MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W2255770487 · doi:10.4271/2003-01-2916

Pulsed Eddy Current Inspections of Aircraft Structures in Support of Holistic Damage Tolerance

2003· article· en· W2255770487 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
Mir Saeed Safizadeh, David S. Forsyth, Z. Liu, B. A. Lepine, M. Liao

Bibliographic record

VenueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper series · 2003
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEngineering
TopicNon-Destructive Testing Techniques
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsEddy currentCurrent (fluid)Computer scienceDamage toleranceSystems engineeringEngineeringReliability engineeringAerospace engineeringEnvironmental scienceElectrical engineering

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Riveted fuselage splice joints are a common feature in the construction of transport aircraft. Traditional durability and damage tolerance analyses of these joints have often ignored or greatly simplified the effect of corrosion damage and its interaction with fatigue. This has required that corrosion damage be repaired as soon as it is detected, which has in turn discouraged the use of sensitive nondestructive inspection (NDI) techniques which may find structurally insignificant amounts of damage. New holistic life assessment models which do account for corrosion damage are under development by many research groups including the National Research Council Canada. These models require quantitative assessment of corrosion damage as well as fatigue damage. Pulsed eddy current (PEC) inspection methods have been developed to address these needs, and this paper presents the results of a signal processing technique developed to characterize material loss in a two-layer structure from PEC data. The goal of the technique is to map the thickness of both the 1st and 2nd layers. Applying this method to PEC data measured on a laboratory test specimen shows that corrosion can be quantified with an error of less than 4% of a layer thickness. The effect of NDI error in corrosion quantification on maintenance and repair is estimated using a holistic, probabilistic life assessment model. The paper will discuss how these models, along with verified NDI techniques, can be used to implement new proactive maintenance paradigms for aircraft structural components.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame machine prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. The Gemma side is a direct model label for every work in the frame, read from the title-only record. The Codex side is a classifier learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and calibrated to design-weighted sample rates; fields without enough sample support carry no Codex call. Candidate is the union of the two sides; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.000
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.001
Version: metacan-v3-hybrid-931329e0061cValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Bench or experimental · Consensus signal: Bench or experimental
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.001
Threshold uncertainty score0.003

Distilled classifier scores by category (both heads)

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0000.001
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0010.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0010.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.019
GPT teacher head0.275
Teacher spread0.256 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one source (direct Gemma or distilled Codex), not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designBench or experimental
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations2
Published2003
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueSAE technical papers on CD-ROM/SAE technical paper seriesSame topicNon-Destructive Testing TechniquesFrench-language works237,207