where expertise comes together - since 1996

Web's Largest Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)
Open Access Database (Conference Proceedings, Articles, News), Exhibition, Forum, Network

All Forum Boards
Technical Discussions >
a question
Career Discussions
Job Offers
Job Seeks
Classified Ads
About NDT.net
Articles & News

2603 views
00:59 Oct-25-2005
shapour ershadi
a question

what is minimum thikness that we can use ut for welding of piping ? where standard write it?
please send me info as soon as

by thanks


 
03:25 Oct-26-2005

J. Mark Davis

Teacher, And Consultant
University of Ultrasonics, Birmingham, Alabama,
USA,
Joined Mar 2000
83
Re: a question I have performed UT of piping 2 inches in diameter with a wall thickness of .100 inches using OD Creeping Waves.

Generally, materials of .200 inches in thickness can be examined with high angle shear waves.

By Code, the goal is to inspect the weld volume and heat affected zone. This may require one or more refracted angles.

Another option is using Phased Arrays where you can sweep the angles (60 to 75 degrees)with electronic scans (Sectorial Scans) to cover the volume of weld and HAZ.

Contact Olympus/ RDTech regarding applications of Phased Array.

Sincerely,

J. Mark Davis

----------- Start Original Message -----------
: what is minimum thikness that we can use ut for welding of piping ? where standard write it?
: please send me info as soon as
: by thanks
------------ End Original Message ------------




 
08:36 Oct-26-2005

Juan Amado

Engineering, Inspection
Arco Industrial, S.A.,
Panama,
Joined Nov 2001
44
Re: a question In theory Ultrasonic testing can be applied to a range of different thicknesses, from very thin using surface waves, to thick materials using different diffracted angles and low frequencies. In practice, however, inspection work would probably be performed in accordance to a standard, which will in turn place some constraints on some of the variables related the work being performed. For example, the AWS D1.1:2000 Structural Welding Code, pp. 203 states that the procedures for ultrasonic inspection described in that document are for testing groove welds and heat affected zones between the thicknesses of 5/16" and 8". Other thicknesses may be tested, but require special approvals, and procedures. Similarly you will find that in other codes or standards, different rules apply.

Hope this helps,
Juan Amado


----------- Start Original Message -----------
: I have performed UT of piping 2 inches in diameter with a wall thickness of .100 inches using OD Creeping Waves.
: Generally, materials of .200 inches in thickness can be examined with high angle shear waves.
: By Code, the goal is to inspect the weld volume and heat affected zone. This may require one or more refracted angles.
: Another option is using Phased Arrays where you can sweep the angles (60 to 75 degrees)with electronic scans (Sectorial Scans) to cover the volume of weld and HAZ.
: Contact Olympus/ RDTech regarding applications of Phased Array.
: Sincerely,
: J. Mark Davis
: : what is minimum thikness that we can use ut for welding of piping ? where standard write it?
: : please send me info as soon as
: : by thanks
------------ End Original Message ------------




 
08:15 Oct-27-2005
shapour ershadi
Re: a question
first thank you

we use B31.3 ANSI we work in amoniak plan (petrochemica plan)

WE&INSPECTION THINK DIFRENT SOME ONE SAY MUST BE
TEST UP THICKNESS UP 20&SOME ONE SAY WE CAN TEST UP
8 mm in thickness but in asme sec IV we didnot see
any thing about the limited thickness
at now we searching by some one who read some thing about this




 
02:41 Oct-28-2005

Ed Ginzel

R & D, -
Materials Research Institute,
Canada,
Joined Nov 1998
1185
Re: a question Mark and Juan make good points. Yes, a high angle compression mode (the
so-called OD creeping wave) can be used, but with a wavelength of 1.2mm on
the 2.5mm (0.100 inch) wall Mark referred to, there is not much other than
detection of surface conditions that can be done (no real flaw detection as
we would traditionally do in heavy wall sections). Also, with the
high-angle compression mode you need to do your detection in the first
10-12mm of distance from the probe as there will soon be mode converted
signals arriving as well.

Juan points to the limitations stated by some codes. AWS is burdened by the
gross dimensions of the mandatory probes so even the limit of 8mm is relying
on several skips to get to the weld zone in most cases. ASME B31.3 does not
have such a limit stated. But neither does it have strict requirements
placed on the probe that is to be used. I have worked with phased array
configurations on 5.5mm wall but the interpretation can be very tricky due
to the boundary effects. Even using a small 6mm diameter probe on a 5.2mm
wall (this would be the nominal for 2.5 inch diameter Schedule 40 pipe) is
problematic. The dimension of the pulse leaving the wedge means that the
lower portion of the pulse arrives at the ID before the upper portion leaves
the wedge. Even before the main pulse centre-of-beam has reached the inside
surface the back of the beam has reflected off the inside surface. Before
long you have 2 or 3 pulses arriving very close to one another and again
there is no practical way of a sensible "flaw detection" where you plot the
defect using trigonometry. Added to these issues will be the effect of the
curvature of the pipe and its effect on spreading the beam.

Attached is a model of a pulse in a 5.2mm thick cross-section. It shows the
"half-skip" and two reflected portions occurring just before the
centre-of-beam makes a full skip. Some success can be had using a focusing
effect with a phased array setup but even this has limits for focusing.
Lower elements used for focusing at higher nominal angles (>60°) suffer
apodisation at the second critical angle. If too many elements are used the
upper elements then try to contribute to the focus using angles smaller than
the first critical angle and annoying compression modes are introduced.

Ed



 
01:49 Oct-30-2005

A.A.AMIRI

Consultant, NDT/QC/WELD INSPECTION
Iran,
Joined Nov 2005
20
Re: a question ----------- Start Original Message -----------
: DEARE SIR,
WHAT IS TEST ON YOUR OPINION WHICH SPOKE ABOUT IT?
:


 
02:06 Oct-30-2005

A.A.AMIRI

Consultant, NDT/QC/WELD INSPECTION
Iran,
Joined Nov 2005
20
Re: a question ----------- Start Original Message -----------
DEAR SIR,
IN COMMON & PRACTICAL TECHNIQUE OF UT (pulse echo)BY MANUAL EQUIPMENTS & CONTACT METHOD,MINIMUM THK. FOR OBTAIN BEST RESULT OF EVALUATION,IS 10 mm.BUT AS PER AWS-D1.1
MIN.8 mm.& ACCORDING TO ASNT UT LEVEL III STUDY GUID,
MIN. 6 mm. HAVE BEEN MENTIONED.


 
01:05 Nov-14-2005
Kaveh
Re: a question Dear friends
Your comments are OK. My opinion is as followed. If you think that other parameters are important please complete this.
Standards define some ranges for Minimum thickness such as 8 mm. But the important parameter that can be used for measuring the minimum thickness is ultrasonic WAVELENGTH.
When plate thickness is thin in comparison with the wavelength, guided waves can propagate in the plate with a low attenuation. These waves are dispersed and can not be evaluated by common ultrasonic methods.
So, if you use high frequency probes, you can use the UT for thin plates such as plates with a thickness lower than 1 mm.
If you want information for a research, I recommend that you read some papers about Lamb wave or Guided wave.
Best wishes
Kaveh


 


© NDT.net - The Web's Largest Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT) ISSN 1435-4934

Open Access Database, |Conference Proceedings| |Articles| |News| |Exhibition| |Forum| |Professional Network|