Signal Processing for NDE

  • Masoud Vejdannik
  • Ali Sadr
  • Victor Hugo C. de Albuquerque
  • João Manuel R. S. TavaresEmail author
Reference work entry


Testing and evaluating of industrial equipment using nondestructive tests are fundamental steps in the manufacturing process. The complexity and high costs of manufacturing industrial components require examinations in some way about the quality and reliability of the specimens. However, it should be noted that in order to accurately perform the nondestructive test, in addition to theoretical knowledge, it is also essential to have experience and care, which require special courses and experience with theoretical education. Therefore, in the traditional methods, which are based on manual testing techniques and the test results depend on the operator, there is a possibility of an invalid inference from the test data. In other words, the accuracy of conclusion from the obtained data is dependent on the skill and experience of the operator. Thus, using the signal processing techniques for nondestructive evaluation (NDE), it is possible to optimize the methods of nondestructive inspection, in other words, to improve the overall system performance, in terms of reliability and system implementation costs.

In recent years, intelligent signal processing techniques have had a significant impact on the progress of nondestructive assessment. In other words, by automating the processing of nondestructive data and signals, and using artificial intelligence methods, it is possible to optimize nondestructive inspection methods, hence improving the overall system performance in terms of reliability and implementation costs of the system. This chapter reviews the issues of intelligent processing of nondestructive testing (NDT) signals.



VHCA acknowledges the sponsorship from the Brazilian National Council for Research and Development (CNPq) via Grant No. 301928/2014-2. JMRST gratefully acknowledges the funding of Project NORTE-01-0145-FEDER-000022 – SciTech – Science and Technology for Competitive and Sustainable Industries, co-financed by “Programa Operacional Regional do Norte” (NORTE2020), through “Fundo Europeu de Desenvolvimento Regional” (FEDER).


  1. Acciani G, Brunetti G, Fornarelli G, Giaquinto A (2010) Angular and axial evaluation of superficial defects on non-accessible pipes by wavelet transform and neural network-based classification. Ultrasonics 50:13–25CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  2. Akram N, Isa D, Rajkumar R, Lee L (2014) Active incremental support vector machine for oil and gas pipeline defects prediction system using long range ultrasonic transducers. Ultrasonics 54:1534–1544CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  3. Baker A, Windsor C (1989) The classification of defects from ultrasonic data using neural networks: The Hopfield method, NDT International, 22(2):97–105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  4. Baker A, Windsor C (1992) The classification of defects from ultrasonic data using neural networks: the Hopfield method, NDT & E International, 25(1):46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  5. Barry T, Kesharaju M, Nagarajah C, Palanisamy S (2015) Defect characterisation in laminar composite structures using ultrasonic techniques and artificial neural networks. J Compos Mater 50:861–871CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  6. Bustillo J, Fortineau J, Gautier G, Lethiecq M (2014a) Ultrasonic characterization of porous silicon using a genetic algorithm to solve the inverse problem. NDT E Int 62:93–98CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  7. Bustillo J, Fortineau J, Gautier G, Lethiecq M (2014b) Ultrasonic characterization of electrochemically etched porous silicon. Jpn J Appl Phys 53:060308CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  8. Cau F, Fanni A, Montisci A, Testoni P, Usai M (2006) A signal-processing tool for non-destructive testing of inaccessible pipes. Eng Appl Artif Intell 19:753–760CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  9. Chen J, Shi Y, Shi S (1999) Noise analysis of digital ultrasonic nondestructive evaluation system. Int J Press Vessel Pip 76:619–630CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  10. Crouch I, Kesharaju M, Nagarajah R (2015) Characterisation, significance and detection of manufacturing defects in Reaction Sintered Silicon Carbide armour materials. Ceram Int 41:11581–11591CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  11. de Albuquerque V, Cortez P, de Alexandria A, Tavares J (2008) A new solution for automatic microstructures analysis from images based on a backpropagation artificial neural network. Nondestruct Test Eval 23:273–283CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  12. de Albuquerque V, de Alexandria A, Cortez P, Tavares J (2009a) Evaluation of multilayer perceptron and self-organizing map neural network topologies applied on microstructure segmentation from metallographic images. NDT E Int 42:644–651CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  13. de Albuquerque V, Tavares J, Durão L (2009b) Evaluation of delamination damage on composite plates using an artificial neural network for the radiographic image analysis. J Compos Mater 44:1139–1159CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  14. de Albuquerque V, Filho P, Cavalcante T, Tavares J (2010a) New computational solution to quantify synthetic material porosity from optical microscopic images. J Microsc 240:50–59MathSciNetCrossRefGoogle Scholar
  15. de Albuquerque V, de Macedo Silva E, Pereira Leite J, de Moura E, de Araújo Freitas V, Tavares J (2010b) Spinodal decomposition mechanism study on the duplex stainless steel UNS S31803 using ultrasonic speed measurements. Mater Des 31:2147–2150CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  16. de Albuquerque V, Melo T, de Oliveira D, Gomes R, Tavares J (2010c) Evaluation of grain refiners influence on the mechanical properties in a CuAlBe shape memory alloy by ultrasonic and mechanical tensile testing. Mater Des 31:3275–3281CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  17. de Albuquerque V, Silva C, Menezes T, Farias J, Tavares J (2010d) Automatic evaluation of nickel alloy secondary phases from SEM images. Microsc Res Tech 74:36–46CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  18. de Albuquerque V, Silva C, Normando P, Moura E, Tavares J (2012) Thermal aging effects on the microstructure of Nb-bearing nickel based superalloy weld overlays using ultrasound techniques. Mater Des 36:337–347CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  19. de Albuquerque V, Barbosa C, Silva C, Moura E, Filho P, Papa J, Tavares J (2015) Ultrasonic sensor signals and optimum path forest classifier for the microstructural characterization of thermally-aged inconel 625 alloy. Sensors 15:12474–12497CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  20. de Araújo Freitas V, Normando P, de Albuquerque V, de Macedo Silva E, Silva A, Tavares J (2011) Nondestructive characterization and evaluation of embrittlement kinetics and elastic constants of duplex stainless steel SAF 2205 for different aging times at 425 °C and 475 °C. J Nondestruct Eval 30:130–136CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  21. de Macedo Silva E, de Albuquerque V, Leite J, Varela A, Moura E, Tavares J (2009) Phase transformations evaluation on a UNS S31803 duplex stainless steel based on nondestructive testing. Mater Sci Eng A 516:126–130CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  22. de Macedo Silva E, Leite J, de França Neto F, Leite J, Fialho W, de Albuquerque V, Tavares J (2014) Evaluation of the magnetic permeability for the microstructural characterization of a duplex stainless steel. J Test Eval 44:20130313CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  23. de Macedo Silva E, Leite J, Leite J, Fialho W, de Albuquerque V, Tavares J (2016) Induced magnetic field used to detect the sigma phase of a 2205 duplex stainless steel. J Nondestruct Eval 35.
  24. Duda R, Hart P, Stork D (2001) Pattern classification. New York, NY: John Wiley & SonsGoogle Scholar
  25. Durão L, Tavares J, de Albuquerque V, Marques A, Magalhães A, Vieira A (2010) Tool effects on hybrid laminates drilling. Mater Manuf Process 25:476–481CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  26. Durão L, Gonçalves D, Tavares J, de Albuquerque V, Marques A (2011) Comparative analysis of drills for composite laminates. J Compos Mater 46:1649–1659CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  27. Durão L, Tavares J, de Albuquerque V, Gonçalves D (2013) Damage evaluation of drilled carbon/epoxy laminates based on area assessment methods. Compos Struct 96:576–583CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  28. Farley S, Durodola J, Fellows N, Hernández-Gómez L (2012) High resolution non-destructive evaluation of defects using artificial neural networks and wavelets. NDT E Int 52:69–75CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  29. Freitas V, Albuquerque V, Silva E, Silva A, Tavares J (2010) Nondestructive characterization of microstructures and determination of elastic properties in plain carbon steel using ultrasonic measurements. Mater Sci Eng A 527:4431–4437CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  30. Haikeyin (2001) A comprehensive foundation. Prentice Hall PTRGoogle Scholar
  31. Iyer S, Sinha S, Tittmann B, Pedrick M (2012) Ultrasonic signal processing methods for detection of defects in concrete pipes. Autom Constr 22:135–148CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  32. Karray F, De Silva C (2004) Soft computing and tools of intelligent systems design. Addison-Wesley, HarlowGoogle Scholar
  33. Kesharaju M, Nagarajah R (2015) Feature selection for neural network based defect classification of ceramic components using high frequency ultrasound. Ultrasonics 62:271–277CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  34. Kesharaju M, Nagarajah R, Zhang T, Crouch I (2014) Ultrasonic sensor based defect detection and characterisation of ceramics. Ultrasonics 54:312–317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  35. Kuncheva L (2014) Combining pattern classifiers. Wiley, HobokenzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  36. Liu S, Du C, Mou J, Martua L, Zhang J, Lewis F (2013) Diagnosis of structural cracks using wavelet transform and neural networks. NDT E Int 54:9–18CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  37. Manolakis D, Ingle V, Kogon S (2005) Statistical and adaptive signal processing. Artech House, BostonGoogle Scholar
  38. Margrave F, Rigas K, Bradley D, Barrowcliffe P (1999) The use of neural networks in ultrasonic flaw detection. Measurement 25:143–154CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  39. Nunes T, de Albuquerque V, Papa J, Silva C, Normando P, Moura E, Tavares J (2013) Automatic microstructural characterization and classification using artificial intelligence techniques on ultrasound signals. Expert Syst Appl 40:3096–3105CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  40. Oppenheim A, Schafer R (2014) Discrete-time signal processing. Pearson, HarlowzbMATHGoogle Scholar
  41. Papa J, Falcão A, de Albuquerque V, Tavares J (2012) Efficient supervised optimum-path forest classification for large datasets. Pattern Recogn 45:512–520CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  42. Papa J, Nakamura R, de Albuquerque V, Falcão A, Tavares J (2013) Computer techniques towards the automatic characterization of graphite particles in metallographic images of industrial materials. Expert Syst Appl 40:590–597CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  43. Santos J, Perdigão F (2001) Automatic defects classification – a contribution. NDT E Int 34:313–318CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  44. Silva E, Marinho L, Filho P, Leite J, Leite J, Fialho W, de Albuquerque V, Tavares J (2016a) Classification of induced magnetic field signals for the microstructural characterization of sigma phase in duplex stainless steels. Metals 6:164CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  45. Silva E, Paula A, Leite J, Leite J, Andrade L, de Albuquerque V, Tavares J (2016b) Detection of the magnetic easy direction in steels using induced magnetic fields. Metals 6:317CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  46. Simas Filho E, Souza Y, Lopes J, Farias C, Albuquerque M (2013) Decision support system for ultrasound inspection of fiber metal laminates using statistical signal processing and neural networks. Ultrasonics 53:1104–1111CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  47. Singh G, Udpa S (1986) The role of digital signal processing in NDT. NDT Int 19:125–132CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  48. Song S, Schmerr L (1992) Ultrasonic flaw classification in weldments using probabilistic neural networks. J Nondestruct Eval 11:69–77CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  49. Su L, Zha Z, Lu X, Shi T, Liao G (2013) Using BP network for ultrasonic inspection of flip chip solder joints. Mech Syst Signal Process 34:183–190CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  50. Su L, Shi T, Du L, Lu X, Liao G (2015) Genetic algorithms for defect detection of flip chips. Microelectron Reliab 55:213–220CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  51. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2015) Application of linear discriminant analysis to ultrasound signals for automatic microstructural characterization and classification. J Signal Process Sys 83(3):411–421CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  52. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2016a) Automatic microstructural characterization and classification using higher-order spectra on ultrasound signals. J Nondestruct Eval 35:1CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  53. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2016b) Automatic microstructural characterization and classification using probabilistic neural network on ultrasound signals. J Intell Manuf. Scholar
  54. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2016c) Automatic microstructural characterization and classification using dual tree complex wavelet-based features and Bees Algorithm. Neural Comput Applic 28(7):1877–1889CrossRefGoogle Scholar
  55. Vejdannik M, Sadr A (2016d) Application of statistical signal processing techniques to ultrasound signals for automatic microstructural characterization and classification, In: 3rd International Iranian NDT Conference, Tehran: IRAN NDTGoogle Scholar

Copyright information

© Springer Nature Switzerland AG 2019

Authors and Affiliations

  • Masoud Vejdannik
    • 1
  • Ali Sadr
    • 1
  • Victor Hugo C. de Albuquerque
    • 2
  • João Manuel R. S. Tavares
    • 3
    Email author
  1. 1.School of Electrical EngineeringIran University of Science and Technology (IUST)Narmak, TehranIran
  2. 2.Programa de Pós Graduação em Informática AplicadaUniversidade de Fortaleza (UNIFOR)FortalezaBrazil
  3. 3.Instituto de Ciência e Inovação em Engenharia Mecânica e Engenharia Industrial, Faculdade de EngenhariaUniversidade do PortoPortoPortugal

Section editors and affiliations

  • Ida Nathan
    • 1
  • Norbert Meyendorf
    • 2
  1. 1.Department of Electrical and Computer EngineeringUniversity of AkronAkronUSA
  2. 2.Center for Nondestructive EvaluationIowa State UniversityAmesUSA

Personalised recommendations