann, “Industrial Applications of Computed
Tomography,” CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology,
Vol. 63, No. 2, 2014, pp. 655–677.
998 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
Hiller, J., M. Maisl, and L.M. Reindl, “Physical Characterization
and Performance Evaluation of an X-ray Micro-computed
Tomography System for Dimensional Metrology Applica-
tions,” Measurement Science and Technology, Vol. 23,
No. 8, 2012.
Hsieh, J., Computed Tomography: Principles, Design, Arti-
facts and Recent Advances, second edition, John Wiley &
Sons, Hoboken, New Jersey, 2009.
Kak, A.C., and M. Slaney, Principles of Computerized Tomo-
graphic Imaging, IEEE Press, New York, New York, 1988.
Kruth, J.-P., M. Bartscher, S. Carmignato, R. Schmitt, L.
De Chiffre, and A. Weckenmann, “Computed Tomography
for Dimensional Metrology,” CIRP Annals – Manufacturing
Technology, Vol. 60, No. 2, 2011, pp. 821–842.
Neuser, E., O. Brunke, and A. Suppes, “High Resolution
Industrial CT Systems: Advances and Comparison with
Synchrotron-based CT,” Proceedings of the International
Symposium on Digital Industrial Radiology and Computed
Tomography, Berlin, Germany, 20–22 June 2011.
VDI, VDI/VDE 2630, Part 1.3, Computed Tomography in
Dimensional Measurement – Influencing Variables on
Measurement Results and Recommendations for Computed
Tomography Dimensional Measurements, Verein Deutscher
Ingenieure, Dusseldorf, Germany, 2010.
Verburg, J.M., and J. Seco, “CT Metal Artifact Reduction
Method Correcting for Beam Hardening and Missing Projec-
tions,” Physics in Medicine and Biology, Vol. 57, No. 9, 2012.
 w
x ME FEATURE

TURBINE
airfoils
Analysis
Techniques for
Volumetric
Computed
C
omputed tomography has been a valuable nondestructive testing
(NDT) technique for decades. Because of its long cycle times for

Tomography data acquisition and analysis, traditionally it has not seen wide-
spread use in manufacturing environments. It is used in the
Inspection of aerospace industry in a single slice mode to evaluate the severity of indica-
tions seen with other NDT methods such as radiographic testing (RT) or ultra-
Turbine Airfoils sonic testing (UT). It has been applied with multiple computed tomography
images to critical or hard-to-inspect areas of components as part of standard
by Patrick Howard, Joseph Portaz, production flow when other, more cost-effective techniques do not meet the
and Peter Wassenaar inspection requirements. Computed tomography has seen wide use, however,
as part of new product development and root cause investigations by
collecting computed tomography slices for the entire volume of components.
For these applications, the long inspection times and large data sets are not
an issue. The engineering insight provided by the inspection data offsets the
inspection time and cost for these uses.
The use of computed tomography slices covering the entire volume of a
component has been critical to the advancement of innovative aerospace
technologies such as additive manufacturing and ceramic matrix composites.
Photo credit: GE Aviation Inspection times for these components were often measured in hours, as data

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 999
ME FEATURE w
x inspection of turbine airfoils
reduced inspection time provided by VCT has
made it practicable to use this technique for the
production inspection of advanced components
were acquired one single computed tomography slice
at a time. Recent advancements in computed tomog-
raphy data acquisition technology have moved from
the use of linear X-ray detectors to area X-ray detectors
that can collect computed tomography data from a
component in a single acquisition. The use of area
X-ray detectors to collect computed tomography data is
often referred to as volumetric computed tomography
(VCT) and has reduced data acquisition times for an
entire component from hours to minutes (Telesz,
2015). The reduced inspection time provided by VCT
has made it practicable to use this technique for the
production inspection of advanced components. In
order to realize the use of VCT in a production environ-
ment, the data produced by the inspection must be
analyzed within a time comparable to the time taken
by the data acquisition. This paper describes a
technique for rapidly analyzing VCT inspection data
and the application of that technique to the inspection
of turbine airfoils.
Volumetric Image Review in a Production
Environment
Previously, the authors described a concept for the
review of VCT data in a production environment based
Figure 1. Concept for the review of volumetric data sets by breaking them down into a series of views.
1000 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
on breaking the dataset down into a series of views
for an inspector to analyze (Howard et al., 2010). This
concept is illustrated in Figure 1.
These views can consist of planes, volume render-
ings, or complex surfaces from the relevant areas of
the component. Software has been created to define a
series of views from the component and then present
them to the inspector as a workflow. That workflow
can then be applied to multiple components of the
same design. This concept has been successfully
applied to the production inspection of turbine
airfoils. The remainder of this paper describes typical
views used in the airfoil workflow.
Turbine Airfoil Inspection
The proper flow of air through the cooling passages
and holes found in the airfoils used by modern
aviation turbines is critical to the performance of the
airfoil and the overall motor. The majority of airfoils
are cast components. During the manufacturing
process, most airfoil castings are inspected for foreign
material in the cooling passages using RT. The thickness
of the cooling passage walls is measured using UT. The
castings are then sent for final machining operations
where the attachment areas are machined and cooling
holes are drilled. After the machining operations are
complete, the machined areas are inspected using
penetrant testing. The cooling holes and passages are
checked for the presence of foreign material or incom-
pletely drilled holes using RT and flow testing. The
thickness of the cooling passage walls is verified again
using RT and computed tomography. Although the
wall thickness of the cooling passages is checked
before final machining, errors in the cooling hole
drilling process can cause local variations in thickness.
If the drilling process does not stop at the proper
depth, it may contact an unintended surface of the
cooling passage, causing the passage wall to lose
thickness in that region. This condition is commonly
referred to as a scarf, or overdrill, and is shown in
Figure 2. The rest of this paper focuses on the use of
VCT to inspect the cooling passages and holes of
machined airfoils.

Overdrill

Figure 3. Example of an oblique plane in a volumetric

computed tomography data set.

Scarf Application of Planes to Turbine Airfoil Inspection

Figure 2. Common conditions that can arise from errors
that occur when drilling cooling holes in an airfoil.
Planes
A plane is a flat, 2D surface in a 3D space. In 3D
imaging, orthogonal planes are three planes that are
mutually perpendicular to each other. In computed
tomography imaging, the orthogonal planes are
typically the data acquisition system’s reference
frame. A plane not parallel to one of those orthogonal
planes is described as oblique. An example oblique
plane in a VCT data set of a turbine airfoil is depicted
in Figure 3.
Although orthogonal planes could be used for the
inspection of turbine airfoils, oblique planes are more
useful in practice. Oblique planes can be aligned with
individual cooling holes or groups of cooling holes to
produce views that are useful to inspectors, as illus-
trated in Figure 4.
Figure 4a conceptually shows an oblique plane
through a cooling hole as viewed on an orthogonal
slice of the computed tomography data set. The
oblique plane through that row of holes is shown in
3D space in Figure 4b. The oblique plane can be
extracted from the dataset and visualized as a 2D
image, as shown in Figure 4c. Such a view can be
used by an inspector to easily identify overdrills,
scarfs, and holes that are not completely drilled to the
desired depth. As indicated by the blue arrows in
Figure 4a, a small collection of oblique planes parallel
to each other can be assembled into a short movie for
the inspector to view. The use of a movie compen-
sates for any manufacturing variation in the placement
of the cooling holes from part to part.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1001
ME FEATURE w
x inspection of turbine airfoils

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 4. Application of oblique planes to turbine airfoil inspection: (a) location of oblique plane; (b) view of oblique plane in 3D; and
(c) extracted oblique plane image.

Ruled Surfaces
In geometry, a surface is considered “ruled” if through
every point of that surface there is a straight line that
lies on the surface. A familiar example of ruled surface
is the hyperboloid shown in Figure 5a. A ruled surface
also defines the surface that connects two curves in
3D space, as illustrated in Figure 5b. It is this concept
that is applied to turbine blade inspection.

Application of Ruled Surfaces to Turbine Airfoil In-

spection
A ruled surface can be used to visualize a surface of
an airfoil such as the exterior or the interior of one of
(a) the cooling passages. Figure 6a conceptually shows
one of the curves that can define a ruled surface
located on an orthogonal plane of the computed
tomography dataset. This curve accompanied by
another similar curve on a different orthogonal plane
defines the ruled surface visualized in Figure 6b.
Similar to the oblique plane, the ruled surface can be
extracted from the volume and visualized as a 2D
image, as shown in Figure 6c. Such a view can be
used by an inspector to easily identify overdrills,
scarfs, and holes that are not completely drilled, in
areas that are not easily visualized using oblique
planes. Similar to oblique planes, a small series of
neighboring ruled surfaces can be assembled into a
short movie for the inspector to view, as indicated by
the blue arrows in Figure 6a.

Example Views from Turbine Airfoil Inspection

(b)
Figure 5. Examples of ruled surfaces: (a) hyperboloid;
and (b) simple ruled surface defined by points on two
curves and lines connecting those points.
The visualization techniques described in this paper
were applied to VCT data sets of turbine airfoils with
known radiographic indications. Representative
examples from those trials are presented in the
following.

1002 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 (a) (b) (c)

Figure 6. Application of ruled surfaces to turbine airfoil inspection: (a) location of a ruled surface curve; (b) view of the ruled surface in 3D; and
(c) extracted ruled surface image.

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 7. Oblique plane visualization showing: (a) overdrill indication viewed perpendicular to the drill direction;
(b) overdrill indication viewed parallel to the drill direction; and (c) incomplete drill indication.

Oblique Planes
For groups of holes drilled in a pattern that is close to
linear, oblique planes provide a view that allows the
inspector to rapidly identify overdrill indications. In
Figure 7a, the oblique plane is located parallel to and
through the axis of a group of holes. The holes are
shown on the left hand side of the image and the
overdrill indications, circled in green, are on the right
hand side.
The orientation of the oblique plane parallel to the
axes of the group of holes is also effective for identi-
fying indications from holes that are incompletely
drilled. An incomplete drill indication is illustrated in
Figure 7c.
For internal surfaces of the airfoil, which are
approximately planar, an oblique plane can be
oriented parallel and adjacent to that surface to
identify overdrill indications on that surface. The wall
of an interior cooling passage is an example of such a
surface. Figure 7b contains an overdrill indication visu-
alized using an oblique plane in this orientation. The
indication from the cooling hole is circled in green.
The other circular features in the images are either
cast or drilled intentional features of the casting.
These image features are present in the image from
every acceptable airfoil of this design, whereas the
indication circled in green will occur only in airfoils
that have an overdrill in this area of the airfoil.
Ruled Surfaces
Overdrill indications from groups of holes that are not
linear or from non-planar surfaces of an airfoil can
often be visualized using ruled surfaces. Figure 8a
gives an example of two overdrill indications that

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1003
ME FEATURE w
x inspection of turbine airfoils
(a) (b)
Figure 8. Ruled surface visualization showing: (a) overdrill indications; and
(b) incomplete drill indication.
occur on the wall of an internal cooling passage in the
airfoil’s leading edge. In this figure, the indications are
circled in green. The other features in the image are
from normally occurring cooling holes in the airfoil.
These features will be present in all properly manufac-
tured components, while the circled indications will be
present only in the case of an overdrill. Similarly,
incomplete drills can be identified using the same
view. This is shown in Figure 8b where a feature of the
image, which is normally present, is missing.
Ruled surfaces can also be used to visualize the
internal cooling passages of an airfoil in a single
image, as shown in Figure 9. Images such as these
Figure 9. Application of a ruled surface to identify foreign
material during turbine airfoil inspection.
1004 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
can be used to identify foreign material remaining in
the cooling passages. The indication circled in green
in Figure 9 is from shot media left in a cooling
passage of the airfoil after a peening operation.
Conclusions
Advances in the speed of data acquisition for
computed tomography systems have accelerated the
migration of computed tomography inspection from
the laboratory toward the production environment. In
the production environment, the large, complex data
sets produced by VCT inspections will need to be
analyzed with a cycle time not exceeding that of the
data acquisition. Efficient evaluation techniques for
the data generated by the computed tomography
inspection of turbine airfoils have been developed
and implemented in the production inspection of
those components. w x
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors wish to acknowledge their colleagues at FEI:
Patrick Barthelemy, Franck Fauverte, and Alexandre
Marinkovic, who implemented the concepts described in
this paper in the Avizo Clue software package.
AUTHORS
Patrick Howard: M.S.E.E.; GE Aviation, Cincinnati, Ohio;
e-mail patrick.howard@ge.com.
Joseph Portaz: GE Aviation, Cincinnati.
Peter Wassenaar: M.S.; GE Aviation, Cincinnati.
REFERENCES
Howard, P., J. Portaz, J. Janning, P. Barthelemy, and F.
Fauverte, “3D Digital Testing Techniques for High Volume
Production Applications,” Materials Evaluation, Vol. 68,
No. 4, 2010, pp. 400–406.
Telesz, S., “Technology Leaps in Production Readiness of
Computed Tomography Technology and Solutions,”
Proceedings of the ASNT Digital Imaging Conference XVIII,
Warwick, Rhode Island, 27–29 July 2015.
PRODUCT
Phased Array Instrument
Retaining the best features of the VEO line,
the VEO+ features key design elements,
including superior digital technology with a
new 32:128PR board and four available
phased array configurations: 16:64PR,
32:64PR, 16:128PR, or 32:128PR. The
ability to upgrade in the field further
improves the VEO+ user experience. Along
with the standard and advanced phased
array toolsets, the VEO+ new board and
software technology delivers an excep-
tional signal-to-noise ratio, accurate
readings (based on a 125 MHz digital
sampling rate), and beam forming capabil-
ities. The phased array/ultrasonic testing
(UT)/time of flight diffraction multiscan
platform offers unique features such as
premium computing performance based
on a 64-bit Linux operating system and
Intel processor for instant calculations,
settings, and data management; onboard
live 3D scan plan; fast and large memory
capacity (128 GB SSD); speedy and
versatile networking abilities (Wi-Fi and
GB Ethernet); remote control solutions
(UT Link); and customized software
development kit possibilities. The VEO+
enclosure was designed to withstand the
toughest environments and has been
successfully tested in the field for five
years. Its enhanced wide sunlight readable
light-emitting diode backlit display gives
the technician the ability to see and
interpret results with ease and efficiency.
Finally, the VEO+ is portable, with batteries
1006 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
gallery
giving a minimum of 6.6 h autonomy
with its hot swappable concept for
continuous use.
Sonatest, Inc., Milton Keynes, United
Kingdom
www.sonatest.com
Ultrasonic Instrument
Zetec, Inc. has introduced the Topaz32, a
fully integrated phased array ultrasonic
nondestructive testing instrument
optimally designed for oil and gas, power
generation, manufacturing, and transporta-
tion applications. An advanced onboard
computer substantially improves the
power of the instrument, reducing typical
processing times by up to 50% at setup
creation, calibration, or reporting. The
ultra-bright touchscreen is crystal clear
whether indoors or outside, and getting
started is easy—users interact just like
they would with a smartphone or a tablet.
Configuration is simple as well: connect
any Zetec scanner or accessory such
as a probe to the Topaz32 and it will
automatically recognize and preconfigure
accordingly, saving valuable time and
resources. Data acquisition speed is
significantly improved, reducing time
for processing and creating reports by
up to 50% versus previous versions.
Furthermore, sectorial and linear
scanning combine to increase the
covered inspection area while reducing
scanning time. UltraVision touch software
is embedded in the Topaz32, and 2D
matrix array probe support is now
included without the need for any
external software. This fully-integrated
and simplified approach can reduce
the amount of equipment needed to
perform an inspection. Plus, the rugged
magnesium housing is long lasting and
has no air intake, making it ideal for
the harshest environments.
Zetec, Inc., Snoqualmie, Washington
www.zetec.com
Flaw Detector
The Isonic 3510 combines phased array,
single- and multi-channel conventional
ultrasonic testing (UT), and time of flight
diffraction (TOFD) modalities, providing
100% raw data recording and imaging.
Along with an intuitive user interface, porta-
bility, light weight, and battery operation
makes it suitable for everyday ultrasonic
inspections. The phased array modality has
fully parallel 32:32 phased array electronics
expandable to 64:64 or 128:128 function-
ality; two phased array probe terminals:
1 × 32:32 and 2 × 16:16 switchable; an
ability to work with phased array probes
carrying up to 64 or 128 elements;
SPOTLIGHT w
x Computed Tomography

Industrial Process Control

The scatter|correct technology from GE Measurement & Control is now available for the
phoenix v|tome|x m computed tomography system. It provides significant computed
tomography data quality improvements for high-energy microfocus computed tomography
scans with up to 300 kV. The scatter|correct technology enhances discontinuity detection
and analysis as well as 3D metrology in the automotive, aerospace, and power generation
sectors and can be applied to high scattering materials. This technological advancement
automatically removes scatter artifacts from the computed tomography volume, allowing
users to gain a low scatter artifact quality level. Process control productivity on the
production floor is increased by clearly improved quantitative volume evaluations, such
as automatic discontinuity recognition or more precise 3D metrology results. The phoenix
v|tome|x m is a versatile X-ray microfocus computed tomography system with optional
high resolution nano-computed tomography capability for 3D metrology and failure
analysis with up to 300 kV/500 W. Beyond down to <1 µm detail detectability, the system
offers excellent magnification and power at 300 kV.
GE Measurement & Control, Wunstorf, Germany
www.gemeasurement.com

Screening Detectors
Detection Technology has introduced the X-Scan D detector series, which accelerates
vehicle and cargo screening. Moreover, it has applications for screening dense objects and
heavy machinery, multiplying the uses within industrial nondestructive testing and
computed tomography. The X-Scan D has superior detection efficiency and up to 10 higher
sensitivity than conventional cargo detectors, making it ideal for high-throughput systems
operating with low dose rates on high and medium radiation energies. The series comes
with the state-of-the-art detector architecture with single and dual row pixel configurations.
It has high-speed data transfer over the robust Gigabit Ethernet protocol, enabling high
scanning speeds with the standard hardware and streamlined system architecture. It is
built on an extremely low noise and compact digital platform. With separated detector
elements and ideal absorption length the series achieves optimized radiation collection,
minimized crosstalk, and high conversion efficiency. The X-Scan D also supports dual-
energy imaging for material recognition. The compact and efficient detector design enables
overall system optimization with direct savings on enclosure and other hardware, while
low dose rates result in minimal shielding and radiation exclusion zones.
Detection Technology, Inc., Billerica, Massachusetts
www.deetee.com

Microtomograph
Micro Photonics, Inc. has released the SkyScan1275 desktop microtomograph from Bruker.
The SkyScan1275 is specially designed for fast scanning using new advances in the
technology of X-ray sources and efficient flat-panel detectors. It opens the possibility for
reducing scan time down to a few minutes without compromising image quality. Current
graphics cards give an additional gain in performance and speed. Fast realistic visualization
of the microstructure through volume rendering enables excellent imaging with the ability to
virtually cut or fly around the inside of objects. Fast scanning with high quality results is
crucial for scientific research and industrial applications such as quality control or production
process monitoring. The SkyScan1275 provides a high level of automation. A simple push of a
button on the front of the system starts an auto sequence of a fast scan, followed by
reconstruction and volume rendering executed during scanning of the next sample.
Micro Photonics, Inc., Allentown, Pennsylvania
www.microphotonics.com

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1007

NDT
Web
SIghTINgS
The following are online resources of interest to the NDT community.
Each listing includes a description of the website and a photo of the
site’s home page. Published four times a year, NDT Web Sightings is
a great way to bring traffic to your site.
www.physicalacoustics.com
Physical Acoustics, the renowned acoustic emission testing (AE)
leader worldwide, has launched its website featuring its entire line
of sensors, systems, software, and monitoring solutions.
Check out the new Physical Acoustics website for all your AE needs!
Start browsing today at www.physicalacoustics.com
www.universityofultrasonics.com
Broaden your ultrasonic testing (UT) spectrum with advanced
ultrasonics skills training for tomorrow’s UT, phased array and time
of flight diffraction inspectors. University of Ultrasonics’ (UUT’s)
qualified instructors deliver field-oriented training methods in a
high-level learning environment. With a curriculum structured to
maximize each student’s learning potential, UUT classes go
beyond that which is traditionally taught in basic skills training.
Register online for your class today.
1008 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
PRODUCT gallery
SPOTLIGHT w
x
Computed Tomography
Computed Tomography Software
VGStudio MAX 3.0, the latest version of Volume Graphics’
high-end software for the visualization and analysis of
industrial computed tomography data, is available now. This
software enables companies to easily run comprehensive,
nondestructive tests. VGStudio MAX 3.0, which has been
completely redeveloped to take full advantage of modern
hardware, now supports fast solid-state drive storage and
graphics processing unit acceleration. A new unload/reload
data function for gray values drastically reduces memory
requirements. This benefits both metrologists, who do not
require the gray values of the object’s interior, and users,
who edit and share high-resolution computed tomography
data sets. VGStudio MAX 3.0 can also work with point cloud
data in addition to voxel, computer aided design, and mesh
data. Moreover, users can convert from one format to
another. For flexible process automation, macros can now
be combined, rearranged, and reused like building blocks.
A new combined analyses feature lets users combine, for
example, a wall thickness analysis with a porosity/inclusion
analysis. A discontinuity is then classified not only according
to its size, but also according to its size in relation to the
local wall thickness. The improved Coordinate Measurement
Module, which allows users to measure even difficult-to-access
component surfaces, offers new and enhanced object
registration options, tolerancing of registration results, and
line and surface profile tolerances. A new Transport
Phenomena Module performs virtual experiments on, for
example, computed tomography scans of soil and rock
samples, to identify material properties.
Volume Graphics, GmbH, Heidelberg, Germany
www.volumegraphics.com
independently adjustable emitting and
receiving aperture with parallel firing;
analog-to-digital conversion; on-the-fly
real-time digital phasing; and two inde-
pendent channels for UT and TOFD capable
for both single and dual modes of use.
Top-level performance is achieved through
firing phased array, TOFD, and conven-
tional probes with the bipolar square wave
initial pulse with wide-range-tunable
duration and amplitude (up to 300 Vpp).
The unique true-to-geometry volume
overlap coverage and real-time imaging of
the Isonic 3510 allows high-performance
inspection of simple and complex
geometry welds with scanning from
one or both sides simultaneously, as
well as bolts, bridge hanger pins, wind
turbine and other shafts, and more. The
precise and easy reproducible automatic
equalizing of the sensitivity within an
entire cross-section or volume of the
material is provided by the unique inde-
pendent angle gain and gain per focal
law compensation solution and image
normalization.
Qualitek, LLC, Houston, Texas
www.qualitek-ndt.com
Wheel Inspection System
Following test operations during production
involving more than 250 000 inspected wheel, an annual throughput of 1.5 million
wheels, Yxlon has officially launched the inspected wheels is being applied as the
WI26 G wheel inspection system with basis. The WI26 G is equipped with the
automated discontinuity recognition and Yxlon Panel 460 detector. Because of the
the Yxlon Panel 460 detector. The design extremely large active area, the number of
for the WI26 G is geared toward speed, projections per inspection run is reduced,
inspection decision-making, and minimum equivalent to a savings in real time. The
maintenance requirements. At less than innovative manipulation concept using
20 s of inspection time per standard grippers increases the speed of inspection
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1009
even further. The efficient wheel feed and
discharge via a new type of loadlock and
transfer construction design ensures
complete shielding against radiation and
implements wheel identification directly
during insertion. At the same time, the
ingenious mechanics minimize unneces-
sary wear and tear, while automatic cali-
bration programs eliminate frequent
program adjustments. Aligned to work with
a wide range of wheel sizes and weights,
the WI26 G is excellently suited for mixed
operation and remains operable even in
the event of an expanded product
portfolio.
Yxlon, Hamburg, Germany
www.yxlon.com
Probe Pusher System
Eddyfi has launched the Probot probe
pusher system. It is easy to transport and
1010 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
set up, requires no compressed air, has a
small footprint, and offers the robustness
required by the industry. Probot also
makes one-person inspection a reality. The
probe pusher system is designed to
dramatically and safely increase inspection
speed, while maintaining high-quality
results. Furthermore, Probot is designed
with versatility in mind, exceeding the
requirements of balance of plant inspec-
tions, while offering other markets a
productivity-enhancing tool. By automating
probe motion to inspect heat exchangers,
the system always yields accurate and
reliable data at speeds optimized for the
technique. Probot is compatible with
industry-standard probes and is fully inte-
grated into Eddyfi’s product lineup. It is
designed to enhance the operation of
Eddyfi’s most innovative tubing probes.
Users can configure and control Probot
with Magnifi advanced multi-technology
software for tube inspections. Adding the
Ectane test instrument creates a powerful
heat exchanger inspection system.
Eddyfi, Quebec, Quebec, Canada
www.eddyfi.com w x
Contact ASNT
The ASNT International Service Center is open from 8:30 a.m. to 5:00 p.m. Eastern time, Monday
through Friday. Voicemail messages can be left 24 hours a day by following the recorded prompts. In
the U.S. and Canada, call toll free (800) 222-2768 or (614) 274-6003; fax (614) 274-6899. E-mail
addresses for individual staff members are given below. If you prefer, write ASNT, 1711 Arlingate Lane,
P.O. Box 28518, Columbus, OH 43228-0518. ASNT’s website is available at www.asnt.org.
AREA OF INQUIRY CONTACT (EXTENSION) E-MAIL
Executive Offices
Executive Director Arny Bereson (201) abereson@asnt.org
Executive Assistant Michelle Thomas (223) mthomas@asnt.org
Accounting Department
Chief Financial Officer Mary Potter (203) mpotter@asnt.org
Account balance inquiries Angie Guzzo (228) aguzzo@asnt.org
Credit and collections Trina Coakley (220) tcoakley@asnt.org
Dues payment inquiries Margaret Leonard (229) mleonard@asnt.org
Book Department
Book and catalog orders Sandy Simpson (215) ssimpson@asnt.org
Curtis Smith (214) csmith@asnt.org
Customer service supervisor Trina Coakley (220) tcoakley@asnt.org
Certification and Technical Services Department
Chief Technical Officer James Bennett (250) jbennett@asnt.org
Senior Manager of Certification and
Technical Services Jim Houf (212) jhouf@asnt.org
Application requests Tricia Davis (219) tdavis@asnt.org
ASNT NDT Level III examinations (International) Tricia Davis (219) tdavis@asnt.org
ASNT NDT Level III examinations (U.S.) Lisa Law (226) llaw@asnt.org
ASNT NDT Level III recertification Tricia Davis (219) tdavis@asnt.org
Certification Specialist Kimberly Donaldson (242) kdonaldson@asnt.org
General inquiries Lisa Law (226) llaw@asnt.org
IRRSP/radiation safety Jennifer Harris (237) jharris@asnt.org
Technical Services Supervisor Charles Longo (241) clongo@asnt.org
Senior Manager of Quality Control Mike Boggs (218) mboggs@asnt.org
Senior Manager of Training Matthew Patience (240) mpatience@asnt.org
Conference Department
Senior Manager of Conferences Christine Schnitzer (202) cschnitzer@asnt.org
Conference registration Angie Guzzo (228) aguzzo@asnt.org
Exhibit and event coordination Ruth Staat (227) rstaat@asnt.org
Level III refresher courses Alicia LeMasters (213) alemasters@asnt.org
CEU program Angie Guzzo (228) aguzzo@asnt.org
Program coordination Alicia LeMasters (213) alemasters@asnt.org
Internet
ASNT website Stephen Schaefer (222) sschaefer@asnt.org
Advertising Jessica Miller (209) jmiller@asnt.org
Marketing Communications Department
Senior Manager of Marketing Communications Garra Liming (211) gliming@asnt.org
Advertising Supervisor Jessica Miller (209) jmiller@asnt.org
Communications Manager Matt Monta (239) mmonta@asnt.org
Public Relations and Brand Manager Dana Sims (244) dsims@asnt.org
Corporate design services Paul Conley (232) pconley@asnt.org
Member Relations and Services Department
Senior Manager of Member Relations and Services Heather Cowles (216) hcowles@asnt.org
Awards Jessica VanDervort (233) awards@asnt.org
Sections Coordinator Debbie Segor (235) dsegor@asnt.org
Program Coordinator Jessica VanDervort (233) jvandervort@asnt.org
Committee participation Jessica VanDervort (233) jvandervort@asnt.org
President’s Award points Pat White (217) presaward@asnt.org
Publications Department
Senior Manager of Publications Tim Jones (204) tjones@asnt.org
Library Toni Kervina (205) tkervina@asnt.org
Materials Evaluation
Advertising Jessica Miller (209) jmiller@asnt.org
Articles Nat Moes (207) nmoes@asnt.org
Buyers Guide Jessica Miller (209) jmiller@asnt.org
Calendar Toni Kervina (205) tkervina@asnt.org
Employment Service Toni Kervina (205) tkervina@asnt.org
Ready Reference Guide Nat Moes (207) nmoes@asnt.org
Reprints Toni Kervina (205) tkervina@asnt.org
Section News Pat White (217) presaward@asnt.org
NDT Handbook inquiries Patrick Moore (224) pmoore@asnt.org
NDTMarketplace inquiries Toni Kervina (205) tkervina@asnt.org
Advertising Jessica Miller (209) jmiller@asnt.org
New publications authors Cynthia Leeman (225) cleeman@asnt.org
Bob Conklin (245) bconklin@asnt.org
RNDE inquiries Hollis Humphries (206) hhumphries@asnt.org
The NDT Technician (TNT) inquiries Toni Kervina (205) tkervina@asnt.org
If you are having trouble locating who should handle your inquiry, please ask the operator at extension
200 to direct your call to the appropriate department personnel.

Structural Health
Monitoring of Composite
Structures using Fiber
Optic Methods
On 23 August, CRC Press will
release Structural Health
Monitoring of Composite
Structures using Fiber Optic
Methods, by Ginu Rajan and B.
Gangadhara Prusty. Drawing on the
extensive experience of its distin-
guished contributors, this compre-
hensive, all-in-one reference covers the
basics of composite materials and manu-
facturing methods as well as how optical
fiber sensors are used to monitor the
structural health of material structures
using the latest monitoring requirements.
With practical applications of fiber optic
sensor-based monitoring of composite
structures in aerospace, wind turbine, and
marine applications presented throughout,
this text’s usefulness will appeal to scien-
tists and engineers working in the field as
well as to mechanical, mechatronic, struc-
tural, and electrical undergraduate and
graduate students.
www.crcpress.com
Fraunhofer IZFP Annual Report
Fraunhofer IZFP has released its “Annual
Report 2015.” In the field of nondestruc-
tive testing (NDT), a paradigm shift
became apparent in 2015. Against the
backdrop of discussions surrounding
“Industry 4.0” an impending dramatic
change can be predicted in which the
practices of the “old“ NDT as proven over
many decades exceed the height of their
importance and are replaced by the
maxims of a “new” NDT. In accordance
with the slogan “quality is produced, not
tested,” the institute will significantly help
shape the future process all the way to the
development of a new approach for the
NEW
“new” NDT. This report is partially
available in English for the preamble as
well as thematic abstracts.
www.izfp.fraunhofer.de
Strategic Analysis of the Global
Gamma Sources Market
Research and Markets has announced the
addition of the “Strategic Analysis of the
Global Gamma Nondestructive Testing
(NDT) Radioactive Sources Market” report
to its offerings.
The global gamma radioactive sources
market for NDT applications is segmented
by sources into iridium-192, selenium-75,
and cobalt-60. For iridium-192 and
selenium-75, a detailed unit shipment
forecast has been provided. Pricing
analysis and market position ranking for
the top participants in the market have
also been given.
As the cobalt-60 market is very small,
only a unit shipment forecast has been
provided. The base year is 2015 and the
forecast period is 2016 to 2020. With the
recent oil price decline, the market will be
turbulent. However, in the long term,
selenium-75 is expected to provide growth
opportunities. Cobalt-60 is likely to be
phased out in the next 15 years, while
growth of iridium-192 will be tepid in most
regions.
www.researchandmarkets.com
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N
media
ASTM International Standard
for Structural Defects
A proposed ASTM International
standard will cover a nondestructive
testing technique that detects struc-
tural defects in both new and in-
service parts for planes, cars, power
generation systems, and more.
According to ASTM member Eric
Biedermann, process compensated
resonance testing (PCRT) is used for
inspection of critical components. The
testing identifies components that have a
significant discontinuity or condition that
will affect performance. Biedermann, a
development engineer with Vibrant Corp.,
noted that such components include gas
turbine engine blades for jet propulsion
and power generation; aircraft landing
gear and brake parts; and powertrain,
steering, and suspension components for
automobiles.
The proposed standard also will
describe how screenings are implemented
and used on a day-to-day basis. In
addition, the standard outlines what appli-
cations are relevant to these screenings
and what the technique’s limitations are,
allowing users to decide whether PCRT is
the right tool for the job and how to best
use it.
Manufacturers will potentially use the
standard to inspect new parts. Commercial
and government maintenance repair and
overhaul organizations will use it for
inspection of in-service parts. Suppliers of
both new and in-service parts will also
find the standard useful. With the
standard, organizations can list PCRT
outlier screening as a required inspection
during the manufacture of a new
component or during maintenance of an
in-service component.
www.astm.org w x
1013
Participate
Participate in American
National Standards
Development
ASKthe president
ASNT’s Standards Development
Committee (SDC) develops ASNT’s
standards, including proposed
ASNT CP-107: ASNT Standard for
Performance Based Qualification and
Certification of Nondestructive Testing
Personnel; ANSI/ASNT CP-106:
Nondestructive Testing – Qualification
and Certification of Personnel;
ANSI/ASNT CP-105: ASNT Standard
Training Outlines of Nondestructive
Testing Personnel; ANSI/ASNT CP-
189: ASNT Standard for Qualification
and Certification of Nondestructive
Testing Personnel; and ANSI/ASNT
ILI-PQ: In-line Inspection Personnel
Qualification and Certification.
If you wish to join the SDC
Subcommittee and participate in
the development of the performance
based testing standard, contact Editor’s note: Ask the President questions near you, you can reach out to the chair or
SDC Secretary Matthew Patience at
can be submitted to president@asnt.org; membership director to learn more. Also,
mpatience@asnt.org. More informa-
selected questions will be answered in sections are always looking for volunteers
tion is available at www.asnt.org/
publications/standards/standards upcoming issues. to coordinate activities, and serving on a
.htm. committee is a great way to get involved.
New Testing Opportunities If there isn’t a section in your area or
if you are interested in starting a new
Kevin, over the last few months, I’d heard section, you can contact Debbie Segor,
Patents about the Section Leaders Conference that
was held in May. It seemed like a very
ASNT sections coordinator, at dsegor
@asnt.org. Debbie can help you navigate
important event. I’m interested in getting the section chartering process and get
Have you been awarded a involved with my section. Where do I start? you on the right path.
patent? And if you’d like to take a more
If you have recently been granted a That is an excellent question. I’m glad active role and wish to serve as an officer,
new patent by a government patent you’re eager to take part in your local I urge you to attend an upcoming Regional
office, we invite you to let us know section. Local sections are incredibly Planning Meeting (RPM), which will next be
about it. We are looking for patents important groups that promote networking held in spring 2017. Similar to the Section
that describe innovations in the and knowledge among ASNT members Leaders Conference, an RPM focuses on
science and practice of nondestruc- and the NDT community. Each member of section leader networking and section
tive testing. You can send a few ASNT is automatically assigned to a management training.
paragraphs describing the invention section depending on geographic location. The ASNT International Service Center
and its range of applications, and a Chances are your section may be meeting focuses on supporting members and
copy of the patent document (or if it very soon! sections, so if you have any questions I
was issued by the United States To get involved, I’d recommend visiting encourage you to call the Member
Patent and Trademark Office, you www.asnt.org/sections and exploring that Relations and Services Department to
can just give us the patent number). area of the website. There, you will find a connect with staff and get involved.
E-mail to ndeguy@yahoo.ccom with list of all the chartered ASNT sections
“ASNT M.E. New Patents” in the around the world. Each active section KEVIN D. SMITH
subject line. listed will include the section contact’s 2015–2016 ASNT President
information. Some sections have websites president@asnt.org
For more information on the
patents, go to the U.S. Patent and
that list information like the names of the w
x
section officers and dates and locations
Trademark Office website at
for section meetings. If there is a section
www.uspto.gov.

1014 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
INDUSTRY
Tecnatom Signs Contracts for
Inspection
Tecnatom Aerospace is developing an
inspection system for the manufacturer
Songwol in South Korea. In addition, it has
signed a contract with Finmeccanica-Alenia
Aermacchi, for which it has been awarded
the supply of an automated inspection
system based on ultrasound, composed of
a robot mounted on a linear rail, allowing
the application of pulse-echo techniques
using phased array technology for the
detection and characterization of potential
discontinuities in aircraft parts. The versa-
tility of this robot-based configuration will
make it possible to scan complex geome-
tries with high levels of productivity.
South Korea is one of the most active
customers of Tecnatom in providing inspec-
tion systems, as five systems are currently
implemented in this Asian country. For
Songwol, a system is being developed for
the inspection of major components made
of composites. This system stands out espe-
cially for its versatility, since it allows the
control of parts by means of dual through-
transmission or pulse-echo ultrasonic tech-
niques, depending on the structure of the
1016 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
news
component. For this purpose it is
equipped with a mechanical solution
based on two robots, which can work
collaboratively for the inspection of major
parts using the through-transmission
technique or independently, in two
separate work areas, to inspect parts
using the pulse-echo technique. Tecnatom
is designing this system by applying the
most innovative in-house technology to
double its working capacity, since it allows
for the simultaneous inspection of two
parts located in two different inspection
areas.
Hexagon Acquires AICON
Hexagon AB, a global provider of informa-
tion technologies that drive productivity
and quality across geospatial and indus-
trial enterprise applications, has
announced the acquisition of AICON 3D
Systems, a provider of optical and portable
noncontact 3D measuring systems for
industrial manufacturing.
Founded in 1990 and based in
Braunschweig, Germany, AICON has been
meeting the measurement needs of auto-
motive manufacturers and companies in
the aerospace, shipbuilding, renewable
energy, and mechanical engineering
markets for over 25 years. Its technology
portfolio includes portable coordinate
measuring machines for universal
applications and specialized optical 3D
measuring systems that enable efficient,
high-precision monitoring, and quality
assurance and control in manufacturing
production.
With over 140 employees, AICON has a
direct presence in Germany, subsidiaries in
China, Korea, Japan, and the U.S., as well
as a network of resellers worldwide
supported by its field support resources.
Physik Instrumente Invests in
Technology Center
Physik Instrumente L.P. (PI) recently
announced the construction of a new
Technology Center at its worldwide head-
quarters in Karlsruhe, Germany. After a
year of planning, the cornerstone has been
ceremoniously laid.
In its current space, PI employs more
than 400 people in Karlsruhe. At the
ceremony, attended by industry and
political guests, Karl Spanner, founder and
president of the company, stated, “We are
active in a high-tech sector and are
investing more than 10% of our sales in
research and development. The invest-
ment is necessary to maintain and expand
our position on the world market for
precision positioning.”
The new Technology Center covers
more than 9600 m2 (100 000 ft2) and will
include 200 workplaces, laboratories, envi-
ronmental chambers, and an auditorium
for seminars and training events. Expected
to open at the beginning of 2017, the
Center will bring together PI’s development
teams into one shared space.
University of Bath Develops
Tomography Technique
A researcher from the University of Bath
has been awarded a new grant to develop
a way of assessing a key stage of the
production of steel, greatly benefitting the
competitiveness of the U.K. and E.U. steel world-leading techniques in our engi- the competitive production of high quality
industry. neering tomography lab, in the area of steel, which is very important for the
Manuch Soleimani is leading this electromagnetic imaging. This is an sustainable future of the U.K. and
three-year project to develop an innovative exciting and yet very challenging project European steel industry.” wx
new technology that will enable the U.K. that will have a great impact in helping in
and E.U. steel industry to become more
competitive and sustainable.
The Shell-Thick project will develop an
induction tomography system for
assessing the solidification process of
metal. This system will significantly
improve the continuous casting process of
steel by providing a real-time, nondestruc-
tive and reliable technique of measuring
the molten steel to detect any discontinu-
ities or flaws as it solidifies and becomes a
market product.
The system will form a kind of contact-
less bracelet around the billet of molten
steel and take continuous measurements
as the steel solidifies. It will visualize the
electrical conductivity of the different
states of the solidifying steel and therefore
provide an image of the structural compo-
sition of the steel as it cools.
By enabling industry to continuously
monitor and alter the cooling process of
steel, this technique will improve the
quality, safety, productivity, costs, and ulti-
mately competitiveness of the U.K. and
E.U. steel industries.
Induction tomography is a new and
emerging noninvasive imaging technique
used in a number of applications including
medical diagnostics, geophysical explo-
ration, and civil engineering.
The E.U. and particularly U.K. steel
industry is currently in a desperate state
and facing widespread job losses due to
its inability to compete with the highly
subsidized steel industries in China.
Steelworks such as the Tata Steelworks at
Port Talbot are currently in emergency talks
to prevent the plant’s closing. It is hoped
this technology might help the E.U. steel
industry become more competitive and have
greater job security in the long-term future.
The University of Bath works closely
with its industrial partners in the U.K. and
across the E.U. to bring innovation to the
marketplace, delivering impactful research
to industry and society.
Soleimani said, “We are delighted to
play a critical part in this project by using

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1017
 NDT pics
Liberty Bell RT, 40 Years Ago
As part of the U.S. bicentennial celebration in 1976, the Liberty Bell was radiographed in Philadelphia, Pennsylvania, prior to moving the
historical symbol of American freedom to a new pavilion. The radiographs were proposed by former ASNT President Ralph E. Turner, a
director with the Eastman Kodak Radiography Markets Division. Fourteen sheets of film measuring 1.32 × 2.13 m (4.5 × 7 ft) were
exposed simultaneously, producing the largest single-sheet radiograph at that time. Apart from the familiar main cracks, the testing
showed some shrinkage separations and cracks not known to exist, but nothing prevented the bell’s moving to its new National Park
Service housing, where it still resides today, 40 years later.

“How They Did It—Radiographing the Liberty Bell,” Materials Evaluation, Vol. 34, No. 2, 1976, pp. 14A–18A, 26A. w
x

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1019
CORPORATE
3angles, Inc. (Albany, NY)
3D Engineering Solutions
(Cincinnati, OH)
3E NDT, LLC (La Porte, TX)
4A Inspection, LLC (Houston, TX)
A
Abdallah I AlTamimi Industrial
Services (Khobar, Saudi Arabia)
Access Plug Flange, Inc. (Houston, TX)
ACNDT, Inc. (Middleburg, FL)
Acoustic Technology Group
(Grandville, MI)
Acuren Group, Inc. (Edmonton,
Canada)
Ademinsa (Lima, Peru)
Aduche, Ltd. (Port Harcourt, Nigeria)
Advanced Corrosion Technologies &
Training, LLC (Sulphur, LA)
Advanced Energy (Fort Collins, CO)
Advanced Inspection Services Co.
(Jubail, Saudi Arabia)
Advanced Inspection Technologies
(Melbourne, FL)
Advanced Material Solutions
(Phoenix, AZ)
Advanced OEM Solutions
(Cincinnati, OH)
Advanced Test Equipment Rentals
(San Diego, CA)
Advantest (San Jose, CA)
Aerocentro De Servicios, C.A. (Doral, FL)
Aerojet Rocketdyne (Rancho
Cordova, CA)
Aerotest Operations, Inc. (San
Ramon, CA)
AES Destructive & NDT, Ltd. (Kwai
Chung, Hong Kong)
African NDT Centre Pty., Ltd.
(Centurion, South Africa)
AGD Inspection Services, LLC
(Stafford, TX)
AGR Inspection, Inc. (Burleson, TX)
AIP (Houston, TX)
AIP Global Strategies (Pelham, NH)
Air on Academy (Pathanamthitta,
India)
Air Services (Middleburg Heights, OH)
Aircraft Inspection Services (Grand
Rapids, MI)
Aircraft X-Ray Labs, Inc. (Huntington
Park, CA)
Akroscan NND Chile, S.A. (Santiago,
Chile)
Akura Bina Citra (Bekasi, Indonesia)
Al Mansoori Inspection Services
(Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates)
Al Othman Trading & Contracting
Co. (Dammam, Saudi Arabia)
Allis Engineering, Inc. (Lake
Elsinore, CA)
AllPro NDT (Melville, NY)
Alnabaa Alyaqeen Co. (Erbil, Iraq)
Alpha NDT (Ho Chi Minh City, Vietnam)
Alpha Testing Services (Abu Dhabi,
United Arab Emirates)
Alpha Training Institute (Al Seeb,
Oman)
Al-Rook Engineering Services, Ltd.
(Karrada, Iraq)
Alta Vista Solutions (Richmond, CA)
ALX Industries (Pasadena, TX)
1020 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
Thank You
ASNT is proud to present these NDT manufacturers, users
and suppliers who support the Society. This list is current
as of 1 June 2016.
AMA Consultants Corp. (Braselton, GA)
AME International (Singapore)
Amerapex Corp. (Houston, TX)
American Inspection Services, Inc.
(Grand Bay, AL)
American Institute of Nondestructive
Testing (Baxter, MN)
American Marine Corp. (Anchorage, AK)
American NDT, Inc. (Lancaster, OH)
American Piping Inspection (Tulsa, OK)
American Testing Services
(Miamisburg, OH)
Amo & Partners Engineering Co.
(Khobar, Saudi Arabia)
AMOSCO (Eastleigh, United Kingdom)
Amotus Solutions, Inc. (Québec,
Canada)
Amron, LLC (New Waterford, OH)
AMS Store and Shred, LLC (Lake in
the Hills, IL)
Andire and Co., Ltd. (Port Harcourt,
Nigeria)
Anglo Eastern Industries (Dubai,
United Arab Emirates)
Apex NDT Training Services
(Houston, TX)
Applied Technical Services
(Marietta, GA)
Applus RTD (Edmonton, Canada)
Applus RTD USA (Bakersfield, CA)
Aqua Communications, Inc.
(Waltham, MA)
Aral General Trading, LLC (Port
Saeed, United Arab Emirates)
Arcadia Aerospace Industries (Punta
Gorda, FL)
Arcmart Indonesia (Bandung,
Indonesia)
Aria Azmoon Sanat Co. (Tehran, Iran)
Array Training Ltd. (Aberdeen,
United Kingdom)
Arrow-Tech, Inc. (Rolla, ND)
Artis NDT (Pasig City, Philippines)
Arya Fould Gharn (Ahwaz, Iran)
Asian Institute of Petroleum and
Construction Technology (Cochin,
India)
AssetSmart (Calabasas, CA)
Associated X-Ray Corp.
(East Haven, CT)
Aurora Institute & Inspection
Services (Coimbatore, India)
AUT Solutions (Fulshear, TX)
Automated Inspection Systems
(Martinez, CA)
Avonix Imaging (Plymouth, MN)
Axionz Petroleum Institute
(Kozhikode, India)
Aycan Data Management
(Rochester, NY)
AZTech Training & Consultancy
(Dubai, United Arab Emirates)
partners
B (Twinsburg, OH)
Baker Testing Services, Inc.
(Rockland, MA)
Base Line Data, Inc. (Portland, TX)
BCI Morocco (Casablanca, Morocco)
Ben-Mem Oilfield & General
Services, Ltd. (Warri, Nigeria)
Bercli Corp. (Berkeley, CA)
BETZ Engineering & Technology
Zone (Chennai, India)
BFW Engineering & Testing
(Paducah, KY)
BG Detection Services/LA X-Ray
(Sun Valley, CA)
Bighorn Inspection, Inc. (Laurel, MT)
Biomet, Inc. (Fair Lawn, NJ)
BKS Consulting & Training Institute
(Tehran, Iran)
Blastline Institute of Surface
Preparation & Painting (Kochi, India)
Blatek, Inc. (State College, PA)
BlueScope Steel Research (Port
Kembla, Australia)
Blueveld Nigeria, Ltd. (Port Harcourt,
Nigeria)
Boeing (Seattle, WA)
Bossier Parish Community College
(Bossier City, LA)
Boston Piezo Optics, Inc.
(Bellingham, MA)
Branch Radiographic Labs, Inc.
(Cranford, NJ)
BRL Consultants, Inc. (San Antonio, TX)
Brotherhood Technical Service Co.
(Dammam, Saudi Arabia)
Bruker (Kennewick, WA)
BTEC, LLC (Pueblo, CO)
C CWB Group (Milton, Canada)
Cadillac Casting, Inc. (Cadillac, MI)
Cadorath Aerospace (Broussard, LA)
Calaya Engineering (Port Harcourt,
Nigeria)
Callington Haven Pty., Ltd.
(Rydalmere, Australia)
Canadian Engineering & Inspection,
Ltd. (Edmonton, Canada)
Canyon State Inspection (Tucson, AZ)
Carbon Steel Inspection, Inc.
(Pittsburgh, PA)
Carestream NDT (Rochester, NY)
Carl Zeiss Industrial Metrology
(Maple Grove, MN)
Caterpillar, Inc. (Peoria, IL)
CATSI, Inc. (Valparaiso, IN)
CDA Technical Institute (Jacksonville, FL)
Cenergy International Services, LLC
(Houston, TX)
Central Flying Service (Little Rock, AR)
Centre De Recherche Scientfique et
Technique en Soudage et Controle
(Cheraga, Algeria)
CentroTest Asia, Inc. (Mandaluyong,
Philippines)
Centura X-Ray NDT (Cleveland, OH)
Certisq (Luanda, Angola)
CFS Inspections (Searcy, AR)
Chemetall US, Inc. (New Providence, NJ)
Chesapeake Testing (Belcamp, MD)
Chevron (Picayune, MS)
Churchill Steel Plate, Ltd.
Cimetrix, Ltd. (Seattle, WA)
Circle Systems, Inc. (Hinckley, IL)
Clover Park Technical College
(Lakewood, WA)
CNI Pacific Co., Ltd. (Banchang,
Thailand)
CNS Pantex (Amarillo, TX)
College of the North Atlantic
(Stephenville, Canada)
Comet Technologies USA, Inc.
(Shelton, CT)
Comibassal (Alexandria, Egypt)
Commodity Resource &
Environmental, Inc. (Burbank, CA)
Computerised Information
Technology, Ltd. (Milton Keynes,
United Kingdom)
Condition Monitoring &
Maintenance Institute (Vega Baja,
Puerto Rico)
Cooperativa Metalurgica e
Inspecciones ND, R.L.
(Barquisimeto, Venezuela)
Cooperheat Saudi Arabia Co., Ltd.
(Jubail, Saudi Arabia)
CoreStar International Corp. (Irwin, PA)
Cotech IRM Services, Inc. (Houston, TX)
Creaform, Inc. (Lévis, Canada)
Crosby Group McKissick Products
Division (Tulsa, OK)
Crossroads Institute
(Oklahoma City, OK)
Curtis Industries, Inc. (Kittanning, PA)
Curtiss Wright Anatec-LMT (Irvine, CA)
Cutech Group (Singapore)
Cuyahoga Community College
(Cleveland, OH)
CXR Corp. (Kure, Japan)
Cygnus Instruments, Inc.
(Annapolis, MD)
DARLSCO Inspection Services
(Dubai, United Arab Emirates)
D
Dakota Ultrasonics (Scotts Valley, CA)
Danatronics (Danvers, MA)
Danco Inspection Service, Inc.
(Oklahoma City, OK)
Dantec Dynamics, GmbH (Ulm,
Germany)
Dantec Dynamics, Inc. (Holtsville, NY)
Dares, Srl. (Casamarciano, Italy)
DBI, Inc. (Lincoln, NE)
Del Mar College (Corpus Christi, TX)
Detection Technology, Inc.
(Billerica, MA)
Detek, Inc. (Temple Hills, MD)
Diamond Technical Services, Inc.
(Blairsville, PA)
Dixon Hard Chrome (Sun Valley, CA)
DJA Inspection Services, Inc. (Reno, PA)
DK Shah NDT Training Institute
(Baroda, India)
Dominion NDT Services, Inc.
(Chesterfield, VA)
Dürr NDT, GmbH & Co. KG
(Bietigheim-Bissingen, Germany)
DW Clark, Inc. (East Bridgewater, MA)
E JANX (Parma, MI)
Echo Ultrasonics (Bellingham, WA)
Eclipse Scientific Products, Inc.
(Waterloo, Canada)
ECS, Inc. (Kennesaw, GA)
Eddyfi (Québec, Canada)
Edison Welding Institute
(Columbus, OH)
Eishin Kagaku Co., Ltd. (Minato-Ku,
Japan)
Elmag NDT, Ltd. (Santiago, Chile)
Enerfab, Inc. (Cincinnati, OH)
ETher NDE, Ltd. (St. Albans, United
Kingdom)
ETM, Inc. (Newark, CA)
Euroteck Systems U.K., Ltd.
(Tamworth, United Kingdom)
Exel North America, Inc.
(Streamwood, IL)
Exova (Linkoping, Sweden)
Extende (Ballston Spa, NY)
ExxonMobil (Baytown, TX)
F Technologies Co., Ltd.
FEI (Houston, TX)
First Alert Sling Testing, LLC
(Lafayette, LA)
First Due Training & Safety
Consultants, LLC (Brielle, NJ)
Fish & Associates, Inc. (Middleton, WI)
Flathead Valley Community College
(Kalispell, MT)
FlawSpec Manufacturing, Inc.
(Edmonton, Canada)
FlawTech (Concord, NC)
Foerster Instruments, Inc.
(Pittsburgh, PA)
Force Technology (Broendby,
Denmark)
Formweld Fitting, Inc. (Milton, FL)
Fujifilm North America – NDT
Materials and Equipment (North
Kingstown, RI)
G Kuwait Pipe Industries & Oil
G&G Technical Services, Ltd.
(London, United Kingdom)
Gamesa Innovation & Technology
(Sarriguren, Spain)
Gamma Rad (Tehran, Iran)
Gammatec Middle East General
Trading, LLC (Dubai, United Arab
Emirates)
GB Inspection Systems, Ltd.
(Cannock, United Kingdom)
GE Measurement & Control
(Lewistown, PA)
GE Power Generation Services
(Niskayuna, NY)
Gems Technologies (Hyderabad, India)
General Dynamics NASSCO Norfolk
(Norfolk, VA)
Genesis Systems Group (Davenport, IA)
Geophysical Survey Systems, Inc.
(Nashua, NH)
George Consulting Services, Inc.
(Monaca, PA)
GISCO (Dammam, Saudi Arabia)
Gladd Solutions (Plymouth, MI)
Glajoe Multi Services, Ltd. (Port
Harcourt, Nigeria)
Global Academy of Quality
Controlling (Kochi, India)
Global Diving & Salvage, Inc.
(Anchorage, AK)
Global Engineering Documents
(Englewood, CO)
Global Inspection Services, S.L.U.
(Madrid, Spain)
Global Lifting Services, Ltd. (Port
Harcourt, Nigeria)
Global Pipe Co. (Jubail, Saudi
Arabia)
Global X-Ray & Testing Corp.
(Morgan City, LA)
Globe X-Ray Services, Inc. (Tulsa, OK)
Glomacs Fz, LLC (Dubai, United Arab
Emirates)
Golden Engineering, Inc.
(Centerville, IN)
Goolsby Testing Laboratories
(Humble, TX)
Gravitech Inspection Services
(Ernakulam, India)
Grupo Simples Oil, Lda. (Luanda,
Angola)
Guangdong Goworld Co., Ltd.
(Shantou, China)
Guangzhou Doppler Electronic
(Guangzhou, China)
Guided Ultrasonics, Ltd. (Brentford,
United Kingdom)
Guided Wave Analysis, LLC (San
Antonio, TX)
Gulf Quality Control Co., Ltd.
(Khobar, Saudi Arabia)
Gulf X-Ray Services, Inc. (Gretna, LA)
Gulmay (Suwanee, GA)
H Integrated Quality Services
HAECO Americas (Lake City, FL)
Hakem Group (Lyttelton, South Africa)
Haks Engineers Architects & Land
Surveyors (New York, NY)
Halifax International, Fze. (Erbil, Iraq)
Hamamatsu Corp. (Bridgewater, NJ)
Heli-One Colorado (Fort Collins, CO)
Helium Leak Testing, Inc.
(Northridge, CA)
Hellier (Houston, TX)
Herzog Services, Inc. (St. Joseph, MO)
Hi Tech Aerospace Corp. (Yauco,
Puerto Rico)
High Technology Sources, Ltd.
(Didcot, United Kingdom)
Hi-Spec Systems, Ltd. (Nantwich,
United Kingdom)
HMT Inspection (Houston, TX)
Hobart Institute of Welding
Technology (Troy, OH)
Hocker, Inc. (Houston, TX)
Hodges Transportation, Inc. (Carson
City, NV)
Honeywell Aerospace Servicios
(Chihuahua, Mexico)
Honeywell Federal Manufacturing &
Technologies (Kansas City, MO)
Houston Community College System
(Houston, TX)
HSI Group, Inc. (Torrance, CA)
Hull Inspection Services, Ltd. (Ijaiye
Ojokoro, Nigeria)
I IS Industrie Thailand, Ltd. (Bangkok,
Idaho National Laboratory (Idaho Thailand)
Falls, ID) IVC Technologies (Lebanon, OH)
Ideh Azma Iranian International Co. IveyCooper Services, LLC (Soddy
(Tehran, Iran) Daisy, TN)
ImechE Engineering Training
Solutions (Sheffield, United
J
Jan Kens Co., Inc. (Monrovia, CA)
Kingdom)
Imen Joosh Pouyan Co. (Mashhad,
JB Testing, Inc. (Blaine, MN)
Iran)
JC International, Ltd. (Port Harcourt,
IMS Cochin (Eranakulam, India)
Nigeria)
Industrial Inspection Systems, Ltd.
Jentek Sensors, Inc. (Waltham, MA)
(Vaughan, Canada)
JES Pipelines, Ltd. (Willemstad,
Industrial Testing Laboratory
Netherlands Antilles)
Services, LLC (Pittsburgh, PA)
Jesse Garant Metrology Center
Innerspec Technologies, Inc. (Forest, VA)
(Windsor, Canada)
Innodes (Quito, Ecuador)
JETS, Inc. (Carrollton, TX)
Innovated NDT Training Solutions
Jindal Tubular USA, LLC (Bay
(Sulphur, LA)
St. Louis, MS)
Insight, K.K. (Tokyo, Japan)
Jireh Industries, Ltd. (Ardrossan,
Inspec Testing, Inc. (National City, CA)
Canada)
Inspectest Pvt., Ltd. (Lahore,
Joemarine Nautical Co., Ltd.
Pakistan)
(Effurun, Nigeria)
Inspection & Tests Nigeria, Ltd. (Port
Johnghama International Services,
Harcourt, Nigeria)
Ltd. (Warri, Nigeria)
Inspection Plug Strategies, LLC
Joint Technology Pakistan Pvt., Ltd.
(Houston, TX)
(Karachi, Pakistan)
Inspection Point Seals, LLC
Jubail Industrial College (Jubail,
(Prairieville, LA)
Saudi Arabia)
Inspection Technologies, Inc.
Juva-Oil Services, Ltd. (Port
(Pomona, CA)
Inspectioneering (The Woodlands, TX)
Harcourt, Nigeria)
JZ Russell Industries, Inc.
Institute of Industrial Quality
(Nederland, TX)
Management (Shoranur, India)
Institute of Nondestructive Testing
K
and Training (Mumbai, India)
Kakivik Asset Management, LLC
Instrument Technology, Inc.
(Anchorage, AK)
(Westfield, MA)
Kalva Engineers Pvt., Ltd.
Integrated Inspection & Surveying
(Hyderabad, India)
(Dubai, United Arab Emirates)
Karl Storz Industrial Group (El
Integrated Petroleum Services, Ltd.
Segundo, CA)
(Khobar, Saudi Arabia)
Kavosh Karan Mobin (Tehran, Iran)
Keltron Kerala State Electronics
(Ontario, CA)
Development Corp., Ltd.
Integrity & NDT Solutions (Cajica,
(Trivandrum, India)
Colombia)
Keville Enterprises, Inc. (Boston, MA)
Integrity Scientific Laboratory
Kimtron, Inc. (Oxford, CT)
(Dubai, United Arab Emirates)
Kinetic Solutions, LLC (Fort Ripley, MN)
Integrity Smart Services, LLC
Kostec NDT Consultancy, Sdn. Bhd.
(Muscat, Oman)
(Subang Jaya, Malaysia)
Integrity Testing & Inspection, LLC
KSG Holdings Pte., Ltd. (Singapore)
(Onaway, MI)
International Inspection (Santa Fe
Services Co. (Kuwait City, Kuwait)
Springs, CA)
KXR Inspection, Inc. (Barker, TX)
International Leak Detection, LLC
(Des Plaines, IL)
L
International Quality Systems
Labino AB (Solna, Sweden)
(Concepcion, Chile)
Laboratory Testing, Inc. (Hatfield, PA)
Intertek (Amelia, LA)
LACO Technologies (Salt Lake City, UT)
Intertek Industry Services Japan,
Landmark Aviation (Greensboro, NC)
Ltd. (Tokyo, Japan)
Lansar Institute for Employability
Intron Plus (Moscow, Russia)
(Thrissur, India)
Inuktun Services, Ltd. (Nanaimo,
Lavender International NDT
Canada)
Consultants (Sheffield, United
Ionix Advanced Technologies (Leeds,
Kingdom)
United Kingdom)
Leland Saylor & Associates, Inc.
IPSI (Courbevoie Cedex, France)
(San Francisco, CA)
Iranian Society of Nondestructive
Lenor (Santiago, Chile)
Testing (Tehran, Iran)
Librestream Technologies
IRED Thermal Group, Ltd.
(Winnipeg, Canada)
(Edmonton, Canada)
Lion Inspection Services, Inc.
Iris Inspection Services, Inc.
(Houston, TX)
(Baytown, TX)
Lucid Software, Ltd. (Chennai, India)
IRM Services, Ltda. (Macae, Brazil)
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1021
CORPORATE
M National University Polytechnic
MA Al Mutlaq Sons Co. (Dammam,
Saudi Arabia)
MAC NDT Services, LLC
(Montgomery, TX)
Magnaflux (Glenview, IL)
Magnetic Analysis Corp. (Elmsford, NY)
Magwerks Corp. (Danville, IN)
Maintenance & Inspection Services,
Inc. (Morganton, NC)
Mandina’s Inspection Services, Inc.
(Belle Chasse, LA)
Marietta Nondestructive Testing,
Inc. (Marietta, GA)
Martin Testing Laboratories, Inc.
(McClellan, CA)
Matec Instrument Cos., Inc.
(Northborough, MA)
Matrix U/E Technologies, Ltd.
(Beijing, China)
Merrick Group, Inc. (West Hazleton, PA)
Merrill Technologies Group
(Saginaw, MI)
Metal Fatigue Solutions (Las Vegas, NV)
Metals Testing Co. (South Windsor, CT)
Metalscan Inspection Services
(Chennai, India)
MetalTek International (Lakeland, FL)
Met-L-Chek (Santa Monica, CA)
Meyer Tool, Inc. (Cincinnati, OH)
MFE Enterprises, Inc. (Dripping
Springs, TX)
MFE Rentals (Pasadena, TX)
Middle East Industrial Training Institute
(Abu Dhabi, United Arab Emirates)
Midgard Scientific, LLC
(Cartersville, GA)
Milan Tool Corp. (Cleveland, OH)
Minton Treharne & Davies, Ltd.
(Cardiff, United Kingdom)
MIR Engineering (Tangerang, Indonesia)
Mistras Group, Inc. (Princeton
Junction, NJ)
Mitchell Laboratories (Pico Rivera, CA)
Modal Shop, Inc. (Cincinnati, OH)
Moraine Valley Community College
(Palos Hills, IL)
Morex 71, Ltd. (Even Yehuda, Israel)
Motabaqah Brand of Saudi
Specialized Laboratories Co.
(Riyadh, Saudi Arabia)
Mountain Pressure Testing
(Longview, TX)
moviTherm (Irvine, CA)
Mozzat Enterprise, Sdn. Bhd. (Kuala
Belait, Brunei)
MPM Products, Inc. (Ontario, CA)
MR Chemie, GmbH (Unna, Germany)
MSPEC (Mussafah, United Arab
Emirates)
Multicare Safety & Industrial
Inspections, LLC (Dubai, United
Arab Emirates)
N OKOS Solutions, LLC (Manassas, VA)
Nanjing Tycho Information
Technology Co., Ltd. (Beijing, China)
NASSCO (Jacksonville, FL)
National Marine Consultants, Inc.
(Parlin, NJ)
National Oilwell Varco Pte., Ltd.
(Singapore)
1022 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
partners
Institute (San Diego, CA)
Naya Engineering Services (Basra, Iraq)
NDE Professionals, Inc. (Portland, OR)
NDE Solutions, LLC (Bryan, TX)
NDT & Corrosion Control Services
(Dammam, Saudi Arabia)
NDT Academy (Houston, TX)
NDT Academy Pte., Ltd. (Chennai,
India)
NDT Classroom, Inc. (Buffalo, NY)
NDT Italiana, Srl. (Concorezzo, Italy)
NDT Seals, Inc. (Houston, TX)
NDT Solutions, Inc. (New
Richmond, WI)
NDT Solutions, Inc. (Hollywood, FL)
NDT Supply.com, Inc. (Shawnee
Mission, KS)
NDT Systems, Inc. (Huntington
Beach, CA)
NDT Testing, Srl. (Odobesti, Romania)
NDT Training & Testing Center
(Houston, TX)
NDT-PRO Services (Houston, TX)
NdtXducer, LLC (Northborough, MA)
NE Bridge Contractors, Inc. (Norton, MA)
Nersten Services, Ltd. (Port
Harcourt, Nigeria)
New Energy Services Co., Ltd.
(Lagos, Nigeria)
Newco, Inc. (Florence, SC)
Newport News Shipbuilding
(Newport News, VA)
Nexco-West USA (Vienna, VA)
NextNDT (Redwood City, CA)
Niile Solution (Chennai, India)
Nikon Metrology (Brighton, MI)
Nondestructive Inspection Service,
Inc. (Hurricane, WV)
Nordco Rail Services & Inspection
Technologies (Beacon Falls, CT)
Norfolk Naval Shipyard
(Portsmouth, VA)
North Idaho College/Aerospace
Technology (Hayden, ID)
North Star Imaging, Inc. (Rogers, MN)
Northeast Testing & Manufacturing,
LLC (Beverly, MA)
NOVO DR, Ltd. (Yehud, Israel)
NQS Inspection, Ltd. (Corpus
Christi, TX)
O & Systems (Spartanburg, SC)
Obelix Maintenance & Inspection
Services, S.A.C. (Arequipa, Peru)
Ocean Corp. (Houston, TX)
Oceaneering (Panama City, FL)
Oceaneering International Asset
Integrity (Houston, TX)
OcerT Training & Consulting, Ltd.
(Jianding New City, China)
Ogden Weber Applied Technology
College (Ogden, UT)
OGTC Pvt ., Ltd. (Islamabad, Pakistan)
Olympus Scientific Solutions
Americas (Dallas, TX)
Omni Metal Finishing, Inc. (Fountain
Valley, CA)
Opgal (Karmiel, Israel)
Optim, LLC (Sturbridge, MA)
Orbit Industries, Inc. (Cleveland, OH)
OSG Testing Pty., Ltd. (Alberton,
South Africa)
P Promotora de Servicios en
Pac Testing Services, Ltd. (Port Ingenieria, S.A. de C.V. (Distrito
Harcourt, Nigeria) Federal, Mexico)
Pacsess (Bellevue, WA) PSSI NDT (League City, TX)
Paragon Industries, Inc. (Sapulpa, OK) PT Karsa Kencana Indonesia
Parhoon Toos Industry Welding (Tangerang, Indonesia)
(Mashhad, Iran) PT Radiant Utama Interinsco Tbk.
Parker Research Corp. (Dunedin, FL) (Jakarta, Indonesia)
Patterson Tubular Services
(Channelview, TX)
Q
QA Systems Pte., Ltd. (Singapore)
PCA Engineering, Inc. (Pompton
Qass Technologies (Marietta, GA)
Lakes, NJ)
QinetiQ NDT Pty., Ltd. (South
PdM Consultores Internacional, Srl.
(El Tejar, Costa Rica)
Melbourne, Australia)
QSA Global, Inc. (Baton Rouge, LA)
Pearls Institute of Petroleum
QTech (Khobar, Saudi Arabia)
(Ernakulam, India)
QTI, LLC (Lindon, UT)
Peltec Services, Inc. (Darlington, SC)
Qualimation (Ernakulam, India)
Perennity EMEA (Brussels, Belgium)
Qualitek, LLC (Houston, TX)
Performance Review Institute
Quality Control Co. (Cairo, Egypt)
(Warrendale, PA)
Quality Control Council U.S. (Kansas
Petro Base, Ltd. (Richmond, TX)
Petro Service International (Cairo, Egypt)
City, KS)
Quality Control Services Co., Ltd.
PetroKnowledge (Masdar City,
United Arab Emirates)
(Khobar, Saudi Arabia)
Quality Equipment Distributors, Inc.
PetroScanalog International, Ltd.
(Port Harcourt, Nigeria)
(Orchard Park, NY)
Quality NDE, Ltd. (Mercier, Canada)
Pfinder KG (Boeblingen, Germany)
Quality Network, Inc. (Sparta, NJ)
PFL Engineering Services, Ltd.
Quality Systems International, Inc.
(Lekki, Nigeria)
(Russellville, AR)
PH Tool Reference Standards
Quality Testing Services, Inc.
(Pipersville, PA)
Phased Array Co. (West Chester, OH)
(Maryland Hts., MO)
Quality Testing Services, Inc.
Phasors Tech, Sdn. Bhd. (Shah
Alam, Malaysia)
(Linden, NJ)
QualSpec (Torrance, CA)
Phateco Technical Services Joint
Qualtech NDE (Karachi, Pakistan)
Stock Co. (Haiphong, Vietnam)
Phoenix Inspection Systems, Ltd.
(Warrington, United Kingdom)
R
Ram Design (Broussard, LA)
Phoenix Nuclear Labs (Monona, WI)
Ray-Check MFG, Inc. (Clovis, CA)
Pine (Windsor, NJ)
R-CON NDT, Inc. (Menomonie, WI)
Pinnacle X-Ray Solutions
Reinhart & Associates, Inc. (Austin, TX)
(Suwanee, GA)
Rel, Inc. (Calumet, MI)
Pioneer Inspection and Technical
Resource Engineering, Inc.
Services, WLL (Doha, Qatar)
Pipe & Well O&M Services Est.
(Tempe, AZ)
RF System Lab (Traverse City, MI)
(Dammam, Saudi Arabia)
Riccardelli Consulting Services, Inc.
Plant Integrity, Ltd. (Cambridge,
United Kingdom)
(Lehi, UT)
Ridgewater College (Hutchinson, MN)
PM Testing Laboratory, Inc. (Fife, WA)
Ritec, Inc. (Warwick, RI)
Pooya Sanat Moshaver Espadan
RLN Industries (Hitchcock, TX)
(Isfahan, Iran)
Rohmann Eddy Current Instruments
Portsmouth Naval Shipyard
(Portsmouth, NH)
Rokaysan Engineering, Ltd. Co.
PQNDT, Inc. (Arlington, MA)
(Bursa, Turkey)
Pragma (Québec, Canada)
Rolls-Royce (Williamson, NY)
Precision Flange & Machine, Inc.
RTW Roentgen-Technik
(Houston, TX)
(Neuenhagen, Germany)
Premier NDT Services, Inc.
Russell NDE Systems, Inc.
(Farmington, NM)
(Edmonton, Canada)
Premier Tubular Inspection Services
RusselSmith Nigeria, Ltd. (Lagos,
Pte., Ltd. (Karachi, Pakistan)
Nigeria)
Premium Inspection & Testing
Rusyal Institute, LLC (Muscat, Oman)
(Houston, TX)
Prime NDT Services, Inc.
S
(Schnecksville, PA)
Safe Ocean Service, Inc. (Houston, TX)
Principia Inspecciones, S.A.C. (Lima,
Safe Systems For Advanced
Peru)
Technologies (Jeddah, Saudi Arabia)
PRINDT Corp. (Toa Baja, Puerto Rico)
SAI Global (Paramus, NJ)
PRL Industries, Inc. (Cornwall, PA)
Salt Lake Community College (Salt
Pro Mag Inspection, LLC (Gray, LA)
Lake City, UT)
Proceq (Gurnee, IL)
Sarl 3MECS Engineering &
Professional NDT Services
Consulting Services (Laghouat,
(Broussard, LA)
Algeria)
SB Enterprises Pvt., Ltd. (Karachi,
Pakistan)
Scan Systems Corp. (Houston, TX)
ScanMaster IRT, Inc. (Greenville, SC)
ScanTech Instruments, Inc.
(Longview, TX)
School of Applied Non Destructive
Examination (Boksburg, South
Africa)
SCI Control & Inspeccion (Ajalvir, Spain)
SE International, Inc.
(Summertown, TN)
SEAL Aviation (Fort Lauderdale, FL)
Senne Technical Services
(Sunland, CA)
Sense of Siam International Trading
Co., Ltd. (Sattahip, Thailand)
Sensor Networks (Boalsburg, PA)
Sensors & Software, Inc.
(Mississauga, Canada)
Setcore Arabia Petroleum Services
(Dammam, Saudi Arabia)
SGS Group Industrial Services
(Geneva, Switzerland)
Shale Flow Specialties (Kilgore, TX)
Shanghai CHiNDT Systems and
Services (Shanghai, China)
Shanghai Fengjie Valve Service Co.,
Ltd. (Shanghai, China)
Sherwin, Inc. (South Gate, CA)
Siemens Energy, Inc. (Pittsburgh, PA)
Silean (Tremonton, UT)
Silverwing (Swansea, United
Kingdom)
SIS Institute of NDT (Chennai, India)
SIUI (Shantou, China)
SKF Latin America, Ltda. (Bogota,
Colombia)
Sky Prime Aviation Services (Riyadh,
Saudi Arabia)
SMEC Automation Pvt., Ltd. (Cochin,
India)
Snell Group (Barre, VT)
SODIP, Sarl. (Douala, Cameroon)
Son Set Consultants, LLC (Owasso, OK)
Sonartech (Kempton Park, South Africa)
Sonaspection International, Inc.
(Concord, NC)
Sonatest, Ltd. (San Antonio, TX)
Sonic Systems International
(Houston, TX)
Sonomatic, Inc. (Mooresville, NC)
Soundwel Technology Corp., Ltd.
(Monterey Park, CA)
Source Production & Equipment Co.,
Inc. (St. Rose, LA)
Southern Inspection Services
(Chennai, India)
Southwest Research Institute (San
Antonio, TX)
Sowsco Inspection Services, Ltd.
(Port Harcourt, Nigeria)
Sparrows (Bridge of Don Aberdeen,
United Kingdom)
Spartan College of Aeronautics &
Technology (Tulsa, OK)
Special Oilfield Services Co., LLC
(Ruwi, Oman)
Specialized Services & Supplies
General Trading & Contracting Co.
(North Shuwaikh, Kuwait)
Specpro (Santiago, Chile)
Spectronics Corp. (Westbury, NY)
Spellman High Voltage Electronics
Corp. (Hauppauge, NY)
Join Us
Being a part of the Society links your business to the worldwide
NDT community and puts your business on the front lines of the
industry. To learn more about becoming a Corporate Partner, see
the Membership section of the ASNT website at www.asnt.org.
Springleaf Integrated Links, Ltd.
(Port Harcourt, Nigeria)
ST Aerospace Engineering Pte., Ltd.
(Singapore)
St. Johns NDT Training & Services
(Pathanamthitta, India)
Stalion-Primi (Port Harcourt, Nigeria)
Standard Testing and Inspection
Services, Ltd. (Port Harcourt, Nigeria)
Stanley Inspection (Houston, TX)
Star Pipe Service, Inc. (Moore, OK)
State Energy Inspection Services,
Inc. (Crosby, TX)
Structural Integrity Associates
(Huntersville, NC)
Sullivan & Associates, Inc.
(Ladson, SC)
Super Welding of Southern
California (Chula Vista, CA)
Superior Inspection Services, LLC
(Broussard, LA)
System One Services (Princeton, NJ)
System One Services (Cheswick, PA)
T Washita Valley Enterprises, Inc.
Talen Energy (Berwick, PA)
Target NDT (Mangaf, Kuwait)
TCR Arabia Co., Ltd. (Dammam,
Saudi Arabia)
Team Industrial Services (Alvin, TX)
Tech Service Products, Inc.
(Harahan, LA)
TechCorr USA Management
(Pasadena, TX)
Techinco (Tehran, Iran)
Techna NDT (Kent, WA)
Technical Loadarm, Ltd. (Guelph,
Canada)
Technisonic Research, Inc.
(Fairfield, CT)
Technology Design Ltd. (Winsford,
United Kingdom)
Technoscan Inspection Services
(Pathanamthitta, India)
Techshore Inspection Services
(Cochin, India)
Techstreet (Ann Arbor, MI)
Tecnatom, S.A. (Madrid, Spain)
Teledyne DALSA (Santa Clara, CA)
Teledyne ICM (Andrimont, Belgium)
Tesco Corp. (Kanagawa, Japan)
Test Equipment Distributors, LLC
(Troy, MI)
Test NDT, LLC (Brea, CA)
Testex, Inc. (Pittsburgh, PA)
Testing Service Group SAC (Lima, Peru)
Texas Research International
(Austin, TX)
Thermal Wave Imaging, Inc.
(Ferndale, MI)
Thermographie GG, Inc. (Granby,
Canada)
TIBA Oil Tools (Cairo, Egypt)
Tilt Inspection and Consulting, Inc.
(Sherwood Park, Canada)
TMAC Technologies (Mansfield, TX)
Torque Engineering Consultants
(Ernakualm, India)
Total NDT, LLC (Longview, TX)
TP Group, S.A. (Bogota, Colombia)
Trident Refit Facility (Kings Bay, GA)
Trinity NDT Engineers (Bangalore, India)
Tru Amp Corp. (Jackson, MS)
TSC Inspection Systems
(Buckinghamshire, United Kingdom)
TTAsia Co., Ltd. (Ho Chi Minh City,
Vietnam)
Tulsa Welding School (Tulsa, OK)
Turbo Nondestructive Testing, Inc.
(Kemah, TX)
Turnco, LLC (Houston, TX)
Turner Specialty Services, LLC
(Pasadena, TX)
TUV Saarland Holding, GmbH
(Sulzbach, Germany)
TWI, Ltd. (Cambridge, United
Kingdom)
Twin Peaks, Inc. (Long Island City, NY)
U
Ultracon Service, LLC (Kiev, Ukraine)
Ultrasonics & Magnetics Corp.
(Harvey, LA)
Uniclimb Services Pte., Ltd.
(Singapore)
Unico (Cairo, Egypt)
United NDT Training and Inspection
Centre (Cochin, India)
Universiti Sains Malaysia (Kuala
Lumpur, Malaysia)
University of Alaska Anchorage
(Anchorage, AK)
UniWest (Pasco, WA)
U.S. Army Yuma Proving Ground
(Yuma, AZ)
U.S. Photon Service (Hayward, CA)
U.S. Underwater Services, LLC
(Mansfield, TX)
USPS NCED (Norman, OK)
UT Technology (Edmonton, Canada)
Utex Scientific Instruments, Inc.
(Mississauga, Canada)
V
V2 Consulting, Ltd. (Tuen Mun, Hong
Kong)
VAAL University of Technology
(Vanderbijlpark, South Africa)
Valley Inspection Service, Inc.
(Allentown, PA)
Vandergriff Technologies NDT
Services (Haltom City, TX)
Varian Security & Industrial Imaging
Components (Salt Lake City, UT)
Vector TUB, GmbH (Hattingen,
Germany)
Velosi, Sdn. Bhd. (Kuala Belait,
Brunei)
Venture Inspection, Ltd. (Derby,
United Kingdom)
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N
Verasonics, Inc. (Kirkland, WA)
Veri-tech International (New Cairo,
Egypt)
Versa Integrity Group (Sulphur, LA)
Vibspectrum International, LLC
Trading & Electromechanical
(Dubai, United Arab Emirates)
Vidisco, Ltd. (Or Yehuda, Israel)
Vincotte International Algeria
(Mahelma, Algeria)
Vincotte International Middle East,
LLC (Abu Dhabi, United Arab
Emirates)
Virtual Media Integration
(Pensacola, FL)
VisiConsult X-ray Systems &
Solutions, GmbH (Stockelsdorf,
Germany)
Vision Financial Group, Inc.
(Pittsburgh, PA)
Vizaar Industrial Imaging
(Gibsonia, PA)
VJ Technologies, Inc. (Bohemia, NY)
VMX Confiabilidad Integrada, S.A.
de C.V. (Monterrey, Mexico)
Volume Graphics, Inc. (Charlotte, NC)
Volunteer NDT Corp. (Chattanooga, TN)
W
Walt Disney World Co. (Lake Buena
Vista, FL)
Warren Associates (Pittsburgh, PA)
Wartsila Defense, Inc.
(Chesapeake, VA)
(Oklahoma City, OK)
Welding and Control (Oran, Algeria)
Welding Inspection (Cologne, NJ)
Welding Technology & NDT Research
Application Center (Ankara,
Turkey)
Weldtest (Bir Khadem, Algeria)
WENS Quality Assurance Pvt., Ltd.
(Singapore)
WesDyne Amdata (Windsor, CT)
West Penn Testing Group (New
Kensington, PA)
Williams Bridge Co. (Richmond, VA)
Willick Engineering Co., Inc. (Santa
Fe Springs, CA)
Wohler USA, Inc. (Danvers, MA)
World Testing, Inc. (Mt. Juliet, TN)
WorldSpec Group (Houston, TX)
Wyle (Dayton, OH)
X
X-Ray Associates, LLC (San Dimas, CA)
X-Ray Industries, Inc. (Troy, MI)
X-Scan Imaging Corp. (San Jose, CA)
Y
Yxlon (Hudson, OH)
Z
Zagros Tatbigh Kala Engineering and
Technical Inspection Co. (Tehran,
Iran)
Zamil Lifting & Industrial Supports
(Dammam, Saudi Arabia)
Zeppelin Systems Gulf Co. Industrial
Services (Jubail, Saudi Arabia)
Zetec, Inc. (Snoqualmie, WA)
Zuuk International, Inc.
(Charleston, SC) w x
1023
meetings
Meetings are events at which
paper and/or poster presentations
are made and recent developments
in technology, research and devel-
opment are discussed by those in
attendance. These are generally
sponsored by academic or profes-
sional technical associations. The
sponsor is the same as the contact
except where noted.
For ASNT meetings and events
(highlighted in red) contact the
ASNT Conference Department,
1711 Arlingate Lane, P.O. Box
28518, Columbus, OH 43228-
0518; (800) 222-2768 or (614)
274-6003; fax (614) 274-6899;
e-mail conf@asnt.org.
2016
25–26 JUL
Digital Imaging XIX, Foxwoods
Resort and Casino,
Mashantucket, Connecticut.
Contact: ASNT.
27–29 JUL
Ultrasonics for Nondestructive
Testing, Foxwoods Resort and
Casino, Mashantucket,
Connecticut. Contact: ASNT.
5–6 OCT
Maintenance for Offshore
Wind, Hamburg, Germany.
Contact: Melanie Mulazzi; 44 0
203 141 0605; e-mail
mmulazzi@acieu.net; website
www.wplgroup.com.
29–31 AUG
NDE/NDT For Highways and
Bridges: Structural Materials
Technology, DoubleTree by
Hilton Hotel Portland, Portland,
Oregon. Contact: ASNT.
24–27 OCT
75th ASNT Annual Conference
2016, Long Beach Convention
Center, Long Beach, California.
Contact: ASNT.
PLEASE NOTE: Materials Evaluation’s Calendar department is
28 JUL–1 AUG
Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
derived from information sent to our offices by the sponsoring Trinity.
organizations. ASNT staff is not responsible for collecting or
verifying the information contained herein: for more information 1–8 AUG
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
on meetings or courses, please contact the sponsoring organi-
zation. The Calendar copy deadline is the first of the month, two Decibel.
months prior to the issue date: for example, 1 August for the Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
October journal. Send your organization’s information by e-mail, Decibel Remote.
fax, or mail to the Associate Editor, Materials Evaluation, 1711 22–26 AUG
Arlingate Lane, P.O. Box 28518, Columbus, OH 43228-0518; fax Eddy Current Level I, Brea,
(614) 274-6899; e-mail tkervina@asnt.org. Information in the California. Test.
Calendar runs for four months at a time. ASNT reserves the right
29 AUG–2 SEP
to reject event listings for any reason. Listings will be edited to
Eddy Current Level I, Brea,
conform to ASNT’s editorial style.
California. Test.
29–31 AUG
25–26 OCT ASNT neither approves nor Wheel Class, Atlanta, Georgia.
Offshore Energy Exhibition & disapproves of any program or
ATS.
Conference, Amsterdam RAI, training course claiming to meet
Amsterdam, the Netherlands.
the recommendations of ASNT’s 1–5 SEP
Recommended Practice No. Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
Contact: Navingo BV; 31 010 SNT-TC-1A. The following are
Trinity.
2092600; fax 31 010 4368134; contacts for only those organiza-
website www.offshore-energy tions that offer public courses 1–8 SEP
.biz. listed in this month’s Calendar. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
The following courses are listed
Decibel.
without necessarily giving their full
2017 titles. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
13–16 MAR
26th ASNT Research Acoustic Emission Testing 12–16 SEP
Symposium, Jacksonville, Eddy Current Level I, Maryland
13–15 SEP
Florida. Contact: ASNT. Heights, Missouri. Quality.
AE for Scientists and
30 OCT–2 NOV Engineers, Princeton Junction, 19–23 SEP
ASNT Annual Conference, New Jersey. Mistras. Eddy Current Level II, Maryland
Gaylord Opryland Resort and Heights, Missouri. Quality.
10–14 OCT
Convention Center, Nashville, Level I, Princeton Junction, New 29 SEP–3 OCT
Tennessee. Contact: ASNT. Jersey. Mistras. Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
Trinity.
courses Electromagnetic Testing 1–8 OCT
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Courses are events where partici- 1–8 JUL
pants are instructed in the tech- Decibel.
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
nologies and methodologies of a Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
particular technical area and which Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
generally conclude with the Decibel Remote.
student being evaluated to 3–7 OCT
11–15 JUL
determine the student's retention Level I, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
of the material presented. These Eddy Current Level I, Maryland
events often offer some form of Heights, Missouri. Quality. 10–14 OCT
course credit or continuing Level I, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS. Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
education units to those partici-
pants successfully completing the 18–22 JUL 24–28 OCT
course. For ASNT refresher Eddy Current Level II, Maryland Eddy Current Level II,
courses, see page 1034. Heights, Missouri. Quality. Pittsburgh, Pennsylvania.
Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS. Odyssey.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1025
calendar
Infrared and Thermal 7–16 AUG Level I Thermographic 19–23 SEP
Testing Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Applications, Portland, Level I Thermographic
Decibel. Oregon. Snell. Applications, Charlotte, North
11–14 JUL Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Level I Thermographic Carolina. Snell.
Level I Thermographic Decibel Remote. Applications, Toronto, Ontario, Level I Thermographic
Applications – Buildings, Canada. Snell. Applications, Chicago
8–12 AUG
Toronto, Ontario, Canada. (Palatine), Illinois. Snell.
Snell. Level II Thermal NDT of 12–16 SEP
Materials, Ferndale, Michigan. Level I Thermographic 26–30 SEP
11–15 JUL Snell. Applications, Barre, Vermont. Level I Thermographic
Level I Thermographic Snell. Applications, St. Louis,
22–26 AUG
Applications, Barre, Vermont. Level I Thermographic Missouri. Snell.
Snell. Level I Thermographic
Applications, Cedar Rapids, Applications, Dartmouth, Nova Level I Thermographic
Iowa. Snell. Scotia, Canada. Snell. Applications, Calgary, Alberta,
Canada. Snell.

Course Contacts
The following are contacts for only those organizations that offer public courses listed in this month’s Calendar.

Atlantic: Atlantic NDT Training; Gary L.
Chapman; 24 Flat Rock Rd., Branford, CT
06405; (203) 481-4041; website
www.atlanticndttraining.com.
ATS: Applied Technical Services; Lisa
Henry; 1049 Triad Ct., Marietta, GA
30062; (888) 287-5227; (678) 444-
2897; fax (770) 514-3299; e-mail
lhenry@atslab.com; website
www.atslab.com/training.
BRL: BRL Consultants, Inc.; 219 W.
Rhapsody Dr., San Antonio, TX 78216;
(210) 341-3442; fax (210) 341-2844;
e-mail info@brlconsultants.com;
website www.brlconsultants.com.
Decibel: Decibel NDE Training Institute;
1st Floor Plainfield, Pattambi, Palakkad,
Kerala, India 679303; 91 9387 674
153, 91 466 2214 333, or 91 8089 000
250; e-mail info@decibelnde.com;
website www.decibelnde.com.
Decibel Remote: Decibel Remote
Training Center; TC No. 1/1374(12), 2nd
Floor, Kottakath Bldg., Poonthi Rd.,
Kumarapuram, Trivandrum, India; 91 81
29508881; e-mail decibeltvm@decibel
nde.com; website www.decibelnde.com.
Extende France: Extende, Inc.; Le
Bergson, 15 Ave. Emile Baudot, 91300
Massy, France; 33 1 78 90 02 21; fax
33 09 72 13 42 68; e-mail contact
@extende.com; website www.extende
.com.
INTS: Innovated NDT Training Solutions,
LLC; 101 Jackson Ave., Sulphur, LA
70663; (337) 313-6106; website
www.indttraining.com.
Kraft: Kraft Technology Resources; Karl
E. Kraft; 1377 Timshel St., Dayton, OH
45440; (405) 819-7786; fax (405) 691-
4342; e-mail kraftndt@aol.com; website
www.ndtbootcamp.com.
LTI: Laser Technology, Inc.; Christa
Ditlow; 1055 West Germantown Pike,
Norristown, PA 19403; (610) 631-5043;
fax (610) 631-0934; e-mail cditlow
@laserndt.com; website www.laser
ndt.com.
LTS: Leak Testing Specialists, Inc.;
Cyndi Reid; 5776 Hoffner Ave., Ste. 304,
Orlando, FL 32822; (407) 737-6415;
fax (407) 737-6416; e-mail cyndi.reid
@leaktestingspec.com; website
www.leaktestingspec.com.
Mistras: Mistras Group, Inc.; Christina
Librandy; 195 Clarksville Rd., Princeton
Junction, NJ 08550; (609) 716-4020;
fax (609) 716-0706; e-mail christina
.librandy@mistrasgroup.com; website
www.mistrasgroup.com.
Moraine: Moraine Valley Community
College; 9000 W. College Pkwy., Palos
Hills, IL 60465; (708) 974-5498; e-mail
murphym272@morainevalley.edu;
website www.morainevalley.edu/
ccce/continuing/nondestructive-testing.
Odyssey: Odyssey Technology Corp.;
Carol Sansieri; 3000 Village Run Rd.,
Unit 103, #149, Wexford, PA 15090;
(843) 817-3475; e-mail carols
@odysseytest.com.
PQT: PQT Services Co.; Kim Rosa; 806
Botany Rd., Greenville, SC 29615; (864)
292-1115; fax (770) 514-3299; e-mail
krosa@atslab.com; www.pqt.net.
QCTL: QCTL, Inc.; Rod Reinholdt or
Stephen Black; 21112 Scott Park Rd.,
Davenport, IA 52804; (800) 391-8500;
fax (563) 391-0112; e-mail testlab1
@att.net; website www.testlab1.com.
Quality: Quality Testing Services;
Melissa Rankin; 2305 Millpark Dr.,
Maryland Heights, MO 63043; (314)
770-0607; (888) 770-0607; fax (314)
770-0103; e-mail training@quality
testing.com; website www.quality
testing.com.
Snell: The Snell Group; 322 N. Main St.,
Ste. 8, Barre, VT 05641; (802) 479-
7100; fax (802) 479-7171; e-mail
info@thesnellgroup.com; website
www.thesnellgroup.com.
Test: Test NDT; Richard Harrison; 193
Viking Ave., Brea, CA 92821; (714) 255-
1500; fax (714) 255-1580; e-mail
ndttrain@aol.com; website www.test
ndt.com.
Trinity: Trinity Institute of NDT
Technology; Ravi Kumar T. or Shiva
Kumar R.; Plot No. V-22a, 2nd Stage,
Peenya Industrial Estate, Bangalore,
India 560058; 91 99009 29439 or 91
98441 29439; e-mail training@trinity
ndt.com; website www.trinityndt.com.
XRI: X-Ray Industries; Bob Henchar;
1961 Thunderbird Dr., Troy, MI 48084;
(248) 244-1582; e-mail bob.henchar
@xrayindustries.com; website
www.xrayindustries.com.

1026 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
Level I Thermographic
Applications (French),
Montreal, Quebec, Canada.
Snell.
3–4 OCT
Electrical Applications,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Snell.
3–7 OCT
Level I Thermographic
Applications, Cincinnati, Ohio.
Snell.
5–6 OCT
Mechanical Applications,
Calgary, Alberta, Canada. Snell.
7–16 OCT
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
17–21 OCT
Level I Thermographic
Applications, Phoenix, Arizona.
Snell.
Level I Thermographic
Applications, Pittsburgh,
Pennsylvania. Snell.
18–21 OCT
Level I Thermographic
Applications (Spanish),
Santiago, Chile. Snell.
24–27 OCT
Level I Thermographic
Applications (Spanish),
Buenos Aires, Argentina. Snell.
24–28 OCT
Level I Thermographic
Applications, Tampa, Florida.
Snell.
Level I Thermographic
Applications, Toronto, Ontario,
Canada. Snell.
Level II Advanced
Thermographic Applications
(French), Montreal, Quebec,
Canada. Snell.
31 OCT–3 NOV
Level I, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
Laser Methods
31 OCT–4 NOV
Level II Shearography and
Holography NDT, Norristown,
Pennsylvania. LTI.
Leak Testing
24–30 JUL
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
5 AUG
Bubble Level I/II, Maryland
Heights, Missouri. Quality.
22–26 AUG
Pressure Change Measurement
Level I/II, Orlando, Florida. LTS.
12–16 SEP
Mass Spectrometer Level I/II,
Orlando, Florida. LTS.
19–23 SEP
Pressure Change Measurement
Level I/II; Bubble Level I/II;
Level III Prep, Orlando, Florida.
LTS.
24–30 SEP
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
31 OCT–4 NOV
Mass Spectrometer Level I/II,
Orlando, Florida. LTS.
Advertise Now
Liquid Penetrant Testing
7–12 JUL
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Don’t Miss Your Opportunity to
Decibel. Advertise in TNT
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote. Make plans today to take
11–13 JUL
part in the next issue of
Level I/II, Greenville, South
Carolina. PQT. The NDT Technician (TNT)
11–14 JUL newsletter advertising
Level I/II, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality. program. TNT is published
18–19 JUL quarterly in January, April,
Level I/II, Palos Hills, Illinois.
Moraine. July, and October. For more
19–24 JUL information on the next issue, published in
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
October, contact Advertising Supervisor
Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Jessica Miller:
Decibel Remote.
20–21 JUL
Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
Trinity.
(800) 222-2768 X209 (U.S./Canada)
25–27 JUL
E-mail jmiller@asnt.org.
Level I/II, Jacksonville, Florida.
PQT.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1027
calendar
Liquid Penetrant Testing, cont. 12–14 SEP 24–25 OCT 3–7 OCT
Level I/II, Greenville, South Level I/II, San, Antonio, Texas. Level I/II, Greenville, South
25–30 JUL Carolina. PQT. BRL. Carolina. PQT.
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. 13 SEP 24–27 OCT 17–21 OCT
Decibel. Level I, Davenport, Iowa. QCTL. Level I/II, Maryland Heights, Level I/II, Atlanta, Georgia.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Missouri. Quality. ATS.
13–16 SEP
Decibel Remote.
Level I/II (NAS-410), Troy, 25–30 OCT 23–30 OCT
1–3 AUG Michigan. XRI. Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Practical, Pattambi, India.
Level I/II, Greenville, South Decibel. Decibel.
15–16 SEP
Carolina. PQT. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Practical, Trivandrum, India.
Level II (SNT-TC-1A), Brea,
1–4 AUG California. Test. Decibel Remote. Decibel Remote.
Level II, Heath, Ohio. Mistras. 26–27 OCT 24–28 OCT
19–22 SEP
1–5 AUG Level I/II, Bangalore, India. Level I/II (NAS-410), Troy,
Level I/II, Maryland Heights,
Level I/II (NAS-410), Branford, Trinity. Michigan. XRI.
Missouri. Quality.
Connecticut. Atlantic. Level I/II (NAS-410), Atlanta, 28–29 OCT
Georgia. ATS. Level II (SNT-TC-1A), Brea, Magnetic Particle Testing
4–5 AUG
Level II (SNT-TC-1A), Brea, 19–24 SEP
California. Test. 1–6 JUL
California. Test. Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel. Magnetic Particle and Decibel.
7–12 AUG
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Liquid Penetrant Testing Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote. Decibel Remote.
Decibel. 11–15 JUL
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. 21–22 SEP Level I/II, Greenville, South 5–8 JUL
Decibel Remote. Level I/II, Bangalore, India. Carolina. PQT. Level II (NAS-410), Greenville,
Trinity. South Carolina. PQT.
8–11 AUG 23–30 JUL
Level I/II, Maryland Heights, 25–30 SEP Practical, Pattambi, India. 13–15 JUL
Missouri. Quality. Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Decibel. Level I/II, Greenville, South
Decibel. Practical, Trivandrum, India. Carolina. PQT.
15–16 AUG
Level I/II, Atlanta, Georgia. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Decibel Remote. 13–18 JUL
ATS. Decibel Remote. 25–29 JUL Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Level I/II, Sulphur, Louisiana. 26–28 SEP Level I/II, Jacksonville, Florida. Decibel.
INTS. Level I/II, Jacksonville, Florida. PQT. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
PQT. Decibel Remote.
19–24 AUG 1–5 AUG
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. 3–5 OCT Level I/II, Greenville, South 18–19 JUL
Decibel. Level I/II, Greenville, South Carolina. PQT. Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Carolina. PQT. Trinity.
15–19 AUG
Decibel Remote. 18–21 JUL
7–12 OCT Level I/II, Atlanta, Georgia.
22–23 AUG Level I/II, Pattambi, India. ATS. Level I/II, Maryland Heights,
Level I/II, San, Antonio, Texas. Decibel. Level I/II (NAS-410), Troy, Missouri. Quality.
BRL. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Michigan. XRI. 20–22 JUL
24–25 AUG Decibel Remote. 23–30 AUG Level I/II, Palos Hills, Illinois.
Level I/II, Bangalore, India. 10–13 OCT Practical, Pattambi, India. Moraine.
Trinity. Level II (NAS-410), Greenville, Decibel. 25–30 JUL
25–30 AUG South Carolina. PQT. Practical, Trivandrum, India. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. 17–18 OCT
Decibel Remote. Decibel.
Decibel. Level I/II, Atlanta, Georgia. 12–16 SEP Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. ATS. Level I/II, Greenville, South Decibel Remote.
Decibel Remote. Carolina. PQT. 26–29 JUL
17–19 OCT
7–12 SEP Level I/II (SNT-TC-1A), 23–30 SEP Level II, Heath, Ohio. Mistras.
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Branford, Connecticut. Atlantic. Practical, Pattambi, India. Level I/II (NAS-410), Troy,
Decibel. Decibel. Michigan. XRI.
19–24 OCT
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Practical, Trivandrum, India. 27–29 JUL
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel Remote. Decibel Remote. Level I/II, Jacksonville, Florida.
Decibel.
12 SEP Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. 26–30 SEP PQT.
Level I, Davenport, Iowa. QCTL. Decibel Remote. Level I/II, Jacksonville, Florida. 1–3 AUG
PQT. Level II (SNT-TC-1A), Brea,
California. Test.

1028 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
1–4 AUG 19–20 SEP
Level I/II, Maryland Heights, Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
Missouri. Quality. Trinity.
1–6 AUG 25–30 SEP
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel. Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote. Decibel Remote.
3–5 AUG 26–29 SEP
Level I/II, Greenville, South Level I/II, Maryland Heights,
Carolina. PQT. Missouri. Quality.
13–18 AUG
Level I/II (NAS-410), Atlanta,
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Georgia. ATS.
Decibel. 27–30 SEP
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Level I/II (NAS-410), Troy,
Decibel Remote. Michigan. XRI.
15–19 AUG 28–30 SEP
Level I/II (NAS-410), Branford, Level I/II, Jacksonville, Florida.
Connecticut. Atlantic. PQT.
17–19 AUG 1–6 OCT
Level I/II, Atlanta, Georgia. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
ATS. Decibel.
Level I/II, Sulphur, Louisiana. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
INTS. Decibel Remote.
22–23 AUG 5–7 OCT
Level I/II, Bangalore, India. Level I/II, Greenville, South
Trinity. Carolina. PQT.
24–26 AUG 11–14 OCT
Level I/II, San Antonio, Texas. Level II (NAS-410), Greenville,
BRL. South Carolina. PQT.
25–30 AUG 13–18 OCT
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel. Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote. Decibel Remote.
1–6 SEP 17–20 OCT
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I/II, Maryland Heights,
Decibel. Missouri. Quality.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. 19–21 OCT
Decibel Remote. Level I/II, Atlanta, Georgia.
12–14 SEP ATS.
Level II (SNT-TC-1A), Brea, Level I/II (SNT-TC-1A),
California. Test. Branford, Connecticut. Atlantic.
13–18 SEP 24–25 OCT
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
Decibel. Trinity.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. 24–27 OCT
Decibel Remote. Level II (SNT-TC-1A), Brea,
14–15 SEP California. Test.
Level I, Davenport, Iowa. QCTL. 25–30 OCT
14–16 SEP Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Level I/II, Greenville, South Decibel.
Carolina. PQT. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
16 SEP
Decibel Remote.
Level II, Davenport, Iowa. 26–28 OCT
QCTL. Level I/II, San Antonio, Texas.
BRL.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1029
calendar
Radiographic Testing 7–16 AUG
Film Interpretation Level II,
1–10 JUL Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Film Interpretation Level II, Film Interpretation Level II,
Pattambi, India. Decibel. Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Film Interpretation Level II, Remote.
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote. 8–12 AUG
Film Interpretation, San
1–12 JUL Antonio, Texas. BRL.
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I Film, Greenville, South
Decibel. Carolina. PQT.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Level II, Sulphur, Louisiana.
Decibel Remote. INTS.
Practical, Pattambi, India.
15–19 AUG
Decibel.
Practical, Trivandrum, India. Level I Film, Atlanta, Georgia.
Decibel Remote. ATS.
Level II Film, Greenville, South
11–15 JUL Carolina. PQT.
Film Interpretation, Sulphur, Radiation Safety, San Antonio,
Louisiana. INTS. Texas. BRL.
Radiation Safety, Palos Hills, Radiation Safety, Kent,
Illinois. Moraine.
Washington. Mistras.
13–23 JUL Radiation Safety, Maryland
Film Interpretation Level II, Heights, Missouri. Quality.
Pattambi, India. Decibel. 22–23 AUG
Film Interpretation Level II, IRRSP Refresher, Atlanta,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel Georgia. ATS.
Remote.
22–24 AUG
18–22 JUL Radiation Safety Worker,
Digital Detector Array Level II, Greenville, South Carolina.
Troy, Michigan. XRI. PQT.
Radiation Safety, Sulphur,
Louisiana. INTS. 22–26 AUG
Computed Radiography
22–24 JUL Level II, Sulphur, Louisiana.
Level I/II, Bangalore, India. INTS.
Trinity. Level I, Maryland Heights,
25–29 JUL Missouri. Quality.
Level I, Troy, Michigan. XRI. Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
Level I Film, Atlanta, Georgia. Radiation Safety
ATS. Radiographer, Greenville,
South Carolina. PQT.
1–12 AUG
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. 24–26 AUG
Decibel. Radiation Safety Officer,
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Greenville, South Carolina.
Decibel Remote. PQT.
1–5 AUG 26–28 AUG
Level I, Sulphur, Louisiana. Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
INTS. Trinity.
Level I, Davenport, Iowa. QCTL.
29 AUG–2 SEP
1–6 AUG Level II, Maryland Heights,
X-ray, Pattambi, India. Decibel. Missouri. Quality.
X-ray, Trivandrum, India. 1–10 SEP
Decibel Remote. Film Interpretation Level II,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Film Interpretation Level II,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
1030 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
1–12 SEP 3–7 OCT
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I, Troy, Michigan. XRI.
Decibel. Radiation Safety, Davenport,
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Iowa. QCTL.
Decibel Remote. Radiation Safety, Maryland
Practical, Pattambi, India. Heights, Missouri. Quality.
Decibel. Radiation Safety (IRRSP Prep),
Practical, Trivandrum, India. Brea, California. Test.
Decibel Remote. 7–16 OCT
7–9 SEP Film Interpretation Level II,
Film Interpretation, Atlanta, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Georgia. ATS. Film Interpretation Level II,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
12–16 SEP
Level I, Heath, Ohio. Mistras. Remote.
Level I, Kent, Washington. 10–14 OCT
Mistras. Digital Detector Array Level II,
Radiation Safety, Sulphur, Troy, Michigan. XRI.
Louisiana. INTS. Level I, San Antonio, Texas. BRL.
Radiation Safety, Troy, Level I, Maryland Heights,
Michigan. XRI. Missouri. Quality.
Level I, Brea, California. Test.
13–23 SEP
Film Interpretation Level II, Level II, Kent, Washington.
Pattambi, India. Decibel. Mistras.
Film Interpretation Level II, 17–21 OCT
Trivandrum, India. Decibel Film Interpretation, Davenport,
Remote. Iowa. QCTL.
Level I Film, Atlanta, Georgia.
19–23 SEP
Level I Film, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
ATS. Level I Film, Greenville, South
Level II, Heath, Ohio. Mistras. Carolina. PQT.
Level II, Troy, Michigan. XRI. Level II, San Antonio, Texas.
BRL.
23–25 SEP Level II, Maryland Heights,
Level I/II, Bangalore, India. Missouri. Quality.
Trinity. Level II, Brea, California. Test.
26–30 SEP Radiation Safety, Sulphur,
Film Interpretation, Sulphur, Louisiana. INTS.
Louisiana. INTS. 24–28 OCT
Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS. Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
1–6 OCT Level II Film, Greenville, South
X-ray, Pattambi, India. Decibel. Carolina. PQT.
X-ray, Trivandrum, India. 28–30 OCT
Decibel Remote. Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
1–12 OCT Trinity.
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. 31 OCT–2 NOV
Decibel. Radiation Safety Worker,
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Greenville, South Carolina.
Decibel Remote. PQT.
Practical, Pattambi, India.
31 OCT–4 NOV
Decibel.
Radiation Safety
Practical, Trivandrum, India.
Radiographer, Greenville,
Decibel Remote.
South Carolina. PQT.
Ultrasonic Testing
1–12 JUL
Phased Array Level II,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Phased Array Level II,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
1–15 JUL
Practical, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Practical, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
8 JUL
Thickness, Digital/A-scan, San
Antonio, Texas. BRL.
9–20 JUL
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
11–15 JUL
Level I, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
Level I, San Antonio, Texas.
BRL.
Level I, Heath, Ohio. Mistras.
Level II, Brea, California. Test.
13–17 JUL
Level I/II, Bangalore, India.
Trinity.
13–21 JUL
Practical, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Practical, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
13–24 JUL
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
Time of Flight Diffraction Level II,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Time of Flight Diffraction Level II,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
16–30 JUL
Practical, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Practical, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
18–19 JUL
Introduction to Phased Array,
Brea, California. Test.
Level II, Davenport, Iowa. QCTL.
18–22 JUL
Level I, Greenville, South
Carolina. PQT.
Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
Level II, San Antonio, Texas. BRL.
Level II, Heath, Ohio. Mistras.
Phased Array Level I (SNT-TC-1A),
Brea, California. Test.
25–27 JUL
Thickness, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
25–29 JUL
Level I, Palos Hills, Illinois.
Moraine.
Level II, Greenville, South
Carolina. PQT.
Phased Array (first 40 h), San
Antonio, Texas. BRL.
Phased Array Level II (SNT-TC-1A),
Brea, California. Test.
1–5 AUG
Level I, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
Level II, Palos Hills, Illinois.
Moraine.
Phased Array (second 40 h),
San Antonio, Texas. BRL.
1–12 AUG
Automated, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Automated, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
8–12 AUG
Level I, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
Level I, Brea, California. Test.
Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
9–20 AUG
Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
13–21 AUG
Practical, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Practical, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
13–24 AUG
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel Remote.
15–19 AUG
Level I, Davenport, Iowa. QCTL.
Level II, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
Level II, Brea, California. Test.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1031
calendar
Ultrasonic Testing, cont. 13–24 SEP 13–21 OCT 19 JUL
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Practical, Pattambi, India. Level I, Davenport, Iowa. QCTL.
Decibel. Decibel.
17–21 AUG 20–21 JUL
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Practical, Trivandrum, India.
Level I/II, Bangalore, India. Trinity. Level II, Davenport, Iowa. QCTL.
Decibel Remote. Decibel Remote.
17–30 AUG Time of Flight Diffraction Level II, 25–30 JUL
13–24 OCT
Phased Array Level II, Pattambi, India. Decibel. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Pattambi, India. Decibel. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Time of Flight Diffraction Level II, Decibel.
Phased Array Level II, Decibel.
Trivandrum, India. Decibel Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Trivandrum, India. Decibel Remote. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Remote. Decibel Remote.
Practical, Pattambi, India. Decibel. Decibel Remote.
14–18 SEP 27–29 JUL
Practical, Trivandrum, India. 17–21 OCT
Level I/II, Bangalore, India. Level I/II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
Decibel Remote. Level I, Heath, Ohio. Mistras.
Trinity. 1–6 AUG
22–25 AUG 17–30 OCT
16–30 SEP Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
Thickness Level II Limited, Phased Array Level II,
Practical, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Sulphur, Louisiana. INTS. Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Decibel. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
23–30 AUG
Phased Array Level II,
Practical, Trivandrum, India. Decibel Remote.
Auto Data Interpreter, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Decibel Remote. 15–17 AUG
Pattambi, India. Decibel. Remote.
19–23 SEP Practical, Pattambi, India. Weld Inspection, Heath, Ohio.
Auto Data Interpreter,
Level I, Greenville, South Decibel. Mistras.
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Carolina. PQT. Practical, Trivandrum, India. 29–31 AUG
Remote.
Level I, Brea, California. Test. Decibel Remote. Level I/II, San Antonio, Texas.
29 AUG–2 SEP Level II, San Antonio, Texas. BRL.
19–23 OCT BRL.
Level I, Atlanta, Georgia.
20–22 SEP Level I/II, Bangalore, India. Level I/II, Greenville, South
ATS.
Thickness, Davenport, Iowa. Trinity. Carolina. PQT.
1 SEP QCTL.
23–30 OCT 6–8 SEP
Thickness, Digital/A-scan, San
26–30 SEP Auto Data Interpreter, Level I/II, Maryland Heights,
Antonio, Texas. BRL.
Level I, Maryland Heights, Pattambi, India. Decibel. Missouri. Quality.
1–12 SEP Missouri. Quality. Auto Data Interpreter, Level II, Brea, California. Test.
Phased Array Level II, Level II, Greenville, South Trivandrum, India. Decibel 12–14 SEP
Pattambi, India. Decibel. Carolina. PQT. Remote. Level I/II, Sulphur, Louisiana.
Phased Array Level II, Level II, Brea, California. Test.
24–28 OCT INTS.
Trivandrum, India. Decibel Phased Array (first 40 h), San
Remote. Level II, Heath, Ohio. Mistras. 25–30 SEP
Antonio, Texas. BRL.
31 OCT–2 NOV Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
1–15 SEP 1–12 OCT
Thickness, Maryland Heights, Decibel.
Practical, Pattambi, India. Automated, Pattambi, India.
Missouri. Quality. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel. Decibel. Decibel Remote.
Practical, Trivandrum, India. Automated, Trivandrum, India. 31 OCT–4 NOV
Decibel Remote. Decibel Remote. Level I, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS. 1–6 OCT
Level I, Brea, California. Test. Level I/II, Pattambi, India.
9–20 SEP 3–7 OCT
Phased Array Composite Decibel.
Level I/II, Pattambi, India. Level I, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
Inspection, Brea, California. Level I/II, Trivandrum, India.
Decibel. Level I, Troy, Michigan. XRI.
Test. Decibel Remote.
Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Level II, Maryland Heights,
Decibel Remote. Missouri. Quality. 19–21 OCT
Phased Array (second 40 h), Visual Testing Level I/II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS.
12–16 SEP
Level I, San Antonio, Texas. San Antonio, Texas. BRL. 5–7 JUL
BRL. 9–20 OCT Level I/II, San Antonio, Texas. Short Courses/Topical
Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. Level I/II, Pattambi, India. BRL. Seminars
ATS. Decibel. Level I/II, Maryland Heights, 1–8 JUL
Level II, Pittsburgh, Level I/II, Trivandrum, India. Missouri. Quality. NDT Systems Auditing,
Pennsylvania. Odyssey. Decibel Remote. 12–14 JUL Pattambi, India. Decibel.
13–21 SEP 10–14 OCT Level I/II (SNT-TC-1A), Troy, NDT Systems Auditing,
Practical, Pattambi, India. Level II, Atlanta, Georgia. ATS. Michigan. XRI. Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Decibel. Level II, Troy, Michigan. XRI. 18–20 JUL
Remote.
Practical, Trivandrum, India. Level I/II, Sulphur, Louisiana.
Decibel Remote. INTS.

1032 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
1–12 JUL
API 510 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 510 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level I, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level I, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
9–20 JUL
NDT Appreciation Program,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
NDT Appreciation Program,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
13–24 JUL
API 653 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 653 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level II, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level II, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
15–30 JUL
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
21–30 JUL
Introduction to NDT, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Introduction to NDT,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
Lead Auditing ISO 9001,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Lead Auditing ISO 9001,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
25–30 JUL
API 570 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 570 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Piping Inspection, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Piping Inspection, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
1–8 AUG
NDT Systems Auditing,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
NDT Systems Auditing,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
1–12 AUG
API 510 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 510 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
Inspection and Quality Control
Level I, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level I, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
8–12 AUG
Introduction to NDT, Sulphur,
Louisiana. INTS.
9–20 AUG
NDT Appreciation Program,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
NDT Appreciation Program,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
13–24 AUG
API 653 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 653 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level II, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level II, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
15–30 AUG
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
21–30 AUG
Introduction to NDT, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Introduction to NDT,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
Lead Auditing ISO 9001,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Lead Auditing ISO 9001,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1033
 calendar
Short Courses/Topical Seminars,
cont.
25–30 AUG
API 570 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 570 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Piping Inspection, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Piping Inspection, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
29–31 AUG
Basic Metallurgy for NDT,
Heath, Ohio. Mistras.
1–8 SEP
NDT Systems Auditing,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
NDT Systems Auditing,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
1–12 SEP
API 510 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 510 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level I, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level I, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
9 SEP
NDT 101, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
9–20 SEP
NDT Appreciation Program,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
NDT Appreciation Program,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
13–24 SEP
API 653 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 653 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level II, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level II, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
1034 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
15–30 SEP
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
19–22 SEP
API QUTE Prep, Sulphur,
Louisiana. INTS.
21–30 SEP
Introduction to NDT, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Introduction to NDT,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
Lead Auditing ISO 9001,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Lead Auditing ISO 9001,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
25–30 SEP
API 570 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 570 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Piping Inspection, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Piping Inspection, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
26–30 SEP
CIVA NDE Simulation Software:
Intro & Applications (UT, RT),
Massy, France. Extende France.
1–8 OCT
NDT Systems Auditing,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
NDT Systems Auditing,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
1–12 OCT
API 510 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 510 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level I, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level I, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
9–20 OCT
NDT Appreciation Program,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
NDT Appreciation Program,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
13–24 OCT
API 653 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 653 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level II, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Weld Inspection and Quality
Control Level II, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
15–30 OCT
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Mechanical Inspector – Oil and
Gas, Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
17–19 OCT
CIVA NDE Simulation Software:
Intro & Applications (UT Beam,
UT Analysis), Massy, France.
Extende France.
21–30 OCT
Introduction to NDT, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Introduction to NDT,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
Lead Auditing ISO 9001,
Pattambi, India. Decibel.
Lead Auditing ISO 9001,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
24–28 OCT
CWI Prep, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
25–30 OCT
API 570 Prep, Pattambi, India.
Decibel.
API 570 Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Piping Inspection, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Piping Inspection, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
Level III Examination
Preparation/Refreshers
1–6 JUL
UT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
UT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
5–7 JUL
PT Level III, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
7–12 JUL
RT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
RT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
11–12 JUL
PT Level III, Branford,
Connecticut. Atlantic.
11–15 JUL
Basic Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
12–13 JUL
MT Level III, Branford,
Connecticut. Atlantic.
13–16 JUL
MT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
MT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
14–15 JUL
Basic Level III, Branford,
Connecticut. Atlantic.
17–20 JUL
PT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
PT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
18–20 JUL
MT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
20–22 JUL
PT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
21–25 JUL
Basic Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Basic Level III Prep,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
25–29 JUL
ET Level III, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
UT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
1–3 AUG
VT Level III, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
1–5 AUG
Basic Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
1–6 AUG
UT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
UT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
7–12 AUG
RT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
RT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
8–10 AUG
MT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
10–12 AUG
PT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
13–16 AUG
MT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
MT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
15–19 AUG
UT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
17–20 AUG
PT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
PT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
21–25 AUG
Basic Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
Basic Level III Prep,
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Remote.
22–26 AUG
Basic Level III, Maryland
Heights, Missouri. Quality.
Digital Radiography Level III,
Troy, Michigan. XRI.
RT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
29 AUG–2 SEP
Eddy Current Level III,
Houston, Texas. Kraft.
UT Level III, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
1–6 SEP
UT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
UT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
6–7 SEP
PT Level III, Dayton, Ohio.
Kraft.
PT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
7–12 SEP
RT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel.
RT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote.
8–9 SEP
MT Level III, Dayton, Ohio.
Kraft.
MT Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
12–16 SEP
Basic Level III, Dayton, Ohio.
Kraft.
Basic Level III, Houston, Texas.
Kraft.
RT Level III, Maryland Heights,
Missouri. Quality.
13–16 SEP 7–12 OCT
MT Level III Prep, Pattambi, RT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
India. Decibel. India. Decibel.
MT Level III Prep, Trivandrum, RT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
India. Decibel Remote. India. Decibel Remote.
17–20 SEP 10–11 OCT
PT Level III Prep, Pattambi, PT Level III, Brea, California.
India. Decibel. Test.
PT Level III Prep, Trivandrum, VT Level III, Brea, California.
India. Decibel Remote. Test.
19–23 SEP 10–12 OCT
UT Level III, Dayton, Ohio. MT Level III, Maryland Heights,
Kraft. Missouri. Quality.
UT Level III, Houston, Texas.
12–14 OCT
Kraft.
Eddy Current Level III, Brea,
21–25 SEP
California. Test.
Basic Level III Prep, Pattambi, VT Level III, Houston, Texas.
India. Decibel. Kraft.
Basic Level III Prep,
13–16 OCT
Trivandrum, India. Decibel MT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
Remote.
India. Decibel.
26 SEP–1 OCT MT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
UT Level III, Brea, California. India. Decibel Remote.
Test. 17–20 OCT
1–6 OCT PT Level III Prep, Pattambi,
UT Level III Prep, Pattambi, India. Decibel.
India. Decibel. PT Level III Prep, Trivandrum,
UT Level III Prep, Trivandrum, India. Decibel Remote.
India. Decibel Remote. 17–21 OCT
3–5 OCT Basic Level III, Brea, California.
RT Level III, Brea, California. Test.
Test. Eddy Current Level III,
Houston, Texas. Kraft.
3–7 OCT
RT Level III, Houston, Texas. 21–25 OCT
Kraft. Basic Level III Prep, Pattambi,
6–7 OCT
India. Decibel.
Basic Level III Prep,
MT Level III, Brea, California.
Trivandrum, India. Decibel
Test.
Remote.
31 OCT–4 NOV
Basic Level III, Maryland
Heights, Missouri. Quality. w
x
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1035

A Comparative Study on the Characteristics Between
Different Computed Tomographic Acquisition
Techniques
by Stephan Zuber
UNCLASSIFIED; Distribution Statement A: Approved for public release
ABSTRACT
Computed tomography is widely used and a well-
known nondestructive testing technique. However,
the newest generations of computed tomography
systems, specifically the sixth and seventh, are
just now in the process of being incorporated for
use into the industrial world. Most of the current
computed tomography systems used in the
industry utilize the common back-projected cone
beam reconstruction process, which provides an
extensive amount of data in many situations. In
some cases, the artifacts, required resolution,
mechanics of the motion hardware, and configura-
tion of the part itself can all contribute to lost,
masked, or incorrect information in the final recon-
struction. In general, a proportion of the applicable
parts that are inspected using computed tomog-
raphy would be more accurately reconstructed
using a helical acquisition and reconstruction
process. This paper provides an overview of
different reconstruction techniques and specifically
shows the empirical differences between three
different techniques commercially available in
today’s market.
KEYWORDS: radiography, computed tomography,
nondestructive testing, NDT, cone beam
ASNT NDT Level III; U.S. Army Armament, Research, Development, and
Engineering Center, Radiography Lab, Quality Engineering & System
Assurance Directorate, Picatinny, New Jersey 07806; (973) 724-4130;
e-mail stephan.c.zuber.civ@mail.mil.
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x
Introduction
The works presented within this paper are a general overview
and comparison of three different acquisition techniques used
in computed tomography imaging. A series of experiments
and tests were performed on a commercially available
computed tomography scanning system to show the advan-
tages and disadvantages of each technique. The specific
system under review has the ability to choose different
options prior to acquisition and reconstruction. The options
under review involve the translation and rotation of the part,
detector, and/or X-ray source; effective resolution; and artifact
reduction processing. The motion of the part in relation to the
source and detector are the primary factors that are compared in
this report. More specifically, step wise, continuous, and helical
motion acquisition techniques are compared.
Background on Image Acquisition in Computed
Tomography
A standard cone beam acquisition is available on the system in
use, which uses a stepping rotation during acquisition. In
general, most industrial computed tomographic systems use
this technique to take advantage of large fields of view and
mechanical motion limitations, and to allow the use of avail-
able reconstruction algorithms. This technique has a fixed
X-ray source and fixed detector array, while the part is rotated
in steps to each position during the acquisition of each projec-
tion. A second type of acquisition under review is identical to
the first technique, except the part is rotated in a continuous
motion. This process typically reduces the chance that the
part may vibrate or shift between each acquired projection. A
third option that is examined is the ability to perform helical
acquisitions and reconstructions. This technique is accom-
plished by continuously rotating the part while it translates
through the field of view between the source and detector.
This can be accomplished either by translating the rotating
turntable up and/or down, or, in this case, rotating the part
while the source and detector translate up and/or down in
synchronous motion with one another. The data set from this
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1037
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques

acquisition process in turn follows a helical path around the The reconstruction methodology between the step and
inspection piece. The final reconstruction, however, treats the continuous acquisition schemes are identical. Background on
data set slightly differently. Figure 1 shows a visual depiction applying the filtered back-projection through radon and fourier
of each of the acquisition techniques that are characterized in transforms can be found in outside literature (Feldkamp et al.,
this paper. 1984). The step and the continuous techniques differ by how
In some inspections, a minimal difference in effective reso- each projection is acquired in the acquisition sequence and
lution, image quality, and the impact of artifacts may not show what the motion of the inspection piece is during that time.
that one technique is better than another. In this case, the The step version fully stops the motion of the part for each
technique with the shortest exposure time would be the most projection, thereby allowing for minimized variation from one
advantageous. However, in some part designs and configura- image to the next except for the actual change in the attenuation
tions, advanced techniques such as helical acquisition and of the X-ray photons through the part. The continuous version,
reconstruction are necessary to achieve the required resolu- however, never stops the rotation of the part throughout the
tion or image quality. This paper attempts to best describe the entire acquisition sequence. This puts the dependency of when
responses of this industrial system for several different parts each projection is taken solely on the detector and the frame rate
and configurations. selected for the inspection. Because of the frame rates available
on many of the solid state detectors, most artifacts created by the
continuous motion are all but eliminated. Frame skipping, highly
precise and slow moving turntables, and frame averaging also
assist in the reduction of artifacts. In most cases where fixturing
the part is difficult and part vibration may occur, the continuous
technique has an advantage at reducing the impact it may have
on the final alignment of the reconstruction.
The helical process holds some of the same functioning as
the continuous technique, but the sampling is slightly
Sample
different. Since the area of interest translates and rotates
Planar simultaneously, the data points taken in each sinogram are
detector unaligned in a sense. In order to use the same filtered back-
Turntable projected reconstruction algorithm, data points are measured
X-ray (step-wise
(a) source movement) at every 360° interval. The distance between these data points
is commonly referred to as the slice thickness, or helical pitch.
The actual data created during the reconstruction are prima-
rily the mean value between the upper and lower rotation for
each corrected sinogram. The most beneficial advantage of
this technique is for larger or taller inspection pieces, when
high magnification is in use, or whenever an entire part needs
Sample to be acquired in a single data set. A generalized example for
Planar
the differences between slice thickness in the step and contin-
detector uous cone beam reconstruction versus the helical technique
Turntable
X-ray (continuous are shown in Figure 2.
(b) source motion)
System Features
The computed tomography system under investigation in this
Path of continuously
report has two separate X-ray sources, a mid-energy low power
Direction of rotating turntable 450 kV unit and a 225 kV microfocus unit. Each set of experi-
X-ray tube and part ments described throughout this paper was imaged, reviewed,
and detector
and analyzed using identical techniques, excluding the acquisi-
tion/reconstruction technique. The detector in use was an
amorphous silicon array with a scintillator, 200 μm pixel pitch,
and a bit depth of 16 (maximum gray value of 65 535). Figure 3
(c) Start of helical scan shows a common setup on the system, the general layout, the
placement of the detector (far left), the turntable, and the X-ray
sources (far right). The system was built on a U-shaped frame to
Figure 1. Visual depiction of the acquisition/reconstruction allow the detector and source(s) to translate up and down inde-
techniques under review: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical. pendently or fully synchronized. The turntable can rotate and

1038 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 translate in between the detector and source to change the orien-
tation or physical magnification of the part under inspection.
Translation from left to right of the source is also available to
3D volume
allow precision alignment of the part, rotation, and field of view of
Stacked slices
the detector. The ability to tilt the turntable is also available to
allow for additional alignment of the part, area of interest, and to
Slice offset the axis of rotation if needed. The source-to-detector
distance was kept at its maximum distance for all the tests
performed to maintain the highest potential spatial resolution
possible, leaving the dependency mainly on the spot size of the
(a) source in use. Part fixturing varied from one inspection piece to
the next to ensure sufficient placement in the beam path and for
stable handling of the part. However, the fixturing was kept iden-
tical from one comparison of the reconstruction technique to
another.
Helix axis
Characterizing with a Phantom
A series of tests were analyzed using a computed tomography
performance phantom. Detailed information and references
for this device can be found in the American Association of
Physicists in Medicine Report No. 1 (AAPM, 1977). This
Repeat 360°
phantom is a 21.6 cm diameter by 32.39 cm tall acrylic
cylinder that contains a series of different inserts for meas-
Pitch, p uring various responses specific for computed tomography
use and is water filled. The phantom that was used in this
experiment contained from top to bottom: the computed
tomography number calibration insert, resolution insert, slice
thickness insert, and low-contrast extension insert. Figure 4
(b) shows the layout of the phantom interior as well as a photo-
graph of the actual sample prior to acquiring the data. The
external resolution and whole body ring inserts were not used.
This section was left as an open water cavity at the top of the
Figure 2. Depiction of the: (a) helical pitch; and (b) and slice phantom. All the examples and tests on this phantom used the
thickness. technique shown in Table 1. All the measurements taken
throughout this analysis were from the gray scale inverted
reconstructions, where black is fully exposed air and white is a
highly attenuating material.

Computed Tomography Number Calibration Insert

Figure 3. Photograph of the industrial computed tomography system
as tested.
The computed tomography number calibration insert is
19 cm in diameter and 6.35 cm tall and contains 2.54 cm
diameter contrast pins. These pins are made of polyethylene,
acrylic, polycarbonate, polystyrene, and nylon, with physical
densities of 0.95, 1.19, 1.20, 1.05, and 1.10 g/cm3, respec-
tively. For the basis of comparison between the three recon-
structions techniques under investigation, these inserts were
measured for their difference in contrast with the water filled
background within the phantom. The technique of deter-
mining the contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) was constructed
from outside literature (Modulus, 2013). Equations 1 to 3
show the methodology of calculating the signal-to-noise ratio
(SNR), CNR, and contrast sensitivity for each pin within the
phantom for each of the three reconstruction techniques.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1039
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques

Fluorocarbon resin band

simulating bone

Resolution
insert
Water tank
External
resolution and
whole-body
Low ring
contrast
extension Alignment
insert

Stand
blocks Slice
thickness
Computed insert
tomography
(a) number calibration (b)
insert

Figure 4. Computed tomography performance phantom: (a) exploded view of internal configuration; and (b) photograph.

TABLE 1
Radiographic technique settings used during the examination of the computed tomography phantom*
Settings No. projections Helical pitch (mm) Time File size (GB) Resolution/slice thickness (µm)
Step 2801 – 58 min 33 s 17.88 1562 × 1971 × 1559
Continuous 2801 – 46 min 44 s 20.83 1672 × 1971 × 1697
Helical 2821 24.69 47 min 5 s 22.09 1555 × 2427 × 1571
* Source = commercial X-ray tube; inline beam filter = 381 µm brass; kV = 225; µA = 305; spot size = ~6 µm; gain = 0.25 µF; frame rate = 4 fps; frame
average = 0; source-to-detector distance = 1381.14 mm; source-to-object distance = 1035.2 mm; magnification = 1.33; voxel size = 149.7 µm.

TABLE 2
Measured signal-to-noise ratio (SNR), contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), and contrast sensitivity (CS) values for each pin within the computed
tomography number calibration insert
Step Continuous Helical
Pin SNR CNR CS (%) SNR CNR CS (%) SNR CNR CS (%)
Polyethylene 26.09 1.93 7.42 25.15 1.73 6.88 10.13 0.51 5.04
Acrylic 22.90 1.01 4.42 22.26 1.10 4.94 10.05 0.53 5.25
Polycarbonate 24.99 2.06 8.23 25.02 1.86 7.43 10.58 0.96 9.07
Polystyrene 23.50 1.16 4.94 23.77 1.29 5.43 10.07 0.57 5.66
Nylon 26.18 2.39 9.14 24.77 2.09 8.44 10.10 0.79 7.80

Gray value (GV) Table 2 shows the summary of the results obtained from
(1) SNR =
Standard Deviation (StdDev) the histogram measurements taken from the computed
tomography number calibration insert. Figure 5 shows a qual-
GV ( region ) − GV ( background) ∆GV itative view of the insert for each of the three reconstruction
(2) CNR = =
StdDev ( background) StdDev techniques.
From the measurements of the computed tomography
CNR contrast ∆GV
number insert, small differences were seen between the step
(3) Contrast sensitivity = = = and continuous scans, but the helical technique was signifi-
SNR signal GV
cantly lower in the contrast values of the pins. The major

1040 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 factor that reduced the SNR and CNR in the helical scan was
the relatively large standard deviation of the background
(water). The standard deviation of the background is other-
wise understood as the noise within the water region. Because
of the addition of more moving parts during the inspection,
more noise would be expected. An additional possibility is
that, since the part translates across the mid-plane of the
detector and the source, slight differences in saturation will
occur in the area of the phantom and surrounding air. These
small differences, however, would not be corrected for by
means of the gain calibration since that is performed only in
an open field of view without the part. These small variations
from projection to projection would add up to a significant
contribution of the total noise within the final reconstruction.
Changing the frame rate, total number of projections, and
effective motion speed allows the ability to reduce the impact
(a) in the helical technique if the inspection is to be fully opti-
mized beyond what is presented in this section. The total
impact, however, is completely dependent on the inspection
piece from its size, shape, internal scatter characteristics, and
total variances in linear attenuations internal to the part.

Resolution Insert
The resolution insert was 19 cm in diameter and 6.35 cm tall
and contains an acrylic block with nine sets of five holes, all of
which were filled with air. From largest to smallest the holes
for each of the sets were: 1.75, 1.5, 1.25, 1.00, 0.75, 0.61, 0.5,
0.4, and 0.2 mm in diameter. The center-to-center distance
between each hole was twice the diameter of the hole, or
otherwise understood that the width or spacing between each
hole was equal to the diameter of the adjacent holes. These
(b) sets of holes were used to qualitatively and quantitatively
measure the minimal detectable spacing for each of the three
different types of acquisitions under review in this experiment.
Figure 6 shows the insert from the top-down (transverse)
view. Figure 7 shows the sagittal (side) view for each of the
five sets of holes for each of the reconstruction techniques.
Figure 8 provides the output of each line profile across the
holes in the top-down view for all three techniques.
Qualitatively, the differences between the step and contin-
uous techniques are very subtle, but the continuous images
show a slightly better contrast difference between the holes
and the background acrylic. This increase in contrast provided
an added benefit, even though the noise within the contin-
uous images was slightly higher. Even with the compressed
formatted images in Figure 7, it is visible that the seventh set
of holes (0.5 mm) in the continuous reconstruction had the
best contrast and spatial resolution, where the separation of
(c) the holes is clear. The separation of the eighth set of holes
(0.4 mm) is questionable in the step and continuous. The
ninth set (0.2 mm) cannot be visibly discerned in any of the
three techniques. The helical technique, surprisingly, had
Figure 5. Transverse slice through the computed tomography number
calibration insert inside of the performance phantom: (a) step; spatial resolution and contrast deficiencies at the sixth set of
(b) continuous; and (c) helical. holes (0.61 mm). The level of noise present in the helical

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1041
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques

(a)

(b)

(a) (b) (c)

(c)

Figure 6. Transverse slice through the resolution insert inside of the Figure 7. Reconstruction slices for each of the nine sets of resolution
performance phantom: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical. holes starting from the top with the largest diameter of 1.75 mm:
(a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.

1042 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 (a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

(g) (h)

Figure 8. Line profile measurements (gray scale value versus pixel location) across each set of resolution holes in the transverse (top-down)
orientation: (a) 1.75 mm holes; (b) 1.5 mm holes; (c) 1.25 mm holes; (d) 1 mm holes; (e) 0.75 mm holes; (f) 0.61 mm holes; (g) 0.5 mm holes;
and (h) 0.4 mm holes. The error bars show the ±1 standard deviation.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1043
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques

(a) (b)

(c) (d)

(e) (f)

(g) (h)

Figure 9. Line profile measurements (gray scale value versus pixel location) across each set of resolution holes in the sagittal (side view)
orientation: (a) 1.75 mm holes; (b) 1.5 mm holes; (c) 1.25 mm holes; (d) 1 mm holes; (e) 0.75 mm holes; (f) 0.61 mm holes; (g) 0.5 mm holes;
and (h) 0.4 mm holes. The error bars show the ±1 standard deviation.

1044 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
images is apparent just as it was with the computed tomog-
raphy number insert.
Quantitatively, the line profiles taken across the top-down
views show similar results. The 0.2 mm holes could not be
measured at all, and the helical technique could not accurately
detect the 0.4 mm holes. The helical technique, however, did
show comparable or even slightly better detection across the
holes in the first set (1.75 mm), fourth set (1.0 mm), and fifth
set (0.75 mm). This suggests that, though a higher contrast
and signal was achieved in the original technique, the helical
technique may result in the most accurate reconstruction as
long as the noise level remains at the levels seen in the data
obtained within this comparison. However, using the
standard deviation (noise) of the line profiles, the most
consistent technique was the continuous version. A general-
ized analysis of the profiles shows that, when the gray values
exceed the noise, the level of contrast of the holes is readily
visible. The separation between the peaks and valleys can also
be detected. In the graphs where the peaks and valleys reach
but do not exceed the noise, the holes and separations are
visible but are not as easily detected. At the point where the
holes and separations are no longer detectable, the peaks and
valleys drop below the noise and can no longer be discerned
from the noise of the image where the profile was taken.
Figure 9 provides the output of each line profile across the
holes in the side view for all three techniques.
The side view measurements of the profiles were not as
clear as the image appears qualitatively. Some of this may
likely be a result caused by the difficulties in aligning the three
reconstructions the same way between each test and measure-
ment (that is, to have the exact planes/axes aligned accurately
(a) (b)
Figure 10. Sagittal (side) slice through the slice thickness insert inside of the performance phantom: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.
to one another during the image review and analysis).
Secondary software (ImageJ) was necessary to extract the
non-transverse (top-down) slices of the reconstruction for
measurement (NIH, 2004). As a result of a manual alignment,
not all five holes for each set were visible in the same slice
planes. For the most part, the three centered holes were together
simultaneously for each measurement. This is the main reason
the profiles are not as clear in Figure 9 as they are in Figure 8.
Overall, the same results were seen in comparison to the meas-
urements taken in the top-down profiles of the resolution insert.
The step technique was reliable down to the 0.4 mm range; the
continuous technique was reliable down to the 0.4 mm range
with the ability to detect some 0.2 mm separations; and the
helical technique was valid in the 0.61 to 0.75 mm range when
inspecting the phantom with this technique.
Slice Thickness Insert
The slice thickness insert was 19 cm in diameter and 8.89 cm
tall and contained three aluminum strips. The strips were
0.51 mm thick and 2.54 cm long and were angled at 45° from
the long axis of the phantom. These strips were measured and
compared to the calculated slice thickness of the reconstruc-
tions as a comparative analysis of the true versus actual slice
thickness. Six separate measurements were taken for each
acquisition technique, including one on each of the three
strips and one at both extremes (very top and very bottom)
for each strip. The measurements were made by taking a
standard line profile (using a constant line length) across the
strip. The resulting profile was then plotted so that the full
width at half maximum (FWHM) across the peak of the
curve could be obtained. The FWHM is the measured slice
(c)
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1045
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 11. Transverse (top-down) slice through the slice thickness insert inside of the performance phantom: (a) step; (b) continuous; and
(c) helical.

TABLE 3
Measurement of the slice thickness using the full width at half maximum of the aluminum strips within the phantom (mm)
Measurement no. Position Step Continuous Helical
1 Upper right 1.56 1.87 1.85
2 Upper center 1.50 1.50 1.54
3 Upper left 1.43 1.90 1.86
4 Right center 1.23 2.00 2.08
5 Center center 1.60 1.40 2.44
6 Left center 1.60 1.68 1.94
7 Lower right 1.40 1.80 2.16
8 Lower center 1.81 1.98 2.15
9 Lower left 1.85 1.74 2.18
Average – 1.55 1.76 2.02

thickness for the respective reconstruction. Figure 10 provides
a side view through the reconstruction showing the three
slanted strips inside the phantom for each of the reconstruc-
tion techniques. Figure 11 shows the top-down view where
the slice thickness measurements were made. Table 3
shows all of the results of measuring the FWHM from the
aluminum strips. Equation 4 provides the basic technique
of interpolation from the measured data from each line
profile across the strip, which results in a gaussian distribution
curve:
(4) FWHM = 2 2σLn ( 2) = σ 8Ln ( 2) = 2.354 × σ
where
σ = standard deviation.
The first takeaway from examining the slice thickness
insert was that the strips seen within the step acquisition were
actually duplicated so that a double image of the strips was
apparent. This artifact primarily would be a result if the part
shifted or moved from its original position on the turntable
during the acquisition sequence. However, the rest of the
phantom did not show this condition. Typically the part
would have to be fixtured such that the part was fully stable
and the data set re-acquired, but in this instance the actual
insert shifted within the phantom. This was most likely a
result of too fast or too hard of a stopping action between
each step. This artifact could have been corrected by changing
the speed of the rotation or by increasing the number of
frames skipped between each projection. In this case it was
valuable to visibly see this artifact occur, which did not occur
in the continuous or helical techniques. This was a result and
benefit of smooth fluid motion of the turntable in those tech-
niques. The measurements of this insert showed the step
version had the smallest slice thickness and therefore the best
spatial resolution. This coincides with the smaller noise values
measured throughout the phantom. In order to avoid confu-
sion, the very edge of each strip was measured since that is
where the duplicated strips overlapped. This was considered

1046 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 (a) (b) (c)

Figure 12. Transverse slice through the low-contrast extension insert inside of the performance phantom: (a) step; (b) continuous; and
(c) helical.

TABLE 4
Measurement of the signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) and contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR) between the largest air cavity and the surrounding
acrylic
Settings Air hole – large Acrylic
Signal Noise SNR CNR CS Signal Noise SNR CNR CS
(mean GV) (SD) (mean GV) (SD)
Step 10 810.52 569.15 18.99 7.60 0.40 15 484.29 615.11 25.17 – –
Continuous 11 535.03 593.40 19.44 6.66 0.34 16 539.23 750.82 22.03 – –
Helical 11 356.05 1369.98 8.29 3.62 0.44 16 737.28 1486.58 11.26 – –
* GV = grayscale value; CS = contrast sensitivity; SD = standard deviation.

the worst case since overlap would likely result in a thicker
than actual measurement. The helical technique presented an
average slice slickness that was approximately 25% higher
than the step. The continuous technique slice thickness was
measured to almost halfway between the other two versions.
Low-contrast Extension Insert
The low-contrast extension insert was 21.6 cm in diameter
and 7 cm tall and contained two rows of 5.72 cm deep
cavities. For this experiment the cavities were left empty (air),
but could be used to compare the contrast between various
materials, if needed. The diameter for each pair of cavities
ranged from 2.54 cm to 1.9, 1.27, 0.83, and 0.32 cm in size.
This insert was used only as a basic comparison of achieved
signal and contrast values, in addition to general acquisition
artifacts that may be present in the three techniques. In
Figure 12, the top-down view of the low-contrast inserts for
the three acquisition techniques is provided. Table 4 includes
the measurements taken within the 2.54 cm holes and the
surrounding acrylic.
The step technique again shows the lowest noise levels of
the three reconstructions and has consistently shown that in
all measurements taken throughout the phantom tests.
However, even with consistently higher noise values in
comparison to the step technique the continuous technique
had the highest SNR and CNR. The helical technique once
again had the highest noise of all three. Coinciding with the
noise of each reconstruction, the visible level of artifacts
followed the same pattern. The step technique had little to no
artifacts from motion or sampling patterns but did show
common levels of beam hardening around and in between the
holes. The continuous technique was similar to the step but
had a slightly higher amount of background noise from the
motion. The helical technique, however, had slightly higher
sampling lines that were visible only on the very exterior
casing of the phantom and match where each slice was cut.
These did not appear to affect the quality of the interior of the
phantom except for the increase in noise from the motion
during the acquisition cycle.
Real-life Sample Measurements
A second inspection piece was examined to further charac-
terize the computed tomography system present at the U.S.
Army Armament, Research, Development, and Engineering
Center. The sample that was selected was an inert 30 mm
modified shaped charge warhead. This sample represents a
practical product to investigate the characteristics of the
system and the three acquisition techniques. This sample can

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1047
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques
Figure 13. Photograph of a 30 mm shaped charge warhead.
be seen in Figure 13 and used the technique settings provided
in Table 5. A part of this design typically has areas of interest
such as the overall integrity of the interior components,
ensuring the copper liner is in full contact with the energetic
fill, and verification that the energetic fill is homogenous with
minimal voiding or porosity. This specific example included a
secondary liner that was set into place only to potentially
show the effects of beam hardening. One of the biggest differ-
ences in the overall setup in comparison to the phantom is the
physical magnification and was a primary factor under review.
Figure 14 represents the final reconstruction and volume
rendering of the 30 mm sample for each of the three tech-
niques. Some of the detected indications of the sample
included heavy porosity and cavitation within the inert ener-
getic simulant fill. There is a significant gap between the fill
and the primary liner. This is most notable at the uppermost
interface. Qualitatively, several artifacts are apparent or distin-
TABLE 5
Radiographic technique settings used during the examination of the 30 mm shaped charge sample*
Settings No. projections Helical pitch (mm)
Step 2800 – 58 min 33 s
Continuous 2801 – 46 min 44 s
Helical 2821 6.25
* Source = commercial X-ray tube; beam filter = 381 µm brass; kV = 200; µA = 350; spot size = <6 µm; gain = 0.25 µF; frame rate = 4 fps; frame average = 0;
source-to-detector distance = 1381.14 mm; source-to-object distance = 280 mm; magnification = 4.93; voxel size = 40.4 µm.
1048 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
guishable between the three different techniques. One of the
artifacts that can be seen is visible in the side view of the
reconstruction (lowermost image in each figure) and is
located at the bottommost portion of both liners and the top
curved edge of the outer housing. This artifact makes the
inspection piece appear as if it is tilted or that the parallax was
not corrected for in the final reconstruction. This, however, is
a result of both beam hardening skewing the true position of
the edges and the system’s inability to sufficiently adjust or
correct for the part at the outer portions furthest from the
mid-plane. This in effect makes circular interfaces appear as
front and rear edges as if beam alignment was off in a single
plane radiograph. This condition can be seen in the side view
slice plane provided within Figures 14a and 14b. For this
specific part, this was not a major concern since it occurred
outside the primary area of interest. However, this could
cause a major impact on reliability and accuracy for other part
configurations or in situations where there are more stringent
inspection requirements. This condition is fully corrected for
in the helical technique. The helical technique has shown it
can compensate for some beam hardening since the projec-
tions are essentially acquired on an angle. This in effect
reduces the total attenuation of the front and rear overlay
within each projection and does not vary the energy spectrum
of the beam as much. The helical technique also ensures the
entire part transverses across the true mid-plane of the recon-
struction, therefore, being more accurate in the position of all
the edges within the part.
A qualitative review of the modulation transfer function
(MTF) was performed on the top-down view of the recon-
struction near the lowermost edge of the sample. Figure 15
Figure 15. Photo of taking the modulation transfer function
measurement on the top-down view using the slanted edge macro
within ImageJ.
Time File size (GB) Resolution/slice thickness (µm)
5.68 922 × 1884 × 877
5.3 862 × 1897 × 870
47 min 6 s 28.55 1980 × 1955 × 1980
 Rounded surfaces are
partially distorted

Parallax type
artifact
Energetic fill
with porosity
(a) and cavitations
present

Rounded surfaces are

partially distorted

Parallax type
artifact
(b) Gap between
the liner and
the fill

Rounded surfaces
Lower surface is
have very little to
straight across with
no distortion
(c) minimal distortion

Figure 14. Standard back-projected cone beam reconstruction of the inspection piece using: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1049
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques

attribute of the added mechanical motion of the technique

1.2 y = –0.0099x6 + 0.1642x5 – 1.0438x4 + 3.148x3 – 4.2711x2 + 1.6463x + 0.7722
R2 = 0.9917
and its inherent addition of more noise into each projection
1
and final reconstruction. This added noise also reduced the
0.8 contrast values specifically in the fill area in comparison to the
MTF

0.6 step and continuous images. The step technique had slightly
0.4 higher contrast values in comparison to the continuous
0.2 version. Taking every variable into consideration, the most
0
accurate technique is dependent on the inspection criteria. If a
0 1 2 3 4 5 major focus were on the accuracy and precision of detecting
(a) Line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm) as much porosity and as many cavitations as possible, the step
1.2 reconstruction would be preferred. If the alignment and
y = –0.01x6 + 0.1662x5 – 1.0594x4 + 3.1944x3 – 4.38x2 + 1.7277x + 0.7591

1
R2 = 0.9920 detection of two or more flush surfaces were key to the
integrity and intended part function, then the helical tech-
0.8
nique would be advantageous. In this specific sample, the
MTF

0.6
criterion for the interfaces is the most stringent requirement.
0.4 The size of allowable pores or voids in the fill is a secondary
0.2 requirement and is equal to or greater than the largest void
0 detected in all three techniques. In this case, if further analysis
0 1 2 3 4 5
were needed using computed tomography, the helical approach
(b) Line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm)
would be used. In addition to the benefit of a slightly shorter
1.2 exposure time in comparison to the step technique, the helical
1 y = –0.0104x6 + 0.1652x5 – 0.9888x4 + 2.7243x3 – 3.1981x2 + 0.6583x + 0.8501
R2 = 0.9587 technique can be used at this magnification setting and even
0.8 larger. The settings chosen for this review had to limit magnifica-
tion to allow the sample to fit into the field of view for the step
MTF

0.6
0.4
0.2
0 that the diameter of the part would fill the entire field of view of
0 1 2 3
(c) Line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm)
Figure 16. Modulation transfer function (MTF) profiles of the 30 mm
test samples reconstructions: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.
shows a screen capture of where the measurement was made
and the accompanying graphical output within ImageJ. The
data sets of the measured MTFs for each of the three tech-
niques are provided in Figure 16 and include the sixth order
polynomial trend line used to determine the value of the
normalized MTF in line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm). The
resulting values of the MTFs are shown in Table 6 at 10 and
50% modulation. Overall, the spatial resolution of the step
and continuous techniques was nearly identical, whereas the
helical values showed a fair drop-off. This is most likely an
and continuous techniques. Since the height exceeds the
diameter, the magnification used was limited by the part height.
Using the helical technique, magnification could be increased so
4 5
the detector. This in turn would increase the height, size, and
acquisition time of the inspection, but allows for an increase in
effective resolution, if needed.
Taken at High Magnification
A third sample was chosen to compare and characterize the
computed tomography system at a high magnification setting.
The inspection sample was an electromechanical piston
assembly. Figure 17 shows a photograph of the item, the
measured height using a micrometer, and its placement in
front of the microfocus X-ray source. The technique settings
of this inspection are provided in Table 7.
In high magnification inspections, keeping the part
perfectly still is very important. Any movement or vibration
of even 25.4 µm from the part’s original position can result in
an inaccurate or unusable reconstruction. One of the most

TABLE 6
Measurements of the modulation transfer function (MTF) for the three different types of acquisition/reconstructions of the 30 mm
sample*
Settings Lp/mm at 50% MTF Lp/mm at 10% MTF
Step 0.885 1.415
Continuous 0.892 1.414
Helical 0.667 1.149
* Top down

1050 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
TABLE 7
Radiographic technique settings used during the high magnification examination of an electromechanical piston assembly*
Settings No. projections Helical pitch (mm) Time File size (GB) Resolution/slice thickness (µm)
Step 3750 – 1 h 34 min 18 s 814.82 422 × 1115 × 469
Continuous 3751 – 31 min 20 s 644.39 389 × 1125 × 386
Helical 3757 2.399 31 min 24 s 816.92 392 × 1214 × 450
* Source = commercial X-ray tube; inline beam filter = 381 µm brass; kV = 150; µA = 350; spot size = <6 µm; gain = 0.25 µF; frame rate = 2 fps; frame
average = 0; source-to-detector distance = 1381.14 mm; source-to-object distance = 84.36 mm; magnification = 16.37; voxel size = 12 µm.

(a)
(a)

(b)
(b)

(c) (c)

Figure 17. Electromechanical piston assembly: (a) photo; (b) measured Figure 18. Transverse (top-down) views of the piston assembly for the
length; and (c) placement in front of the X-ray source. three reconstructions: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1051
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques
(a) (b) (c)
Figure 19. Sagittal (side) views of the piston assembly for the three
reconstructions: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.
difficult tasks in high magnification inspections is the ability
to fixture or hold the part in place without impacting the areas
of interest. In this example, a crude homemade setup was
used, which included placing the piston halfway down into
a common coffee stirrer, which was then rigidly fixed into
place. As seen in Figures 18 and 19, the part clearly vibrated
or moved during the step technique and caused a significant
blurring effect. A void was detected within an area of interest
internal to the piston assembly. This indication was used
as the focus area for comparison of the three techniques.
In regards to the contrast values between the void and
surrounding casing, the continuous technique exceeded the
step technique, but was significantly less than the helical tech-
nique. It is also easily seen in Figures 18 and 19 that the effec-
tive resolution of the reconstruction was visibly higher in the
helical images, which is the inverse result in comparison to the
(a) (b)
Figure 20. Area of interest where the modulation transfer function was taken: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.
1052 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
measurements of the phantom. In high magnification setups,
the helical technique appears to compensate for part
movement significantly better. This benefit clearly exceeds
the fact that the inherent noise is higher in the helical tech-
nique and reduces the SNR and CNR in a one to one compar-
ison to the continuous and step techniques.
Even though the qualitative review of the three recon-
structions shows which technique is the most beneficial, a
quantitative examination was performed. Figure 20 provides
the top-down view that was used to measure the MTF values
for the three techniques. Figure 21 includes the tallied MTF
functions in respects to the lp/mm, and Table 8 provides the
values calculated from the trend lines. Here, the MTF
numbers would suggest the step and continuous acquisition
techniques provide better results in regards to spatial resolu-
tion versus the helical technique. The graphs, however, show
that the profiles have non-smooth functions as a result of
blurred or noisy edges, and discredit the accuracy of the calcu-
lated numbers for the MTFs. This is evident since the fitting
function of the trend line (R2) is off by a significant amount.
Figure 22 provides top-down views of a second area of
interest in the piston assembly reconstructions, specifically
the end of the extending pin. A line profile was drawn across
the pin to measure the edge response in each of the three
techniques. The resulting responses are shown in Figure 23
and clearly outline the accuracy of each technique. The helical
approach has the smooth curve that would be expected with a
distinct rise at the start of a sharp edge and a near identical fall
at the end of the pin. The step technique, however, shows two
discrete edges on both the rising and falling edges of the pin,
which is exactly what is viewable in the reconstruction slice.
The continuous version is somewhere in between the other
two techniques with a slightly less visible plateau at the
leading and trailing edge of the pin. Its presence, however, still
shows the inaccuracy of the overall reconstruction since the
edge response should be a single rise and fall coinciding with
the true edges across a cylindrical pin.
(c)
 1.2 y = 0.0048x6 – 0.0808x5 + 0.5304x4 – 1.7357x3 + 2.9818x2 – 2.5943x + 0.953 70 000
R2 = 0.9171
1 60 000

Gray value
0.8 50 000
MTF

40 000
0.6
30 000
0.4
20 000
0.2 10 000
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
(a) Line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm) (a) Pixel
1.2 70 000
1 y = 0.0059x6 – 0.0973x5 + 0.6262x4 – 1.9857x3 + 3.2354x2 – 2.574x + 0.8356
60 000

Gray value
R2 = 0.8249
0.8 50 000
MTF

40 000
0.6
30 000
0.4
20 000
0.2 10 000
0 0
0 0.5 1 1.5 2 2.5 3 3.5 4 4.5 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
(b) Line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm) (b) Pixel
1.2 60 000
y = 0.0087x6 – 0.1455x5 + 0.9481x4 – 3.0292x3 + 4.8894x2 – 3.6607x + 0.9652
1 R2 = 0.9567
Gray value 50 000
0.8 40 000
MTF

0.6 30 000
0.4 20 000
0.2 10 000
0 0
0 1 2 3 4 5 0 20 40 60 80 100 120
(c) Line pairs per millimeter (lp/mm) (c) Pixel

Figure 21. Modulation transfer function (MTF) measurements across Figure 23. Line profiles across the cylindrical pin shown in Figure 20:
the cylindrical casing shown in Figure 18: (a) step; (b) continuous; (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.
and (c) helical.

TABLE 8
Measurements of the modulation transfer function (MTF) for the cylindrical casing*
Settings Lp/mm at 50% MTF Lp/mm at 10% MTF
Step 0.226 0.755
Continuous 0.159 0.605
Helical 0.157 0.413
* Top down

(a) (b) (c)

Figure 22. Area of interest where line profile edge functions were taken: (a) step; (b) continuous; and (c) helical.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1053
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x computed tomographic acquisition techniques
Overall Assessment
Taking the results acquired and reviewed in the phantom
sample alone, it appeared as though the helical technique was
not as accurate as the step or continuous techniques.
However, as magnification was increased and practical inspec-
tion pieces were examined, the helical technique showed to
have more advantages. The helical technique has the ability to
compensate for part vibrations or movement during the
acquisition cycle significantly more than the other techniques.
Additional benefits of using the helical approach include a
more accurate reconstruction since the entire inspection piece
transverses through the calibrated mid-plane of the source
and detector, which allows the interfaces at the extreme ends
of the field of view to be exact, where in the other two tech-
niques some artifacts occurred that had the appearance of
uncorrected parallax. The helical technique also reduces the
exposure time and dose by a measurable amount in comparison
to the step technique. Although the helical technique has signifi-
cantly higher noise than the other versions and therefore
1054 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
reduced contrast, the technique can compensate by changing
the time per projection, slice thickness, and total number of
projections. The helical technique is also not bound by the
height of an inspection piece if it is necessary to acquire and
inspect a component as a whole in one cycle. Overall, the
characteristic of the system under review has been baselined
and has quantified the system responses for future compar-
ison and for tracking system degradation.
REFERENCES
Feldkamp, L.A., L.C. Davism and J.W. Kress, “Practical Cone Beam Algo-
rithm,” Journal of the Optical Society of America A: Optics, Image Science, and
Vision, Vol. 1, No. 6, 1984, pp. 612–619.
AAPM, “Phantoms for Performance Evaluation and Quality Assurance of
CT Scanners,” Report No. 1, American Association of Physicists in
Medicine, Chicago, Illinois, 1977.
Modulus, “Contrast to Noise Ratio Lab Manual: 5, Modifications for P551
Fall 2013 Medical Physics Laboratory,” Document no. DCT-LM5-14022013,
Modus Medical Devices, Inc., London, Ontario, Canada, 2013.
NIH, ImageJ (version 1.48v/Java 1.6.0_20), National Institutes of Health,
2004.
Computed Tomography Helical Scanning for
Dimensional Metrology: Evaluation of Measurement
Errors
by Valentina Aloisi*, Simone Carmignato†, Joseph Schlecht‡, and Eric Ferley§
ABSTRACT
In industrial X-ray computed tomography, it is
frequently necessary to scan long objects that
exceed the dimensions of the detector, while
meeting dimensional accuracy requirements (for
example, in automotive and aerospace fields).
Conventional scans using circular trajectories face
limits when dealing with internal and complex
features on elongated work pieces. To this extent
helical scanning is a valuable solution that also
enables obtaining a strong improvement on image
quality, eliminating the cone beam artifacts that
characterize conventional scans. To use helical
scanning for dimensional quality control, the
assessment of metrological performances is
needed. In this work, metrological performances
for helical scanning are investigated and compared
with those of conventional circular scans.
Repeated helical scans are performed to investi-
gate the influence of main helical scans parame-
ters when performing dimensional measurements.
Experimental results show that helical scanning,
with appropriate scan parameters, performs better
than traditional circular scans with a strong
improvement on image quality.
KEYWORDS: X-ray computed tomography, helical
scanning, metrological performance verification,
dimensional measurements, measurement errors,
accuracy.
* M.S.; Department of Management and Engineering, University of Padova,
Stradella S. Nicola, 3, 36100 Vicenza, Italy; e-mail valentina.aloisi@dii
.unipd.it.
† Ph.D.; Department of Management and Engineering, University of
Padova, Stradella S. Nicola, 3, 36100 Vicenza, Italy; e-mail simone.carmignato
@unipd.it.
‡ Ph.D.; North Star Imaging, Inc., Rogers, Minnesota; e-mail jschlecht@4nsi.com.
§ Ph.D.; North Star Imaging, Inc., Rogers, Minnesota; e-mail eferley@4nsi.com.
Introduction
X-ray computed tomography is increasingly used in the field
of industrial metrology as an innovative and powerful alterna-
tive to classic (that is, tactile and optical) coordinate measuring
machines (CMMs) for performing a wide variety of measure-
ments tasks (Carmignato and Savio, 2011; Kruth et al., 2011).
Besides conventional 3D computed tomography techniques
using a circular scanning trajectory, some industrial 3D computed
tomography systems also allow exploiting helical scanning
(De Chiffre et al., 2014). For many industrial applications,
indeed, such as automotive and aerospace fields, scanning of
long objects exceeding the dimensions of the detector is usually
needed, while meeting dimensional accuracy requirements. In
these cases, circular trajectories face limits mainly due to the
dimensions of the detector. Moreover, helical scanning enables
eliminating the cone beam artifact that characterizes conventional
circular trajectories (Hsieh, 2000). Helical scanning is therefore a
powerful solution that enhances the flexibility of the system and,
when using suitable parameters, improves image quality. On the
other hand, because of additional required movements of the
manipulator (or the X-ray source and detector), additional
error sources for metrological applications could be introduced.
For the use of computed tomography systems relying on
helical scanning principles as coordinate measuring systems
the assessment of metrological performances is therefore of
crucial importance.
With the current state of the art, there are no internation-
ally accepted standards for performance verification of
computed tomography systems (Bartscher et al., 2014).
Working Group 10 of International Organization for Stan-
dardization (ISO) Technical Committee 213 is currently
working on a new draft standard, which is proposed to
become the future part 11 of the ISO 10360 series. In the
absence of such a standard, the existing German guideline
VDI/VDE 2630-1.3 is being used as a de facto international
consensus (VDI, 2011). In strict accordance with ISO 10360
series for CMMs, the VDI/VDE document describes how to
calculate the metrological characteristics length measurement
error (E), as well as probing errors of size and form for testing
the 3D global and local error behavior of axial computed
tomography systems (Carmignato et al., 2009; ISO, 2010;
Marinello et al., 2008). Therefore, it is intended also for
helical scan trajectories. Currently, VDI/VDE 2630-1.3 is
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1055
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x helical scanning for dimensional metrology

the guideline used by most computed tomography systems the detector and increase with cone beam angle (Hsieh,
manufacturers to verify metrological performances of axial 2000). When using helical trajectories instead, with an appro-
computed tomography systems. This paper also follows priate helical pitch (that is, vertical distance traveled per revo-
the guideline for helical scanning. This allows also a direct lution), these artifacts can be eliminated since, in principle,
comparison between circular and helical scanning. the radon space may be completely filled (Buzug, 2008).
Performance verification for helical scanning has not been
fully studied yet. In a study reported elsewhere, probing errors Experimental Setup
for circular and helical scanning were compared by means of Computed tomography measurements in this work were
simulations tools (Hiller et al., 2010). Simulated results performed with a commercial metrological computed tomog-
proved significantly lower probing errors of form for helical raphy system equipped with a 225 kV microfocus reflection
scanning; however, no real data were acquired to validate the X-ray source and a temperature controlled cabinet
simulation. In another an outside study, the authors imple-
mented exact helical cone beam reconstruction using katse-
vich filtered back projection (Muders et al., 2011). A 10 × 10 Flat-panel
× 10 mm3 titan alloy cube featuring 25 spherical calottes on detector
three sides was scanned. Simulated results were compared
with real data; however, in this case helical scans showed the Rotation axis
highest form errors in contrast with simulated data.
In this paper, an experimental study based on repeated
computed tomography measurements of a calibrated refer-
ence object was performed. Sphere distance errors and
probing errors of size and form were calculated for both
circular and helical scanning. Repeated helical scans were also
performed to evaluate the influence of the number of projec-
tions when applying helical trajectories on metrological
performances of computed tomography systems. X-ray
OD)
source sta nce (S D)
- obje ct d i
ista n ce (SD
Helical Scanning Principle e-to ector
d
Sourc e - to-det
The helical scanning principle consists of a different scanning So u rc
Y
strategy in which the rotation of the object is simultaneously
performed with a translational movement along its rotation X
(a) Z
axis, as schematically shown in Figure 1.
The translational movement along the rotation axis Flat-panel
(which in Figure 1 is represented along the vertical direction) detector
can be obtained by moving the manipulator along the rotation
axis direction or using a combined movement of source and
Rotation and
detector. In both cases, the geometrical magnification is given
translation axis
by the ratio of the source-to-detector distance (SDD) to the
source-to-object distance (SOD). Regardless of how the
movement is obtained, the travelling path of a point on the
sample, viewed by a fixed point on the detector, describes a
helix. Helical scanning trajectories allow obtaining two main
advantages compared to traditional circular scan geometries.
First, long objects exceeding the dimensions of the detector
X-ray
along the vertical axis (with the setup represented in Figure 1)
source
can be analyzed in a single scan. Second, cone beam artifacts
are reduced. One of the most implemented reconstruction SOD SDD
algorithms for circular trajectories is the feldkamp-davis-kress
(FDK) algorithm (Feldkamp et al., 1984). However, the suffi- Y
ciency condition is not satisfied in circular cone beam X
(b) Z
computed tomography (Smith, 1985; Wang et al., 1995).
Therefore, shading and streaking artifacts caused by incom- Figure 1. Representation of scanning geometries for: (a) cone beam
plete sampling, known as cone beam artifact or feldkamp computed tomography with circular trajectory; and (b) cone beam
artifact, occur while moving away from the middle plane of computed tomography with helical trajectory.

1056 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
 A calibrated reference object was used for the experimental The reference object was calibrated by means of a
investigation. As represented in Figure 2, it consisted of a ball commercial CMM equipped with a tactile scanning probe
bar with six equally spaced ruby spheres with nominal diameter head. Calibrated values of center-to-center distances between
D = 3.18 mm glued on a carbon fiber frame. The object allowed spheres and form measurements were obtained through
measuring 15 unidirectional lengths (center-to-center distances) repeated CMM measurements.
ranging nominally from 10 to 50 mm. For both helical and circular scans, the work piece was
placed inside the measuring volume in the vertical orientation
(that is, with the carbon fiber rod holding the spheres in the
vertical orientation). This scanning setup allowed for fully
Sphere 6
taking into account the cone beam artifact at both poles of the
spheres. Each computed tomography scan was performed
with scan parameters reported in Table 1 as a good compro-
Sphere 5
mise between scanning time and scan quality.
By intention, an extremely short focal length of 536 mm
Sphere 4
was used. This allowed obtaining a cone angle of 25.6°, which
is quite critical for conventional scanning mode.
Sphere 3 The reference object was scanned with both circular and
helical scan trajectories. Three repeated computed tomog-
Sphere 2 raphy scans were performed with conventional circular trajec-
tories according to the parameters of Table 1 and acquired
Sphere 1 1080 projections. Repeated helical scans were also performed
with the scanning parameters reported in Table 2 to compare
Y the metrological performances with respect to the conven-
tional circular scanning mode.
3 mm
For the helical scans, a fixed helical pitch (that is, vertical
distance travelled per revolution) of 3.1 mm was used and
Z X three different numbers of projections were taken into
account to assess the influence of number of projections on
the measurement results. Scan number 3 was repeated three
times to assess the repeatability of the computed tomography
Figure 2. Schematic of the ball bar used for the experimental
investigation. measurements when applying helical scanning mode in the
configuration that, theoretically, should provide the best
results (highest number of projections).
TABLE 1
Scanning parameters used for the experimental investigation Results and Discussion
Parameter Measurement Computed tomography data were reconstructed using a
Voltage 110 kV standard FDK algorithm for the circular scans, whereas for the
Current 180 µA helical scans an FDK-based algorithm adapted for helical
Exposure time 200 ms trajectories was utilized. Computed tomography volumes
Frame averaging 5 frames were subsequently imported and analyzed by means of
Filtering 0.127 mm copper
commercial viewing software. A local adaptive surface deter-
Source-to-object distance 142 mm
Source-to-detector distance 536 mm
mination was used for all computed tomography scans.
Detector pixel size 127 µm
For each sphere of the ball bar, a region of interest,
Voxel size 33.6 µm consisting of the top hemisphere, was taken into account.
This allowed for removing the part of the spheres glued to the
rod, which could lead to inaccuracies in measurements, and at

TABLE 2
Parameters used for the repeated helical scans
Scan number Helical pitch Number of projections
Scan 1 3.1 mm 1080
Scan 2 3.1 mm 2500
Scan 3 3.1 mm 4000

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1057
ME TECHNICAL PAPER w
x helical scanning for dimensional metrology
the same time to take into account the cone beam artifact at
both poles of the sphere with the ball bar oriented along the
vertical direction.
Gaussian least square fitting was used for sphere evalua-
tion. Sphere distance errors and probing errors of size and
form were calculated according to VDI/VDE 2630-1.3.
In Figure 3, probing errors of form are plotted for each of
the six spheres of the ball bar. Results of the repeated helical
scans and circular scans are reported and compared. For both,
in circular scan and helical scan number 3, results presented in
the graph are average values obtained from three repeated
computed tomography measurements. Figure 3 shows how,
for circular scan trajectories, the spheres at the bottom and
top of the detector (respectively, sphere 1 and sphere 6) are
highly influenced by the cone beam artifact. In this case,
because of the chosen configuration with a high cone beam
angle of 25.6° (SOD = 142 mm, SDD = 536 mm), the form
error reaches 25 µm. For spheres closer to the mid-plane of
the detector (spheres 3 and 4), probing errors of form are
significantly smaller and go down to 6 µm. In circular scan
trajectories, therefore, probing errors of form are not
uniformly distributed, and the influence of the cone beam
artifact depends on the distance from the mid-plane of the
detector and SDD. For helical scans, instead, probing errors of
form show a homogeneous distribution along the whole
detector. Figure 3 shows also, as expected, that by increasing
0.026
0.024
0.022
0.020
0.018
0.016
PF/mm
0.014
0.012
0.010
0.008
0.006
0.004
0.002
1 2
Figure 3. Measured probing errors of form (PF) for circular and helical scans.
1058 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
the number of projections, probing errors of form improve.
Depending on the selected number of projections, probing
errors of form range from 6 to 10 µm (respectively, highest
and smallest number of projections). Using a higher number
of projections, in fact, means an increased number of projec-
tions per revolutions. An increase of probing errors of form is
observed when decreasing the number of projections, due to
the undersampling caused by a too small number of projec-
tions per revolution. When using a helical pitch of 3.1 mm
and 4000 projections, probing errors of form are comparable
with the ones obtained with circular scans for spheres 3 and 4.
For probing errors of size and sphere distance errors, no
substantial difference between helical and circular scans was
observed.
Conclusion
In this work, metrological performance of computed tomog-
raphy helical scanning was investigated and compared to that
of conventional circular scans. The influence of the scanning
parameters for helical scans was studied by performing
repeated helical scans. Experimental results show that the use
of helical scanning trajectories significantly reduces the
measured probing errors of form. With exactly the same
scanning configuration, probing errors of form are reduced
from 25 µm (for circular scans with high cone angle) to 6 µm
when using helical scanning. Moreover, in the latter case,
#1 helical scan, 1080 projections
#2 helical scan, 2500 projections
#3 helical scan, 4000 projections
Circular scan
3 4 5 6
Sphere number

uniform probing errors of form can be obtained for all
spheres, even for those at the bottom and top of the detector.
For helical scan trajectories, therefore, probing errors of form
are not dependent on the location of the sphere from the mid-
plane of the detector. Probing errors of size and sphere
distance errors were also calculated; no significant difference
between circular and helical scans was found.
Experimental results show that helical scanning, with
appropriate scan parameters, performs better than traditional
circular scans with a strong improvement on image quality.
Therefore, helical scanning is suitable for dimensional quality
control. Results also show that, when increasing the number
of projections, probing errors of form decrease. For probing
errors of size and sphere distance errors, the number of
projections does not show a significant influence.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
The authors want to thank TEC Eurolab, Italy, for providing CMM measure-
ments on the reference object. North Star Imaging provided the CXMM 50
computed tomography metrology system, as well as efX-CT 1.2 reconstruc-
tion software. Measurements were made with Volume Graphics VG Studio
MAX 2.2.
REFERENCES
Bartscher, M., O. Sato, F. Härtig, and U. Neuschaefer-Rube, “Current State
of Standardization in the Field of Dimensional Computed Tomography,”
Measurement Science and Technology, Vol. 25, No. 6, 2014.
Buzug, T.M., Computed Tomography: From Photon Statistics to Modern
Cone-beam computed tomography, Springer, Berlin, Germany, 2008.
Carmignato, S., D. Dreossi, L. Mancini, F. Marinello, G. Tromba, and
E. Savio, “Testing of X-ray Microtomography Systems using a Traceable
Geometrical Standard,” Measurement Science and Technology, Vol. 20,
No. 8, 2009.
Carmignato, S., and E. Savio, “Traceable Volume Measurements using
Coordinate Measuring Systems,” CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology,
Vol. 60, No. 1, 2011, pp. 519–522.
De Chiffre, L., S. Carmignato, J.-P. Kruth, R. Schmitt, and A. Weckenmann,
“Industrial Applications of Computed Tomography,” CIRP Annals –
Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 63, No. 2, 2014, pp. 655–677.
Feldkamp, L.A., L.C. Davis, and J.W. Kress, “Practical Cone-beam Algorithm,”
Journal of the Optical Society of America A, Vol. 1, No. 6, 1984, pp. 612–619.
Hiller, J., S. Kasperl, T. Schön, S. Schröpfer, and D. Weiss, “Comparison of
Probing Error in Dimensional Measurement by Means of 3D Computed
Tomography with Circular and Helical Sampling,” 2nd International
Symposium on NDT in Aerospace, Hamburg, Germany, 22–24 November
2010.
Hsieh, J., “A Practical Cone Beam Artifact Correction Algorithm,” IEEE
Nuclear Science Symposium Conference Record, Vol. 2, 15–20 October 2000,
pp. 15/71–15/74.
ISO, ISO 10360-2: Geometrical Product Specifications (GPS) – Acceptance
and Reverification Tests for Coordinate Measuring Machines (CMM) –
Part 2: CMMs used for Measuring Linear Dimensions, International Organi-
zation for Standardization, Geneva, Switzerland, 2010.
Kruth, J.P., M. Bartscher, S. Carmignato, R. Schmitt, L. De Chiffre, and
A. Weckenmann, “Computed Tomography for Dimensional Metrology,”
CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 60, No. 2, 2011, pp. 821–842.
Marinello, F., E. Savio, S. Carmignato, and L. De Chiffre, “Calibration
Artefact for the Microscale with High Aspect Ratio: The Fiber Gauge,”
CIRP Annals – Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 57, No. 1, 2008, pp. 497–500.
Muders, J., J. Hesser, A. Lachner, and C. Reinhart, “Accuracy Evaluation
and Exploration of Measurement Uncertainty for Exact Helical Cone Beam
Reconstruction using Katsevich Filtered Backprojection in Comparison to
Circular Feldkamp Reconstruction with Respect to Industrial CT
Metrology,” Proceedings of the International Symposium on Digital Industrial
Radiology and Computed Tomography, Berlin, Germany, 20–22 June 2011,
pp. 1–8.
Smith, B.D., “Image Reconstruction from Cone-beam Projections: Neces-
sary and Sufficient Conditions and Reconstruction Methods,” IEEE Trans-
actions on Medical Imaging, Vol. 4, No. 1, 1985, pp. 14–25.
VDI, VDI/VDE 2630, Part 1.3, Computed Tomography in Dimensional
Measurement – Guideline for the Application of DIN EN ISO 10360 for Coor-
dinate Measurement Machines with CT Sensors, Verein Deutscher Inge-
nieure, Dusseldorf, Germany, 2011.
Wang, G., T.H. Lin, and P.C. Cheng, “Error Analysis on a Generalized
Feldkamp’s Cone‐beam Computed Tomography Algorithm,” Scanning,
Vol. 17, No. 6, 1995, pp. 361–370.
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1059
 Technical Paper Submission Procedure
Materials Evaluation, an official journal of ASNT, is an
abstracted, archival, peer reviewed journal. It welcomes
original papers on NDT applications and on applied NDT
research. Subject matter may cover traditional or non-
traditional technical areas of nondestructive testing.
8 Manuscripts submitted to Materials Evaluation must be
written in English and be no more than 5000 words in length.
Illustrations (or elements of illustrations) should be limited
to 10.
8 Materials Evaluation is an SI (International System of Units)
journal. All measurements should be given in the appropriate
SI format.
8 Text references are by author and date (Jones and Smith,
1986).
8 The reference section of the paper should contain complete
information (author, title, source, date, publisher information,
page) with citations arranged in alphabetical order by the last
name of the first author.
8 Authors must assign copyright to ASNT. Before reproducing any
material, ASNT requires a signed transfer of copyright from the
author to the American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc.
1060 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
MANUSCRIPTS SUBMITTED FOR PUBLICATION in Materials
Evaluation should be uploaded online at mc04.manuscript
central.com/me for review. Instructions may also be found on
the ASNT website under the Events and Publications tab. IF
YOU HAVE QUESTIONS, please call Nat Moes at (800) 222-
2768 or (614) 274-6003 X207 or e-mail nmoes@asnt.org.
Materials Evaluation is a trademark and ASNT is a registered
trademark of The American Society for Nondestructive
Testing, Inc.
GRAPHICS
8 Text labels should be set in either Helvetica or Arial
using only regular or bold. Type size should be 7 to 9 point.
8 Figure box widths are 86.4 mm (3.4 in.), 101.6 mm (4 in.)
116.9 mm (4.6 in.), 132 mm (5.2 in.) and 178 mm (7 in.).
Actual size of illustrations, including text, should be at
least 6.35 mm (0.25 in.) less wide than these area widths.
8 All photographs must be supplied in high resolution
(300 dpi minimum). Original files are preferred.
8 All line art must be supplied in high resolution (1200 dpi
minimum). Original files are preferred.
 SERVICE directory
EMPLOYMENT SERVICE
Looking for a job or an employee? E-mail Associate Editor Toni Kervina at tkervina@asnt.org for information on listing your qualifi-
cations in Materials Evaluation. This is a free service for ASNT members. Our Employment Service listings can also be found in the
Jobs section of ASNT’s website at www.asnt.org.

POSITIONS WANTED
ASNT NDT Level III in MT, UT, VT, RT, ET, and PT as well as PCN Level II in UT (3.1, 3.2, 3.8, 3.9), MT, PT, and RTFI. B.E. degree in the
mechanical field. More than four years’ experience in QA/QC in welding and NDT services—ultrasonic testing, magnetic particle testing,
liquid penetrant testing, radiographic testing, visual testing, and eddy current sorting by working for leading organizations in the field of
pipelines, boilers and pressure vessels, refineries, and automotive industrial units. Currently looking for suitable opportunities in the
NDT field. Reply to Dept. 06-01-16.

Aerospace NDT engineer with 18 years of experience as an ASNT NDT Level III in MT, UT, and IR. PCN Level 3 in UT; PCN Level 2 in PT,
MT, ET, and UT; ASNT NDT Level II in PT, MT, ET, UT, and RT. EN 4179 Level 2 in IRT and FAA airframe license. Wide experience in
aerospace and cross-country pipelines. Looking for suitable opportunities in the NDT field. Reply to Dept. 06-02-16.
To reply to Employment Service ads, contact Toni Kervina at tkervina@asnt.org.

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1061
SERVICE directory

NDTMarketplace
ASNT’s semi-annual product
guide, NDTMarketplace, will
be published next in December
2016, highlighting the very
latest in NDT technology. Bring
your products to the attention
of the key decision-makers of
the NDT industry with display
Get the Word Out advertising opportunities.
Contact Advertising Supervisor
ASNT offers a number of
advertising media and platforms Jessica Miller for more
to accommodate every business information on getting your
and budget. For a copy of our
products the attention they
Media Planner, or to discuss your
advertising strategy, contact the deserve!
Advertising Supervisor at
jmiller@asnt.org or by phone at E-mail: jmiller@asnt.org
(800) 222-2768 X209.

1062 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1063
SERVICE directory

1064 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1065
SERVICE directory

1066 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
X-RAY Sales & Service
New & Reconditioned Equipment
• Portable & Stationary
• Real Time & Digital Imaging Systems
• Sale – Rental – Lease
In-House or On-Site Service For:
• Andrex • Philips • Sperry/Stavely
• XMAS • Balteau • Tubes/H.V. Cables
• TFI • Scanray • Seifert/Eresco
• Gemini • ICM • Magnaflux
• Rigaku • Gulmay • Pantak
• Faxitron • Comet • Astrophysics
ASSOCIATED X-RAY
246 Dodge Ave
E. Haven, CT 06512
Ph: (203) 466-2446
Email: axrcorp@aol.com

J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1067
SERVICE directory
X-RAY • NDT
• Real Time & Digital Imaging Systems
• Portable & Stationary Equipment
• Cabinet X-Ray Systems
• Micro focus equipment
• Radiation safe rooms and cabinets
• Safety interlock switches
• Room alarms/portable warning units
• Automatic film processors
• X-Ray film and chemicals
• High intensity illuminators
• Dark room supplies
• US & Export sales and service
ASSOCIATED X-RAY
246 Dodge Ave
East Haven, CT 06512
Ph: (203) 466-2446
Email: axrcorp@aol.com

1068 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1069
SERVICE directory

1070 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6
J U LY 2 0 1 6 • M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N 1071
 AD index
July 2016
Bolded listings in the ad index below indicate platinum and gold advertisers.

coming
attractıons Advanced OEM Solutions www.aos-ndt.com 956

l In August, Materials Curtis Industries www.curtis-test.com 968

Evaluation will feature papers

Fuji www.fujindt.com IFC
on Aerospace NDT, including a
two-part paper on aircraft Hellier www.hellierndt.com 950
structural health monitoring.
Make sure your company is in Jess W. Jackson & Associates, Inc. www.jwjndt.com 987

the issue; contact the adver-

Labino AB www.labino.com BC
tising supervisor today!

l The September issue of Lavender www.lavender-ndt.com 1027

Materials Evaluation will look at

Magnaflux www.magnaflux.com 941
NDT Education and Training,
important topics that are MFE Enterprises www.mfescan.com 948
relevant to NDT professionals in
all areas. This issue will also NDT Boot Camp www.ndtbootcamp.com 1024
include the Education Forum
NDT Classroom www.ndtclassroom.com 967
special advertising section.
Contact the advertising super-
NDT Mart www.ndtmart.com 1024
visor to be part of the issue!
Nikon Metrology www.nikonmetrology.com 942
Looking for a low cost, highly
visible advertising program? Physical Acoustics www.physicalacoustics.com 952, 1008, 1011
Consider placing a directory ad
in Materials Evaluation. Build Sentinel/QSA Global www.sentinelndt.com IBC
product or service recognition
with this popular program. Silverwing www.silverwingndt.com 987

Use the Coming Attractions Spectronics www.spectroline.com 990

information to help plan your

TecScan www.tecscan.ca 967
advertising schedule. Contact
Advertising Supervisor Jessica TesTex www.testex-ndt.com 960
Miller at (800) 222-2768 X209
or by e-mail at jmiller@asnt.org. University of Ultrasonics www.universityofultrasonics.com 961, 1008

UniWest www.uniwest.com 945

Virtual Media Integration www.starrview.com 947

1072 M AT E R I A L S E VA L U AT I O N • J U LY 2 0 1 6

FOCUS
Digital Radiography in Industry: Digital
Detector Arrays in Radiographic Testing
by Brad Kraai
Introduction
Digital detector array (DDA) systems
CONTENTS
within industrial radiography are becoming
Focus:
very common in high performance, critical
Digital Radiography in Industry........ 1
margin of safety, and endurance test
FYI: Hydrophilic Emulsifier article inspections. Investment castings,
Concentration.................................. 8 thermal joints, and a wide variety of other
NDT Professional test articles are being routinely inspected,
Connections................................. 12 with improved probability of detection
(POD), and much faster throughput
Practitioner Profile:
than conventional film systems—with
Brad Remmich.............................. 14
high levels of user satisfaction. Potential
users within the industrial X-ray imaging
community continue to recognize these
values and exploit this new technology
for potential applications, but to do so,
a basic understanding of DDA systems
and application is a necessary foundation.
Smooth implementation of this novel
technology can be challenging, and
consultation should be considered from an
outside, unbiased, reputable organization.
There are several integrators, or vendors,
that are widely recognized as providers of
The American Society for DDA systems development, installation,
Nondestructive Testing and service—each having its own merits
www.asnt.org
and specialties.
ASNT...CREATING A SAFER WORLD! TM
Vol.
Vol. 13,
15, No.
No. 1
3
This article explores DDA systems:
application, capability, process controls,
image attributes and evaluation, and
personnel qualifications—to hopefully
promote an increased interest and
enlightenment for potential users.
Definitions
Per ASTM E 2736, Standard Guide for
Digital Detector Array Radiology, a digital
detector array is defined as: “an electronic
device that converts ionizing or penetrating
radiation into a discrete array of analog
signals which are subsequently digitized
and transferred to a computer for display
as a digital image corresponding to the
radiation energy pattern imparted upon the
input region of the device. The conversion
of the ionizing or penetrating radiation
into an electronic signal may transpire by
first converting the ionizing or penetrating
radiation into visible light through the use
of a scintillating material” (ASTM, 2010a).
While DDAs can be used for real-time or
radioscopic techniques, most applications
for critical test articles employ static
imaging and evaluation. Figure 1 provides
a simplified diagram of a DDA.
TNT · July 2016 · 1
FOCUS | Digital Radiography in Industry

the responsibility of the potential user,

not the integrator or vendor, to ensure
that DDA system performance metrics
are met for a given target application.
X-ray signal Obviously, DDA systems are a considerable
capital expenditure, so once the system
is designed, built, and installed, it must
Test article meet the requirements—resolve the
defects reliably—as intended. This cannot
be overemphasized. Film images are
commonly used as the baseline or referee
for a correlation study with the DDA
imaging techniques, and will often be
Electronics shielding (reduces radiation dose to electronics)
required for process approval.
Gadolinium oxysulfide or cesium iodide (converts X-ray signal to light signal) High levels of automation are possible
Digital data to
Amorphous silicon TFT (converts light signal to electronic signals)
frame buffer
and often used with DDAs. Imaging, from
Electronics (captures electronic signals, organizes and converts to digital data) one acquisition to the next, can be mere
Glass substrate (stable TFT and electronics structure base)
seconds, depending on the type of DDA
and acquisition settings, technique, and
Figure 1. Simplified diagram of a digital detector array (not to scale). TFT = thin film transistor.
level of automation. Fully articulating and
programmable robotics within custom-
built radiation enclosures are becoming
The most popular types of DDAs in use raw or full fidelity image is saved unaltered quite common in turbine blade inspection;
contain an initial and indirect conversion for critical applications. Raw image file size a single blade can be imaged with several
layer (or scintillator)—typically either primarily depends on the resolution, or views in less than a minute. Other
gadolinium oxysulfide terbium doped, pixel pitch, and input region (or array size) automation tactics may include external
or cesium iodide thallium doped—that of the DDA, as well as its bit depth. ingress of test articles into the enclosure by
converts an X-ray signal to visible light As one can see, DDAs are quite conveyors, or manual loading of numerous
or luminescence. This luminescence then sophisticated electronic conversion parts in fixtures or platens. DDA systems
enters the amorphous silicon (αSi) thin devices. Yet, they can provide simplicity with turntables for the test article and a
film transistor diode array (discrete pixel to the radiographic imaging process, as C-arm—with the X-ray tube on one end
locations), whereby the light is converted to consistency and reliability are often the and DDA on the other—are commonly
an electronic voltage (bias change) at each result of a properly engineered, tuned, and used for larger test articles. Other
pixel, which is subsequently “read out” of applied DDA system. sophisticated systems have incorporated
the array in channels and groups during two robots: one for the X-ray tube and the
X-ray exposure. This electronic information Applications
other for the DDA, while the test article
is amplified and then digitized, typically For the purpose of application validation, a remains stationary. System integrators can
through several analog-to-digital converters, potential user must evaluate “representative be creative, and depending on the target
synchronized, and sent to the frame buffer quality indicators,” or, more simply application, will often readily collaborate
within the image processor and system stated, potential test articles with known with the potential user to design and
software. conditions or defects (of a minimum size incorporate optimized article handling and
Gray values for each pixel’s digital and all types likely to be encountered) for imaging for the intended application.
(binary) value are then assigned by a lookup any DDA system under consideration. It must be realized that DDAs are in
table, and a corresponding pixel matrix Quite often, DDA systems are designed fact a consumable, and will eventually
that represents X-ray attenuation from the and built around a target application or require replacement due to performance
initial image acquisition is generated and family: the potential test articles to be issues or degradation. They will and do
considered as the raw or full fidelity image inspected with the DDA system will all fail (unpredictably, in most cases) over
file. This image file also contains meta-data, be related—similar in material type and time. The cumulative effects of radiation
or image tags of process information as material thickness, subject contrast range, exposure and thermal variations within
configured by the system integrator. The and inspection standard criteria. It is the device produce effects that may range

2 · Vol. 15, No. 3

from image quality degradation all the
way to failure. There are no guarantees
of a DDA’s usable duration. Inadvertent
or unintentional exposure to the DDA
should be avoided. Recent developments in
hardened electronics have increased DDA
resistance to exposure effects. Shielding
of the electronics around the periphery
of the DDA must be provided by the
integrator, and should be analyzed by the
DDA manufacturer for warranty viability.
Moreover, users of DDA systems must
contemplate detector failure or sub-par
imaging contingency and warranty when
negotiating procurement.
As mentioned previously, the DDA
and its supportive software are very
complex. This DDA system complexity
can be very intimidating, so a word of
advice: complexity of the entire DDA
system should be held to a minimum—
configurations should be limited to fit the
needs of the user. During DDA system
design and development, it is vital that
the potential user recognize excessive
complexity for what it can be—and often
is—the enemy of execution. Careful
analysis of all DDA system features and
their intricacy may reveal unwanted or
unwarranted complication.
Capabilities
While DDAs are challenged for image
spatial resolution, due to the finite
SRb
(effective
pixel size)
Figure 2. A 3 × 3 pixel matrix in image quality indicator (IQI) hole—calculation for minimum
magnification.
resolutions (discrete pixel dimensions
or “pixel pitch”) currently available, the
contrast sensitivity for these devices is
remarkable—provided noise is controlled.
Due to inherent DDA resolution,
geometric magnification (M) techniques
are often employed, which amplify
discontinuity size and enhance POD
via a higher number of pixels under the
potential discontinuity or feature within
the test article. It is a relatively simple
matter to calculate for a specific number
of pixels under a known dimension at
geometric magnification, and quite often,
the calculation is applied to determine
pixel density within an essential image
quality indicator (IQI) hole dimension.
The minimum recommendation is three
pixels, so by using the basic spatial
resolution (SRb) or effective pixel size of
the DDA, and the specified IQI hole size
(d), minimum geometric magnification can
be calculated by the following equation
(Figure 2).
SR b
(1) Mmin = 4.25 ×
d regarded as that specific wire diameter and
For example, if SRb = 215 µm
(0.008 in.) and d = 508 µm (0.020 in.),
Mmin = 1.7987 µm (1.8 in.). Obviously,
as the SRb value decreases (for higher
resolution DDAs having a finer pixel
pitch), the Mmin required to achieve the
IQI hole ø – d
recommended 3 × 3 pixel matrix in the
IQI hole decreases in turn. Higher M
factors increase pixel density for a specific
dimension within the image, thereby
promoting higher POD. Higher M factors
applied within techniques will decrease the
image field of view, resulting in decreased
throughput for larger test articles as
compared to the DDA input region.
Another primary consideration for any
geometrically magnified technique is image
unsharpness (Uimg), wherein a reduced
effective focal spot size (EFSS) is often
necessary at higher magnifications. Uimg
calculations take into account the
geometric unsharpness (Ug) of the
technique, (where [M – 1] × EFSS = Ug),
the geometric magnification factor
(M = source-to-detector distance / source-
to-object distance), and the SRb of the
DDA. Uimg can also be evaluated by
imaging, at the source side of the area
of interest, a unique IQI—the duplex
wire gage (Figure 3)—to determine
which specific wire pairs merge within
the acquired image: Uimg then being
its adjacent space combined. Uimg and
geometric magnification are both important
technique parameters that must be well
understood and evaluated prior to DDA
system build.
Several techniques exist for minimizing
noise: acquired image noise can never
Figure 3. Duplex wire gage.
TNT · July 2016 · 3
FOCUS | Digital Radiography in Industry
be fully eliminated, and is composed of
signal and system noise. Common noise
reduction tactics include frame averaging,
DDA calibration, X-ray beam filtration,
X-ray beam collimation, and exposure
optimization. The averaging of frames
basically provides better statistics for
the raw image data, by adding the pixel
signal value for each individual pixel
through all frames captured, dividing by
the number of frames, and assigning the
averaged value to that pixel for the raw
image. Averaging more frames impacts
throughput, increases dose to the DDA,
and typically only presents improved
statistics at a threshold. DDA calibrations,
or normalizing, are a necessary function
of the DDA imaging process. Most users
apply calibration techniques for DDA offset
and gain per the integrator or vendor’s
recommendation. Offset is basically dark
or inherent noise within the DDA, and
gain is inconsistencies in pixel responses
(amplitude or gain) during exposure.
Without normalization, any DDA would
basically be unusable for an application.
It is extremely important that the user
establish DDA normalization protocol and
evaluate its efficacy X-ray beam filtration
is often employed, thereby attenuating
certain portions of the soft radiation
spectrum, which in turn reduces noise
and improves signal-to-noise ratio (SNR).
Experimentation is key, and SNR can be
evaluated during system validation and
technique development. Applying filtration
also reduces dose to the DDA, which
may increase its lifespan. Collimation,
or restricting the X-ray beam to only
illuminate the input region of the DDA,
will also lower signal noise and reduce dose
to the DDA’s electronics. Besides fixed
collimators, there are also programmable
X-ray beam shuttering mechanisms that
can be completely closed (for X-ray system
warm-up) or opened/closed, as appropriate,
for the imaging technique. Proper exposure
ensures optimized signal capture within
the DDA, and a translation to low contrast
sensitivity. Within any signal amplification,
4 · Vol. 15, No. 3
the law of Poisson exists, where noise will
increase by the square root of the variable
signal increase (exposure). That being said,
higher exposure or signal provides higher
SNR, albeit with an increase in exposure
time or image acquisition, and effectually
a higher dose to the DDA. High SNR
results in extremely low contrast sensitivity
capability for DDA techniques: quite
often well below 0.5%, particularly for
thinner areas of interest within test articles.
This high SNR also contributes to high
contrast-to-noise ratio (CNR), as measured
within an image of a conventional IQI.
Figure 4 illustrates a CNR measurement
on a 0.05 IQI, 127 µm (0.005 in.) T, on a
1.27 mm (0.05 in.) thick base material. As
important technique attributes, SNR and
CNR measurement can be accomplished
with specific tools within most imaging
software. High CNR values are not
possible without high SNR values, and
these two metrics can be used to validate
one another—provided measurements are
consistent and controlled.
Figure 4. Contrast-to-noise ratio
measurement on an image quality
indicator of 29.5; this translates to
0.8% contrast sensitivity.
The available DDAs are normally 14-bit
(214) or 16-bit (216), 0 to 16 383 or 0 to
65 535 possible pixel values, respectively:
very long scale as compared to the limited
scale of film—that is, 1.50 to 4.00 H&D
(Hurter and Driffield) or ~250 usable
radiographic optical densities. The usable
range of the DDA will always be less
than the full scale or bit depth, but is still
significant. This long scale enables the
very low contrast sensitivity mentioned
previously—provided noise is controlled.
The long scale also provides adequate image
quality through a wider thickness range in
one exposure. Another advantage of DDAs
is this very high dynamic range as compared
to short scale imagers, mainly film
As can be clearly seen, there are
multiple variables that must be evaluated
and correlated during DDA system
consideration and design. Resolution and
contrast performance for any radiographic
imaging system are the primary objectives,
and the requirements for the inspection
application must be recognized and
understood. The characterizations of
performance within any DDA system are
various, but can be boiled down to system
SRb, allowable or required geometric
magnification, Uimg, and contrast sensitivity
through the material type and thickness
range to be inspected. Many other
considerations exist, more or less depending
on the target application, that are beyond
the scope of this article. Realistically, at the
beginning, middle, and end of the day, the
required performance of the DDA system
is just this: to consistently and reliably
detect and accurately portray substandard
defects for the selected application and its
technique.
Process Controls
Any DDA system’s performance must be
monitored for instability and degradation.
Most users apply a duplex plate phantom
(DPP) and specialized software to enable
consistency within the measurements
required for stability and performance.
The DPP (Figure 5) must be of the
same material group as the inspection
application, with a thin and thick section
closely matching the thinnest and
thickest sections of the test article(s).

Figure 5. Duplex plate phantom—used for digital detector array system stability
measurements. Ti6Al4V titanium alloy 19 to 1.27 mm (0.75 to 0.05 in.) including duplex
wire gage.
ASTM E 2737, Standard Practice for Digital
Detector Array Performance Evaluation
and Long-term Stability is typically
requisite as a process control mechanism
(ASTM, 2010b). The performance
attributes measured can include: spatial
resolution, contrast sensitivity, SNR,
signal levels, offset, burn-in, lag, and bad
pixel distribution. Most users apply the
core image quality tests, and by using
statistical process controls, upper and lower
thresholds of ±3σ are determined during
a prescribed baseline period. Bad pixel
distribution includes mapping and listing for
pixels that are outside of a specific standard,
as defined within ASTM E 2597, Standard
Practice for Manufacturing Characteristics of
Digital Detector Arrays (ASTM, 2014). All
DDAs have bad pixels, and DDAs may be
graded according to the percentage of bad
pixels within the device upon manufacture.
Connected bad pixels or clusters, bad lines
or segments (columns or rows), and their
presence within a DDA will increase over
time. Most of these pixels in the DDA are
correctable by interpolation within the
DDA software; those bad pixels without
enough good neighbors (five minimum
are required per ASTM E 2597) cannot
be corrected and must remain in the
production image, and are therefore
considered image artifacts. Depending
on the application, an escalation of these
qualify all acquired images to the previous
qualifier. If the qualifier does not present
the required level of image quality, all
previous images to the last viable qualifier
are then considered invalid. The user must
assess the reprocessing risk and possible
burden associated with qualifier frequency
and application.
Not unlike any nondestructive testing
process, practices for process controls
must demonstrate system repeatability and
reliability, providing confidence and value
for the user and customer.
Image Attributes and Evaluation
Any digital image is a matrix of pixels,
each pixel having a relative value and X,
Y coordinate address (where X = column
uncorrectable bad pixels—referred to
position and Y = row position)—pixels
as cluster kernel pixels (CKPs)—may
are also defined as the smallest component
increase the risk of missed defects to the
of the image that may be altered. The
point that DDA replacement is necessary.
acquired DDA image, being of very
Avoiding imaging within the area of
long scale, requires image processing or
the DDA that contains CKPs is also an
alteration across the matrix, to render
acceptable practice but normally involves
discontinuity or feature visibility with
reprogramming for test article positioning
human vision. There are many different
and possible reductions in usable field
processing techniques than can be applied:
of view. DDA bad pixel and CKP
spatial filters, window/level adjustments,
considerations are all about management,
and electronic magnification (zoom) being
through mapping the DDA and evaluating
most often utilized. Any image processing
the bad pixel distribution list, and most
techniques must be validated, documented,
importantly the presence of CKPs, at
and controlled—it could be said that there
predetermined intervals or as necessary. The
is a viewing technique as well as an imaging
DDA system user or agent should evaluate
technique due to the variety of tools at the
the bad pixel map and distribution list of
technician’s disposal. Image discontinuities,
the purchased DDA upon system buyoff
features, and attributes can be analyzed
and also evaluate the DDA for bad pixels
or quantified with various tools contained
upon system delivery.
within most software platforms. Line or
Ongoing production image quality is
area profiles, linear measurements, regions
most often verified by the use of a qualifier
of interest for SNR/CNR measurements
image, or image capture of a specific
or local image processing, histograms,
quality indicator (conventional IQIs or
and other implements are available for
other) at a prescribed frequency, due to
these purposes. Annotation tools are
the automated inspection environment.
used to identify and characterize image
It is not necessary, nor practical in most
indications, and can either be saved as
cases, to include an IQI within each image
an overlay, or placed permanently within
acquisition. Qualifier images are acquired
the image provided they do not mask or
and evaluated at a prescribed frequency,
obscure an area of interest. Training and
usually at a minimum of once per shift as
experience, and scripted work instructions,
determined by the user and approved by
complement the accuracy and consistency
the end user or customer, and these images
of image evaluation activities.
TNT · July 2016 · 5
FOCUS | Digital Radiography in Industry
Figure 6. Digital viewing environment.
The digital image display should be a high
performance, medium to high resolution,
liquid crystal display (LCD) or LCD/light-
emitting diode type. Typically, medical
grade monochrome displays are incorporated
into the DDA system viewing workstation.
High luminance (brightness), as measured in
candelas per square meter (cd/m2) at 100%
digital driving level (full white) is warranted,
to promote high visible and quantifie
contrast. A video test pattern, most often the
Society of Motion Picture and Television
Engineers’ SMPTE RP-133 or an approved
variant, is presented and evaluated for spatial
precision, visible contrast, and measured
contrast performance of the display
(SMPTE, 1999).
The digital image viewing ambient
environment requirements are basically
identical to those of radiographic film
viewing, but the evaluation of soft copy
images has proven to be much more
consistent, ergonomic and less rigorous
than hard copy image handling and
viewing, resulting in higher levels of
technician confidence, performance, and
contentment (Figure 6).
Personnel Qualification
Potential users of DDA systems also
have the challenge of fully qualifying
technicians and Level 3s for this new
imaging process—the beginning of which
6 · Vol. 15, No. 3
is the revision of the user’s written practice
for qualification and certification of DDA
personnel. Most users are making the
transition from film-based radiography,
so initially, the radiographic testing (RT)
Level 3 must be considered for DDA
Level 3. Formal training is required, and
any experience gained toward qualification
includes, but may not be limited to, DDA
system design and application studies,
vendor demonstrations, and technical
conferences. Experience should be
accumulated under supervision or guidance
of an examiner, instructor, or outside
agency. RT Level 2 promotion to DDA
Level 2 begins with 40 h of formal training
and the required hours of on-the-job
training/experience (OJT/OJE). The formal
training should be administered by an
experienced, requirement and application
savvy instructor, and should occur prior to,
or in conjunction with, OJT or OJE. The
OJT/OJE should be well organized and
delivered under structured planning and
documentation. Technicians can then be
fully qualified by examinations as required
by the employer’s written practice and
subsequently certified. An audition period
or secondary review of a newly certified
DDA Level 2’s image evaluation is often
appropriate, and may be required by the
end user or customer.
Starting from scratch would require
a similar regimen as film radiographer
qualification and certification for the DDA
Level 2.
Conclusion
Increased radiographic inspection
throughput, higher POD and disposition
accuracy, reduction in consumable costs,
and the anticipated solid return on
investments for DDA system users can
be realized with proper understanding,
planning, and implementation (Figure 7).
Potential users must decide if outside
assistance is necessary—at the beginning
of the DDA system selection process—
instead of during or after. This proactive
approach can facilitate the process
Figure 7. Full automated digital detector
array (DDA) system: 225 kVp µ-focus tube
(left); 200 µm amorphous silicon DDA
(center); fully articulating robot and gripper
(top); and “pigeon hole” casting carrier
(right).
efficiency investment returns, and user
satisfaction that DDA systems are capable
of providing. h
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Figure 7 was provided by X-R-I Testing, Troy,
Michigan; and Pinnacle X-Ray Solutions,
Suwanee, Georgia.
REFERENCES
ASTM, ASTM E 2597, Standard Practice
for Manufacturing Characteristics of Digital
Detector Arrays, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2014.
ASTM, ASTM E 2736, Standard Guide for
Digital Detector Array Radiology, ASTM
International, West Conshohocken,
Pennsylvania, 2010a.
ASTM, ASTM E 2737, Standard Practice for
Digital Detector Array Performance Evaluation
and Long-term Stability, ASTM International,
West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2010.
SMPTE, SMPTE RP-133, Specifications for
Medical Diagnostic Imaging Test Pattern for
Television Monitors and Hardcopy Recording
Cameras, Society of Motion Picture and
Television Engineers, Inc., White Plains, New
York, 1999.
AUTHOR
Brad Kraai: X-Ray Industries, Inc., an
Applus RTD Co., NDT Training, Consulting
& Services Group; e-mail brad.kraai@
xrayindustries.com.
TNT · July 2016 · 7

FYI
Hydrophilic Emulsifier Concentration
by Abhishek Wakaskar
Hydrophilic emulsifier is commonly supplied as a 100%
active concentrate, which is diluted in water before use, to
emulsify and remove excess of non-water-based penetrants
(method D). The percentage of concentration depends on
the application technique. The general spray concentration
is up to 5% remover-to-water, and 20% remover-to-water
for immersion dip applications. Concentration measurement
is performed at initial makeup, during additions, and at
intervals during use.
Most nondestructive testing (NDT) standards require a
weekly check of the hydrophilic emulsifier concentration
Figure 1. The refractometer kit comes with: a refractometer,
a microfiber cloth, distilled water, a pipette, and a
screwdriver.
8 · Vol. 15, No. 3
Photo credit: Magnaflux
using a refractometer (Figure 1). As an NDT professional
working for an aerospace company, I check the concentration
of our hydrophilic emulsifier every week per ASTM E 1417/E
1417M-13 using a handheld refractometer (ASTM, 2013b).
I have found that there is not much information available
regarding this subject, and so this article presents a brief
walkthrough on how the process works.
The use of a refractometer is suitable and practical for
measuring the concentration of hydrophilic emulsifier,
also referred to as a remover, and also for water-based
water-washable penetrant.
What is a Water-based Water-washable
Penetrant?
Water-based penetrants are soluble in water and can be
diluted. They contain no petroleum-based solvents. They
are generally used in applications where a petroleum-based
solvent may attack the test surface, such as plastics, and may
also be used on ceramics. Their composition is based on
fluorescent dye and liquid emulsifying agents. Dilution with
water helps to lower their viscosity.
ASTM E 1417/E 1417M-13
According to ASTM E 1417/E 1417M-13: “7.8.2.3 Water
content of Water-Based Water-Washable Penetrants—
The water content of water-based Method A penetrants
shall be checked at the intervals specified in Table 1 using
a refractometer. The water content must be maintained
according to the manufacturer’s recommendation.”
For measurement of the concentration of lipophilic
emulsifier and non-water-based water-washable penetrant,
different test techniques, such as ASTM D 95 and
ASTM D 6304, or the Karl Fischer technique, as described
in Annex A1 of ASTM E 1417/E 1417M-13, are most
often used (ASTM, 2007; ASTM, 2013a; ASTM, 2013b).
What is a Refractometer?
A refractometer is an optical device that measures the refractive
index of a liquid. This value increases in proportion to the
dissolved solids in the liquid and hence is used to measure
the concentration of hydrophilic emulsifier and water-based
water-washable penetrants.

What is Determined by the Concentration?

The following are determined by the concentration:
l The quantity of emulsifier to be added to compensate for
changes in the concentration during use.
l The sensitivity and performance of the emulsifier
l The amount of contact time required to remove the surface
penetrant.
l The economies of its use reducing excess use of emulsifier
In this walkthrough, I will measure the concentration of
hydrophilic emulsifier or remover diluted in water using a handheld
refractometer.
Note: non-standard temperatures and contamination by liquid
penetrant can cause the refractive index to shift, resulting in false
values. Figure 3. Prism onto which drops of distilled or reverse osmosis
water should be added.
The refractometer in this example uses a Brix scale. The Brix
scale was designed to measure sugar and water mixtures. Therefore,
it is imperative to create a chart (Figure 2) to establish a correction. bubbles. Once that happens, wait 30 s for the sample to stay on the
In this case, we want the concentration to not exceed 5%. prism. Then look through the eyepiece and adjust the calibration
screw until the light/dark boundary coincides with the null line
(Figure 4). Note: adjustment should be done at an environmental
temperature of 20 °C (68 °F). In the case of our refractometer,
which is provided with an automated temperature compensation
function, the correction of temperature is not needed.

Figure 2. Concentration control Brix refractometer scale (0–32).

So, we create mixtures of: 1 part emulsifier to 25 parts water (4%),

1 part emulsifier to 20 parts water (5%), and 1 part emulsifier to
50 parts water (2%). The concentration is controlled using a Brix
refractometer and a concentration chart.
Based on the chart, a refractive index reading of 1 will actually
be a concentration level of 2% emulsifier

Method of Operation
Adjustment to zero (null): place two to three drops of distilled or
Figure 4. Through the eyepiece we can see that the scale reads
reverse osmosis water on the refractometer’s main prism (Figure 3).
zero (that is, calibrated to null).
The water must spread across the surface of the prism without any

TNT · July 2016 · 9

FYI | Hydrophilic Emulsifier Concentration
Figure 5. Through the eyepiece we can see that the scale reads 4%.
Now that the refractometer calibration is complete, measure the
emulsifier sample in the same manner as for calibration. Clean the prism
using a microfiber cloth. Add two to three drops of emulsifier onto the
prism, again making sure that the emulsifier spreads evenly across the
surface without any bubbles and wait for 30 s. Then look through the
eyepiece and read the corresponding scale on the light/dark boundary.
As per ASTM E 1417/E 1417M-13, for spraying applications,
the maximum concentration allowed is 5%. In this case, since
the sample reads 4% (Figure 5) with the corrected reading of
1% (referring to the correction chart), it would be 5%, which
means it is good for spraying applications.
Note: too much emulsifier concentration will cause all of the
penetrant to be removed from the part, even the discontinuities,
and will require a complete reapplication of penetrant. On the
other hand, too little emulsifier concentration will cause excessive
background florescence. The solution is simple, that is, add more
emulsifier to the mixture if the concentration is too low or add
more water to the mixture if the concentration is too high. h
AUTHOR
Abhishek Wakaskar: ASNT NDT Level III; Aerospace Precision, Inc.,
2851 Evans St., Hollywood, Florida 33020; (954) 923-3213; fax (954)
923-3223.
REFERENCES
ASTM, ASTM D 6304, Standard Test Method for Determination of Water in
Petroleum Products, Lubricating Oils, and Additives by Coulometric Karl Fischer
Titration, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2007.
ASTM, ASTM D 95, Standard Test Method for Water in Petroleum Products
and Bituminous Materials by Distillation, ASTM International, West
Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2013a.
ASTM, ASTM E 1417/E 1417M-13, Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant
Testing, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsylvania, 2013b.
TNT · July 2016 · 11
 NDT Professional Connections | Products and Services

12 · Vol. 15, No. 3

Professional Connections allow companies to showcase their business cards. Check out the various
products and services on display each issue to see what may be of value to you.

Make plans today to take part in the next

issue of The NDT Technician (TNT) newsletter
advertising program. TNT is published quarterly
in January, April, July, and October. For more
information on advertising in the next issue,
published in October, contact: Advertising
Supervisor Jessica Miller at (800) 222-2768
X209 (U.S./Canada) E-mail jmiller@asnt.org.

TNT · July 2016 · 13

 Practitioner Profile
Brad Remmich
“Brad Remmich is a good example of
a person that completes school, works
in the industry, and then moves into
something he really likes to do—sales. I
have always contended that a technical
degree or Level II certification is only
the beginning of where a person can go
in NDT.” –Bruce Crouse
Q: How did you first become involved in NDT?
A: I had just completed my four years in the Marine Corps as
an F-4 electrician. I was living in Hawaii and was between
jobs. I applied and was accepted to the Honolulu Police
Academy, but unknown to me at the same time my uncle,
who was a Minnesota State vocational counselor, had
enrolled me in Hutchinson Area Vocational Technical
College in the NDT program two years earlier. At the time,
the waiting list was that long to get into the NDT program.
I decided to give that a try even though I did not know what
NDT was, so I shipped my car from Hawaii to Long Beach
and drove to Minnesota. I started college the next day.
Q: Tell us about your training.
A: Most of my training was acquired from the NDT school
in Hutchinson, but my first job out of college was with
Beech Aircraft working primarily on the Beech Starship all
composite aircraft program. Certification and continuous
training came from the Beech organization, as well as from
outside classes I took.
Q: What was a typical workday like?
A: Every day at Beech was different. A technician could be
running a real-time X-ray system inspecting bond lines
in aircraft spars, or running a large UT scanning system
inspecting aircraft fuselages or wings. Then you could be out
on the flight line doing line repair inspections with any one
of the NDT disciplines. The variety of inspection jobs that
we encountered on a daily basis was exciting and diverse.
14 · Vol. 15, No. 3
There was nothing routine and every inspection job could
require a different inspection method depending on the
aircraft type.
Q: Is your work focused on a particular field?
A: My work is very focused now, as I changed directions from
being a technician into the sale of NDT equipment. This
line of work is 100% focused on providing solutions to
the customer’s applications, and getting them the right
equipment to do their inspections in whatever industry
they work in. We see a very diverse application range in the
different market segments. We have several sales personnel
focused on specific NDT technologies to become experts in
that particular field.
Q: Tell us about your transition from working as a technician to
sales. How are they different?
A: Both different and the same; the transition was somewhat
painful in the beginning, as I missed the hands-on aspect
with the equipment and more specifically working on the
aircraft that I inspected. But I realized that I would see far
more industries and applications than just the aviation
industry, so over time I settled into the magnitude of the
overall NDT industry. It became a natural transition, as I
enjoyed aspects of both roles in the NDT world.
Q: How important is an ability to communicate in writing?
A: The core competencies need to include good communication
skills. Technicians needs to be able to articulate the results
they find during an inspection either verbally or in writing,
and present to the engineers who make the final decisions
as to how to disposition the part. The ability to make the
complicated simple is a rare gift and anything a person can
do to improve these skills will always pay big rewards.
Q: How important is the ability to interface with client?
A: There is no sale without interface with the client. It is said
in almost all sales training that the most important buying
decision is based on this interaction. In this internet and
social world, people still buy from people.
Q: What innovations have you seen in inspection technology/working
methods?
A: Back when I was in school we used analog instruments, and the
industry has now seen the digital technologies take precedence.
Most instruments now use flat panel screen technologies with
LCD and LED screens. We also have seen robotics become routine
in the UT machine systems being manufactured. One technology
that has really impacted the NDT industry is the advent of
computed radiography and digital radiography and the film
replacement technologies, following the medical industry in the
implementation of these detection methods. Phased array has also
been making a huge impact on the UT market, both in portable
scanning and automated scanning equipment.
Q: How important is a background in engineering or mechanical systems
to NDT technicians?
A: I believe that a background in engineering or mechanical systems
is extremely beneficial to an NDT technician, as it gives you the
foundations needed to be successful in the industry. Acquiring
a four-year engineering degree or attending a specialized NDT
college—and there are several—will provide the interested
candidate with the necessary tools needed. NDT covers a vast
range of technologies and those interested in an NDT career
can be best served with a core foundation that covers both the
technical and academic classes.
Q: What have been your professional goals?
A: My professional goals included obtaining my bachelor of science
degree, which I completed several years ago to complement my
two-year technical degree from Hutchinson Technical College. My
career goal with my current employer was to run a territory of sales
managers and train and mentor junior salesmen, which has been the
most rewarding aspect of the job, passing on lessons learned in the
industry.
Q: What other aspects have been rewarding?
A: In my current field, helping the customer is different everyday.
I see every market segment and application. When we can help
someone solve a problem, it is rewarding. Our industry is dedicated
to the safety of all; everything we do helps others.
Q: What areas of NDT would you like to learn more about?
A: I would like to continue to learn the advanced X-ray computed
tomography applications and solutions. This is becoming one of
the largest growing segments of NDT and several companies are
focusing on these applications.
Q: What can ASNT do to assist technicians in their careers?
A: I truly believe that local ASNT sections provide the foundation for
young technicians to meet other industry professionals and learn
about the industry. It provides an immediate network to expand
their knowledge base and also an avenue for further training. h
Brad Remmich can be reached at bradley.remmich@ge.com.

TNT · July 2016 · 15

 ASNT
NONPROFIT
The NDT Technician US POSTAGE
The American Society for PO Box 28518 PAID
Nondestructive Testing ST JOSEPH, MI
www.asnt.org Columbus, Ohio 43228-0518 PERMIT NO. 84
ASNT...CREATING A SAFER WORLD! TM

Volume 15, Number 3 July 2016

Publisher: Dr. Arnold Bereson
Publications Manager: Tim Jones
Editor: Toni Kervina
Technical Editor: Ricky L. Morgan
Review Board: William W. Briody (emeritus), Bruce G. Crouse,
Anthony J. Gatti, Sr., Edward E. Hall, James W . Houf, Jocelyn
Langlois, Raymond G. Morasse, Thomas B. Munson, Ronald
T. Nisbet, Angela Swedlund
The NDT Technician: A Quarterly Publication for the NDT Practitioner
(ISSN 1537-5919) is published quarterly by the American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Inc. The TNT mission is to provide information
valuable to NDT practitioners and a platform for discussion of issues
relevant to their profession.
ASNT exists to create a safer world by advancing scientific, engineering,
and technical knowledge in the field of nondestructive testing.
Copyright© 2016 by the American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ASNT
is not responsible for the authenticity or accuracy of information herein. Published
opinions and statements do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ASNT. Products
or services that are advertised or mentioned do not carry the endorsement or
recommendation of ASNT.
IRRSP, Materials Evaluation, NDT Handbook, Nondestructive Testing Handbook,
The NDT Technician and www.asnt.org are trademarks of The American Society
for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ACCP, ASNT, Level III Study Guide, Research in
Nondestructive Evaluation, RNDE, and “ASNT...CREATING A SAFER WORLD!” are
registered trademarks of the American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc.
 FROM THE EDITOR
As the world moved into the digital age, computer information and automation made
processes faster and easier, including nondestructive testing (NDT). Some of this
month’s selections look at that, including the second Robert B. Oliver Scholarship
Award paper, from Keith James Glasch, who wrote about microprocessors, and a
Product Showcase from 1987 on robotic NDT.
ASNT expanded its reach as well. The first overseas exam was held in 1981, the
archival journal Research in Nondestructive Evaluation began publishing in 1988, and
plans for the Industrial Radiography Radiation Safety Personnel program took shape in
1989. The Society also left the Chicago area and moved into a new headquarters build-
ing in Columbus, Ohio.
We hope you enjoy this month’s Retrospective of reprints from past issues of Materials
Evaluation.
Nathaniel Moes
Editor, Materials Evaluation
nmoes@asnt.org

MAY 1980 SEPTEMBER 1985

1 “Fun and Games with a ‘Stump the Experts’ 19 Dedication to Gerold H. Tenney
Night” 20 “WCNDT Technical Program Preview”
by Harold L. Pinsch by Harold Berger
AUGUST 1981 APRIL 1987
4 “The First ASNT Fellowship” 23 “Education Close-up: Hutchinson Area
SEPTEMBER 1981 Vocational-Technical Institute”
5 “First Overseas Exam Held”
SEPTEMBER 1987
MARCH 1982
25 “Product Showcase: Robotic
8 “Back to Basics: What do Nondestructive Nondestructive Testing”
and Vibration Testing Have in Common?”
by Wayne Tustin OCTOBER 1988
SEPTEMBER 1982 27 “Be A Charter Subscriber to ASNT’s
New Archival Journal”
10 “Education and Qualification Council
Becomes Operative” NOVEMBER 1988

AUGUST 1983
28 Section News
13 “Utilization of Microprocessors in FEBRUARY 1989
Nondestructive Evaluation” 30 “ASNT Certification Program for Industrial
by Keith James Glasch Radiation Safety”
AUGUST 1984 by William C. Plumstead
16 “Highlights of the ASNT Spring OCTOBER 1989
Conference” 32 “ASNT Builds New Headquarters”

This insert contains copyrighted property of The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc., and may not be duplicated or altered in any manner.
Copyright © 2016 by the American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ASNT is not responsible for the authenticity or accuracy of information herein and
published opinions and statements do not necessarily reflect the opinion of ASNT. Products or services that are advertised or mentioned do not carry the
endorsement or recommendation of ASNT.
IRRSP, NDT Handbook, The NDT Technician and www.asnt.org are trademarks of the American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc. ACCP, ASNT, Level III
Study Guide, Materials Evaluation, Nondestructive Testing Handbook, Research in Nondestructive Evaluation, RNDE, and “ASNT...CREATING A SAFER
WORLD!” are registered trademarks of the American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc.

ASNT… Creating a Safer World! ®

The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc.

i RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

MAY 1980

1980–1989 1
MAY 1980

2 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

MAY 1980

1980–1989 3
AUGUST 1981

4 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

SEPTEMBER 1981

1980–1989 5
SEPTEMBER 1981

6 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

SEPTEMBER 1981

1980–1989 7
MARCH 1982

8 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

MARCH 1982

1980–1989 9
SEPTEMBER 1982

10 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

SEPTEMBER 1982

1980–1989 11
OCTOBER 1982

12 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

AUGUST 1983

1980–1989 13
AUGUST 1983

14 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

AUGUST 1983

1980–1989 15
AUGUST 1984

16 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

AUGUST 1984

1980–1989 17
AUGUST 1984

18 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

SEPTEMBER 1985

1980–1989 19
SEPTEMBER 1985

20 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

SEPTEMBER 1985

1980–1989 21
NOVEMBER 1986

22 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

APRIL 1987

1980–1989 23
APRIL 1987

24 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

SEPTEMBER 1987

1980–1989 25
SEPTEMBER 1987

26 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

OCTOBER 1988

1980–1989 27
NOVEMBER 1988

28 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

NOVEMBER 1988

1980–1989 29
FEBRUARY 1989

30 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

FEBRUARY 1989

1980–1989 31
OCTOBER 1989

32 RETROSPECTIVE • PART 5 STEPS TOWARD THE FUTURE

OCTOBER 1989

1980–1989 33