Student or educator? Sign up with your school email and get 6 months of Pro free.
Cited by 795

The DOI matches its Crossref record.

A review of non-destructive testing methods of composite materials

Open access
Gholizadeh, S.·2016·Procedia Structural Integrity

Abstract

A review provided about non-destructive testing (NDT) methods for the evaluation of composites. The review considers the capabilities of most common methods in composite NDT applications such as Visual Testing (VT or VI), Ultrasonic Testing (UT), Thermography, Radiographic Testing (RT), Electromagnetic Testing (ET), Acoustic Emission (AE), and Shearography Testing with respect to advantages and disadvantages of these methods. Then, methods categorized based on their intrinsic characteristics and their applications.

Overview

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Integrity signals

Registry

Crossref · 10.1016/j.prostr.2016.02.008

Cites

Statistics

Verification

Claims the paper makes

The claims and statistics of this paper haven’t been checked yet.

Run the check — free, no account needed. It reads the open-access text and checks the sources it cites.

A few free checks a day · papers already verified open instantly · results are public

Self-check

Percentages, sums and reported differences re-computed from the paper’s own numbers.

The self-check needs the paper’s full text.

Citations

Cited by

See all 795

Metadata

Authors
Gholizadeh, S.
Venue
Procedia Structural Integrity
Publisher
Elsevier BV
Published
2016
Volume
1
Pages
50-57
ISSN
2452-3216 (ISSN-L)
OpenAlex
W2337083997
Cited by
795
References
0
FWCI
44.86
Type
journal article
Language
en
Open access
diamond

About these checks

Registry, retraction, Cites and statistics results are computed, not judged, with one exception: a printed reference that no index lists is read once by a model before it counts as a citation error. Claims are extracted by a model and kept only when their quote appears verbatim in the text; each cited source is then checked, with a model’s help, for whether it says what the claim relies on. Those verdicts can be wrong — read the claim’s quote and the cited source before relying on one.

Statistics and arithmetic are recomputed, not judged.

Confidence bands are shown only for fields calibrated on our annotated test set. None is calibrated yet, so no band is shown.

What counts as a claim ›How we measure confidence ›How we check this ›

Are you an author, or do you see a problem with this page? Request a review

How to cite

Cite CoChat for the checks on this page, and the paper for its own findings.

This page
CoChat. (2026). Citation check: A review of non-destructive testing methods of composite materials. https://app.cochat.ai/papers/10.1016/j.prostr.2016.02.008
The paper
Gholizadeh, S. (2016). A review of non-destructive testing methods of composite materials. Procedia Structural Integrity. https://doi.org/10.1016/j.prostr.2016.02.008

Data sources

Bibliographic data: Semantic Scholar, OpenAlex, Crossref.

Contains information from the Semantic Scholar Academic Graph Datasets, made available under the ODC Attribution License (ODC-BY 1.0).

Semantic Scholar’s data is described in: Kinney, R., et al. (2023). The Semantic Scholar Open Data Platform. arXiv:2301.10140.