Maximum detection depth of PT
Thread Content
What is the maximum detection depth for non-destructive testing PT? It is best to have a written basis
Perhaps there are concerns about using TOFD+PT as a replacement for radiographic testing? However, it’s likely difficult to determine these two exact values. It is said that TOFD has relatively poor sensitivity to surface cracks; it isn’t mentioned as a blind zone either, and this seems to be related to the placement of the probe. A professional would need to provide an answer. However, ordinary carbon steel uses TOFT+MT; why is PT used? Is it stainless steel? The stainless steel TOFT effect isn’t very good, right?
PT must be open; where does depth come from?
PT is itself a surface inspection method – is there a concept of depth involved?
Magnetic particle testing can detect defects up to 1–2 mm near the surface, while penetrant testing can only detect those on the surface.
It’s about the depth of the opening on the surface as measured by PT – how deep can it go at most? Can it still detect defects even if their depth is very great?
Only defects can be detected; it is not possible to determine their exact depth. As long as enough penetrant is used, it can reach the deepest areas, but it is not possible to measure this depth. If conditions permit, ultrasound can be used for measurement
PT cannot detect the depth of defects
No one can tell how deep the river ahead is. . . Got it?
First of all, it should be understood that PT testing is a surface inspection method. The advantage over visual inspection is that it can bring to light defects that are impossible or difficult to detect with the naked eye (such as cracks), making them clearly visible. PT can only tell you where the defects are; as for the depth of those defects, that goes beyond PT’s capabilities. Otherwise, what would be the purpose of UT and RT? The function of MT is similar to that of PT, except that their areas of application differ. MT is more targeted in its use, and it provides significantly better detection results for ferromagnetic materials compared to PT. However, PT has a wider range of applications – it can be used on stainless steel, aluminum alloys, and virtually any other material, including plastics and ceramics. :)