Radiographic film interpretation

[Shashank Vagal]

Hi all, In one RT film we have a 10-12 mm spot with density 3.13. The weld density is 3.17 and the parent metal density is 3.3. It is apparently interpass LoF in the 2nd fill pass after hot pass (confirmed by UT, where the indication ht is approx 20%of DAC). Is there any or what is the criteria for acceptance/rejection based on density difference? Rgds, Shashank Vagal

[Kale, Bhaskar M]

Greeting All,

As understand from the information provided, its look like gas pocket .do the transverse scan you will find the increase in amplitude. (Scanning movement F as per API RP 2X).it is normal; many times we find such type of defect.

There is no acceptance/ rejection criteria depend on the density for radiography. What is code of constriction?

Some details like welding procedure and reference sensitivity for UT calibration will helpful to judge the situation.

Also when you repair this try to observe the defect this will be lesson learn for future.

 

Regards, Bhaskar Kale

--
To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

--
धन्यवाद,
भास्कर मनोहर काळे
+60149129098

--
To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[Declan Foley]

Never heard of one. I'm sure there are plenty of people on this forum like me who have vast experience of viewing & interpreting radiographs. Any chance you could take a photo (of the radiograph) and post it here?

Declan

--
To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[Karthik]

hi, please refer with ASME Section-V,T-282 for further acceptance limitation on film density difference. Karthikeyan.S   Getabec Energy Co.,Ltd. 379,Moo6,Soi8,Nikhomphatana, Rayong-21180, Thailand. Phone: 0066 38 897035-8 (Off) Fax: 0066 38 897034 Hand Phone: 0066 892512282 --- On Thu, 4/15/10, Shashank Vagal <nach...@yahoo.com> wrote:

-- To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[Sam Malemela]

Hi Shashank,

 

There are guidelines for acceptance of developed film density depending on the Code you are using. Some codes are calling for 1.8 - 4.0 being acceptable density ranges within which reasonable interpretation and disposition of imperfections can be executed safely.

 

Some codes however call for a Radiographic film density of 2-3.

If you are interpreting to a code of specification, make your ruling within the parameters provided for in the Governing code of specification.

 

The bottom line is whether the image you are looking at is reasonably visible to your eye aided or not to enable you to Accept or Reject it? Can you see what you are expected to see without any doubt that the image is not good enough to enable you to make a decision.

 

The densities you are providing are within the range for 1.8 – 4.0.

 

Regards,

 

NS MALEMELA

Contracts & Quality Manager [Special Projects]

Southern Pipeline Contractors

TEL:(011) 914-8519

FAX:(011) 914-4524

082 389 2592 Cell

smal...@spc.co.za

[Muzib_ur_Rahuman.]

Dear,



Shashank Vagal.

Refer ASME sec V article 2, T 282.2 page 14


T-282.2 Density Variation
(a) General. If the density of the radiograph anywhere
through the area of interest varies by more than minus
15% or plus 30% from the density through the body of
the hole IQI or adjacent to the designated wire of a wire
IQI, within the minimum/maximum allowable density
ranges specified in T-282.1, then an additional IQI shall be
used for each exceptional area or areas and the radiograph
retaken. When calculating the allowable variation in density,
the calculation may be rounded to the nearest 0.1
within the range specified in T-282.1.
(b) With Shims. When shims are used with hole-type
IQIs, the plus 30% density restriction of (a)

pl review

> --
> To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
> To unsubscribe from this group, send email to
> materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
> For more options, visit this group's bolg at
> http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
> The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and
> meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions
> w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.
>

> To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.
>


--
K.Muzip ur Rahuman.
QA/QC Coordinator.
BLNG
Adinin Works Engg.
Brunei

Mob;006737170703

[Mircea Raican]

If your radiographic density determinations are correct, result a slight negative radiographic contrast (-0.04, very close of the  threshold of human eye perception: 0.02). This means to evaluate the following possible imperfections: 1. weld:     a. metallic inclusions (tungsten or copper,depending the welding process);     b. weld spatter;     c. a small higher thickness. 2. film handling and manipulation (artifacts).   All the other imperfections possible in welds create a positive radiographic contrast (including LoF).   Imperfections 1.b); c) and 2. can be easy verified by VT of weld  or viewing, by reflexion, the surface of the film. Imperfection 1.a): - tungsten inclusion, specific for TIGW, creates a high negative contrast indication (> - 0.2, depending the radiation source energy) and can not be considered. -copper inclusion create a small negative contrast indication (a little higher specific weight than steel) and can be considered. There are not acceptance criteria depending the contrast. This helps, only,  for imperfection (discontinuity) diagnosis. A UT discontinuity indication of 20 % DAC (DAC-14 dB) is not important (considered, for example, by EN 1713 as insignificant and by ASME VIII, app. 12 at the upper limit of non-evaluation), so could be associated to the upper mentioned copper inclusion.

--- On Thu, 4/15/10, Shashank Vagal <nach...@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Shashank Vagal <nach...@yahoo.com> Subject: [MW:4850] Radiographic film interpretation To: material...@googlegroups.com

-- To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

[PEMMARAJU RAGHAVENDRA]

pl.let us know what is the reference standard and Code for acceptance criteria to be applied on this radiograph.

As per ASME, the same goes for rejection as the indication is planar in nature and there is no tolerance for planar defects.

Also pl.do mention what is the joint nature and thickness of the weld under test.

Regards,

Larsen & Toubro Limited
www.larsentoubro.com

This Email may contain confidential or privileged information for the intended recipient (s) If you are not the intended recipient, please do not use or disseminate the information, notify the sender and delete it from your system.

>>> Shashank Vagal <nach...@yahoo.com> 15/04/2010 08:16 pm >>>

--
To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

To unsubscribe, reply using "remove me" as the subject.

Larsen & Toubro Limited
www.larsentoubro.com

This Email may contain confidential or privileged information for the intended recipient (s) If you are not the intended recipient, please do not use or disseminate the information, notify the sender and delete it from your system.

[BHARAT GOLE]

As per ASME section VIII Div 1 Appendix 4 clause 4-3 Density within image of the indication may vary and is not criterion for acceptance or rejection.
However acceptance or rejection will be  based on size, spacing, concentration and type of indication etc.

If indication is conformed as  LOF as per UT apart from  20% DAC then its not acceptable as per ASME Section VIII  but certain length of Inter pass LOF is acceptable as per API 1104 So its depend upon code of constrruction.

But there is no creteria for acceptance or rejection based on density difference Only Root concvity & undercuts will be accepted or rejected based on density differnece.

Regards

Bharat B. Gole

---

Date: Thu, 15 Apr 2010 20:16:46 +0530
From: nach...@yahoo.com

Subject: [MW:4850] Radiographic film interpretation
To: material...@googlegroups.com

--
To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com
To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com
For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/
The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

---

The latest auto launches and test drives Drag n' drop

[Kale, Bhaskar M]

This is acceptance rejection criteria for film quality and not for the weld quality.

our friend seek advice for acceptance rejection criteria for weld quality based on radiographic density.

originally mentioned indication is most probably gas voids filled with some dense materials etc

Regards, Bhaskar

--
धन्यवाद,
भास्कर मनोहर काळे
+60149129098

[SENTHILKUMAR SWAMINATHAN]

Mr. Shashank, Can you give more details like what is the welding process, Pipe or Plate joint. In flow lines I use to see these type of indication in crude oil pipelines especially in 4" & 6". As per API 1104 I will reject due to size you mentioned.   Regards, S.Senthilkumar --- On Thu, 15/4/10, Shashank Vagal <nach...@yahoo.com> wrote:

From: Shashank Vagal <nach...@yahoo.com> Subject: [MW:4850] Radiographic film interpretation To: material...@googlegroups.com

-- To post to this group, send email to material...@googlegroups.com To unsubscribe from this group, send email to materials-weld...@googlegroups.com For more options, visit this group's bolg at http://materials-welding.blogspot.com/ The views expressed/exchnaged in this group are members personel views and meant for educational purposes only, Users must take their own decisions w.r.t. applicable code/standard/contract documents.

Send free SMS to your Friends on Mobile from your Yahoo! Messenger. Download Now! http://messenger.yahoo.com/download.php

[Shashank Vagal]

Hi Senthil, Good to hear from you. Process: SMAW, structural tubular butt weld made to AWS D1.1. On further scrutiny the following was observed, let us take this as a more representative data: Density Location	Overlapping films	Single  film
Weld	2.6	3.24
PM	2.96	3.61
Indication	2.79	3.38
IQI	2.90	3.15

 

By UT we confirmed that the indication is coming from the 1st weld pass just after back grinding and re-welding. The indication is similar to a wagon track type. But in my opinion it is interpass LF. Any comments?

Another issue with developed Kodak M100 film, is it usual for the fim to turn to more to a brownish tinge instead of blackish? The bath is new. We have noted, Agfa D series films give a blackish film after developing.

One more issue in 6GR WQT there always comes a sharp line due to 25 mm edge in the RT film. This might mask discontinuity (e.g. LF) on the fusion line at that side. To avoid this shortcoming, what is the solution?

Please advise.

Rgds,

Shashank

--- On Sat, 17/4/10, SENTHILKUMAR SWAMINATHAN <skuma...@yahoo.co.in> wrote:

[SENTHILKUMAR SWAMINATHAN]

Mr Shashank, Thank you. By UT we confirmed that the indication is coming from the 1st weld pass just after back grinding and re-welding. The indication is similar to a wagon track type. But in my opinion it is interpass LF. Any comments? For me its looks like slag inclusion at start and stopover location due to lack of cleaning.   Another issue with developed Kodak M100 film, is it usual for the fim to turn to more to a brownish tinge instead of blackish? The bath is new. We have noted, Agfa D series films give a blackish film after developing. If I am right Kodak M100 is equvivalent to D2 in Agfa. You are right kodak is giving brownish.     One more issue in 6GR WQT there always comes a sharp line due to 25 mm edge in the RT film. This might mask discontinuity (e.g. LF) on the fusion line at that side. To avoid this shortcoming, what is the solution? Composite film tech is better solution D4 & D7.   Thank you & Regards,   S.Senthilkumar