Why might an inspector choose to use radiographic testing over ultrasonic testing?

Choosing radiographic testing over ultrasonic testing is often influenced by the capability of radiographic testing to provide a visual image of internal structures. This method utilizes X-rays or gamma rays to penetrate the material, which then creates an image on a film or digital detector showcasing the internal features and inconsistencies within the material being inspected.

This characteristic is particularly valuable in applications where understanding the internal geometry, such as weld penetration, voids, or structural integrity, is crucial. Radiography can reveal issues that might not be easily detected with other methods, as it captures the entire volume of the material in a single image.

The other options contrast with this capability. For instance, while radiographic testing can be cost-effective, it is not generally cheaper or easier than ultrasonic testing; hence such claims can often be misleading. Additionally, surface anomalies are better detected through techniques specifically designed for that purpose, such as visual inspection or dye penetrant testing, rather than radiography. While speed can be a factor depending on the specific circumstances and requirements, radiographic testing is not universally faster than ultrasonic testing, which can often be conducted quickly on-site without the need for film development. Therefore, the significant advantage lies in the ability of radiographic methods to create detailed visual representations of the internal