Answers are grounded in this paper and cite their sources.
A defect’s detectability in flash thermography is highly dependent on the applied post-processing methodology. The majority of the existing analysis techniques operate either on the time-temperature data or on the frequency-phase data. In this paper, we compare the efficiency of time- and frequency-domain analysis techniques in flash thermography for obtaining good defect detectability. Both single-bin and integrated-bin evaluation procedures are considered: dynamic thermal tomography and thermal signal area for the time-domain approach, and frequency domain tomography and adaptive spectral band integration for the frequency-domain approach. The techniques are applied on various carbon fiber reinforced polymer samples having a range of defect sizes and defect types. The advantages and drawbacks of the different post-processing techniques are evaluated and discussed. The best defect detectability is achieved using the integrated procedure in frequency domain.
No takes yet. Share an insight, caveat, or question.
Poelman et al. (2020) studied this question.
Synapse has enriched 5 related papers. Consider them for comparative context: