ECNDT 2006 - Poster 211

SAFT – Is it a Tool for Improved Sizing in

Ultrasonic Testing?
Jorma PITKÄNEN, Posiva Oy, Olkiluoto, Finland

Abstract. The classical tasks of ultrasonic NDT are detection, sizing and
characterisation of structural discontinuities such as cracks, lack of fusion in welds,
inclusions of foreign material or de-laminations.
In ultrasonic testing the detection is important, nevertheless the characterisation and
sizing are necessary for the acceptance of detected defects. The more exact
characterisation of the defect gives information for discrimination of defects with
regard to volume or planar defects and allows to interpret if the signal is a false call
or not. SAFT is one tool for improved understanding of detected ultrasonic signals.
The imaging system applied to improve the reliability of the assessment is the use of
back propagation of elastic waves in synthetic aperture focussing technique, SAFT.
SAFT technique is used for testing of pipes, turbines, plates, vessels or pump
housings of austenitic and ferritic materials.
At the moment there are many other techniques for sizing available starting from
manual inspection with different types of probes and techniques such as diffraction
technique, creeping wave technique, ultrasonic holography, ultrasonic tomography.
Other techniques are also available for accurate visualisation and discrimination of
defects in ultrasonic testing. In this study SAFT measurements were applied in
sizing of cracks and other sizing techniques were evaluated as compared to SAFT.

Introduction

The typical tasks of ultrasonic NDT are detection, sizing and characterisation of structural
discontinuities such as cracks or lack of fusion in welds, inclusions of foreign material or
de-laminations. In ultrasonic testing the detection is important, nevertheless the
characterisation and sizing for estimation of the defects are necessary. Through exact sizing
the extension of the defects is well predicted and fracture mechanics is more precise as well
the estimation of the lifetime. The more exact characterisation of the defects gives
information for discrimination of defects to volume or planar defects and allow interpreting
if signal is a false call or not. SAFT is one tool for improved understanding of detected
ultrasonic signals.
The imaging system applied to improve the reliability of the assessment is the use
of back propagation of elastic waves in synthetic aperture focussing technique, SAFT [1, 2,
3, 4, 5]. SAFT technique is used for testing of pipes, turbines, plates, vessels or pump
housings of austenitic and ferritic materials. At the moment there are available many other
techniques for sizing, e.g., manual inspection with several different types of probes and
techniques such as diffraction technique [6, 7], creeping wave technique [8, 9], ultrasonic
holography [10, 11, 12], ultrasonic tomography [13, 14, 15] and phased array [16, 17, 18,
19, 20, 21, 22]. There are also other techniques available for accurate visualisation and
discrimination of defects in ultrasonic testing [23, 24, 25].

1
Features of SAFT inspection system are discussed and characterised and some results from
measurements performed in field and in laboratory are described in the following:

• The improvement of signal-to-noise ratio (SNR) is one of the main advantages, which
is considered in the theoretical background of SAFT.
• SAFT reconstruction is valid in the far field (Fraunhofer Region).
• This technique is mainly used for single crystal probes but applications of tandem
probes and TOFD have also been realised in various software.
• The main advantage of SAFT is that the focusing possibility, which is independent on
the length of the sound path. This gives possibilities, which are not fully applied, yet.
DDF (Dynamic Depth Focusing) in phased array technique is approaching this idea.
• SAFT reconstruction offers several tools for sizing using mainly crack tip detection, but
not only necessarily. More exact ultrasonic field visualisation makes it easier to
interpret the results.
• After SAFT reconstruction, dynamic 3D -sizing can improve crack detection, sizing and
characterisation capabilities in ultrasonic testing.

Modelling gives information for understanding measured patterns of many ultrasonic

inspection tasks also in SAFT. The measured signal has back propagated into the material.
Even though the image is better than the raw data, the calculated image can still contain, for
instance, some artefacts, which have to be recognised. In the SAFT measurements those
artefacts can be seen, for instance, in turbine axel inspection near the surface. Similar
artefacts can be seen for instance in the phased array field with strong focussing in the near
area of the probe. The modelling gives possibility to improve the SAFT algorithm to take
into consideration the changes in the inspection area such as the austenitic weld or changes
in the grain size and anisotropy [26].

Inspection considerations
In the SAFT inspection the probes should have the opening angle as large as possible. This
is realised with small diameter piezo crystals. Echoes from several defects can be detected
at the same position. The use of small piezo crystals affects also the resolution of the
reconstruction as shown later. The measured ultrasonic data from the different depths of the
tested object shown in the Figure 1 is used for reconstruction. The maximal distance
between measured points should be half of the wavelength projected on surface, λS, taking
in the consideration the angle of incidence, α, in the tested object.

λS = λ / (2 ∗ sin α) (1)

For example, for 2 and 4 MHz shear wave probe with 45° in austenitic steel (shear wave
velocity 3110 m/s) the maximum distance between data acquisition points is
correspondingly 1.1 mm and 0.55 mm.

2
 Scanline x-direction

Defects inside the sound field

Time of flight
RF-signal A(x,y,t) in the position (x,y)

Figure 1 The principle of SAFT

Important elements in practical SAFT measurements are the following:

For SAFT the point spread function calculated according to [27, 28] can be expressed as:

2 AπR
sin( )
PSF = λz , (2)
2 AπR
λz

where probe sound field characteristics is not taken into consideration. First zero point of
the spread function first zero point is when:

zλ
R= . (3)
2A

Factor A is equal to effective aperture length. For rectangular piezo crystal with width Ds
the sound field width, WS, will be:

2λz
WS = . (4)
DS

By combining A = Ws it results in the SAFT resolution, which is:

D
DSAFT = S . (5)
4

When the sound field characteristic is taken into consideration, which in praxis
means that the width of the sound field opening will increase more than twice. This
confirms measurement that lateral resolution will be increased with increasing aperture
D
length, but it becomes nearer and saturates to the value of S [28].
2
The resolution of the reconstruction is D/2, the half of the crystal size of the probe.
With the small element size, the near field is close to the probe and opening angle is large.
Even though the resolution of small crystals is good, the power of ultrasonic response is
low. To increase the power, especially with long sound paths, larger crystals are necessary.
Thus, the resolution is decreased. It is possible to increase the power by using as wide

3
crystal as possible. Of course, the near field must be between the probe and defect. The
axial resolution is equal to the pulse length and not related to the aperture. With shorter
pulse width the amplitude variation in the near field area attenuates. By changing focus
depth or delay lines (contact or immersion) SAFT algorithm can be used also for near
surface area analysis.
Step-to-step distance parameter influences directly the SNR and herewith how
clearly the image of a defect is displayed above the noise. This parameter does not
influence directly the resolution of the image [29, 30]. It is recommended to select a probe
step distance of 0.3 mm, if the probe frequency lies between 1 MHz and 5 MHz (shear or
longitudinal). In general, the maximum probe step distance should not exceed 1/5 of the
effective crystal diameter of the probe. Sizing is independent from the selected probe
distance.
In conventional techniques using the DGS-diagram, amplitude variations influence
immediately the equivalent flaw size: e.g., a drop of 6 dB would reduce the equivalent flaw
size of 6 mm down to 4 mm. Therefore, possible variations in coupling directly affect the
reliability of inspection. SAFT relies less on amplitude information but more on time-of-
flight information. The image is formed summing up information at different probe
positions. As long as there will be sufficient amount of probe positions the image intensity
does not change much if there is loss of coupling during some probe positions. Loss of
amplitude influences the SNR in the image
Additional items that can be considered are waviness of the surface and
amplification of the measurements but one of the most important factor is the effect of
stress state: residual stresses of the weld (1), thermal load from the outside or inside of the
component (2), and mechanical load coming from the structure of component (3). The
effect of the stress state on the crack itself has a strong effect on the detectability and sizing
of the defect.

CR = Corner reflection, MCI = Mode conversion indication, CFI= Crack face indication,
CTI = Crack tip indication, ISI = Inner surface indication, CFRI = Crack face reflection indication

Figure 2 Effect of stress state on the ultrasonic response from a real thermal crack (all data from the same
crack at different positions, crack height is about 10 mm)

In Figure 2 it can be seen how the effect of stress state in the crack changes the
ultrasonic response. This effect has also been partly described in [31]. The reconstructed

4
image varies quite a lot depending on the stress state of the crack. This case exhibits a
thermal crack, which is actually quite straightforward in thickness direction.

Characterisation and sizing of defects

SAFT can be used to determine whether a defect is planar or volumetric. Strong evidence
for a planar defect is the appearance of tip reflection echo(s). Especially in the case of large
cracks, the crack face (fracture surface) can be seen in many cases in the reconstruction
over the noise level (3-10 dB).
Different sizing techniques can be used in general. A typical way is either to use tip
diffraction or 6 dB drop technique. In tip diffraction method subsurface cracks are sized by
measuring the vertical distance between the positions of tip echoes. Surface cracks are sized
by measuring the position of the crack tip or by determining the vertical distance between
the corner and tip echoes. In Figure 4 a corner reflection indication from a real IGSCC is
presented. The size of this crack is about 5-7 mm, depending on the spot, where
measurement is taking place. How well the crack tips are seen, depends on each measured
crack. The lower pictures of Figure 3 show crack tip signals, and sizing is easy by
measuring the tip position in depth. The upper pictures of Figure 3 show mainly reflection
from the crack face. In the left upper picture of Figure 3 the crack is compressed together in
the middle and reflection back to the probe is clearly lower. The sizing is made mainly by 6
dB drop method in these cases. Normally corner reflection from a defect is very strong and
the defect will be detected easy, if it is on the outer or inner surface.

Figure 3 SAFT reconstruction from two fatigue cracks in ferritic pipe (upper figures), from thermal fatigue
crack (left, lower figure) and from IGSCC (right, lower figure) in austenitic pipe

Half-amplitude (-6 dB) method is appropriate, when the defect size equals or is
greater than the beam diameter and the defect is approximately perpendicular to the beam
axis. In the case of SAFT technique, the beam diameter is the focussed diameter, i.e.,
approximately half of the crystal size as shown previously. Measurement is carried out
simply to determine vertical distance between points, where the amplitude has dropped to -

5
6 dB. This method is applicable for both planar and volumetric inner defects. Half-
amplitude method is demonstrated in the upper pictures of Figure 3.

Figure 4 Demonstration of sizing capability from the crack face reflection (NESC-cylinder)

Crack face gives also sometimes clear reflection, which is much more than normal
noise level. Figure 4 shows that the crack is visualised in a very simple way by angle shear
wave probe. The probe was moved on the surface directly to the crack. The ultrasonic beam
hits the crack face during this movement. The reconstruction shows quite clearly the crack
shape from the noise level and the sizing is easy to carry out.
Volumetric defect gives generally strong main echo and weak creeping wave echo
exactly on the beam central axis behind the main echo. Sometimes the main echo can be
rounded in the reconstruction. Round volumetric defects can be sized by measuring the
sound path S between reflected and creeping echo. Diameter D of the defect is calculated
by using equation 6 [32].

4S
D= . (6)
2 +π

Occasionally the use of shadow technique is a useful solution [33]. It is a rather

inaccurate technique, when carried out by conventional manner, but it has certain
advantages. For instance, it is not sensitive to the orientation of the defect. Interpretation of
the acquired data can be improved significantly by SAFT and the height of a defect will be
evaluated from the reconstruction.
Dynamic sizing can be carried out either with phased array using angular scanning
or with SAFT or Holography. After reconstruction the sizing is carried out dynamically
going through the inspected material layer by layer to find the limits of the defects as in this
case the depth and the length of the crack with help of the SAFT reconstructed data.
Dynamic sizing can be carried out also in mechanised ultrasonic raw data form as made in
[34]. Dynamic B-scan, C-scan or D-scan evaluation method will be in the future one of the
main evaluation methods for defect characterisation. Crack tip indication is clearly seen in
the depth of 9 mm and it starts to vanish in the depth of 10.4 mm. The dynamic evaluation
is carried out visually looking from the indications above the noise level by going through
different frames where the indication is detectable. The noise level can be changed during
the evaluation, which gives valuable information to the analysis. This measured fatigue
crack is in the ferritic specimen. The wall thickness of the material is about 40 mm. The
measured crack is surface breaking. Dynamic sizing differs from the static because one can

6
go forward and backward within the reconstructed data and be sure about the indication. Of
course, in this case it is also the main interest to choose the best possible probe
configuration for the measurement. The same idea from dynamic sound field is in phased
array inspections but in the opposite order. The ultrasonic field is dynamic and moving.
Indications are moving due to variable sound field. This gives better understanding of the
nature of the defects. By moving the probe, the crack front is starting to move according to
the movement of the probe. The used software was developed by the IzfP [35]. Dynamic
evaluation has been used in evaluation of the indication in Figure 5.

Figure 5 Dynamic 3D -sizing with SAFT reconstruction

SAFT has not yet so often been used with phased array equipment. In 2004 some
sizing results were presented by using phased array raw data for SAFT reconstruction [36].
According to measurements the tip signals were located and constructed according example
shown in the Figure 6. In the experiments done by Erhard et al [36], it was shown that the

7
tip was better detected with longitudinal waves than with shear waves. It demonstrated also
by Müller 1999 [37]. For the phased array application, the geometry of the PA-probe must
be known quite exactly as well as also the movement on the surface. By changing the
angles during the measurement the index point is changing in the PA-probe. For good
SAFT reconstruction it is necessary to have exact knowledge of the probe sound field
characteristics in different angles. The defect size of 1 mm was the minimum for sizing for
the equipment. In Germany (IzfP FHG) was developed a new type of phased array
equipment in 2005, which can calculate SAFT images much faster than conventional
phased array equipment [22].

Figure 6 Phased array application for SAFT reconstruction [36]

Some SAFT applications

One example of application is the inspection of welds of the main gate valves. At first
defects detected manually were analyzed with SAFT. Nowadays the valves are inspected
with a mechanized system. A scanning manipulator is placed on the nozzle between the
main cooling pipe with a diameter of 500 mm and the valve. The geometry did not allow
direct insonification of the weld, but full skip (reflection from the back wall) had to be
used. Therefore, the sound path was more than 300 mm and because of the strong
attenuation of the ultrasonic pulse in austenitic forging, the SNR was not sufficient to make
a good evaluation of the indications. This case has been handled more thoroughly in [32].

Figure 7 SAFT reconstruction for one indication in the NESC III blind test specimen

SAFT measurements have been performed for the dissimilar metal weld of the
emergency cooling nozzle in the Loviisa NPP. The aim of the SAFT measurement was to
distinguish the geometrical indications from the real defect indications [32]. Several other

8
cases have been visualised in [32] such as primary circuit pump thread inspection, the
analysis of under clad defect, radial support plate inspection. In Figure 7 one indication can
be seen from dissimilar weld of the NESC III trial. The measurement of this indication in
Figure 7 was carried out from the ferritic side. The indication is locating at the dissimilar
metal interface between ferritic material and buttering weld. Some parts of that indication
are extending to the 8 mm height. The thickness of the material was 52 mm. The ferritic
material was clad from inside. This software cannot correct the anisotropy effect of the
material, but small deviations on the sizing from ferritic side can be tolerated. Anisotropy
can be taken into consideration according to Shlivinski er al. [26].
In practical inspections large defects are very seldom met and sized. In the round
robin test of the international NESC I-project this was possible, Figure 8. In the following
two examples are presented showing the results for defects B and R of the test cylinder. In
normal testing it was difficult to detect the crack tip from the normal data of defect B. It
means, that the crack tip was quite tight, see Figure 9. However, in one of the
measurements performed by VTT the noise from the face of the crack was seen in the data.
With the help of the SAFT reconstruction, the size of the defect B was determined. The
comparison to the metallography gave a sizing error of about 2.7%. In the post test the tip
of same defect was detected clearly with 0°L-probe, see Figure 9b. No SAFT
measurements were performed in post-test phase for this defect.
For the post-test phase one new fatigue crack (R) was manufactured. This defect
was measured with normal multi channel ultrasonic equipment and with SAFT equipment.
With normal ultrasonic measurement it is difficult to detect the crack tip profile, Figure
10a. In the SAFT reconstruction the crack tip profile can be detected more precisely, Figure
10b. The error in defect sizing measured ultrasonically with SAFT reconstruction was
about 2.3% based on the metallography. In the NESC cylinder there was also one multi-
branch defect, which was not included in the comparison of the results of the round robin
test. This defect was a large defect of similar size as the two defects mentioned above.

Figure 8 NESC spinning cylinder containing different types of defects. The cylinder was tested in a round
robin trial

9
a) b)
Figure 9 Defect B measured in the pre-test phase with SAFT (a) and in the post-test phase with 0°L 5MHz
probe (b). At the left (a) in Figure the crack characteristics and at the right (b) the crack tip profile are shown

Crack tip profile shadow

Shadow of a crack profile

corner
Crack tip profile in thickness direction

Crack tip
Only highest spot of
the crack can be
seen Corner
Cladding

Figure 10 Defect R measured with normal multi-channel equipment and with one-channel SAFT equipment

The sizing capability of SAFT inspection

SAFT offers good sizing capabilities if the limitations are not exceeded. A large
experimental study was carried out by Müller [28] and according to these results the 6dB
method shows limitations especially in case of point reflectors, because the measured size
is dependent on the reflector size and the used frequency. Figure 11 gives a good base for
understanding the SAFT sizing in practice. Most of the sizing results have been obtained by
the diffraction method. With SAFT it is often possible to size the defects more precisely as
compared to the conventional ultrasonic testing, but it is not the only correct method. In
general, the best result is based on the estimates achieved in combination by different
methods. Figure 11 shows data from some inspections, data from Erhard [33] and data from
the NESC I trial. In each case the metallurgical result has been compared to sizing result of
SAFT measurements. It can be seen that the height sizing error of SAFT measurements is
normally less than 2 mm from the real value. In three cases the error is equal to or more
than 3 mm. Of course, the values tend to increase in percentages, when the sizes of defects
are smaller, but the absolute value seems to be about the same. These values are only giving
a tendency noticed in sizing performed with SAFT method.
The defect sizing standards or nuclear standards describes sparsely or not at all the
analysis of SAFT images [45, 46, 47 and 48]. Procedures should guide the inspector in
order to do the analysis in proper manner. Sometimes the procedures are deficient [47] and
people are missing to carry out SAFT measurements in practice internationally. One of the
main reasons, why SAFT method is not popular is the low speed of the analysis. The high-
speed inspections need high-speed analysis. The diffraction technique manually or with
mechanised systems provides also sufficiently low sizing error compared to SAFT, but not
as good and clear imaging as SAFT offers. TOFD is not as good for austenitic materials as
for ferritic materials. Both methods have always problems when the defect detection suffers
from the compressive stresses. Some teams are qualified with sizing capability of RMS

10
about 1 mm using TOFD technique. By measuring worst cases defects this level of
competence is difficult to keep in this RMS limits. From Figure 11 we can see that the
sizing capability of SAFT is about 2 mm using diffraction technique. ENIQ
recommendations for sizing suggest that the RMS value should be about 3 mm for the blind
test and similarly value is given also in the performance demonstration part of ASME XI.
This can be achieved with sufficient knowledge and experience of the SAFT method. While
the standards does not give proper procedure for the SAFT image analysis, the blind test
according to the ENIQ and ASME principles gives simple way to test SAFT technique.
SAFT has been used as a finer analysis method compared to conventional angle probe
methods. One has to remember that sufficient training makes analysing easier. But the
training defects as well easy blind test defects should include also difficult defects as can be
expected in the practical inspection situations depending on the real defect types in practice.
Dynamic analysis improves the defect detection, sizing and characterisation capability.

SAFT inaccuracy of depth sizing in various tests

5,0

4,0

3,0

2,0
Sizing Error [mm]

1,0

0,0
0,0 20,0 40,0 60,0 80,0 100,0
-1,0

-2,0

-3,0

-4,0

-5,0
Defect depth [mm]
Figure 11 Defect heigth sizing error using SAFT measurement with different defect sizes

Summary and conclusion

SAFT reconstruction can be used in many applications in nuclear power plants to evaluate
the defects detected in components. SAFT measurement can, especially, be applied to
inspections where sound paths in ultrasonic testing are long. This includes especially
pressure vessel, thick-walled piping, main gate valves, etc. SAFT method is mainly
intended to be used for characterisation and sizing of defects.
The accuracy is depending on large amount of factors. The physical resolution of
the method is decisive but also coupling, ultrasonic probe, sizing technique, human factors
affects the result. The analysis of the SAFT image is not properly determined by the
standards. Procedures should determine the way exactly how to do analysing. At the
moment the analysis is based more or less on skills of the operator. Especially dynamic
analysis of the SAFT images can provide better tools for sizing in the uttermost cases when
the crack is under compressive stresses. Normally the analysis in these cases is carried out
near noise level, sometimes as low as the noise level. The dynamic behaviour of the

11
reflected, diffracted and scattered sound waves can be distinguished better then with the
static analysis methods.

References

[1] Doctor, S., Schuster, G. J., Reid, L. D. & Hall, T. E., 1995. Real-Time 3-D SAFT-UT System
Evaluation and Validation. NUREG/CR-6344 PNNL-10571, 169 p + App. 78 p.
[2] Kröning, M. & Schmitz, V., 1997. Contributions of NDT, Risk Based Assessment of Industrial
Components and Plants. 15th –17th December, Madras, Chennai, 31 p.
[3] Müller, W., Schmitz, V. & Schäfer, G., 1985. The Synthetic Aperture Focussing Technique and its
Application in NDE - Principles – Signal Processing and Measurement. Philadelphia, USA
September 25 p.
[4] Osetrov, A. V., 1995, Complex Flaws Reconstruction by Means of Second Order Synthetic Aperture
Focusing Technique. Proceedings International Conference on Computer Methods and Inverse
Problems in Nondestructive Testing and Diagnostics, CM NDT-95, 21st - 24th November, Minsk,
Belarus, pp. 116 - 119.
[5] Schmitz, V., Müller, W. & Schäfer, G., 1988. Ultraschallprüfung mit synthetischen Aperture-
verfahren (SAFT). Symposium für Werkstoffprüfung, Greifswald, Germany, Juni, 17 p.
[6] Gruber, G., 1980. Defect Identification and Sizing by the Ultrasonic Satellite-Pulse Technique.
Deutsche Gesellschaft für zerstörungsfreie Prüfung, Jahrestagung, Göttingen, 12th -14th May 8 p.
[7] Silk M. G., 1987. Changes in Ultrasonic Defect Location and Sizing. NDT International, 20(1987)1
pp. 9-14.
[8] Erhard, A.1983. Untersuchungen zur Ausbreitung von Longitudinalwellen an Oberflächen bei der
Materialprüfung mit Ultraschall. Forschungsbericht 88, BAM, Berlin, 32 p.
[9] Ermolov, I. N., Razygraev, N. P. & Scherbinski, V. G., 1978. The Use of the Head Type Waves for
Ultrasonic Monitoring. Sov. Journal.of NDT, 14(1978)1 pp. 27-33.
[10] Wüstenberg, H., Haufe, U. & Erhard, A., 1984. Contribution to the Ultrasonic Detection of Inner
Wall Surface Breaking Cracks in Pipes. Materials Evaluation, August, 42(1984)9 pp. 1142-1149.
[11] Mohr, F., 1991. KWU-HOLO. Technical report, Siemens, 17th May, 16 p.
[12] Grebennikov, V., Badalyan, V., Grebennikov D. & Vopilkine, A., 2000. Comparative Analysis of
the Ways to Increase Signal to Noise Ratio at NDT Inspection of Austenitic Welds. 15th World
Conference on Non-Destructive Testing, Rome, Italy, 15th - 21st October, 9 p.
[13] Wüstenberg, H., Erhard, A., Schenk, G. & Montag, H.-J., 1987. Anwendung der Ultraschall-
tomographie an Turbinen und Generatorwellen. Materialprüfung, 29(1987)10 pp. 297-302.
[14] Rathore, S. K., Kishore, N. N., Munshi, P.& Singhal, S. K., 2000. Ultrasonic Tomography of Closed
Spaced Defects. 15th World Conference on Non -Destructive Testing, Rome, Italy, 15th - 21st October
2000, 7 p.
[15] Munshi, P., 2003. X-ray and Ultrasonic Tomography. Insight 45(2003)1 pp. 47-50.
[16] Komura, I., Hirasawa, T., Nagai, S., Takabayashi, J.-I. & Naruse, K., 2001. Crack Detection and
Sizing Technique by Ultrasonic and Electromagnetic Methods. Nuclear Engineering and Design,
June, 206(2001)6 pp. 351-362.
[17] Erhard, A., Schenk G., Hauser, T., Völz, U., 2001. New Applications Using Phased Array
Techniques. Nuclear engineering and Design, June, 206(2001)6 pp. 325-336.

[18] Matsuura, 2002. Study of Phased Array UT -Technique to Nuclear Power Plant. 6th EPRI Piping &
Bolting Inspection Conference, Point Clear, Alabama, USA, 30th July- 1st August 21 p.
[19] Wüstenberg H., Erhard, A. & Schenk, G., 2000. Scanning Modes at the Application of Ultrasonic
Phased Array Inspection Systems. 15th World Conference on Non-Destructive Testing, Rome, Italy,
15th - 21st October, 14 p.
[20] Selby, G., 2002. Phased Array Development Update. 12th EPRI NDE Issues Meeting, Kingston
Plantation, Myrtle Beach, USA, 10th July, 78 p.
[21] Spies, M., Gebhardt, W. & Kröning, M., 1998. Neue Entwicklungen in Gruppenstrahler
Technologie. Deutsche Gesellschaft für zerstörungsfreie Prüfung, Jahrestagung, Bamberg, Germany,
7th – 9th September, pp. 73 - 80.
[22] Bulaninov, A., 2005. Der getakte Gruppenstrahler. Dissertation des grades des doktors der
Ingeniurwissenschaften der Naturwissenschaflich-Technischen Fakultät III Chemie, Pharmazie, Bio-
und Werkstoffwissenschaften der Universität des Saarlandes, 11. August, 128 p.
[23] Kitahara M., Nakahata, K. & Hirose, H., 2000. Elastodynamic Inversion for Shape Reconstruction
and Type Classification of Flaws. Wave Motion 36(2000)4 pp. 443 - 455.

12
[24] Stepiniski, T. & Lingvall, F., 2000. Automatic Defect Characterisation in Ultrasonic NDT. 15th
World Conference on Non-Destructive Testing, Rome, Italy, 15th - 21st October, 9 p.
[25] Park, I. K., Park, U. S., Ahn, H. K., Kwun, S. I. & Byeon, J. W. 2000. Experimental Wavelet
Analysis and Applications to Ultrasonic Evaluation, 15th World Conference on Non-Destructive
Testing, Rome Italy 15th - 21st October, 9 p.
[26] Shlivinski, A., Langenberg, K. J., Marklein, R., Schmitz, V., Müller, W. & Mletzko, U., 2004.
Modelling of Elastic Wave Propagation and Imaging of Defects in Dissimilar Welds. NDE in
Relation to Structural Integrity for Nuclear and Pressurised Components, 6th - 8th December, London
UK, pp. 900 – 909.
[27] Thompson, R. N., 1984. Transverse and Longitudinal Resolution of the Synthetic Aperture Focusing
Technique. Ultrasonics, 22(1984)1 pp. 9-15.
[28] Müller, W. & Walte F., 1997. Auflösunfgsvermögen bei SAFT -Rekonstruktionen, ebene Aperturen,
IzfP-FHG, Bericht Nr. 970104-TW, October, 115 p.
[29] Pitkänen, J., Kauppinen, P., Jeskanen, H. & Särkiniemi, P. 1998. Evaluation of Ultrasonic
Indications by Using Synthetic Aperture Focusing Technique. RER/4/011 Regional Workshop on
Flaw Discrimination and Sizing Methods and Techniques, IAEA Workshop, 20th - 24th April,
Madrid, Spain, 7 p.
[30] Kauppinen, P., Jeskanen, H. & Schmitz, V. 1993. Analyse von Primärkreisventilen mittels PCSAFT.
DGZFP-Jahrestagung, Garmisch Partenkirchen, 17th – 19th May, Berlin: Deutsche Gesellschaft für
zerstörungsfreie Prüfung. pp. 659 – 663.
[31] Pitkänen, J., Särkiniemi, P., Kauppinen, P. & Jeskanen H. 1998. Ultrasonic Measurement of a
Thermal Fatigue Crack Field Manually and with a Simple Hand Scanner. 7Th ECNDT European
Conference on Non-Destructive Testing, Copenhagen, 26th - 29th May, pp. 746 - 750.
[32] Pitkänen, J. & Kauppinen P., 2001. Experiences from SAFT in Nuclear Applications. Proceedings of
the Third International Conference on NDE in Relation for Nuclear and Pressurised Components,
14th-16th November, Seville, Spain, pp. 918-928.
[33] Särkiniemi, P. & Kauppinen P., 1994. The Use of Combined Ultrasonic Techniques for Examination
of Under Cladding Flaws from Outside. Report STUK-YTO-TR, Helsinki, STUK. 24 p. (in Finnish)
[34] Kenefick, S. & Henry, G. 2001. Ultrasonic Imaging Technique for Characterizing Surface Breaking
Flaws. Proceedings of the Third International Conference on NDE in Relation for Nuclear and
Pressurised Components, 14th -16th, Seville, Spain, pp. 552-560.
[35] Schmitz, V. & Chakhlov, 2001. Fehleranalyse durch Ultraschallrekonstruktion 3D-CAD-SAFT-
Handbuch v. 1.8. 92 p.
[36] Erhard, A., Tscharntke, D., Montag, H.-J., Tessaro, U., Voskamp R. & Schmidbauer, J.,2004.
SAFT and TOFD Used for Defect Sizing at Steam Generator Feed Water Nozzle. NDE in Relation
to Structural Integrity for Nuclear and Pressurised Components, 6th – 8th December, London, UK, pp.
251 – 260.

[37] Müller, W. & Bruche, D., 1999. Erkannbarkeit von Risspitzensignalen bei Vorwärts- und
Rückstreuung – ein Vergleich. IZFP-FHG Bericht Nr. 990112-TW, March, 140 p.

[38] Pitkänen, J., Särkiniemi P., Kauppinen P. & Jeskanen, H., 1998. The Ultrasonic Detection and
Evaluation of Defects in a Thick-Walled Cylindrical Component Having Cladding on Inside Surface.
7Th ECNDT European Conference on Non-Destructive Testing, Copenhagen, 26th – 29th May, pp.
1420 -1425.
[44] Erhard, A., Schulz, E., Brekow, G., Wüstenberg H. & Kreier. P., 1998. Critical Assessment to the
TODF Approach for Ultrasonic Weld Inspection. 7th EC-NDT European Conference on Non-
Destructive Testing, Copenhagen, 26th – 29th May, pp. 1236 - 1242.
[45] ASME V, 2004. Examination E470. Non-mandatory Appendix E, Edition 2004, pp. 69-73.
[46] ASTM, 2003. E2192-02: Standard Guide for Planar Height Sizing by Ultrasonics. ASTM, 22 p.
[47] Procedure IVO 511 M4, 1994. Defect Height Sizing Measurement with Ultrasonic Testing. 27 p. (in
Finnish)
[48] KTA 3210-4, 1999. Components of Reactor Coolant Pressure Boundary of Light Water Reactors,
Part 4: In-Service Inspections and Operational Monitoring, pp. 19.
[49] EN-583-5, 2000. Nondestructive testing – Ultrasonic examination – Part 5. Characterisation and
Sizing of the Discontinuities. CEN, 57 p.

13