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 -

2090 views
Technical Discussions
Jimbo Q.
Jimbo Q.
00:45 Oct-22-2007
Hypothetical Question

I have a hypothetical question I'd like to get some opinions on regarding flaw sizing (RT). Let's say you are working to API-1104 and you find some root concavity.

The accept/reject criterai for concavity is the same as burn through. Must be over 1/4" and the density must be greater than the thinnest base material. It must meet both requirements to be considered rejectable. Not just one.

What if the concavity was 3/4" long and the density of the concavity was 2.54 and the density of the base material was 2.43. However, only less than 1/4" of the concavity was over the density of the base material. The remaining concavity was less than the density of the base material.
Is this rejectable or acceptable?

This question was posed to me and I think it was a legitimate question and I'd like others opinions on it.

Thanks in advance.


 
 Reply 
 
Michel
NDT Inspector,
consultant, Canada, Joined Sep 2006, 897

Michel

NDT Inspector,
consultant,
Canada,
Joined Sep 2006
897
04:32 Oct-22-2007
Re: Hypothetical Question
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: I have a hypothetical question I'd like to get some opinions on regarding flaw sizing (RT). Let's say you are working to API-1104 and you find some root concavity.
: The accept/reject criterai for concavity is the same as burn through. Must be over 1/4" and the density must be greater than the thinnest base material. It must meet both requirements to be considered rejectable. Not just one.
: What if the concavity was 3/4" long and the density of the concavity was 2.54 and the density of the base material was 2.43. However, only less than 1/4" of the concavity was over the density of the base material. The remaining concavity was less than the density of the base material.
: Is this rejectable or acceptable?
: This question was posed to me and I think it was a legitimate question and I'd like others opinions on it.
: Thanks in advance.
------------ End Original Message ------------


I believe this to be rejectable. You state that both length of concavity and density requirements needs to be met. Well it is. Your concavity is 3/4" and your density at one point is below that of the base metal. You have exceeded both requirements.




 
 Reply 
 
chris s
chris s
00:46 Oct-23-2007
Re: Hypothetical Question
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: I have a hypothetical question I'd like to get some opinions on regarding flaw sizing (RT). Let's say you are working to API-1104 and you find some root concavity.
: The accept/reject criterai for concavity is the same as burn through. Must be over 1/4" and the density must be greater than the thinnest base material. It must meet both requirements to be considered rejectable. Not just one.
: What if the concavity was 3/4" long and the density of the concavity was 2.54 and the density of the base material was 2.43. However, only less than 1/4" of the concavity was over the density of the base material. The remaining concavity was less than the density of the base material.
: Is this rejectable or acceptable?
: This question was posed to me and I think it was a legitimate question and I'd like others opinions on it.
: Thanks in advance.
------------ End Original Message ------------

if your working with that small of a range of densities,then you might want to factor in the accuracy of the densitometer. it should be calabrated, and have an accuracy of + and - of ????


 
 Reply 
 
Michel
NDT Inspector,
consultant, Canada, Joined Sep 2006, 897

Michel

NDT Inspector,
consultant,
Canada,
Joined Sep 2006
897
08:39 Oct-23-2007
Re: Hypothetical Question
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : I have a hypothetical question I'd like to get some opinions on regarding flaw sizing (RT). Let's say you are working to API-1104 and you find some root concavity.
: : The accept/reject criterai for concavity is the same as burn through. Must be over 1/4" and the density must be greater than the thinnest base material. It must meet both requirements to be considered rejectable. Not just one.
: : What if the concavity was 3/4" long and the density of the concavity was 2.54 and the density of the base material was 2.43. However, only less than 1/4" of the concavity was over the density of the base material. The remaining concavity was less than the density of the base material.
: : Is this rejectable or acceptable?
: : This question was posed to me and I think it was a legitimate question and I'd like others opinions on it.
: : Thanks in advance.
: if your working with that small of a range of densities, then you might want to factor in the accuracy of the densitometer. it should be calabrated, and have an accuracy of + and - of ????
------------ End Original Message ------------

Chris,

I understand what you're saying, but all standards have specific value for everything and you have to have a cut off limit somewhere. I believe that whomever wrote those standards have already factored in these factors otherwise, it would become a nightmare to meet the codes. And what would happended if your film is read by someone else? If the accuracy of their densitometer is different than yours, your film maybe rejected!!! Would that be fair and accurate?


 
 Reply 
 
David
David
00:17 Oct-24-2007
Re: Hypothetical Question
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : : I have a hypothetical question I'd like to get some opinions on regarding flaw sizing (RT). Let's say you are working to API-1104 and you find some root concavity.
: : : The accept/reject criterai for concavity is the same as burn through. Must be over 1/4" and the density must be greater than the thinnest base material. It must meet both requirements to be considered rejectable. Not just one.
: : : What if the concavity was 3/4" long and the density of the concavity was 2.54 and the density of the base material was 2.43. However, only less than 1/4" of the concavity was over the density of the base material. The remaining concavity was less than the density of the base material.
: : : Is this rejectable or acceptable?
: : : This question was posed to me and I think it was a legitimate question and I'd like others opinions on it.
: : : Thanks in advance.
: : if your working with that small of a range of densities, then you might want to factor in the accuracy of the densitometer. it should be calabrated, and have an accuracy of + and - of ????
: Chris,
: I understand what you're saying, but all standards have specific value for everything and you have to have a cut off limit somewhere. I believe that whomever wrote those standards have already factored in these factors otherwise, it would become a nightmare to meet the codes. And what would happended if your film is read by someone else? If the accuracy of their densitometer is different than yours, your film maybe rejected!!! Would that be fair and accurate?
------------ End Original Message ------------


If you are using the same densitometer at the same time then any errors will be the same, especially if measuring densities so close to each other. So, if the readings for base metal and concavity are compared any difference should be identical regardless of the absolute value. Your 2.54 could be actually 2.49 or 2.59 and the 2.43 either 2.48 or 2.38 so they don't (quite) overlap anyway if your densitomer is correctly calibrated (ASTM E1079) so should not be an issue.
If you are concerned about film rejection in general for density then you shouldn't really be shooting so close to the limit so the small differences between different densitometers shouldn't be a factor.
As for accept reject, I believe the example given above is rejectablel. Look at the burn through criteria referenced in the internal concavity section and it says that that burn through maximum dimension exceeds 1/4" and ANY portion has a density exceeding base material is rejectable, it doesn't say that the high density area has to be above 1/4" long.


 
 Reply 
 
stotts
stotts
05:37 Nov-09-2007
Re: Hypothetical Question
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: : : : I have a hypothetical question I'd like to get some opinions on regarding flaw sizing (RT). Let's say you are working to API-1104 and you find some root concavity.
: : : : The accept/reject criterai for concavity is the same as burn through. Must be over 1/4" and the density must be greater than the thinnest base material. It must meet both requirements to be considered rejectable. Not just one.
: : : : What if the concavity was 3/4" long and the density of the concavity was 2.54 and the density of the base material was 2.43. However, only less than 1/4" of the concavity was over the density of the base material. The remaining concavity was less than the density of the base material.
: : : : Is this rejectable or acceptable?
: : : : This question was posed to me and I think it was a legitimate question and I'd like others opinions on it.
: : : : Thanks in advance.
: : : if your working with that small of a range of densities, then you might want to factor in the accuracy of the densitometer. it should be calabrated, and have an accuracy of + and - of ????
: : Chris,
: : I understand what you're saying, but all standards have specific value for everything and you have to have a cut off limit somewhere. I believe that whomever wrote those standards have already factored in these factors otherwise, it would become a nightmare to meet the codes. And what would happended if your film is read by someone else? If the accuracy of their densitometer is different than yours, your film maybe rejected!!! Would that be fair and accurate?
:
: If you are using the same densitometer at the same time then any errors will be the same, especially if measuring densities so close to each other. So, if the readings for base metal and concavity are compared any difference should be identical regardless of the absolute value. Your 2.54 could be actually 2.49 or 2.59 and the 2.43 either 2.48 or 2.38 so they don't (quite) overlap anyway if your densitomer is correctly calibrated (ASTM E1079) so should not be an issue.
: If you are concerned about film rejection in general for density then you shouldn't really be shooting so close to the limit so the small differences between different densitometers shouldn't be a factor.
: As for accept reject, I believe the example given above is rejectablel. Look at the burn through criteria referenced in the internal concavity section and it says that that burn through maximum dimension exceeds 1/4" and ANY portion has a density exceeding base material is rejectable, it doesn't say that the high density area has to be above 1/4" long.
------------ End Original Message ------------

reject,concavity length against density makes for a thin argument



 
 Reply 
 
Vishal Gupta
Vishal Gupta
16:21 Sep-08-2013
Re: Hypothetical Question
In Reply to Jimbo Q. at 00:45 Oct-22-2007 (Opening).

I believe the situation posted by you is rejectable because the discontinuity shall meet all the acceptance criteria to be marked as acceptable. The situation doesn't meet both the citeria (length and density) so should be rejected.

 
 Reply 
 

Product Spotlight

Research and Application Development For NDT

Acuren’s Research and Application Development specializes in the development of advanced ultraso
...
nic inspection techniques and systems for challenging inspection applications, with an emphasis on practical solutions which are field deployable. Services include manual and automated ultrasonic inspection system development, inspection technique optimization using laboratory scale studies and ultrasonic modeling (CIVA, BeamTool), preparing technical justification for technique evaluation and qualification (Probability of Detection and sizing accuracy studies), inspection/calibration/analysis procedure preparation to support field deployment of custom techniques, and development of custom imaging algorithms to support challenging inspection applications.
>

AIS229 - Multipurpose Real Time System

Latest standard & automatic real time system developed by Balteau. The AIS229 has been designed to
...
do series inspection in a wide variety of industry. Composed of a shielded cabinet, 5 axis manipulator, x-ray generator and tubehead from 160kV to 225kV, a fl at panel & much more, the AIS229 is most certainly one of the most multipurpose RTR system available on the market.
>

GEKKO - Portable Phased Array Testing with TFM in Real-Time

The portable phased array testing system GEKKO provides 64 parallel test channels. On creating testi
...
ng parameters the operator is assisted by the CIVA software. Due to its modular set-up the GEKKO instrument is suitable for operators of all skill levels.
>

A1525 SOLO

A1525 Solo – the most compact and affordable TMF unit with two phased array transducers and 3D v
...
isualization and analysis software in standard delivery set. A compact, ergonomic and easy to handheld Phased Array unit based on Total Focusing Method for easy-going imaging of inspection objects with two-dimensional and three-dimensional visualization and evaluation of inspection results.
>

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