Industry Standard For X-Ray Verification Test Sizes?
I was hoping to see if anyone had a pulse on if there is an industry standard for X-Ray verification test piece sizes for cards/wands.
I am looking here...
http://www.mt.com/da...atalogue_EN.pdf
They have so many different size pieces and metal types I was hoping to get some guidance on what we should be looking to test for. Millimeter size? Material type?
Thanks in advance.
I was hoping to see if anyone had a pulse on if there is an industry standard for X-Ray verification test piece sizes for cards/wands.
I am looking here...
http://www.mt.com/da...atalogue_EN.pdf
They have so many different size pieces and metal types I was hoping to get some guidance on what we should be looking to test for. Millimeter size? Material type?
Thanks in advance.
Hi jfox,
Afai can see, the short answer to yr query is either "well-hidden" or NO.
Direct quantitative comparison of X-ray to MDs is not easy because the 2 techniques have fundamentally different operational modes, eg - .
In some applications, it’s obvious which type of inspection technology to opt for, since only one of them can reliably detect the contaminants that pose the risk you’re trying to mitigate. However, it’s not always that straightforward. The two technologies will often succeed or fail depending on two different sets of criteria. Success with metal detectors tends to depend on the materials involved (the product, the packaging and the contamination), while x-ray detectors are more likely to be affected by other parameters such as the shape of product and the mode of transport through the unit, in addition to density differentials
.http://www.processin...-x-ray-machines
(The above article IMO contained more practical information, albeit qualitative, than most)
Some (rare) X-ray data -
State-of-the-art X-ray system
Ries, who is responsible for both metal detection and X-ray systems, sees X-ray as a step beyond metal detection, but not a panacea for all inspection applications. “X-ray systems can typically find 10-30 percent smaller metal contaminants and many non-metal contaminants. The price is higher, usually two to three times, and system lifetime is shorter (five to seven years vs. 10 to 15 years for metal detectors).”
Current state-of-the-art with X-ray is 0.5 to 0.7mm detection of metal or thin products. Because X-ray detection is density based, many other contaminants more dense than water can also be found. Glass detection is usually in the 1.5 to 3mm range, and stones with density similar to that of glass have comparable results under X-rays. However, only the most dense bones and plastics are currently detectable, as stated above.
http://www.foodengin...ray-inspection-
A basic MD/X-Ray Comparison table -
MD vs X-ray.png 84.87KB 0 downloads
Source -
WhitePaper-MD-vs-XRay.pdf 1.36MB 76 downloads
We want to ask our suppliers for the sensitivity of their x-ray systems, but we don't quite know what to ask for, and how to interpret any answers we get. Are there industry standards to measure?
We want to ask our suppliers for the sensitivity of their x-ray systems, but we don't quite know what to ask for, and how to interpret any answers we get. Are there industry standards to measure?
Hi diane,
You seem to be repeating the OP ???
Offhand, i would have thought any reputable supplier of X-ray detectors would have to know the answer to yr query. And its interpretation.
IMO it's an excellent question to ask. :thumbup:
addendum -
these xray links may also be of interest, especially the first one maybe -
http://www.ifsqn.com...e-right-choice/
http://www.ifsqn.com...ting-procedure/
http://www.ifsqn.com...198-x-ray-help/