Standard Membercharlie
Standard MemberForum Replies Created
I cannot help with a company in Korea, however i know Dacon Inspection Technologies performs work in S. Korea, and may be able to help you. If you want to know more give me a shout.
For Free Swimming Intelligent tools
Rosen Germany/Holland
Tubocope Vetco (Linalog) Borden Hampshire UK
PII UK Newcastle/Aberdeen
BJ Hughes Pipeline Services USA
NKK Japan (Ultrasonics Only)
For Tethered Intelligent Tools
PSL AGR Bergen Norway
RTD Netherlandsit is difficult to make a recommendation based on the information. Electrofusion joints are relatively easy to test (0° looking for a laminar-type nonfusion). You have not explained what the failure mechanism is. You have indicated that only RANDOM PAUT is being done. But you have not indicated that it was the tested joints that failed or one or many of the untested joints. How long after being put into service did the failures occur? Until you can identify how the failures are occurring there is not much anyone can do to recommend a method to detect the flaw. Creep slow-crack growth in PE pipe may start from a very small initiation site. Perhaps you could carry out 100% PAUT (i.e. test all joints) and your researchers could provide you with more input before you start looking for other solution.
his was the subject of a recent discussion here and I can make the following comments, which are my personal views others may add or disagree:
1. In our case PWHT on carbon steel is generally service related e.g. Carbon steel pipe work in Amine and Caustic service.
2. The code says that NDT should be performed after welding and as heat treatment is a part of the welding technology, it should be performed after heat treatment.
3. Many sites will want to perform NDT before heat treatment as this saves the time and money of having to repair welds and again perform heat treatment on the repair. As the owner we are willing for the contractor to do the NDT before heat treatment, but at his own cost.
4. The NDT carried out before heat treatment should be the same as the NDT carried out after heat treatment. Generally the NDT before heat treatment has been radiography, but as the owner we have substituted this for UT after heat treatment. The theory being, that the only repairable defects likely after heat treatment (if this has not been performed correctly) is cracking and the preferred method for crack detection in this instance would be UT.I looked at a few MTRs we had on file for ASTM A 106 Grade B pipe and saw a range of hardnesses from 73 to 77 HRB. It appears that the specification allows a maximum hardness of up to 100 HRB. I hope that this info is helpful to you.
I have compiled a short list i had already im my files:
at first: Check the internet for Presentation,Lectures, Papers of Uwe Ewert and Uwe Zscherpel from BAM, already here in NDT.net you find a lot. also check Researchgate.net (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Uwe_Ewert2 , https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Uwe_Zscherpel ) . Even videos can be found – e.g.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xefUp80WSfc
As for me, modeling consists in building a model, mathematical or not, to establish predictions in a given field. In NDE, the modeling of a specific phenomenon can therefore predict the outcome of experience in the field of validity of the model.
The simulation is the practical implementation (computing) of the model. This implementation is therefore accompanied by a discretization of the model (whether finite elements or integral methods) and therefore with further approximations to modeling.
In other words, the simulation is the representation of a real phenomenon, based on an underlying theoretical model, itself valid in a bounded domain.
I hope this will help.
Ans Many bearing manufacturers will have their own specification for acceptance of nicks, dents and scratches on bearing raceways.
They keep this information proprietary, so it will be very difficult to get information from them.
The main cause of failure from surface breaking features such as you describe are the effect of the hydraulic pressure that the lubricant applies on the raceway as the feature is overrolled. This holds valid also for raceway surface breaking cracks.
For slightly sub-surface defects, a different failure mechanism comes in to play. This is the effect of compressive stresses on the Hertzian zone, and depending on the rolling element diameter can be between several hundredths of a millimetre to a small number of millimetres deep. This means that inclusions in this region are not recommended, and may shorten the bearing life.
I suggest that you request some information from a bearing manufacturer, and offer to hold the information obtained as confidential.The voltage displayed in the A-scan is the probe voltage measured during the acquisition phase to which is applied gain. The behavior is different to that of a coil discharge as what is measured is the response of the inspected component itsekf.
The A-scan has two distinct phases, the first phase is best described as a power law. During this phase, the eddy currents diffuse as if they were in an infinite wall. The signal comes from the component surface and weather jacket. This phase shows as a rapid drop on a log-lin scale.
During the second phase, the signal comes from the bulk of the material. This portion of the signal is best described s an exponential decay and is characterized by a decay time (best known as CDT). On the A-scan log-lin scale, this phase is shown as a slope.
If you would like to know more on Pulsed Eddy Current, you may reach out to me at gcyr@eddyfi.com or enjoy a free introduction course to Pulsed Eddy Current on the Eddyci academy available here: https://academy.eddyfi.com/free-courses
you can try etching or ultrasonic cleaning
I have compiled a short list i had already im my files:
at first: Check the internet for Presentation,Lectures, Papers of Uwe Ewert and Uwe Zscherpel from BAM, already here in NDT.net you find a lot. also check Researchgate.net (https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Uwe_Ewert2 , https://www.researchgate.net/profile/Uwe_Zscherpel ) . Even videos can be found – e.g.: https://www.youtube.com/watch?v=xefUp80WSfc
BAM is a leading Institute in this field as they work also as a leading body in standardisation e.g. they do contribute to the ASTM Standards – see here
https://www.astm.org/search/fullsite-search.html?query=digital%20radiography&one book from ASTN regarding DR – an older version is linked here (legal?)
ASNT_Level_III_Study_Guide_Radiographic – you get from ACADEMIA (https://www.academia.edu/38830479/ASNT_Level_III_Study_Guide_Radiographic_Testing_Method)
also this book:
Handbook of Nondestructive Evaluation -Charles J.Hellier – you get from ACADEMIA https://www.academia.edu/35003120/HANDBOOF_OF_NONDESTRUCTIVE_EVALUATIONThe IAEA has a lot of valuable documents:
IAEA( https://www.iaea.org/publications ) – check this page about radiography publications, there are some publications nemed
https://www.iaea.org/publications/6382/training-guidelines-in-non-destructive-testing-techniques-2002-edition (Training Guidelines in Non-destructive Testing Techniques 2002 Edition)
https://www.iaea.org/publications/8055/training-guidelines-in-non-destructive-testing-techniques (Training Guidelines in Non-destructive Testing Techniques, 2008 Edition)
https://www.iaea.org/publications/10765/training-guidelines-in-non-destructive-testing-techniques (Training Guidelines in Non-destructive Testing Techniques, 2013 Edition)
https://www.iaea.org/publications/10915/training-guidelines-in-non-destructive-testing-techniques (ultrasonic)
https://www.iaea.org/publications/10833/guidelines-on-training-examination-and-certification-in-digital-industrial-radiology-testing-rt-d (Guidelines on Training, Examination and Certification in Digital Industrial Radiology Testing (RT-D), 2015)
https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/TCS-60_web.pdf
https://www.iaea.org/publications/8614/training-guidelines-in-non-destructive-testing-techniques-manual-for-visual-testing-at-level-2
https://www.iaea.org/publications/8696/training-guidelines-in-non-destructive-testing-techniques-leak-testing-at-level-2
https://www.iaea.org/publications/8414/eddy-current-testing-at-level-2-manual-for-the-syllabi-contained-in-iaea-tecdoc-628rev-2-training-guidelines-for-non-destructive-testing-techniques
https://www-pub.iaea.org/MTCD/Publications/PDF/Pub1561_web.pdf
IAEA TECDOC No. 628, Training Course Series No. 60, No. 67, No. 54, No. 52, No. 48, No. 3 are the NDT Training courses
In canada I found this some times ago:
Examination Guide forInitial Certification, Industrial Radiography, Aerospace Sector http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2018/rncan-nrcan/M39-140-2002-eng.pdf
http://publications.gc.ca/collections/collection_2017/rncan-nrcan/M39-136-2002-eng.pdfSome more links to ASNT documents
https://automaterials.files.wordpress.com/2018/09/radiographic-testing-asnt-3rd-ed.pdf
http://www.gbv.de/dms/tib-ub-hannover/716053276.pdf
https://www.bakerhughesds.com/sites/g/files/cozyhq596/files/acquiadam_assets/industrial_radiography_image_forming_techniques_english_4.pdfThis is also an important source:
http://www.dwgndt.org/Digital%20and%20Film%20Compare%20%20and%20Contrast%20Handout.pdf
http://www.dwgndt.org/fwgidrfiles.htmIn my long career I was involved with all aspects of testing, inspection and quality control including destructive Testing. We did not have any formal certification but we had to ensure that each test was as per a national / international standard specified in the individual specifications – for example tensile testing as per ASTM – E8. The tensile testing machine has to be calibrated again as per the relevant ASTM specification…..that means each test has to be carried out as per user specified specification and the equipment has to be certified (internally or by a third party).
However, if you are planning to use your testing laboratory for carrying out lot of third party testing, you may need a formal certification from the national accreditation bureau. In India, we have NABL (National Accreditation Bureau for Laboratories) – who check all aspects of the lab and certify it.
The NDT Level III certification has no value or relevance as far as mechanical / destructive testing is concerned…
Best regards
Join us to learn about PA corrosion inspection with free 2D crawler MPS-02 for 360° coding. We will have two webinars to meet your time.
It takes about 60 minutes to covers these topics:
● Solution presentation
● Inspection demonstration
● Q & AFeel free to contact us (siui@siui.com) to register.
LinkedIn members could register by these links:
Day 1: https://lnkd.in/gDU-EKT
Day 2: https://lnkd.in/gsiwWUgI would suggest that you look up IAEA site…
Best wishes
I cannot speak in the name of the standardisation organisation, but as a manufacturer we can certainly highlight some new variables that might have an impact over your inspection result.
First, as you probably have noticed, the FMC data, could be acquired using Phased-array equipment. Because of that similarity, a lot of variable having an influence for the PA technique would have an impact over your FMC/TFM inspection, such as velocity, phased-array system, probe parameter, wedge parameter, Encoding device, scan parameter …. Those PA parameters would probably be a mandatory variable as well for the FMC/TFM inspection.
The new parameter-The TFM algorithm would calculated the TFM image based on the selected mode velocity. Hence the propagation mode selection is a major parameter for this new technique. Some modes are known to be more sensitive for specific flaw orientation. Hence, if you may be able to qualify one weld configuration using one mode only, you may need two or more mode to qualify complex weld geometry. Validated your inspection setup on mock up is the best practice here in case of doubt. Typically ; TT mode are more sensitive for direct flaw, TTT mode are better for vertical flaw, and the TT-TT mode are more sensitive for rebound flaw.
-Also, an insufficient image resolution, may induce a lost in amplitude fidelity. This is a similar phenomena as the conversion of an analogue signal into a digitalise signal (image resolution≈ acquisition frequency). If your inspection procedure is amplitude based, you must be carful with this parameter. To stay in within 2dB amplitude tolerance Sonatest would recommend a minimal resolution of λ/5. The amplitude tolerance would increase as this ratio decrease.
-The Zone of interest is the physical area inside your part where you want to calculate the TFM image, this parameter has a huge impact in case of mistake.
– The FMC signal characteristic requirement, shall be in RF rectification mode, the A scan shall have an sufficient acquisition frequency and the ADC resolution should be high enough (12 bit or higher). Any new filter or signal processing should be validated as well and would impact your TFM image.
-Any image smoothing, or enhancement might have an impact over your inspection and should be validated if changed.
I think those are the main parameter, but might not be exhaustive neither, don’t heisted to contact me if you have interogatation on a specific point
Also, If you want a learn more about the Sonatest solution I invite you on our YouTube channel were a a webinar on our FMC/TFM solution would be release soon.
https://www.youtube.com/user/TheSonatest
Hope I could helpsin general, anything that is on top will affect the test in some way. The only way to be 100% sure if you coat a test block the same way and document the results.
You also have to take into account what kind of phosphate coating it is, because there are several with different “base materials”. It will also affect the electrical resistance and therefore your magnetic field in the part (keep demag in mind).
Another thing to keep in mind is what kind of defects you are looking for. Big cracks from heat treatment (gears etc.) or really fine cracks after use (springs etc.).
The surface of the coating can also mess with your powder, since its a bit porous – so you might want to use a different powder (bigger grain size) to avoid background glow.
Specialty chemicals are produced by a complex, interlinked industry. In the strictest sense, specialty chemicals are chemical products that are sold on the basis of their performance or function, rather than their composition. … These accounted for 37% of the industry’s global sales.
Cathodic protection of stainless steel can be obtained at far more positive potentials than carbon steel. A side effect of this is that the cathodic current density requirement of stainless steel is normally less than 5 % of that for carbon steel. … There are several options for cathodic protection of stainless steel.
As we can see there has been no response on this subject, in particular there has been not references forwarded regarding techniques using amplitude that can size a near surface defect accurately to within 0.3mm every time regardless of varying pipe wall thicknesses, defect orientation and slight changes in band position. However there is an AUT company (and consultant) at present that is boasting this sizing accuracy anyway, their sales personnel are passing this info on to their perspective clients. Now considering recent events involving said AUT Company and AUT Consultant I find it strange that they would continue to boast something they can not achieve. If I am wrong about what I have written please correct me.
For the moment I believe the average sizing error for ANY system out there is +/- 1mm using amplitude sizing, again if I am wrong PLEASE correct me. We all know that amplitude sizing policies (not techniques) are a guess at best, why do we continue to allow information to be passed around that we know to be incorrect, fiction if told often enough will become the truth.(as eddy current for oil & gas is completely different from Aerospace (even as materials, srtuctures and even the qualification of methods, procedures and personal differs totally) you should get a NAS410/EN4179 Training and show the necessary paractical experience in the aerospace field. If you should work for suppliers working on behalf of the big Airframes or engine companies, Training according EN4179 or NAS410 is mandatory. If you work for MROs things may be different but finally it is advisabele to check for the needs defined by FAA or EASA whos rules are taken over worldwide as the major airframers and engine manufacturers come from US oor Europe.
PCN is a special standard of UK but not fully recognized outside.)(Dear Sir,
The classic definition of Acoustic Emission (AE) refers to the generation of transient elastic waves in the form of stress waves.
These stress waves can be originated from deep in the components (other than the pipes) having considerable thicknesses and are propagated in all directions. Eventually they reach the surface and can travel several meters and are picked up by the sensors.
When they reach the surface and propagate they can certainly be treated as Lamb waves but not very sure before they reach the surface from several centimeters from inside the component.
Best wishes
