Forum General Discussions      Re: EMAT Posted by: Joe Buckley    (PID_358), E-mail: Address, on November 07, 2008 at 16:32 : In Reply to: Re: EMAT posted by : Larry Hopper , E-mail: Address, on November 07, 2008 at 14:32 : At the risk of being a bit mundane, are you sure you need to use the exotic methods? If you want to carry out wall thickness reduction surveys and weld depth integrity checking on pressure vessels then "conventional" gel/water coupled ultrasonics (whether with monoelement transducers, Phased array or AUT) is well accepted and code approved. EMAT and low frequency ET may work, but you will be off in a minefield of performance demonstation, limited availability of trained operators etc. I would recommed that you be certain you need to use these methods before you go down that route. For weld cracking (as against problems at depth) then conventional Eddy current weld inspection or ACFM may be worth considering. Rgds Joe ----------- Start Original Message ----------- : : I'm looking for EMAT devices to inspect pressure vessels for flaw detections on welds and thickness reduction on walls of these equipments. This is to avoid using other tests like hidraulic and radiographic tests. : : Can someone give me information on companies who provide EMAT devices that fulfill my needs? : : Thanks : : Filipe : There is another alternative that is very effective. The alternative is Low Frequency Electromagnetics. This is used all over the world for tank wall scanning. Secondly, Balanced field eddy current is available for weld crack inspections. Contact TesTex for more information. ------------ End Original Message ------------ Follow Ups: Post a Followup: Name: E-Mail: Subject: Comments: ----------- Start Original Message ----------- : At the risk of being a bit mundane, are you sure you need to use the exotic methods? : If you want to carry out wall thickness reduction surveys and weld depth integrity checking on pressure vessels then "conventional" gel/water coupled ultrasonics (whether with monoelement transducers, Phased array or AUT) is well accepted and code approved. EMAT and low frequency ET may work, but you will be off in a minefield of performance demonstation, limited availability of trained operators etc. I would recommed that you be certain you need to use these methods before you go down that route. : For weld cracking (as against problems at depth) then conventional Eddy current weld inspection or ACFM may be worth considering. : Rgds : Joe : : : : I'm looking for EMAT devices to inspect pressure vessels for flaw detections on welds and thickness reduction on walls of these equipments. This is to avoid using other tests like hidraulic and radiographic tests. : : : Can someone give me information on companies who provide EMAT devices that fulfill my needs? : : : Thanks : : : Filipe : : There is another alternative that is very effective. The alternative is Low Frequency Electromagnetics. This is used all over the world for tank wall scanning. Secondly, Balanced field eddy current is available for weld crack inspections. Contact TesTex for more information. ------------ End Original Message ------------ Optional Link URL: Example: "http://www....html". Alternative write "http://www.ndt.net/wshop/attach/filename.htm" if you transfered a filename.htm via FTP Page Title: is important! Optional Image URL: http://www....gif Attention! Please click the button only once. This may take a moment to process Forum General Discussions Help