where expertise comes together - since 1996 -

The Largest Open Access Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)

Conference Proceedings, Articles, News, Exhibition, Forum, Network and more

where expertise comes together
- since 1996 -
1816 views
Technical Discussions
Mondonico Luca
NDT Inspector
SICES S.p.A., Italy, Joined May 2009, 7

Mondonico Luca

NDT Inspector
SICES S.p.A.,
Italy,
Joined May 2009
7
13:50 Dec-02-2009
Cobalto 60

Do anyone have experience about a gammagrafic exposure with Cobalto 60 on welds having a thickness of 260mm?

 
 Reply 
 
Slawomir Mackiewicz
Slawomir Mackiewicz
20:18 Dec-02-2009
Re: Cobalto 60
In Reply to Mondonico Luca at 13:50 Dec-02-2009 (Opening).

I think it is rather unusual task to do Co-60 exposures on 260 mm (steel) wall thickness. Below I am pointing out some problems with such examination.

1. The European standards EN 444 and EN 1435 covering RT testing of welds limit the use of Co-60 to 200 mm of steel for Class A and to 150 mm of steel for Class B. So you can have a formal problem with the standard compliance.

2. For 260 mm thickness of steel the scattered radiation Build-up Factor for Co-60 emission lines (1,17 and 1,32 MeV) is about 11. It means that the image forming primary radiation stands for less than 10% of the total radiation reaching the film. You surely obtain very poor IQI sensitivity.

3. To meet the EN 1435 requirements for geometric unsharpness for 260 mm wall thickness and typical 5 mm source size you should use SFD not less than 3315 mm.

4. For such SFD, even using 100 Ci source and D7 film you get exposure times of the order of 1000 hours !!!. Even if you break the rules and use SFD=1000 mm you get unacceptable exposure times of the order of 100 hours.

So my advice is: forget about Cobalt radiography for 260 mm thick steel and think about TOFD or other UT technique.

 
 Reply 
 
Mondonico Luca
NDT Inspector
SICES S.p.A., Italy, Joined May 2009, 7

Mondonico Luca

NDT Inspector
SICES S.p.A.,
Italy,
Joined May 2009
7
11:29 Dec-03-2009
Re: Cobalto 60
In Reply to Slawomir Mackiewicz at 20:18 Dec-02-2009 .

I'm completely agree with you, but the final user doesn't accept TOFD examination.
I'm making some test in the bunker, but i'm not sure to obtain a satisfactory result.
Canyou explan better tour point 2?
How are you able to say that the scattered radiation Bulid-up Factor is about 11 and the image forming primary radiation stands for less than 10% of the total radiation reaching the film?
Thank you

 
 Reply 
 
anjafo79
NDT Inspector
Norway, Joined Aug 2009, 204

anjafo79

NDT Inspector
Norway,
Joined Aug 2009
204
12:32 Dec-03-2009
Re: Cobalto 60
In Reply to Mondonico Luca at 11:29 Dec-03-2009 .

Doubt you will find many welding defects this way unless they are huge :)

You can suggest to do x-ray at different weld stages such as after first run, 1/3 and 1/2 welded butt. This way you have some record of the welded joint and complement this with Ultrasonic, MPI/DPI and Visual (even at the same stages?).

 
 Reply 
 
Slawomir Mackiewicz
Slawomir Mackiewicz
19:59 Dec-03-2009
Re: Cobalto 60
In Reply to Mondonico Luca at 11:29 Dec-03-2009 .

Luca

The radiation Build-up Factor, B is not a kind of thing easy to explain in a few words. In short, it is a number by which you have to multiply the intensity of primary radiation (i.e. radiation not scattered within the material) passing the certain material thickness to obtain the TOTAL intensity of radiation passing through this thickness. This TOTAL is the sum of primary and scattered radiation.

So if, the build up factor for your 260 mm steel slab is B=11 it means that the total radiation intensity registered behind your slab is 11 times greater than the intensity of its primary component. In other words “good”, image building, primary radiation stands only for 1/11 (9,1%) of the total radiation registered by your film.

The comprehensive tables of build-up factors for different materials and radiation energies you can find in ANSI/ANS-6.4.3.

Theory is a theory but you mentioned that you have made some practical trials with Cobalt exposures of 260 mm thick steel. I am really curies to your results. What exposure parameters did you use and what film densities and IQI sensitivities did you really obtain.

Best Regards
Slawomir

 
 Reply 
 
Nigel Armstrong
Engineering, - Specialist services
United Kingdom, Joined Oct 2000, 1096

Nigel Armstrong

Engineering, - Specialist services
United Kingdom,
Joined Oct 2000
1096
12:57 Dec-04-2009
Re: Cobalto 60
In Reply to Mondonico Luca at 11:29 Dec-03-2009 .

I'm sorry Mondonico but i have to ask this - have you asked your end-user to state why they insist on Gamma ray under such unusual and dangerous conditions - especially relevant to the excellent considerations put forward by Slawomir? And have they given a clear and unequivocal answer? Or conceded the need, as per Anjafo's post, for intermediate and supplementary inspections? It should be relatively easy for you to provide evidence after a literature search that the TOFD method has a higher probability of detection (POD) than Cobalt gamma ray for heavy wall weld examination. And if you are going ahead with a formal reported inspection make certain you record your doubts in a formal and traceable manner. A signed accepting report with no inadequacy statement is of no benefit to you in case of any manufacturing history investigation - after all 260mm thick steel has a special application.

Perhaps there are conditions such as the acceptance criteria or expected defect types which mitigate for Cobalt gamma, but I would be wondering about the hidden agenda of your end-user. Clue: are they the real end-user or are they the EPMC?

 
 Reply 
 
Roger Duwe
NDT Inspector, API-510, 570, 653
MISTRAS, USA, Joined Jan 2009, 148

Roger Duwe

NDT Inspector, API-510, 570, 653
MISTRAS,
USA,
Joined Jan 2009
148
18:16 Dec-07-2009
Re: Cobalto 60
In Reply to Nigel Armstrong at 12:57 Dec-04-2009 .

I concurr with Mr. Armstrong. TOFD will find all significant defects. Cobalt 60 at that thickness will only find HUGE defects, and that lack of sensitivity will be shown by your penetrameter / Image Quality Indicator. The people you are talking to may not want you to find moderate sized defects.

Any reputable engineer would not demand that you perform NDT outside of the ASME and EN limits. Those limits were established based on experience, and proven [and disproven] capabilities. You are trying to go beyond a physical limitation, as evidenced by Mr. Mackiewicz's calculations.

I strongly recommend that you stay within ASME and/or EN limits. Knowingly going outside established Codes and Standards opens your company up to masssive liability.

 
 Reply 
 

Product Spotlight

Lyft™: Pulsed Eddy Current Reinvented

PEC Reinvented—CUI Programs Redefined Corrosion under insulation (CUI) is possibly the greatest u
...
nresolved asset integrity problem in the industry. Current methods for measuring wall thickness with liftoff, without removing insulation, all have severe limitations. Eddyfi introduces Lyft — a reinvented, high-performance pulsed eddy current (PEC) solution. The patent- pending system features a state-of-the-art portable instrument, real- time C-scan imaging, fast data acquisition with grid-mapping and dynamic scanning modes, and flexibility with long cables. It can also scan through thick metal and insulation, as well as aluminum, stainless steel, and galvanized steel weather jackets. Who else but Eddyfi to reinvent an eddy current technique and redefine CUI programs. Got Lyft?
>

NEW! The PragmaPro Instrument Platform

The PragmaPro is based on a modular cartridge technology and supports various NDT instrument modal
...
ities such as UT, PAUT, ECT and many more. This new platform is based on a machined, powder-coated aluminum frame for shock-proofness, best sealing qualities and maximum heat dissipation. This is practical to extend the outdoor temperature range and/or to extend the power injected in the transducers. The PragmaPro is aiming at a very wide range of applications, such as weld scanning, corrosion mapping and composite testing.
>

YXLON Cougar EVO

Scalable small footprint X-ray inspection systems for assembly and laboratory applications. The
...
YXLON Cougar EVO series was designed to provide the "best-in- class" inspection solutions for SMT, semiconductor, and laboratory assembly applications, while maintaining a small system footprint for maximum convenience. With optimized software and hardware, these systems produce higher quality and more consistent results than other electronics inspection systems currently on the market.
>

Robotic laser shearography enables 100% inspection of complex, flight-critical composite structures

An article in “Composites World Magazine” showcases Non Destructive Testing of aero-structures
...
with Laser Shearography. Over the years Dantec Dynamics has supplied many solutions for the aerospace industry. Referring to specific customer projects several of these cases are examined to outline the advantages of using Laser Shearography for automated defect detection.
>

Share...
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
Accept
top
this is debug window