4.7 Article

Analyzing efficiency of optical and THz infrared thermography in nondestructive testing of GFRPs by using the Tanimoto criterion

Journal

NDT & E INTERNATIONAL
Volume 117, Issue -, Pages -

Publisher

ELSEVIER SCI LTD
DOI: 10.1016/j.ndteint.2020.102383

Keywords

Infrared thermography; Terahertz imaging; GFRP; Tanimoto criterion; Nondestructive testing

Funding

  1. Tomsk Polytechnic University Competitiveness Enhancement Program
  2. ASL, India [ASL/31/16/4020/64/0498/0043]
  3. TPU, Russia [ASL/31/16/4020/64/0498/0043]
  4. Russian Scientific Foundation [17-19-01047p]
  5. Russian Science Foundation [20-19-18008] Funding Source: Russian Science Foundation

Ask authors/readers for more resources

This study demonstrated the potential of optical and THz infrared thermography in identifying inserts in glass fiber reinforced polymer, with the best test procedure being one-sided stationary thermal nondestructive testing (TNDT) using optical heating with Xenon lamps. Close values of the Tanimoto criterion can also be achieved by line-scanning procedures. In practical applications, the line-scanning TNDT procedure with optical heating and halogen lamps is optimal.
This study has illustrated the potentials of optical and THz infrared thermography in the identification of inserts of different nature in glass fiber reinforced polymer. The inspection efficiency has been comparatively evaluated by applying the Tanimoto criterion. The best test procedure has proven to be one-sided stationary thermal nondestructive testing (TNDT) implementing optical heating with Xenon lamps (Tanimoto criterion 87%). Close values of the Tanimoto criterion have been achieved by using the optical and THz line-scanning procedures. A more subjective evaluation of test procedures has been performed by comparing eight parameters of test performance. The line-scanning TNDT procedure implementing optical heating with halogen lamps seems to be optimal in practical applications.

Authors

I am an author on this paper
Click your name to claim this paper and add it to your profile.

Reviews

Primary Rating

4.7
Not enough ratings

Secondary Ratings

Novelty
-
Significance
-
Scientific rigor
-
Rate this paper

Recommended

No Data Available
No Data Available