DGS

A method using the DGS diagram ( Distance Gain Size) for experessing the high echo from a reflector in terms of the
equivalent height of a disc shaped reflector. This techniquie is one of several methods used for the sizing of effects sometimes
reffered to a DAC/AVG- method (German term)
Sizing Method
Advantage :
Simple go/no- system
Can be applied to different shapes

Disadvantage:
Requires special curves, no indication of vertical extent





DGS diagram
The regularities of sound propagation in material have been theoretically known
for a long time and were confirmed in practice by numerous experiments. The
development of modern evaluation methods shows two ways. With the reference
block method the characteristic curve of the sound field is always determined
before carrying out an ultrasonic test, whereas in the DGS method DGS diagrams
for probes are applied for this. A DGS diagram shows the echo amplitudes of disk
shaped reflectors with different diameters and those of large, flat reflectors
(backwall) as a function of the distance Fig.1 DGS Diagram.
Procedure
To understand this better, let us start by explaining the sequences for both evaluation methods at this point.
The reference block method requires that a reference block, corresponding to the test object and
containing one or more reference reflectors, be available for the test. The distance dependence of
echo amplitudes is determined experimentally by means of drilled holes in the reference block, the
resulting curve is then transmitted to the screen display of the test instrument (DAC Distance
Amplitude Correction). This curve automatically includes all probe (sound field) and material
effects. The test object can now be scanned with the probe. An indication recording is made when an
echo reaches the DAC curve or exceeds it.
A prerequisite with the DGS method is that the corresponding DGS diagram be available for the
probe used in the test application. The reference gain of the test instrument, with which the reference
echo is at a fixed screen height (reference level), is determined for a specific reflector, i.e. the
reference reflector. After this, the instrument gain is increased by a certain value, i.e. the test
sensitivity is adjusted. If the reference reflector is a circular arc from one of the standardized
calibration blocks, then the instrument gain should be varied in accordance with the correction value
given for the angle beam probe: the amplitude correction value is adjusted. With different surface
qualities between the test object and the calibration block the transfer correction must be determined
experimentally and likewise taken into consideration. The gain difference with regard to the
reference echo is determined for the maximum echo from a detected indication. This is followed by
a graphic determination of the equivalent reflector size using the DGS diagram. If required, the
sound attenuation correction is additionally carried out. This makes it possible to assess whether the
indication is to be recorded or not. Nevertheless, by using the DGS scale it is possible to
significantly simplify evaluation with the DGS method (Fig.2).
Fig. 2 Evaluation using a DGS scale.
In this connection, the inspector uses an attachment scale for the screen of the
ultrasonic instrument. This scale contains one or several ready made recording curves.
The tiresome graphic evaluation with the DGS diagram can thus be omitted. The
inspector can directly assess flaw indications by means of the curve.
A comparison of the test sequences for the reference block method and DGS method shows the pros and
cons in this table.


Pros and cons of the DGS and reference block method

Refernce block methode DGS-method
Pros
The DAC curve contains all test-related
Influences, i.e. no time-consuming
corrections are recuired.
Easy and reliable evaluation.
No reference blocks required.
Cons
Fabrication or procurement of a
suitable reference block.
Recording of a DAC curve for every
test application
Measurement and consideration of different
individual corrections.
Graphic determination of the equivalent reflector size.

Electronic DGS evaluation
The use of microprocessor controlled ultrasonic instruments considerably simplifies both evaluation
methods, resulting in saving of time and higher test reliability. The DGS evaluation now becomes
particularly easy in an ultrasonic instrument like the USN 50 by an optional evaluation program (Fig.3):
Fig.3 The ultrasonic flaw detector USN 50 with DGS display

There are DGS diagrams for 13 standard probes stored in the instrument. However, other
probes can also be programmed on the basis of their parameters and filed in one of the 30 data
sets. A flat bottom hole (disk shaped reflector), side drilled hole or backwall can be selected as reference
reflectors. Owing to the operational concept, the use of the DGS method in the USN 50 is especially easy
and reliable, operating errors by the inspector are largely excluded due to the display of warning messages
on the screen. After the input of all parameters necessary for the flaw evaluation, the corresponding
recording curve is electronically displayed on the instrument screen (Fig.4).
Fig.4 Display contents of the USN 50 with active DGS function

The evaluation program ensures a direct evaluation of a detected indication. All the necessary
corrections are taken into consideration in this respect: exceeding of the recording threshold, i.e. the dB
value by which the flaw indication exceeds the preset recording curve, is directly displayed on the screen.
This type of evaluation meets the practical requirements specified in most of the testing guidelines. For
example, these do not only include e.g. the widely known HP 5/3, DIN 54 125, SEL 072, etc., but also all
other specifications requiring flat bottom holes as reference reflectors.