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 -

1834 views
Technical Discussions
Ed Ginzel
R & D, -
Materials Research Institute, Canada, Joined Nov 1998, 1235

Ed Ginzel

R & D, -
Materials Research Institute,
Canada,
Joined Nov 1998
1235
03:39 Jan-19-2004
ISO 13847:2000 Porosity and UT

I have just purchased my copy of the ISO standards 13847 Petroleum and natural gas industries - Pipeline transportation systems-Welding of pipelines.
The NDT requirements for testing are reasonably typical and I have no issues with them. However, the ultrasonic acceptance criteria for workmanship has a statement that for nonplanar indications which cover a projected area of not more than 2% on the radiograph shall be considered acceptable. (But this is in the Ultrasonic Acceptance Criteria Section 9.5 and there is no radiograph!)
It also allows that porosity indications may be treated as planar.

This does not seem very helpful to an ultrasonic technician.
It implies that ultrasonic assessment is to be made look like radiography. Although porosity and slag may be evaluated as planar the connection to a 2% projected area has little to do with ultrasonic assessment. (I have also noted that 2% projected area is rarely quantifiable even by experienced radiographers).

How did the ISO committeerationalise this kind of wording for ultrasonic testing? There is a contact in Geneva for problems with the file format but there is no instructions on who to contact when there is a techncal issue like making ultrasonic result equate to radiography.

Does anyone have a suggestion or contact route?
Regards
Ed



    
 
 
Sasaki
Sasaki
01:28 Jan-20-2004
Re: ISO 13847:2000 Porosity and UT
I wonder if this could be helpful, but please see

http://www.iso.ch/iso/en/xsite/contact/contact.html

My personal guess to your posting is that the stipulation of radiograph is made in case of dispute regarding interpretation of UT echo signal with regard to sizing the flaw.
That means, final interpretation should be made by radiograph since UT is inadequate method of "permanent record".

I maybe wrong but wish helpful.


    
 
 
HAREESH KUMAR
HAREESH KUMAR
07:00 Nov-20-2011
Re: ISO 13847:2000 Porosity and UT
In Reply to Ed Ginzel at 03:39 Jan-19-2004 (Opening).

My opinion is like ASME, ISO13847 should create an acceptance criteria specifically for Ultrasonic Examination instead of refering to the Radiographic acceptance paragraph, which makes more confusion in establishing Ultrasonic acceptance standard.
Regards,
HAREESH KUMAR

    
 
 
standards
standards
13:16 Nov-22-2011
Re: ISO 13847:2000 Porosity and UT
In Reply to Ed Ginzel at 03:39 Jan-19-2004 (Opening).

This International Standard specifies the requirements for producing and inspecting girth, branch and fillet welds in the pipeline part of pipeline transportation systems for the petroleum and natural gas industries meeting the requirements of ISO 13623.

http://www.bsb.co.in/

    
 
 
John O'Brien
Consultant, -
Chevron ETC , USA, Joined Jan 2000, 278

John O'Brien

Consultant, -
Chevron ETC ,
USA,
Joined Jan 2000
278
16:20 Nov-23-2011
Re: ISO 13847:2000 Porosity and UT
In Reply to Ed Ginzel at 03:39 Jan-19-2004 (Opening).

Ed

you are correct its nonsense and was not fixed on the 2001 correction. I question why anyone is using a standard more than a decade old which means the wording is probably 12 or more years old in a fast moving technology environment.

I believe this standard falls under TC 67/SC2 Current Chair is Dennis Tikhomirov. You could send your inquiry through Mrs Kirsi Silander silander@iso.org

Good luck if you get anything positive please post here to help close the loop.

    
 
 

Product Spotlight

FMC/TFM

Next generation for Phased Array UT is here now with FMC/TFM! Have higher resolution imaging, impr
...
oved signal to noise ratio, characterize, size and analyze defects better with access to several wave mode views and save raw FMC data for higher quality analysis.  Some of the benefits are:
  • Beautiful Image! Easier to understand what you're looking at
  • Completely focused in entire image or volume
  • Much easier to define setups before inspection
  • Easier to decipher geometry echoes from real defects
  • Oriented defects (e.g. cracks) are imaged better
  • See image from different wave modes from one FMC inspection
  • FMC data can be reprocessed/analyzed without going back to the field
>

TVC awarded UKAS accreditation

TVC are delighted to finally announce we have been awarded UKAS accreditation for our calibration
...
laboratory. Laboratory accreditation to ISO/IEC 17025:2005 enables us to conduct the Electrical Verification of Ultrasonic Flaw Detection Equipment to BS EN 12668-1:2010. It has taken many months of hard work and we want to thank our staff for all their efforts during this massive undertaking.
>

X-ray CT aids research into defect formation in AM parts

X-ray CT is used to research how additive manufacturing process parameters influence defect format
...
ion in AM parts.
>

Ultrasonic Flaw Detector & Thickness Gauge: Smartor

SIUI’s newly launched Smartor is a combination of ultrasonic testing and ultrasonic thickness me
...
asurement. ●IP 66 ●Compact size: 198 (W)* 128 (H) *520 (D) mm ●0.9kg only with battery ●5.7" LCD with high resolution 640×480 pixels ●One-hand operation ●Multiple conventional UT functions ●Smart Test Wizard ●Weld Simulation
>

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