Estimation of probability of detection (POD) curves by NDT typically relies on the manufacture of large numbers of realistic defect specimens, followed by practical trials of the inspection procedure. These are costly and time consuming activities. POD curves could be generated more rapidly and more cost-effectively if theoretical simulation of PODs were shown to be sufficiently representative of actual inspection performance. This paper compares the predictions of two such simulation-based POD models with pre-existing evidence from EDF Energy's Capability Statement for manual ultrasonic testing (UT). One of the models is an in-house software tool called PODPEDGE, which calls the EDF Energy code PEDGE. The other POD tool is part of the CIVA code developed by CEA. Overall the PODs predicted by both tools were consistent with pre-existing evidence. Where like-for-like comparisons were possible, there was also remarkably good agreement between them. In many respects, the CIVA software offers broader functionality than the PODPEDGE tool, eg different materials and component geometries. However, PODPEDGE has the advantage of faster run-times and can therefore produce more accurate point estimates of POD (within a specified run-time). PODPEDGE also includes an internal estimate of model accuracy, based on error flags available within the PEDGE code.
展开▼
