Research Article
Using Expert Opinion to Quantify Uncertainty in and Cost of Using Nondestructive Evaluation on Bridges
Table 5
Concrete and steel NDE method normalized averages for accuracy determined from the participant responses.
| | | Normalized average | | | False positive | False negative | True response |
| | Concrete methods | | Electrical potential | 8.40% | 11.60% | 80.00% | | Mechanical sounding | 10.41% | 12.22% | 77.37% | | Thermal | 6.67% | 33.33% | 60.00% | | Visual inspection | 9.76% | 11.95% | 78.29% | | Steel methods | | Acoustic emission | — | — | 100.00% | | Liquid penetrant | 8.40% | 8.16% | 83.44% | | Magnetic particle-crack | 10.92% | 12.26% | 76.81% | | Magnetic particle-weld | 10.35% | 10.51% | 79.14% | | Radiography | 6.43% | 9.07% | 84.50% | | Ultrasonic-crack | 8.00% | 8.00% | 84.00% | | Ultrasonic-pin | 8.92% | 8.92% | 82.16% | | Ultrasonic-weld | 6.89% | 8.23% | 84.88% | | Visual inspection | 14.54% | 14.83% | 70.63% |
|
|
