Automatic Defect Recognition (ADR) is a term that is gaining traction within the NDT world. However, neither ADR or the functions such a system should deliver are clearly defined.
At JetSoft we prefer to split ADR into two stages, using the terminology Automatic Indication Detection (AID) and Automatic Part Sentencing (APS).
The problem with ADR
The scope of ADR isn’t clear. In theory, ADR can range from a system which highlights abnormalities to an inspector, to one which can perform full sentencing and provide go/no go which eliminates the need for an inspector at all. In practice, most end users anticipate a solution resembling the latter, but this may not be true of the products promoted by equipment vendors.
AID and APS
At JetSoft we don’t use the term ADR, due to the lack of clarity on what this means, instead we use the terms:
- Automatic Indication Detection (AID)
- Automatic Part Sentencing (APS)
Defect detection is a two-step process. The first is the discovery of an indication or discontinuity. JetSoft refers to this as Automatic Indication Detection (AID). The results be highlighted to an inspector or used as an independent assessment and compared with the manual outcome.
For an indication to be consider a defect it must be qualified against a specification. This requires the system to locate, size and interpret what the indication is. Once a system can detect defects it can automatically decide on the future of that component. JetSoft calls this second step Automatic Part Sentencing (APS).
Is ADR overhyped?
ADR is racing towards the peak of inflated expectations on the Hype Cycle. We hear a lot about the benefits involved with ADR, but perhaps less so of the realism of implementing and delivering them.
The Hype Cycle, developed by the technology firm Gartner, details the phases a new technology goes through to reach maturity and widespread adoption.
The scale of the peak and trough of this graph is exacerbated by the lack of clear definition of ADR. It is not difficult to imagine a situation where customers and suppliers differ on the expected functionality, resulting in a negative view of ADR and its possibilities.
However, ADR will happen. There is a large commercial appetite to reduce the cost of inspection and new advances in computation technologies prove that it is possible technically. But it may take a while to get there and take more investment by users than anticipated. The market should be prepared not to expect a single turnkey algorithm that performs ADR and any component for any defect.
What to expect
JetSoft is amongst several companies utilising these new technologies, with working systems in place in production environments.
It is JetSoft’s experience that performing accurate automatic detection of defects takes dedicated time, development, and extensive testing. Furthermore, for an AID system to be effective, additional information beyond inspection data is required. Including component details and upstream process data, both of which are critical.
It is important to note that in every case the preceding step to achieving an APS must be a fully working, and empirically proven AID system.
As always, we would love to hear your thoughts on this, and if you have any questions, or would like to know more about what we do and the systems we have developed please get in contact.