Originally Posted by
carlos danger
you dont need imaging equipment. you need common sense.
they had no "imaging equipment" building the first 50 nuclear/hydrogen bombs. and even if they had it would have been toast. yet they still managed to produce more efficient stuff all the time.
Are you saying that x-ray imaging equipment did not predate nuclear weapons? I didn't think so.
But actually, false analogy. You can build something of very high quality, without imaging equipment, through careful quality control during construction, yet be unable to determine the extent of damage after an impact, without imaging equipment.
I'm not an expert on such equipment. But fiberglass composite boat hulls are subject to osmotic blistering (water penetrates the glass composite via osmosis, unless there is a vinylester or epoxy barrier top coat), and boat inspectors can detect this, I think using ultrasound equipment. If so, that might also be a means for detecting carbon composite skin damage. But even if you have that information, to determine safety, you must then perform a finite element analysis of a computer solid model that includes the damage, under design loads, unless the engineers have already clearly defined "allowable" structural defects in terms of location, size, and orientation on the structure (frame).