Shape-based defect classification for Non Destructive
Testing
Gianni D’Angelo, Salvatore Rampone
University of Sannio
Dept. of Science and Technology
Benevento, Italy
{dangelo, rampone}@unisannio.it
Abstract— The aim of this work is to classify the aerospace
structure defects detected by eddy current non-destructive
testing. The proposed method is based on the assumption that the
defect is bound to the reaction of the probe coil impedance
during the test. Impedance plane analysis is used to extract a
feature vector from the shape of the coil impedance in the
complex plane, through the use of some geometric parameters.
Shape recognition is tested with three different machine-learning
based classifiers: decision trees, neural networks and Naive
Bayes. The performance of the proposed detection system are
measured in terms of accuracy, sensitivity, specificity, precision
and Matthews correlation coefficient. Several experiments are
performed on dataset of eddy current signal samples for aircraft
structures. The obtained results demonstrate the usefulness of
our approach and the competiveness against existing descriptors.
Keywords— Non-destructive testing (NDT); learning algorithm;
signature-based classifier; content-based image retrieval (CBIR);
shape geometric descriptor (SGD); eddy current testing (ECT).

I.

INTRODUCTION

In aircraft manufacturing and maintenance, NonDestructive Testing (NDT) is widely used for evaluating the
property of materials, components, systems, without causing
damage during the analysis. In aerospace industry, NDT is not
only necessary but plays a crucial role in the risk management.
There are many NDT technologies that are available for
aircraft inspections. The most common methods are based on
visual and optical testing: optical holography, X-ray, ultrasonic
wave, infrared detection, X-ray and ultrasonic C-scan.
Eddy Current Testing (ECT) [1] is one of the NDT methods
that are widely used in detecting surface or subsurface crack of
conductive materials. Recent technologies have made ECT
more powerful and useful in quality assurance. Modern ECT
techniques are based on low-cost methods and are easily
applicable for the inspection where premature failures could
give rise to economic or related to human life problems.
However, most of the ECTs in maintenance, are currently
conducted by human inspectors, whose individual experiences
may yield to differences in the interpretation of the results.
Generally, the human operators take decision on the
acceptability of the piece under test by evaluating typical
bidimensional graphs that depict the reactance versus the
resistance of the coil impedance of the ECT probe. Reliable

human performance is vital to inspections and tests. Inadequate
human performance could lead to missed defects and
inaccurate reports, with potentially serious safety and cost
consequences. In addition, manpower assigned to such tasks
imply significant recurrent costs and it is time consuming in
itself. The presence of defects and damages in aerospace
structure pose a significant threat to the integrity of the
structures and also in the reliability and safety of the
inspections. For this reason, the accuracy of diagnosis of
aerospace materials cannot be left only to the human capacity
but also entrusted to mathematical models and advanced
methods of data processing [2]. Different solutions have been
proposed to address this issue [3-5]. The main methods are
based on two principal approaches: the model-based and the
model-free techniques. The first refers to the use of computer
simulators to determine the material electromagnetic
parameters by measuring the probe impedance and relying on
mathematical models of probe geometry [6]. The second are
based on the use of signal analysis acquired during the test. In
this approach, the methods of spectrum analysis and pattern
recognition are often used in multi-parametric control for data
processing [7]. The signals acquired from the sensors are
processed in the frequency domain to extract the magnetic field
information. In fact, the presence of a defect causes an
asymmetricity in the induced signals that can be highlighted in
the frequency domain by analyzing the signal harmonics [8]. In
[9] the authors proposed a "model-free" method based on the
spectrum analysis and on a proper algorithm that uses a
machine learning technique [10]. However, the application of
these methods requires sophisticated techniques for processing
signals that, for a large amount of date, lead to have long
process time [11]. These do not allow the automation of the test
and deprive them of the same dynamism typical of a system
able to adapt itself to changes in the parameters of the testing
system at run-time. NDT should be performed with methods
able to collect the most comprehensive information about new
defects, expand existed base of defects and increase diagnostics
system precision in runtime. The key to a successful testing
system is to choose the right features extraction method that
represent the defect as accurately and uniquely as possible in a
short time. Recently, the image analysis and pattern recognition
techniques in NDT are being increasingly used to increase the
objectivity, consistency and efficiency of the testing [12, 13].
This new “model-free” based approach involves extracting of
the hidden useful “knowledge” [14-16] embedded in the

images representing the ECT results. The fast growth of
multimedia data [17], mainly due to the wide spread of digital
devices [18], has lead to the developing of high-performance
techniques in the field of image retrieval. These techniques are
generally known as Content-Based Image Retrieval (CBIR)
systems [19]. CBIR systems perform the image retrieval
through a similarity process which is defined in terms of visual
features with more objectiveness. The Shape Geometric
Description (SGD) [20] of the objects, represented in images,
is one of the most significant properties used in CBIR tasks.
One of the main advantages of this approach is the
performance in terms of velocity. In fact, the feature data for
each of the visual attributes of each image is very much smaller
in size compared to the image data.
In this paper we propose a CBIR system to recognize the
image that assumes the impedance of the EC probe coil in the
complex plane for a specific defect. We make use of some
geometric parameters to descript the shape of the probe coil
impedance. Shape recognition is tested on the automated
classification of eddy current signatures with three different
machine-learning based classifiers: decision trees, neural
networks and Naive Bayes. The performance of the proposed
detection system are measured in terms of accuracy, sensitivity,
specificity, precision and Matthews correlation coefficient.
The paper is organized as follows. In Section 2 we briefly
give a description of the image retrieval issue. Discussions
related to the features extraction from the EC impedance shape
in the complex plane are presented in section 3. In Section 4 we
explain the SGD-based proposed experiments and we show the
related results. Last section is devoted to the conclusions.
II.

There are many different implementations of CBIR, so that the
CBIR has attracted the attention of researchers across several
disciplines. Nevertheless, the key to a good retrieval system is
to choose the right features that better represent the images
while minimizing the computation complexity.
B. Shape geometric descriptor (SGD)
The shape descriptor aims to measure geometric attributes of
an image. There are many different kinds of shape matching
methods, and the progress in improving the matching rate has
been substantial in recent years. However, these descriptors are
categorized into two main groups: region-based shape
descriptors and contour-based shape descriptors [29]. The first
method uses all the pixel information within a shape region of
a image. Common region-based methods make use of moment
descriptors [30] that include: geometric moments, Legendre
moments, Zernike moments and others [31]. Contour-based
approaches use only the information related to the boundary of
a shape region and do not consider the shape interior content.
These include Fourier descriptor, Wavelet descriptors,
curvature scale space and shape signatures [32].
In Fig. 1 is depicted typical geometric parameters for the shape
signatures. They include: Area (A), perimeter (P), centroid (G),
orientation angle (α), principal inertia axes, width (W), length
(L) and surfaces of symmetry (Si) for an equivalent ellipse
image region.

IMAGE RETRIEVAL

A. CBIR
Content Based Image Retrieval (CBIR) is an actively
researched area in computer vision whose goal is to find
images similar in visual content to a given query from an
image dataset [21]. Image analysis can be based on several
distinct features such as color [22], texture [23], shape [24] or
any other information that can better describe the image. A
typical CBIR system extracts the features from each image in
the dataset and stores them in the database. Then, when similar
images are searched using a “query” image (the image is used
as a query), a feature vector is first extracted from this query
image, then a distance between the calculated vector and the
database image features is computed. Typical distance metrics
between the feature vectors include: Canberra distance,
Euclidean distance, Manhattan metric, Minkowski metric and
others [25]. If the calculated distance is small, then the images
compared are considered similar. Compared with the
traditional methods, which represent image contents by
keywords, the CBIR systems are faster and more efficient. The
main advantage of CBIR system is that it uses image features
rather than image itself. For these reason the application areas
are numerous and different: remote sensing, geographic
information systems, weather forecasting, medical imaging
[26] and in the last few years also in image search on the
Internet [27, 28].

Fig. 1. Typical geometric parameters.

From these base parameters some advanced parameters (not
changing when the original object is submitted to translation,
scale changes and rotations) can be derived. They include [33]:
Compactness: C=4πA/P2. It represents the ratio of the shape
area to the area of a circle having the same perimeter.
Elongation: E=L/W. It is defined by the ratio of the length to
the width of the minimal rectangle surrounding the object
called also the minimal bounding box.
Rectangularity: R=A/(L x V). It represents how rectangular a
shape is. It is equal to the ratio of the shape area to the area of
its minimal bounding box.

Eccentricity: It represents the measure of aspect ratio. It is
obtained from the ratio of the minor axis to the major axis
in the object equivalent ellipse.
Convexity: It is defined as the ratio of perimeters of the
convex hull over that of the original contour.
III.

PROPOSED FEATURE EXTRACTION METHOD

We investigate the application of the CBIR techniques to
characterize the image that assumes the impedance of the EC
probe coil in the complex plane for a specific defect.
Eddy current testing is based on the physics phenomenon of
electromagnetic induction [34]. In an eddy current probe, an
alternating current flows through a wire coil and generates an
oscillating magnetic field. If the probe and its magnetic field
are taken close to a conductive material like a metal test piece,
a circular flow of electrons known as an eddy current will
begin to move through the metal like swirling water in a
stream. That eddy current flowing through the metal will in
turn generate its own magnetic field, which will interact with
the coil and its field through mutual inductance. Changes in
metal thickness or defects like near-surface cracking will
interrupt or alter the amplitude and pattern of the eddy current
and the resulting magnetic field. This in turn affects the
movement of electrons in the coil by varying the electrical
impedance of the coil. In this approach, the presence of damage
is characterized by the changes in the signature of the resultant
signal that propagates through the structure. So, changing
material parameters corresponds to a particular output
impedance that is characterized by a specific shape in the
complex plane. We use the shape of the impedance in the
complex plane as signatures to identify changes in the test
piece. In Fig. 2 a typical shape of coil impedance in the
complex plane for an aluminum sample with notch
perpendicular of width 0.3 mm and depth 1 mm is shown.

L
W
α

Fig. 2. Typical shape of coil impedance in the complex plane. The dotted line
is principal inertia axis. (L,W,α) is the feature vector.

As depicted, we intercept the principal inertia axis and we
use the set (L,W,α), composed by the length (L), width (W)
and orientation angle (α) of the shape, as feature vector that
characterizes a defect. These features are used as input to
machine learning based classifiers.

IV.

EXPERIMENTS AND RESULTS

In order to evaluate the suitability and usefulness of the
proposed set of features to describe shape of the coil
impedance in the complex plane, we selected twelve types of
defects, with 20 shape for each category (class). The
classification performance was evaluated using a ten-fold
cross-validation method.
A. Sample data
The data used in the study refers to a subset of a database
with EC signal samples for aircraft structures [35]. The overall
database is divided in 4 parts. The first contains 240 records
acquired on an aluminum sample with notches of width 0.3
mm, depth 0.4, 0.7, 1, and 1.5 mm perpendicular, depth 0.4,
0.7, 1, and 1.5 mm with an angle of 30 degrees, 0.7, 1 and 1.5
mm with an angle of 60 degrees and 1.5 mm with an angle of
45 degrees. The second refers to 150 records, notches of width
0.2 mm, depth 1, 3 and 5 mm, both perpendicular and 45
degrees orientation of a stainless steel structure. Third database
refers to two-layer aluminum aircraft structure with rivets, two
notches below the rivets in the first layer (width 0.2 mm, length
2.5 mm, angle 90 degrees and 30 degrees) and two in the
second layer (width 0.2 mm, length 2.5 mm and 5 mm, angle
90 degrees), two defect-free rivets. The fourth sample refers to
four-layer aluminum structure (layer thickness 2,5 mm) with
rivets containing 4 notches (width 0.2 mm, length 2.5 mm,
angle 90 deg ) below the rivets in the first, second, third or
fourth layer, four defect-free rivets.
In this work we used the first part of the database that
contains 240 records acquired on an aluminum sample with
notches which differ in the depth and angle. Each record
contains 4096 samples, an sampling frequency of 10KHz and
two canals (real and imaginary part) for each acquired measure.
B. Pre-Processing
To obtain an image suitable for feature extraction, we
performed a noise reduction by removing the irrelevant
information from the shapes. This was accomplished by
detecting and extracting the image regions of interest, cropping
them through their bounding box. As depicted in Fig. 2 the
most noise is concentrated on the top-right side which
represents a high value for both real and imaginary part of the
coil impedance. This is confirmed by also the spectrum
analysis of each single channel of the samples [9]. Using
Matlab program, the upper-right side of the image was
removed through a sorting and cutting procedures acting on the
raw data. At this stage we had to guarantee that all the features
computed were independent from noise. Then, by using the
Image Processing toolbox, the centroid, the principal inertia
axis and then the feature set (L,W,α) were calculated for each
record. To take a look at the separation of the 12 classes
provided by the proposed feature vectors, in Fig. 3 a
tridimensional scatter graph is reported. There is a good
separation among classes. This indicates that the feature
vectors obtained are able to yield good classification from the
classifiers.

assumes the impedance of the EC probe coil in the plane
complex as signatures to identify changes in the test piece. We
have made use of information related to the boundary of the
image through a feature vector composed by only three
geometric parameters: length, width and orientation angle of
the shape. To evaluate the suitability and usefulness of the
proposed set of features we tested them with three different
machine-learning based classifiers: J48 decision trees,
Multilayer Perceptron neural network and Naive Bayes. The
results, evidencing an accuracy rate of almost 100%,
demonstrates the effectiveness of our approach.
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Fig. 3. Tridimensional scatter graph of the proposed feature vectors for 12
classes.

C.

Classifiers
To evaluate the proposed shape descriptor system as
recognition of structure defect we tested it with three different
machine-learning based classifiers: J48 decision trees,
Multilayer Perceptron neural networks and Naive Bayes [36].
The classification performance of each classifier is
evaluated using the ten-fold cross-validation method [37], a
model validation technique for assessing how the classification
results will generalize for an independent data set. The 12
different classes are derived from the overall dataset by
comparing each defect to the others. Then, all the data have
been randomly divided into 10 disjoint subsets (folders), each
containing approximately the same amount of instances. In
each experiment, nine folders have been used as training data,
while the remaining folder is used as validation. This process
has been repeated 10 times, for each different choice of the
validation folder.
The performance results, reported in Table I as mean
values, are presented in terms of accuracy, sensitivity,
specificity, precision and Matthews correlation coefficient [38].
TABLE I.
Classifier
J48
Naive
Bayes
Multilayer
Perceptron

EXPERIMENTAL RESULTS

Mean values of the “ten-fold cross validation” results
Accuracy

Sensitivity

Specificity

Precision

Matthews

0.96

0.74

0.98

0.81

0.75

0.95

0.68

0.97

0.67

0.63

0.98

0.85

0.99

0.89

0.84

The experiment results confirm the good class separation
shown in Fig. 3. In particular, the performance parameters
related to the neural network were very high, near to 1.
V.

CONCLUSIONS

In this paper we have investigated the application of a
"CBIR" method to characterize aerospace structure defects
based on eddy current testing. We have used the shape that

This work has been supported in part by Distretto
Aerospaziale della Campania (DAC) in the framework of the
CERVIA project - PON03PE_00124_1.
REFERENCES
[1] X.-M. Pei, H.-S. Liang, Y.-M. Qia, "A frequency spectrum analysis
method for eddy current nondestructive testing," Proceedings of the
IEEE International Conference on Machine Learning and Cybernetics,
Vol. 3, 2002.
[2] S. Yacout,M. Meshreki, H. Attia,"Monitoring and Control of Machining
Process by Data Mining and Pattern Recognition," Proceedings of the
IEEE International Conference on Complex, Intelligent and Software
Intensive Systems, (CISIS), pp. 106-113, July 2012.
[3] Y. Nagaya, H. Endo, T. Uchimoto, T. Takagi, H. J. Jung, and L.
Bartolomeo, “Crack shape reconstruction using ECT camera system,” in
Proc. SICE Annu. Conf., Sapporo, Japan, , Vol. 3, pp. 2760–2763, 2004.
[4] Z. Chen, K. Aoto, and K. Miya, “Reconstruction of cracks with physical
closure from signals of eddy current testing,” IEEE Trans. Magn., vol.
36, pt. 1, no. 4, pp. 1018–1022, Jul. 2000.
[5] G. Preda, B. Cranganu-Cretu, F. I. Hantila, O. Mihalache, Z. Chen, and K.
Miya, “Nonlinear FEM-BEM formulation and model-free inversion
procedure for reconstruction of cracks using pulse eddy currents,” IEEE
Trans. Magn., Vol. 38, n. 2, pp. 1241–1244, Mar. 2002.
[6] E. Todorov, “Measurement of electromagnetic properties of heat
exchanger tubes with model-based eddy current technique,” Elsevier
NDT&E International, Vol.48, pp.70–76, 2012.
[7] C.H. Chen (Ed.), Signal Processing and Pattern Recognition in
Nondestructive Evaluation of Materials. Springer, Berlin. Proceedings of
the NATO Advanced Research Workshop on Signal Processing and
Pattern Recognition in Nondestructive Evaluation of Materials, held at
the Manoir St-Castin, Lac Beauport, Quebec, Canada, August 19-22,
1987.
[8] I.V. Kuts, A.G. Protasov, I. Iu. Lysenko , O.L. Dugin. "Pulsed Eddy
Current Non-Destructive Testing of the Coating Thickness," 11th
European Conference on Non-Destructive Testing (ECNDT 2014),
Prague, Czech Republic, October 6-10, 2014.
[9] G.D’Angelo, S. Rampone, “Diagnosis of aerospace structure defects by a
HPC implemented soft computing algorithm,” IEEE International
Workshop on Metrology for Aerospace, Benevento, Italy, May 29-30,
2014.
[10]G.D’Angelo, S. Rampone, “Towards a HPC-oriented parallel
implementation of a learning algorithm for bioinformatics applications,”
BMC Bioinformatics 2014, 15 (Suppl 5):S2.
[11] V.S. Eremenko, О. Gileva, "Application of linear recognition methods in
problems of nondestructive testing of composite materials,"
International scientific conference on Electromagnetic and acoustic
methods of nondestructive testing of materials and products, LЕОТЕSТ2009.
[12] R.P. Pein, J. Lu, J. Birger Stav, Q. Xu, M. Uran, L. Mráz, "Automatic
digital x-ray control with contentbased image retrieval techniques," 10th
International Conference of the Slovenian Society for Non Destructive

Testing - Application of Contemporary Non-Destructive Testing in
Engineering -, Ljubljana, Slovenia, pp.167-176, September 1-3, 2009.
[13] N. Nacereddine, D. Ziou, L. Hamami, "Fusion-based shape descriptor for
weld defect radiographic image retrieval," International Journal of
Advanced Manufacturing Technology, Vol. 68, n. 9-12, pp 2815-2832,
2013.
[14] G.D’Angelo, S. Rampone, “Discovering Hidden Information in Big Data:
a Soft computing Approach,” VII International Meeting in Dynamics of
Socio-Economic System, Dyses 2014, Seville, Spain, September 16-18,
2014.
[15] G.D’Angelo, S. Rampone, “A proposal for advanced services and data
processing aiming the territorial intelligence development,” World
Scientific Proceedings First International Workshop “Global
Sustainability Inside and Outside the Territory", Benevento, 14 February
2014.
[16] U. Fayyad, G. Piatetsky-Shapiro, and P. Smyth, “From Data Mining to
Knowledge Discovery in Databases.” Advances in knowledge discovery
and data mining, American Association for Artificial Intelligence,
Menlo Park, CA, 1996.
[17]R.J. Kauffman, A.A.Techatassanasoontorn, "The Global Diffusion
Patterns of Successive Technology Generations: Modeling Analog and
Digital Wireless Phone Growth," IEEE International Conference on
Information and Communication Technology and Development,
ICTD2006 4085540, pp. 266-276, 2006.
[18] A. Xia Liu, Y. Wang, X. Chen, X. Jiang, "Understanding the diffusion of
mobile digital content: a growth curve modelling approach," ACM
Journal Information Systems and e-Business Management archive,
Vol.12, n. 2, pp. 239-258, 2014.
[19] R. Datta, D. Joshi, J. Li, J.Z. Wang, "Image retrieval: Ideas, influences,
and trends of the new age," Journal ACM Computing Surveys (CSUR),
Vol. 40, n. 2, 2008.
[20] Sarfraz and M. Ridha “Content-Based Image Retrieval Using Multiple
Shape Descriptors”, IEEE/ACS International Conference On Computer
Systems and Applications, pp. 730-737, 2007.
[21]V.N. Gudivada, V.V. Raghavan, “Content-based image retrieval
systems”, IEEE Computer, Vol. 28, N. 9, 18-22, Sep. 1995.
[22] M. Swain and D. Ballard, “Color indexing,” Intl. Journal Computer
Vision, Vol. 7, n.1, pp. 11-32, 1991.
[23] R. M. Haralick, “Texture features for image classification,” IEEE Trans.
on Sys. Man and Cyb., 1990.
[24] B.M. Mehtre, “Shape measures for content based image retrieval: a
comparison”, Information Proc. Management, Vol. 33, n.3, pp.319-337,
1997.
[25] M. Kokare, B.N. Chatterji, P.K. Biswas, "Comparison of similarity
metrics for texture image retrieval,"
IEEE Region 10 Annual

International Conference, Proceedings/TENCON, Vol. 3, pp. 571-575,
2003.
[26] L.R. Long, S. Antani, T.M. Deserno, and G.R. Thoma, "Content-Based
Image Retrieval in Medicine: Retrospective assessment, state of the art,
and future directions," Int J Healthcare Inf Syst Inform., Vol.4, n.1, pp
1-16, 2009.
[27] Dingyuan Xia, Pian Fu, Chaobing Huang, Yu Wang, "Trend of ContentBased Image Retrieval on the Internet," IEEE Fifth International
Conference on Image and Graphics, pp. 733 - 738, 2009.
[28] Chun-Rong Su, Jiann-Jone Chen, "Content-Based Image Retrieval On
reconfigurable Peer-to-Peer networks," IEEE 14th International
Workshop on Multimedia Signal Processing (MMSP), pp- 343 - 348,
2012.
[29] B.M. Mehtre, M.S. Kankanhalli, W. F. Lee, "Shape measures for content
based image retrieval: A comparison," Information Processing &
Management, Vol. 33, n. 3, pp. 319-337, 1997.
[30] G. Doretto and Y. Yao, "Region moments: fast invariant descriptors for
detecting small image structures," IEEE Conference on Computer
Vision and Pattern Recognition (CVPR) San Francisco, CA, pp. 30193026, June 2010.
[31] H. Kim, J. Kim, "Region-based shape descriptor invariant to rotation,
scale and translation," Signal Processing: Image Communication,
Vol.16, pp 87–93, 2000.
[32] A. Amanatiadis, V.G. Kaburlasos, A. Gasteratos, S.E. Papadakis,
"Evaluation of shape descriptors for shape-based image retrieval," Image
Processing, IET, Vol.5, n.5, pp.493-499, August 2011.
[33] M. Yang, K. Kpalma, J. Ronsin, "A Survey of Shape Feature Extraction
Techniques," [https://hal.archives-ouvertes.fr/hal-00446037/document],
HAL archives-ouvertes.fr
[34] J. García-Martín, J. Gómez-Gil and E. Vázquez-Sánchez, "NonDestructive Techniques Based on Eddy Current Testing," Sensors,
vol.11, pp. 2525-2565.
[35] EC data - manual inspection.
[http://measure.feld.cvut.cz/usr/staff/smid/datasets/]. Department of
Measurement Czech Technical University in Prague, Faculty of
Electrical Engineering. Online, last access January 8, 2015.
[36] H.J. Jiawei, M. Kamber, J. Pei, Data Mining: Concepts and Techniques:
Morgan Kaufmann Publishers, 2006.
[37] I. Witten, E. Frank: Data Mining: Practical Machine Learning Tools and
Techniques, Morgan Kaufmann, 2005.
[38] G. Holmes, A. Donkin, I.H. Witten, "WEKA: a machine learning
workbench," IEEE Conference on Intelligent Information Systems,
Proceedings of the 1994 Second Australian and New Zealand, 1994.

