04 · Cracks and damage

A scratch that decides whether the product comes back.

Visually detecting scratches, cracks and surface damage — a defect where the stakes can be high, since damage may affect both function and visual appearance.

Cracks and scratches vary in scale — from micro-cracks affecting strength to cosmetic damage visible to the naked eye. The range that makes economic sense to automate depends on how much risk letting that type of damage through carries.

This is one of the cases where imaging conditions matter most — a fine scratch is sometimes visible only from a specific lighting angle, and invisible from another. That is why assessing camera, optics and lighting is the first qualification step here, before any work on the model.

As with other surface defects, the acceptance criteria — how long or deep a scratch is still allowed — are agreed before the pilot, based on the risk and requirements of the specific product.

When this scenario usually works well

01 The damage is visible under lighting conditions reproducible on the line
02 An acceptance threshold is defined — the minimum length or depth of damage counted as a defect
03 Examples of damage at different severity levels exist, not only extreme cases
04 The product surface is repeatable enough to tell material texture apart from damage

What the pilot report shows

For cracks and damage, the false-reject rate matters most — whether the model rejects good products because of natural material texture. The report shows this alongside sensitivity to real damage.

How this works in practice

AIVQC Trainer → AIVQC Server → AIVQC Production

FAQ

Cracks and damage

Can AIVQC tell a scratch apart from natural material texture?+

That depends on the contrast between them under the available imaging conditions — exactly what the camera, optics and lighting qualification checks at the start of the pilot.

Can micro-cracks invisible to the naked eye be detected?+

Yes, if they are visible to the camera and optics used, at the resolution they offer. If they require specialised imaging (e.g. X-ray), that falls outside standard visual inspection.

Other applications

Missing component

Checking assembly completeness and the presence of required components — one of the most common enquiries, because a missing component is easy to miss at line speed and easy to show unambiguously in an image.

↗02

Incorrect assembly

Detecting reversed, displaced or incorrectly seated parts — a defect that differs from a missing component in that the part is present, just in the wrong orientation or position.

↗03

Flash and deformation

Identifying moulding, geometry and product-edge defects — a classic example of an irregular defect, where classic geometric rules quickly stop being enough.

↗05

Labels and print

Verifying the presence, orientation and legibility of markings — a scenario that combines a completeness check (is the label there at all) with a print-quality check (is it legible and correctly placed).

↗06

Contamination

Detecting foreign objects, dirt and surface deviations — inherently the most unpredictable scenario, since contamination can take almost any shape.

↗