Talk:Electromagnetic acoustic transducer

The content of this article has been derived in whole or part from http://www.innerspec.com. Permission has been received from the copyright holder to release this material. Evidence of this has been confirmed and stored by VRT volunteers, under ticket number 2007061810012055.
This template is used by approved volunteers dealing with the Wikimedia volunteer response team system (VRTS) after receipt of a clear statement of permission at permissions-enwikimedia.org. Do not use this template to claim permission.

If you have questions about ultrasonic EMAT or applications, I will be happy to try to address these. jeff

Comment

The text was originally heavily based on the content at http://www.innerspec.com but now isn't. We did receive premission for that text however, so it is noted above. - cohesion 23:35, 22 July 2007 (UTC)[reply]

Could you add to this article a sentence or two (or more)on the use of EMAT's to generate Lamb waves in plates ? I have recently written the Wikipedia article on Lamb waves and have noticed in the literature that EMAT's are one way of generating them. So I am including in the Lamb Wave article a link to this EMAT article. 68.83.145.51 (talk) 15:46, 13 January 2008 (UTC)[reply]

I am interested if a section could be added to this articles that includes the industry uses of EMAT technology when it comes to, pipeline inspection, tank storage inspections, and other plant and facilities services. Maybe even a quick mention as to who offers services like this. Also, how is EMAT technology advancing now? Vonabisz (talk) 14:29, 15 October 2010 (UTC)[reply]

Correct me if I am wrong, but I believe the article in parts misleading when it claims, that EMAT is a non-destructive testing technique. EMAT is only the transducer, converting electric signals to acoustic waves. Non-destructive testing is just an application, that EMATs are used for. PeterOppermann (talk) 12:17, 24 September 2019 (UTC)[reply]

I have added a template about the lack of citations to the top of this article. Something complex, that people disagree about, definitely needs more citations than this Wikipedia article now has. Winderone (talk) 23:44, 6 May 2023 (UTC)[reply]