TÜV Rheinland Sonovation BV

Advantages of applying Phased Array in

lieu of Radiography for the inspection of

small bore austenitic piping

Content presentation

Business case description

Project approach steps

- Selection of codes and standards to be used

- Comparison test of RT and PA inspection methods

- Procedure validation

- Field inspection

Production and rejection levels

Advantages of UT in lieu of RT

Cost / Savings and Conclusions

(Sitech Services C.V. provided part of the information for the project)

2 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Business case description

Piping contractor requested TRSonovation to develop a weld inspection to

replace radiography to be able to weld continuously in 2 shifts to meet the TA

deadline.

Project (17641):

- Ultimate end client: OCI AFA Ammonia plant Geleen the Netherlands

- TA 2018: 800 field butt welds on new inlet header of NH3 reformer

Scope:

- Full penetration pipe to pipe butt welds

- Material stainless steel 347

- Nominal wall thickness 4.85mm

- Diameter 1.5” (42.2mm)

Proposed Technique by TRSonovation: Phased Array

3 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Project approach

Selection of codes and standards to be used

Comparison test of RT and PA inspection methods

Procedure validation

Field inspection

4 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Codes and standards selection

ISO-DIS-20601 Non-destructive testing of welds – Ultrasonic testing – Use of

automated phased array technology for thin-walled steel components. With

specific acceptance criteria

ISO-22825 Non-destructive testing of welds – Ultrasonic testing – Testing of

welds in austenitic steels and nickel-based alloys used for: welded samples,

reference reflectors, calibration and inspection sensitivity

Scope could NOT be covered by (minimum wall thickness 6mm):

- EN-ISO-22825 for UT testing of Austenitic and Nickel based alloys

- EN-ISO-13588 for PA on simple geometry butt welds

- Acceptance criteria ISO-19285 for PA

- Acceptance criteria ISO 11666 for ultrasonic inspection

5 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Comparison test PAUT - RT

To verify that the inspection approach will deliver the same weld quality as

with the original planned NDT Technique (RT), a comparison of both PAUT

and RT was executed on:

- 3 welded samples (samples numbered; 1, 4, 5)

Techniques used:

- PAUT (3.5Mhz 16 element, double sided, sectorial scan 45-70 graden)

(under skip, distance wedge to weld 10mm and 4mm)

- RT (double wall image)

- Computer Tomography (CT) as non-destructive alternative for macro

sectioning

6 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Results sample 1

Welded sample with no intentional discontinuities

7 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Results sample 4

8 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Results sample 5

9 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Acceptance criteria / conclusions

Indications >20% reference level further evaluated.

Lack of fusion, incomplete penetration or cracks are unacceptable if >20%

reference level.

All volumetric indications >25% reference level are unacceptable.

Findings:

- PAUT and RT results were very similar.

- Computer Tomography results have proven that no major indications have

been missed by either RT and PAUT.

Conclusion:

- This means that PAUT inspection technique offers the same level of weld

quality as radiography and therefore a suitable replacement for RT

10 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Procedure validation

Reference blocks (without weld) (A&B) as per EN-ISO-22825 (EDM notches,

needed for piping C-steel inspections)

Demonstration blocks (with weld) (A & B) as per EN-ISO-22825 (Flat bottom

holes for stainless steel welds)

V2 calibration block curved, 316L stainless steel

11 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Setups

3.5Mhz, 16 element PA probe, sectorial scan between 45-70 degree, under

full skip and 1.5 skip.

Double sided, 4mm and 10mm from weld centre line

V2 calibration block curved, 316L stainless steel, 1.5mm SDH. 80% FSH +

6dB (primary reference level as scan sensitivity)

12 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Production and rejection levels

Inspection of max 50 welds shift of 9.5 hours (06.00-15.30—15.30-00.00).

Inspection speed was limited by welding capacity.

Total 923 welds inspected of which 125 rejections = 13.5%

13 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

0

10

20

30

40

50

60

70

80

90

100

Acc.

N.Acc.

0%

10%

20%

30%

40%

50%

60%

70%

80%

90%

100%

N.Acc.

Acc.

Advantages of UT in lieu of RT

Continuous welding in 2 shifts from 06.00 in the morning till 00.00 hours

Safety & environment: no radiation, no chemical waste

Safety & production: no evacuation off areas, continuous work in the

surrounding production area’s which were still online

Partly repair of welds possible = not total cut outs = time saving

Real time analysis for instant feedback to the welders

Setup and inspection reports in electronic format

14 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Costs / Savings and conclusions

Cost per weld < 100 Euro per weld, including all costs for the validation,

comparison testing with RT and CT.

Calculated savings: turn around time reduced with 5 days!!

Conclusion: Making the selection of the NDT technique subject to the total

cost approach can generate large savings. UT in lieu of Radiography can

reduce your turnaround time significantly is safer and better for the

environment.

15 02/12/2019 Company Introduction TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

02/12/201916 Presentation TÜV Rheinland

Thank you for your attention

TÜV Rheinland Sonovation

Elschot 30

4905 AZ Oosterhout

The Netherlands

Tel: +31162425588

E-mail: info@sonovation.com

Managing Director

Fred Gabriëls

E-mail: fred.gabriels@nl.tuv.com

16 02/12/2019