JP7346249B2 - Ultrasonic flaw detection inspection equipment and reflection source identification method - Google Patents

Description

The present invention relates to an ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device and a reflection source identification method, and more particularly to an ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device and a reflection source identification method that can identify reflection sources with a small number of probes.

A conventional ultrasonic flaw detection inspection apparatus including a probe that receives ultrasonic echoes and processes a plurality of detection signals is described in, for example, Japanese Patent Laid-Open No. 2005-152608 (Patent Document 1). According to the publication, the ultrasonic transmitter/receiver includes an ultrasonic probe and a transducer for each ultrasonic transducer in order to simultaneously transmit multiple ultrasonic beams in multiple different directions from the ultrasonic probe. A drive waveform synthesis means that generates information regarding a composite drive waveform obtained by synthesizing a plurality of drive waveforms, and a plurality of transmission circuits that generate a plurality of drive signals according to the information generated by the drive waveform synthesis means, A plurality of transmitting circuits each having a plurality of types of maximum output voltages corresponding to the maximum voltage of the drive signal supplied to each ultrasonic transducer, and a plurality of output voltages output from the plurality of ultrasonic transducers that have received ultrasonic echoes. and a plurality of receiving circuits that process the detection signals, respectively. As a result, in an ultrasonic transmitting/receiving device that performs multi-beam transmission, an increase in the breakdown voltage of the ultrasonic transducer and an increase in power consumption due to an increase in the number of transmission beams can be suppressed.

JP2005-152608A (Summary)

In an ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device, a plurality of probes are used to transmit and receive ultrasonic waves, waveform data obtained by each probe is synthesized, and the results are displayed as an image. At this time, an echo may be displayed separately from the actual position of the reflection source such as a flaw, making it difficult to identify the flaw position.

This invention was made in response to the above-mentioned problems, and provides an ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device that can easily distinguish between echoes at a position where a reflection source where an actual flaw exists and echoes at other locations are located. The purpose is to provide a method for doing so.

The ultrasonic flaw detection inspection apparatus according to the present invention includes a waveform synthesis unit that receives reflected echoes from a plurality of probes, delays the time, adds them, and synthesizes them, and the waveform synthesis unit includes a plurality of Within a predetermined synthesis area where the probe receives reflected echoes, the reflected echoes from multiple probes are received and waveform synthesis is performed. Actually, the echo discrimination means includes a virtual image echo from a position where there is no flaw, and includes an echo discrimination means for discriminating between the real image echo and the virtual image echo, and the echo discrimination means uses the reflected echoes from a certain number of probes to detect the real image echo. and the virtual image echo.

Preferably, the certain value or more is 60% or more.

More preferably, the echo discrimination means includes a peak number counting means for counting the number of peaks of reflected echoes.

The waveform synthesis means may include a waveform correlation processing means that performs waveform correlation processing on the reflected echo to obtain a waveform peak that reflects correlation information with predetermined reference waveform data.

The waveform correlation processing means may use a chirp wave as the reference waveform.

In another aspect of the present invention, the reflection source identification method includes a waveform synthesis step of receiving reflected echoes from a plurality of probes and adding and synthesizing them with a time delay, the waveform synthesis step In this method, the reflected echoes from multiple probes are received within a predetermined synthesis area where multiple probes receive the reflected echoes, and the waveforms are synthesized. The method includes a real image reflected echo and a virtual image echo from a position where there is actually no flaw, and includes an echo discrimination step for discriminating between the real image echo and the virtual image echo, and the echo discrimination step uses reflected echoes from a certain level or more of the probe. to distinguish between real image echo and virtual image echo.

According to this invention, a real image reflected echo from a position where there is actually a flaw is discriminated from a virtual image echo from a position where there is actually no flaw, and the real image echo and the virtual image are distinguished using the reflected echoes from a probe of a certain number or more. In order to distinguish between echoes, it is possible to provide an ultrasonic flaw detection inspection apparatus and a method thereof that can easily distinguish between echoes at a position where a reflection source where an actual flaw is located and echoes other than the echoes.

FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a mechanism of waveform synthesis processing according to an embodiment of the present invention. FIG. 3 is a diagram illustrating an area for waveform synthesis and a state in which waveform data is synthesized at each intersection within the area and graphed. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing a mechanism of waveform correlation processing. FIG. 7 is a diagram showing an echo displayed at a position without a flaw. FIG. 6 is a diagram showing a method for distinguishing between a virtual image and an echo at a position where a flaw actually exists. It is a figure explaining the true nature of a virtual image. FIG. 7 is a schematic diagram showing the state of reflected echoes when there are two probes and one flaw. FIG. 7 is a schematic diagram showing the state of reflected echoes when there are two probes and two flaws. It is a block diagram showing an ultrasonic flaw detection device. It is a flowchart showing the operation of the ultrasonic flaw detection device. It is a flowchart showing the operation of the ultrasonic flaw detection device. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing the number of survey lines and the number of detected peaks of flaw echoes with respect to the number of survey lines. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing the number of peaks at a waveform synthesis position.

Hereinafter, one embodiment of the present invention will be described with reference to the drawings. In this embodiment, ultrasonic waves are transmitted and received using a plurality of probes, and after the waveform data obtained by each probe is synthesized, the results are displayed as an image.

First, waveform synthesis processing for synthesizing received waveforms from a plurality of probes will be explained. In the waveform synthesis process, waveforms received from a plurality of probes are superimposed by a time delay operation and an addition operation. This procedure is shown in Figure 1. Further, FIG. 2 shows a diagram of reflected echoes of the test specimen, a plurality of probes, a predetermined waveform synthesis position, and a flaw position.

Referring to FIGS. 1 and 2, in this embodiment, a reflection source 21 such as a flaw is provided on a test specimen 22 such as a flat steel plate using a plurality of probes 20a to 20e. Receive reflected waves (echoes) from Here, since the distances from the reflection source 21 to the plurality of probes 20a to 20e are different, the propagation time from the reflection source 21 to the probes 20a to 20e is t1 to t5 as shown in FIG. 1(A). Changes to Therefore, the propagation time is corrected so that it becomes the same time t as shown in FIG. 1(B). Then, as shown in FIG. 1C, the received waveforms of the plurality of probes 20a to 20e are superimposed to perform waveform synthesis.

Although it is preferable to use SH wave ultrasound as the ultrasound, it is not necessary to use SH wave ultrasound.

As a result, the waveform data are synthesized at each intersection position within the predetermined area 27 to be synthesized and graphed (imaged). An example is shown in FIG. 2(B). FIG. 2(B) is a diagram showing reflected echoes at flaw positions in an area where waveforms from a plurality of probes 20a to 20e are combined.

Here, the area 27 for synthesizing waveforms for identifying flaws is a rectangular area including the area where the flaw exists, and in this example, the area for waveform synthesis is divided into 5 mm grids.

In addition, here, the position in FIG. 2(B) corresponds to the predetermined area 27 in FIG. 2(A), and the vertical position a and horizontal position b for waveform synthesis in FIG. ) corresponds to the vertical (depth direction) and horizontal (probe placement direction) positions.

Next, waveform correlation processing for making it easier to detect the peak of the received waveform with the probe will be described. FIG. 3 is a diagram for explaining waveform correlation processing.

In the waveform correlation processing, the correlation between the measured data and the reference waveform data 31 (here, a chirp wave (a wave whose frequency changes over time) is used) is checked, and then the correlation information is reflected in the measured data. .

This can be expected to significantly improve the S/N (signal/noise ratio), making it possible to inspect objects that were previously buried in noise and difficult to distinguish between noise and scratch echoes.

Note that the waveform synthesis data described above uses waveform data with a good S/N ratio after waveform correlation processing.

FIG. 3A is a diagram showing reference data, and the reference data includes a reference waveform (reference waveform data 31) and reference waveform data. There is a selection area among the N calculation areas, and a reference waveform is displayed there. FIG. 3(B) is a diagram showing measurement data, and the measurement data includes a measurement waveform and measurement waveform data. Reference waveform data is superimposed on this measured waveform data. Specifically, the following calculations are performed.

1/N×Σ(Di×Ri)
Here, D is measurement waveform data, R is reference waveform data, and N is the number of reference waveform data.

In this way, a correlation calculation is performed and data after correlation processing is obtained.

Specifically, it is as follows. FIGS. 3(C) to 3(F) are diagrams showing specific waveforms obtained. As shown in FIG. 3(C), the reference data serving as standard data is a chirp wave here.

As shown in FIG. 3(D), when data in which the reflection source echo from the test object 22 and the reference waveform are superimposed is obtained, the correlation calculation described above is performed, and as shown in FIG. 3(E), the reflected echo A peak value is obtained at the position where , and as shown in FIG. 3(F), data after correlation processing is obtained.

Next, an explanation will be given of echoes displayed at positions with no flaws. Echoes need to be displayed at locations where there are actually flaws, but in reality, some echoes are displayed at locations where there are no flaws. Here, the echo displayed at a position without flaws is called a virtual image. FIG. 4 is a diagram in which the waveform data of the test specimen 22 with artificial flaws is synthesized, where the X-axis is the probe arrangement direction and the Y-axis is the depth direction. Referring to FIG. 4, the actual position of the artificial flaw is displayed in a region 29 surrounded by squares, and echoes are also displayed at other locations 32a and 32b. In such a state, it is difficult to identify the actual flaw position.

Next, a method for distinguishing between a virtual image and an echo (real image) at a position where an artificial flaw actually exists will be explained.

Similar to FIG. 4, FIG. 5 is a diagram showing echoes from the actual position of an artificial flaw and a virtual image when the X-axis is the direction of multiple probe arrangement and the Y-axis is the depth direction. be. FIG. 5(A) is a diagram showing the case of 5 measuring lines, FIG. 5(B) is a diagram showing the case of 10 measuring lines, and FIG. 5(C) is a diagram showing the case of 20 measuring lines. In addition, in FIGS. 5(A) to 5(C), positions where flaws are actually present are marked with a circle.

Although the probe is not shown here, it is basically the same as in FIG. 2(A).

Here, the measurement line is the number of probes; in the case of 5 measurement lines, 5 probes are arranged horizontally, and in the case of 10 measurement lines, the 5 probes are arranged more closely than in the case of 5 measurement lines. In the case of 20 transverse lines, the five probes were disposed further shifted in one direction than in the case of 10 transverse lines. In the case of five probes, the nine artificial flaws 25a to 25i (actually, the three artificial flaws overlap in the direction in which the probes are arranged) are lined up on the three measuring lines and the artificial flaws. Since ultrasonic waves are transmitted and received from each probe to a position that does not exist (2 survey lines), in the case of 5 survey lines, the total number of data is 25 (5 transmission x 5 reception), and similarly, in the case of 10 survey lines, the total number of data is 25 (5 transmission x 5 reception). The total number of data is 50 (5 transmission x 5 reception x 2), and although there are 20 survey lines in Figure 5(C), the total number of data is 190 (this is because there are places where the probes overlap and cannot be placed). ).

In the five survey lines shown in FIG. 5A, the data of the virtual image has the same intensity as the data of the real image sandwiching them (indicated by cross-hatching in the figure). In the 10 measurement lines shown in FIG. 5(B), the virtual image data shows a lower intensity than the real image data (indicated by hatching in the figure). In the 20 measurement lines shown in FIG. 5(C), the virtual image data exhibits such a low intensity that it is hardly displayed (not shown in the figure).

As shown in FIGS. 5(A) to 5(C), by increasing the number of data from the 5th line to the 10th line to the 20th line, the flaw positions (25a to 25i, the shaded areas in the figure) It can be seen that the difference between the positions without distortion becomes clear (the number of virtual images is relatively reduced), and the distinguishability between the real image echo and the virtual image echo is improved.

That is, by increasing the number of probes or survey lines (number of data), it becomes possible to distinguish between a virtual image and an echo at a position where an actual artificial flaw exists.

From the above, it can be seen that the greater the number of data, the better the identifiability, but the more time and effort it takes for flaw detection.

In order to deal with this problem, the true nature of virtual images will be explained next.

FIG. 6 is a diagram for explaining the true nature of a virtual image. 6(A) to (D) show that when there is one flaw (indicated by a circle in the figure), the reflected echoes from the three failed probes 30a, 30b, and 30c are reflected from these probes 30a. , 30b and 30c (indicated by horizontal lines below the probes). Here, in FIG. 6A, the position of the flaw is closest to the probe 30c, then the probe 30b is the next closest, and the probe 30a is the farthest. Therefore, the magnitude of the reflected echo is largest at the position of the probe 30c , second largest at the position of the probe 30b , and smallest at the position of the probe 30a . Here, the magnitude of the reflected echo is shown by the length of the horizontal line.

FIG. 6B shows data obtained by waveform synthesis processing of these reflected echoes at the flawed position (indicated by an x in the figure). Here, a portion 33 surrounded by a dotted line indicates a case where waveform synthesis is performed at a position where there is a flaw. As shown here, in this case, all the reflected echoes of the three probes 30a, 30b, and 30c are included.

FIG. 6C is a diagram showing a case where waveform synthesis is performed at a position (x) slightly away from the flaw position (○) (here, for example, right above the probe 30b). As shown here, the received echoes of the three probes 30a, 30b, and 30c do not fall within the area 33 surrounded by the dotted line.

Specifically, since the probe 30c is close to the flaw position, strong (long) data can be obtained, but since the distance is further away than in the case of FIG. 6(B), the received echo is smaller than the dotted line. Move to the closer side. On the other hand, with the probes 30b and 30b, data with the same intensity as in FIG. 6(B) is obtained, but because they are close to the measurement position, the received echo moves to the side farther from the dotted line.

FIG. 6(D) is a diagram showing a case where waveform synthesis is performed at a position (×) further away from the flaw position (◯). As shown here, the received echoes of the probes 30a and 30c are not included in the area 33 surrounded by the dotted line, but the received echoes of the probe 30b are included in the area 33 surrounded by the dotted line. This is because even if waveform synthesis is performed at a position without flaws, the beam path of the flaw echo at a position other than the position to be combined matches the distance to the position to be combined, so it is displayed as a composite echo and is a virtual image. .

Next, a case where there are two flaws will be explained. In Fig. 6(E), ultrasonic waves are output from three probes 30a, 30b, and 30c, and the reflected echoes from flaw 1 (indicated by a solid line ○) and flaw 2 (indicated by a dotted line ○) are collected from these. The reflected echo received by the probe (shown by the horizontal line below the probe). Again, the reflected echo from flaw 1 is shown by a solid line, and the reflected echo from flaw 2 is shown by a dotted line. The position of flaw 1 is closest to the probe 30c, the next closest is the probe 30b, and the farthest is the probe 30a.The position of flaw 2 is the closest to the probe 30b, and the position of flaw 2 is the closest to the probe 30b and It is equidistant from the tentacle 30ca.

In this case, when the magnitude of the reflected echo of flaw 1 is shown by a horizontal solid line, the position of the probe 30c is the largest, the position of the probe 30b is the next largest, as in FIG. 6(A), The position of the probe 30a is the smallest. On the other hand, the magnitude of the reflected echo of the flaw 2 is greatest at the position of the probe 20b, and the magnitude at the positions of the probes 30a and 30c is the same.

On the other hand, when the magnitude of the reflected echo of flaw 2 is indicated by a horizontal dotted line, as shown in FIG. The positions of the tentacles 30a and 30c have the same size as shown below.

FIG. 6F shows data obtained by waveform synthesis processing of these reflected echoes at predetermined positions. Here, flaw 1 is represented by a solid line ◯, and the waveform synthesis position is represented by a solid line ×. Here, a portion 33 surrounded by a dotted line indicates a case where waveform synthesis is performed at a position where there is a flaw (a position directly above the probe 30c). As shown here, all the reflected echoes of the three probes 30a, 30b, and 30c from the position of flaw 1 are included.

On the other hand, the reflected echo from the position of flaw 2 is larger than the reflected echo at the position of probe 30a, so it is closer to the area 33 surrounded by the dotted line (in FIG. Since the reflected echo at the position of the probe 30b is larger than flaw 1, it is generated closer to the part surrounded by the dotted line, and the reflected echo at the position of the probe 30c Since the echo is smaller than flaw 1, it is generated further away than the area surrounded by the dotted line (in FIG. 6F, above the area 33 surrounded by the dotted line).

FIG. 6(G) is a diagram when waveform synthesis is performed at the position of flaw 2. Here again, the waveform synthesis position is represented by a solid line x. Here, a portion 33 surrounded by a dotted line shows the case where waveform synthesis is performed at the position where the flaw 2 is located (the position directly above the probe 30b). As shown here, all the reflected echoes of the three probes 30a, 30b, and 30c from the position of flaw 2 are included.

On the other hand, since the reflected echo from the position of flaw 1 is smaller than the reflected echo from the position of probe 30a than flaw 2, it is generated further away from the part 33 surrounded by the dotted line, and is generated at the position of probe 30b. The reflected echo at the position of the probe 30c is smaller than the flaw 2, so it is generated farther away than the part surrounded by the dotted line, and the reflected echo at the position of the probe 30c is larger than the flaw 2, so it is generated closer than the part 33 surrounded by the dotted line. is generated.

As described above, in this case as well, when waveform synthesis is performed at the position of the probe, a reflected echo can be detected in the portion 33 surrounded by the predetermined dotted line.

FIG. 6(H) is a diagram showing a case where waveform synthesis is performed at a different position (x) from flaw 1 (solid line ◯) and flaw 2 (dotted line ◯). As shown here, the received echoes of the probes 30a and 30c are not included in the area 33 surrounded by the dotted line, but the received echoes of the probe 30b are included in the area surrounded by the dotted line. This is because when waveform synthesis is performed at a position without flaws, as in the case of Fig. 6(D), the beam path of the flaw echo at a position other than the position to be synthesized matches the distance to the position to be synthesized. This is displayed as an echo.

As described above, it can be seen that in order to eliminate the virtual image and obtain only the actual reflected echo, it is sufficient to synthesize the waveforms only at the flawed positions.

Conversely, it can be seen that in order to identify the position of a flaw, it is sufficient to have a large number of echo data that falls within a predetermined waveform synthesis position.

Next, this specific method will be explained. FIG. 7 is a schematic diagram showing the state of reflected echoes when there are two probes and one flaw. Referring to FIG. 7(A), ultrasonic waves are output from two probes 30a and 30b to one flaw indicated by a circle, and echoes reflected from the flaw are received by these probes 30a and 30b. FIG. 3 is a diagram showing reflected echoes when

In the case shown in FIG. 7B in which waveforms are synthesized at a flawed position, two reflected echoes are obtained at the combined position surrounded by the dotted line, so it can be determined that there is a flaw at this position.

In the case shown in FIG. 7C, no reflected echo from the probes 30a and 30b is obtained at a predetermined detection position 35 surrounded by a dotted line. Therefore, it can be determined that there is no flaw at this location.

In the case shown in FIG. 7(D), only one reflected echo is obtained at a predetermined detection position 35 surrounded by a dotted line. Therefore, it can be determined that there is no flaw at this location.

Next, a case where there are two flaws will be explained. FIG. 8 is a schematic diagram showing the state of reflected echoes when there are two probes and two flaws. FIG. 8(A) is a diagram showing the reflected echoes when ultrasonic waves are output from two probes 30a and 30b to two flaws and the reflected echoes from the flaws are received by these probes. be.

In FIG. 8B, two reflected echoes are obtained at a composite position 35 surrounded by a dotted line, which is one of the two flaw positions, so it can be determined that there is a flaw at this position.

In the case shown in FIG. 8C, reflected echoes from the probes 30a and 30b are obtained at a predetermined detection position 35 surrounded by a dotted line, which is the other of the two flaw positions. Therefore, it can be determined that there is a flaw at this location as well.

In the case shown in FIG. 8(D), only one reflected echo is obtained at a predetermined detection position 35 surrounded by a dotted line. Therefore, it can be determined that there is no flaw at this location.

As described above, when there are two survey lines, it can be determined that in order to eliminate the virtual image and obtain only the actual reflected echoes, it is sufficient to have two reflected echoes of the echoes that enter the predetermined waveform synthesis position. . This is because if the number of data is one, it seems that a reflected echo was obtained at a predetermined position by chance.

Next, the configuration of the ultrasonic flaw detection apparatus according to this embodiment will be explained. FIG. 9 is a block diagram showing the configuration of the ultrasonic flaw detection apparatus 10 according to this embodiment.

Referring to FIG. 9, ultrasonic flaw detection apparatus 10 includes a plurality of probes 20a to 20c and a control unit 11 such as a personal computer that processes data from the plurality of probes 20a to 20c. The control unit 11 includes a CPU 12 that controls the entire control unit 11, an input/output device 13 connected to the CPU 12, a storage unit 14 such as a RAM, a display 15, and a transmitting/receiving device 18 for transmitting and receiving data from the probe. and an interface 16 for inputting and outputting via.

Next, the operation of the ultrasonic flaw detection apparatus 10 according to this embodiment will be explained. FIG. 10 is a flowchart showing the operation of the ultrasonic flaw detection apparatus according to this embodiment.

Referring to FIG. 10, CPU 11 of control unit 10 receives data of reflected echoes from a plurality of probes 20a to 20c (S11), and synthesizes the reflected echoes (S12). Then, based on the composite data at each position, it is determined whether the reflected echo represents an actual flaw or a virtual image (S13), and its position is specified (S14).

FIG. 11 is a flowchart showing the determination process shown in S13 of FIG. Referring to FIG. 11, in this process, it is determined whether or not there is more than a certain amount of data at the composite position (S131), and if there is more than a certain amount of data (YES in S131), it is determined that it is an actual flaw. If it is otherwise (NO in S131), it is determined that it is a virtual image (S133). Then, the process returns to S13.

Therefore, the CPU 12 operates as waveform synthesis means, echo discrimination means, peak number counting means, and waveform correlation processing means.

Next, a description will be given of a number greater than a certain value that is used to distinguish between the real image echo and the virtual image echo. The inventor actually investigated the number of survey lines and the ratio of the number of detected flaw echo peaks to the number of survey lines for nine flaws. The results are shown in FIG.

Referring to FIG. 12, here, the number of survey lines is plotted as the X-axis, and the ratio of the number of detected flaw echo peaks to the number of survey lines is plotted as the Y-axis for nine flaws.

Here, a to i correspond to flaws 1 to 9, respectively. Note that flaw 4, indicated by d, partially appears in the part with many survey lines (right end), but most of the part with few survey lines overlaps with flaw 7, indicated by g.

As shown in FIG. 12, it can be seen that all flaws are 60% or more regardless of the number of survey lines.

Note that this also covers the case where there is only one flaw, which was previously explained with reference to FIGS. 7 and 8.

That is, if the number of data transmitted and received by the probe is 60% or more (the number of combinations of transmission x reception), it can be determined that the image is a real image.

In the above embodiment, a case has been described in which the number of reflected echoes is counted at a predetermined waveform synthesis position, but the present invention is not limited to this, and peaks may be detected using image recognition technology.

FIG. 13 is a graph showing the number of peaks at each intersection position (waveform synthesis position) when waveforms are synthesized at each intersection position of the waveform synthesis area.

Referring to FIG. 13, the correlation coefficients of the waveform data when the number of data is 25 lines (5 transmission x 5 reception, 25 line data) with 5 probes are synthesized, and the peak of the reflected echo is This is the result of counting the number of peaks, and if 15 or more peaks are obtained, it can be determined that it is a real image.

From this, it can be seen that if it is 60% or more of the number of data transmitted and received by the probe (the number of combinations of transmission x reception), it can be determined that it is a real image.

Although embodiments of the present invention have been described with reference to the drawings, the present invention is not limited to the illustrated embodiments. Various modifications can be made to the illustrated embodiments within the same scope or equivalent scope of the present invention.

According to this invention, a real image reflected echo from a position where there is actually a flaw is discriminated from a virtual image echo from a position where there is actually no flaw, and the real image echo and the virtual image are distinguished using the reflected echoes from at least two probes. It is possible to provide an ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device that can easily distinguish between echoes at the location of the reflection source where a flaw actually exists and other echoes, which is advantageous as an ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device. used.

10 Ultrasonic flaw detection device, 11 Control unit, 12 CPU, 13 I/O, 14 Memory, 15 Display, 16 I/F, 18 Transmission/reception device, 20, 30 Probe, 21 Reflection source, 22 Test object, 27 Predetermined area, 29 area, 31 reference waveform data.

Claims (6)

A waveform synthesis means for receiving reflected echoes from a reflection source of the test object using a plurality of probes, and adding and synthesizing the reflected echoes with a time delay;
The waveform synthesis means receives the waveform data of the reflected echoes from the reflection source within a predetermined synthesis area where the plurality of probes receive the reflected echoes, and the waveform synthesis means receives the waveform data of the reflected echoes from the reflection source within a predetermined synthesis area where the plurality of probes receive the reflected echoes. delaying the waveform data by a time based on the position of and adding them to perform waveform synthesis;
When the waveform data is delayed by a time based on the position in the synthesis area, the number of the waveform data having a peak at the timing corresponding to the position is counted, and based on the counted number, the waveform data at the position is An ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device including an echo discrimination means for determining the presence or absence of flaws in the . The echo discrimination means may be configured to delay the waveform data by a time based on the position in the synthesis area with respect to the number of lines of the reflected echoes from the plurality of probes, and to determine the timing corresponding to the position . Determining whether the ratio of the number of survey lines having a peak is above a certain level, and if the ratio is above a certain level, determining that there is a flaw at the position;
The ultrasonic flaw detection inspection apparatus according to claim 1, wherein the certain value or more is 60% or more. 3. The ultrasonic flaw detection and inspection apparatus according to claim 2, wherein the echo discrimination means includes a peak number counting means for counting the number of peaks of the reflected echoes. 3. The waveform synthesis means includes waveform correlation processing means for performing waveform correlation processing on the reflected echo to obtain a waveform peak that reflects correlation information with predetermined reference waveform data. The ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device according to any one of the above. 5. The ultrasonic flaw detection inspection apparatus according to claim 4, wherein said waveform correlation processing means uses a chirp wave as a reference waveform. a waveform synthesis step of receiving reflected echoes from a reflecting source of the test object using a plurality of probes, and adding and synthesizing them with a time delay;
In the waveform synthesis step, the plurality of probes receive the waveform data of the reflected echo from the reflection source within a predetermined synthesis area where the reflected echoes are received, and the waveform data of the reflected echo from the reflection source is received within the synthesis area set on the test specimen. delaying the waveform data by a time based on the position of and adding them to perform waveform synthesis;
When the waveform data is delayed by a time based on the position in the synthesis area, the number of waveform data having a peak at the timing corresponding to the position is counted, and based on the counted number, the waveform data at the position is A reflection source identification method using an ultrasonic flaw detection inspection device, including an echo discrimination step to determine the presence or absence of a flaw.

Images