Responsible: KUKUK IngenieureUpdated 25 September 2026Sources and editorial principles
Inspection methods · selection · limits

Ultrasound, endoscopy or CT?

Ultrasound, endoscopy and computed tomography answer different questions. The method should be chosen for the component, material, suspected defect, accessibility and the decision the finding must support.

No single method proves that a complete vehicle is free from damage or original. A reliable conclusion requires a defined question, a suitable test setup, expert interpretation and comparison with other observations.

Inspection methods
Inspection methods

What can each method show?

MethodUseful questionPossible findingImportant limit
UltrasoundAre there internal indications in a suitable material?Indications of separation, voids or changes in the sound pathGeometry, surface, calibration and reference affect the result
EndoscopyWhat is visible inside a difficult to reach cavity?Visible corrosion, deposits, tooling marks or foreign objectsOnly reachable and illuminated surfaces are visible
Computed tomographyHow is a suitable component structured internally?Spatial representation of internal structure and deviationsComponent size, density, resolution and installation limit its use
Inspection methods

Five steps before testing

  1. Define the decision

    Clarify whether the finding supports a purchase, repair, restoration or dispute.

  2. Classify the component

    Material, function, manufacture, geometry and known history define the scope.

  3. State the suspected defect

    A method is useful only when it is technically suitable for the possible deviation.

  4. Check access and reference

    Surface, installation position, comparison area and calibration are clarified first.

  5. Connect the findings

    Measurements are compared with visual findings, records, repair files and vehicle history.

Inspection methods

Why more technology does not automatically create more certainty

An intact surface does not rule out internal damage. Equally, an indication in an image is not a complete diagnosis. Material build, component thickness, geometry and an appropriate reference can be decisive.

KUKUK separates observation, measurement, interpretation and limitation. A report must show which area was examined, under which conditions and what remains unresolved.

Sources and editorial principles

Basis and limits

This overview is based on documented KUKUK inspection procedures and the KUKUK Technical Asset Note on carbon repairs. Aviation references provide a methodological frame and are not general rules for road vehicles. Manufacturer information applies only to the named models.

ResponsibleKUKUK Ingenieure
Updated 25 September 2026
FAQ

Short answers

Is ultrasound always the best method for carbon?

No. The appropriate method depends on material, geometry, accessibility, the suspected defect and a suitable reference.

What does endoscopy show?

It makes accessible internal surfaces visible. It does not automatically reveal damage within the material or outside the field of view.

When is CT useful?

CT can provide spatial information about internal structures when component size and the question are suitable. It is often impractical for large installed vehicle components.

Does one test image prove that there is no damage?

No. Test setup, calibration, reference, accessibility and expert interpretation determine what the result can support.

Confidential first contact

Which technical question needs to be resolved?

KUKUK determines which inspection route is appropriate for the component, vehicle and decision.

+49 (0) 2206 95 900