Application guide

Composite NDT Beyond Wind: Aerospace and Marine Parts

Where the open platform goes beyond blades: tighter acceptance criteria, multi-modality payloads on one interface and reporting for aerospace compliance

Author: · Updated 2026-10-07

TL;DR Multi-brand probe support, Eddyfi, Zetec, Olympus and Dolphitech on one interface. Custom scan paths via a C++ and Python SDK for complex or changing geometry. Multi-modality payloads, ultrasonic, eddy current and thermography, on one platform. Traceable reporting with a change log for aerospace and energy compliance.

The composite inspection problem does not stop at a blade. Aerospace and marine structures are built from the same class of material and inspected with the same methods, and their acceptance criteria are tighter rather than looser. What changes is the flexibility the platform has to offer.

What this stage covers

The scope is composite parts beyond wind, where acceptance criteria are tight and geometry varies. An open probe platform that hosts multi-brand probes on one interface, with custom scan paths driven from an SDK, fits a shop that inspects several part families rather than one. A blade programme and an aerospace shop can share the approach even where the limits differ.

What the inspection includes

  • Multi-brand probe support, Eddyfi, Zetec, Olympus and Dolphitech on one interface
  • Custom scan paths via a C++ and Python SDK for complex or changing geometry
  • Multi-modality payloads, ultrasonic, eddy current and thermography, on one platform
  • Traceable reporting with a change log for aerospace and energy compliance

Where the value sits

The flexibility is what carries across part families. A closed system forces one vendor’s probes regardless of the part, while an open interface with tool-free swaps in under 30 seconds and automatic probe recognition lets the probe follow the application. Where an aerospace structure needs a different array than a wind cap, the platform supplies it without a second system. The reporting carries over too, because each indication is versioned against the part serial, the operator and the calibration block, which is the audit trail a tight acceptance criterion needs. Two part families on one platform means one acquisition system where a closed architecture needs two, and a swap in under 30 seconds keeps the changeover inside the shift rather than across it.

How to plan this stage

Run these checks in order. By Step 5 the scan, the threshold and the record are aligned to the stage.

  1. Fix the acceptance threshold. Start from the threshold the zone carries, not from the method you happen to own. IEC 61400-5 Section 11 asks for volumetric detection of indications 6 mm and larger in the laminate plane, and DNV-ST-0126 tightens the leading edge to 3 mm, so the threshold is set before the probe is chosen.
  2. Read the geometry off the drawing. Measure the thickness and the curvature the probe has to travel. A spar cap up to 80 mm of unidirectional laminate and a root transition of changing radius are two different scan problems, and the radius decides how the array is coupled.
  3. Choose the modality pair. Pick modules by defect geometry, not by habit. PAUT images planar separations that lie parallel to the plies, TOFD catches volumetric clusters whatever their orientation, and running both on a 256-channel system puts the two mechanisms in one pass.
  4. Automate the scan path. Put the probe on an encoder-driven carriage and let the path, not the technician, set coverage. A 600 mm spar cap falls to one longitudinal pass at 500 mm/s on a linear array, where a single-element probe needs 20 parallel passes and runs about five times longer.
  5. Lock the evidence chain. Write the coverage map, the daily calibration and the indication log to the blade serial while the scan is running. It is the difference between a 3-day type-certification audit and a 3-hour document review, and it is what ISO 9712 qualification is there to sign.

The numbers below are drawn from the equipment records and field campaigns this site already publishes, not from a generic catalogue.

Frequently Asked Questions

Can the same platform inspect wind and aerospace composites?

Yes, when the probe interface is open. Multi-brand probes on one platform with tool-free swaps in under 30 seconds and automatic recognition let the probe follow the application rather than the vendor.

Why does an open probe architecture matter?

Because a closed system forces one vendor's probes regardless of the part. An open platform selects the best probe for each job, whether that is a wind cap or an aerospace structure, without a second acquisition system.

How are tight acceptance criteria supported?

Through traceable reporting. Every indication is versioned against the part serial, the operator ID and the calibration block, which is the change log a tight criterion and an aerospace or energy audit require.

What can custom scan paths do?

Follow geometry a standard path cannot. The C++ and Python SDK lets a shop define scan paths for complex or changing parts, so an unusual curvature is handled by the path rather than by the operator's hand.

Bottom line: Composite inspection beyond wind runs the same methods against tighter criteria, so the platform has to flex. Use an open probe interface, custom scan paths from an SDK and versioned reporting, and one shop can cover several part families without a second system.

Standards and sources

Need the scan plan behind this?

Send the blade geometry and the gate you inspect at. We will map the scan, the threshold and the reporting to the programme you already run.

Talk to an engineer
Add NDT Windblade as a preferred source on Google