Why is post-weld heat treatment (stress relieving) sometimes necessary for welded vessels?

Ans: During the welding process, the two metal pieces being joined are subject to extreme temperatures and can cause the crystalline structure of the metal to pass through various metallurgical phases. As a result, hardening (and embrittlement) of the metal can occur to varying degrees (usually dependent on carbon content). Heat treatment is designed to reduce the hardness in the heat-affected zone of the metals and increase ductility in these sections. Various pressure vessel codes contain the specifics regarding the procedures for post-weld heat treatment. Heat is usually held for one hour per inch of thickness of the metal. The temperature used is based on the "P-number" of the metals. P-numbers are assigned based on the chemical composition of the metals. Holding temperatures can range from 11001350 F (593-732 C). 3. What is the method of determining maximum differential pressure during hydro testing of shell and tube heat exchangers? Ans: Heat ex changers have two sets of test pressures per side, one for strength tests, and the other for "operating" or "leak" tests. The strength tests are set by the design code and if you have the original design data sheets for your equipment then the information should be shown on these. If you do not then you will have to do the calculations yourself, the exact method will depend upon which design code you use, the most common one being TEMA (which uses the ANSI/ASME pressure vessel code for reference in this area). Most shell and tube ex changers are designed such that each side of the unit will withstand the full design pressure, with only atmospheric pressure on the other side. In order to save money, some larger units will have the tube-sheets especially designed to withstand only a much lower differential pressure (requiring both sides to be tested simultaneously). This important information should be shall quite clearly on the design sheets and on the vessel nameplate (assuming that either are available). If the only need is to check that a gasket has been properly installed then it can be permissible to perform a lower pressure test based on the operating pressure. The acceptability of this lower pressure test will often depend upon the consequences of a leak.

Explain bending moment? Differentiate between a shaper machine and a planner machine Explain the importance of Thermodynamics in the field of Mechanical Engineering? What is the nomenclature of a 6203-ZZ bearing? Give the full form of SCADA, DCS and HMI. How does the failing of Knuckle pin occur? What is the heat rate of a power plant? Which of these have a higher efficiency: Diesel engines or Petrol engines? What are the points in the stress/strain curve for steel? What is ductile-brittle transition temperature? Differentiate between Relay and Conductor? Differentiate between shaper and planner? What is the immediate superclass of Menu? State the laws of conservation of energy. What is a gear box and what are its applications? What is Carnot engine? Which formula forms a link between thermodynamics and electrochemistry? How will you calculate the tonnage of Mechanical Press? What is maximum continuous rating?

What is the difference between Critical speed and Whirling speed? What is plant load factor? What is hard material cast iron or mild steel? How would you find the amount of natural gas required to produce 1 KWhr of energy? What is annealing? How do you measure temperature in a web bulb thermometer? What is the purpose of governor in automobile? What is bearing stress? What is the difference between SCADA and BMS? Explain Otto cycle. What is the efficiency of v-type four stroke diesel engines? Is the boiler a closed system? How many joules are there in one BTU? How many laws of Thermodynamics are there? What is the consequence of not maintaining hydrogen (or air) pressure in generator casing at a value above atmospheric pressure when seal oil system is in service? Explain the effect on the basis of which the cricket ball swings. What is the method for testing Light Emitting Diode? What is the function of EGR value? In a heat exchanger, if I have given pressure on tube side, can I perform hydro test of shell side simultaneously? Why? Which is the hardest compound known? What is gear ratio? Define torque. What is PS? What is the mechanical advantage of a double pulley? What is Hess law? How to control temperature (Electronics method)? What is a Newtonian fluid? What is the significance of Torque (in N-m) given in the engine specification? How to make operations by pressing a single push button (at least for 2 operations)? What are the materials used for sliding wear pad? Explain the second law of thermodynamics. What is the difference between a gas turbine and a steam turbine? What is knurling? What is OEE? Define Reynolds number. What is the difference between a blower and a fan? What is extruded Aluminum?

We would like to seek opinion of other memebers on the subject of Hydro testing of shell and tube type heat exchangers/coolers. The question is which side to be tested inorder to find out if a tube is leaking or thinned out and is to be plugged before taking the HE into operation. . Take one pariticular HE with high tube side pressure

and low shell side pressure such as gas coolers. Tube side pressure could be between 10 -60 barG or even higher whereas shell side is only 4-7 barG ( cooling water pressure). In order to test such exchanger what we do is pressurize the tube side to its required test pressure that is 1.5 times design. check for any pressure drop. If no pressure drop, it is assumed that no tube is leaking. If there is a pressure drop, it is assumed that there is a tube leakage. The next step is how to identify the leaking tube. For this purpose we pressurize shell side with utility air ( 5-7barG) and then identify the leaking tube with soap solution test. The above test is done if the bundle was mecahnically cleaned with HP jet cleaning. In case a HE is identified as already leaking in operation then the above procedure is reversed. That is first the leaking tube is identified /plugged and after making sure all leaking tubes have been identified and plugged then the tube side is pressurized to desired test pressure. It may so happen that again there is a pressure drop. The whole exercise has to repeated once again. The question is at what pressure difference between the shell side and tube side one must go for tube side ( higher pressure ) testing. We have fixed about 10 barG as an arbitrary figure. If the difference between the shell side and tube side is less than 10 barG we test only shell side and assume that tube bundle integrity is ensured. And if the difference of pressure is more than 10 barG , we go for tube side testing as mentioned above. Is this procedure technically acceptable? We have been doing so for the last 20 years with very few cases of missing the target. Most of the time the testing was reliable that is no tube leaked after taking the HE in operation.

ON HYDROSTATIC TESTING HEAT EXCHANGERS

INTRODUCTION Section VIII Division 1 of The ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code (Code)[i] requires testing the integrity of pressure vessels by subjecting them to a hydrostatic pressure test of 1.3 times the maximum allowable working pressure (MAWP) corrected for the difference between allowable stress at the test temperature and the design temperature. The Code provides for testing at higher hydrostatic test pressures but most pressure tests are at the 1.3 multiple. For shell-and-tube heat exchangers built to the TEMA

Standards, Paragraph RCB-1.31 Standard Test, the holding period is at least 30 minutes[ii]. The TEMA Standards require testing the shell and tube sides separately in such a manner that leaks at the tube joints can be detected at least from one side. The Code does not permit any visible leakage through the joints during the Authorized Inspectors (AIs) examination during and after the holding period on hydrostatic test pressure. Paragraph UG-99(g) states in part, Following the application of the hydrostatic test pressure, an inspection shall be made of all joints and connections. This inspection shall be made at a pressure not less than the test pressure divided by 1.3. Except for leakage that might occur at temporary test closures for those openings intended for welded connections, leakage is not allowed at the time of the required visual inspection. (Italics added.) This means that the AI must reject any visible leakage of exposed tube-to-tubesheet joints such as weeping around the tube-to-tubesheet connections during testing. Inspection is with the shell side of the exchanger under the hydrostatic test pressure divided by 1.3 and the tube side at atmospheric pressure with the tube-to-tubesheet joints visible. Tube-to-tubesheet joints of some types of shell-and-tube heat exchangers, such as fixed tubesheet designs and closed feedwater heaters in which the channel is welded to the shell, are visible only from the channel side with the shell side under pressure and the channel side at atmospheric pressure. The ASME Codes Paragraph U-99(g) states, The visual inspection of joints and connections for leaks at the test pressure divided by 1.3 may be waived: provided (1) a suitable gas leak test is applied; (2) substitution of the gas leak test is by agreement reached between the Manufacturer and Inspector; (3) all welded seams which will be hidden by assembly be given a visual examinations for workmanship prior to assembly; and (4) the vessel does not contain a lethal substance. This is particularly pertinent for heat exchangers in lethal service because literal interpretation of the waiver would preclude using fixed tubesheet exchangers for lethal service applications. But many

such exchangers have been Code stamped and this practice continues throughout the industry. Users and designers should be aware that the purpose of the Codes standard hydrostatic test described in Paragraph UG-99 is to test the capacity of the vessel to withstand the design pressure; it is not to determine whether the tube-to-tubesheet joints are sufficiently leak tight to prevent leakage of process fluids with low viscosities through the joints. (Leak rates vary inversely with fluid viscosity.) Users must recognize the hazards of process fluids leaking from the channel into the shell and where hazards exist, specify further leak testing as described in Section V of the Code. This includes the possibility of wiredrawing (wormholing) in high pressure closed feedwater heaters in which a leak of high pressure feedwater through the tube-to-tubesheet welds can erode the steel under the weld overlay to which the tubes are welded. Severe wormholing can shorten feedwater heater life. Current practice is for Manufacturers to use loss of pressure in the channel to determine whether there is leakage from the channel side to the shell side when the shell side is not visible for inspection. However, the gradations on pressure test equipment in common use are too coarse to indicate very small leaks or weeping. It follows that users should specify that Manufacturers use other methods to verify non-visible leakage when such leaks could be hazardous or harmful during operation of the heat exchanger. See Table 1 for typical test pressures and pressure gage graduations. Because the ASME Code rules and the API and TEMA Standards do not require gas leak testing to verify that there are no-leaks from the channel side to the shell side, Manufacturers will not perform such tests unless the User or the Users Agent specifies that they do so.Therefore, when they hydrostatically test the tube side, they rely on pressure loss in the tubes and channel during the holding period to indicate leakage through the tube-to-tubesheet joints. The gages in widespread use in the heat exchanger and pressure vessel industries for hydrostatic testing to meet the Code requirements are dial type Bourdon tube gages. Some Manufacturers use strip chart or circular recording gages but the graduations are similar to those of dial gages.

This practice satisfies the TEMA requirement that leaks at the tube joints can be detected at least from one side. API 660 also accepts this practice[iii]. Although gas leak testing is not onerous and costly, heat exchanger manufacture is a very competitive business and it is not likely that Manufacturers will perform testing that the ASME Code does not require unless the procurement specification requires it. For constructions in which the Authorized Inspector cannot visibly examine the shell sides of tubesheets, heat exchanger users are cautioned that pressure loss to determine whether there are leaks from the channel into the shell does not indicate weeping through the tube-to-tubesheet joints because the gages in common use are not sufficiently sensitive to indicate a pressure loss that discloses such small leaks. This is especially so when the tube side hydrostatic test pressure is substantially higher than that of the shell side. An analysis of the pressure testing process which hydrostatic test water is applied in the tubeside of an exchanger where the backside of the tubesheet is not visible was adapted from material previously published on the MGT Inc. website. It demonstrates that relying on gage indication of pressure loss to assess leaks (weeping) that would not be visible during hydrostatic testing does not indicate whether there are such small leaks. [iv] It shows that using test gage pressure loss to determine if there is leakage through the tube joints from the channel to the shell of heat exchangers in which the back side of the tubesheet is not visible does not disclose weeping leakage from the channel into the shell through the tube-totubesheet joints. Such leakage does not comport with the implication of the language of the Codes Paragraph U-2(g) that leakage is not permitted. In this discussion weeping is defined as a leak of 20 drops per hour or approximately 1 cm 3 (0.061 in3) which if visible would be 10 drops of water on the tubesheet face after the half-hour TEMA minimum holding period. If the exchanger service is for a fluid less viscous than water the likelihood of leakage in services may be very high if the Manufacturer relies on changes in the pressure gage reading to assess whether there is leakage from the channel side into the shell during hydrostatic testing.

ISSUES ABOUT HYDROSTATIC TESTING HEAT EXCHANGERS

1. Should the User or the Users agent or a Manufacturer with knowledge about the hazards of the service be required to specify further leak testing and the kind of leak testing the Manufacturer must use and whether the API-660 and TEMA Standards requirements meet the Codes requirements? 2. Despite the Code rules about the unacceptability of leakage through the joints of pressure vessels and heat exchangers, the TEMA and API standards do not require leak testing every heat exchanger and Manufacturers will not perform such leak tests unless Users request them. It is necessary to understand the service of the exchanger and the degree of hazard such leakage presents. when determining whether to require the Manufacturer to perform leak tests. For example, a minor tube joint leak in a water-to-water cooler presents no hazard, whereas leakage of a volatile, flammable or explosive fluid could cause damage such as wire drawing, injury or death. How should users deal with the possibility of such leaks? 3. What constitutes a suitable leak test if the standard Code hydrostatic test cannot disclose very small leaks (weeping)? 4. Are only leak tests described in the Codes Section V acceptable for meeting the Codes no -leak requirement?

The simplest and least costly additional test is gas-bubble testing (often erroneously described as soap bubble testing.) Typically, the Manufacturer pressurizes the shell with air or nitrogen at 30 to 50 psi and applies a commercial bubble former to the tube-to-tubesheet joints. This is a very effective way to disclose leaking tube-totubesheet joints. When the User or Users agent or knowledgeable Manufacturer is aware of the potential hazard of a leak in service, or when the channel side design pressure is substantially higher than that of the shell side, it is reasonable to specify halogen or helium sniffer leak testing to satisfy a no-leak requirements. For tubes welded to the tubesheet and subsequently expanded, the prudence suggests that in addition to such leak testing the welds should be fluid penetrant examined. When the channel side design pressure is very high in the order of 1500 lb/in2 and above - it is prudent to require cycle testing.Typical procurement specifications for high-pressure feedwater heaters require 10 cycles of bringing the channel to the hydrostatic test pressure followed by dropping the pressure to atmospheric for each

cycle. (Figure 1) Such testing has beneficial effects on the structure in addition to possibly cracking subsurface porosity bubbles and disclosing cracks in the welds. For such equipment small leaks of high-pressure feedwater through the tubeto-tubesheet joints leads to wire drawing (wormholing), which when severe can be extremely expensive to repair, especially when considering the loss of cycle efficiency when the heater is bypassed to allow access for repairs. Therefore, typical feedwater heater procurement specifications require helium leak sniffer testing (mass spectrometer) testing the tube-to-tubesheet joints during manufacture. COMMENTS AND RECOMMENDATIONS
1. The Code is a pressure containment safety code and the hydrostatic test represents only a test adequate for the typical heat exchanger not in a specific service where leakage is an issue. Users should be aware of these facts. 2. Loss of test gage pressure during ASME Code required hydrostatic testing does not disclose very small leakage (weeping) from the channel side to the shell side because of the insensitivity of the test gages used industry wide for hydrostatic testing. 3. Users of the Code should also be aware that, although the TEMA Standards require a minimum of one-half hour hold time of hydrostatic pressure, the Code does not specify a hold time, which would be important for detecting leakage through welds and joints. Because hold time does not guarantee that a joint is 100% free from leaks, Designers, Users, and Manufacturers need to agree on the suitable test(s) for the service conditions. 4. Designers, Users, and Manufacturers should agree on the definition of joint type and to the nondestructive Tests (NDT) for all welded joints. 5. Designers, Users and Manufacturers of heat exchangers should consider the specific language of the Codes no-leak requirement of UG-99(g) and the differences between it and the requirements of API 660 and the TEMA Standards. 6. When preparing procurement specifications, Engineers should consider the service of the exchanger and the UG-99(g)s requirements and determine the appropriate leak tests for meeting them. Users and Manufacturers should agree beforehand on the suitable leak detection system when invoking the waiver provisions of the Codes Paragraph UG - 99(2)(g).

7.

The language of the waiver in UG-99(2)(g) needs clarification with respect to using fixed tubesheet exchangers for lethal service, possibly with a specific exception allowing their use with appropriate precautions.

NDT TECHNIQUES

Radiographic Testing Procedure

This content provides you with a example Radiographic Testing Procedure. This is a general and sample RT procedure and you need to modify it to meet your project specifications. 1. SCOPE: 1.1-This Procedure describes the general requirements for radiography examination (RT) according to related approved weld map for the metallic welding and casting as may be required by the specification or under which component is being designed and manufactured. 1.2-This radiographic testing procedure provides the material, equipment, calibration, personnel qualification, examination process, evaluation, records and acceptance standards for XXX Project which will be fabricated in YYY. 2. SURFACE CONDITION According to T.222.2, the weld ripples or weld surface irregularities on the both the inside (where accessible) and out side shall be removed by any suitable process to such a degree that the resulting radiographic testing image due to any surface irregularities cannot mask or be confused with the image of any discontinuity. the finished surface of all butt welded joints mat be flush with the base material or may have reasonably uniform crowns, with reinforcement not to exceed that specified in the referencing code section. 3. RADIATION SOURCE 3.1- X-Radiation: The radiography testing techniques shall demonstrate that the required radiography sensitivity has been obtained. Maximum x-ray voltage is 300 KV. 3.2- Gamma radiation: The recommended minimum thickness for which Radio-active isotopes may be used as follow:

Table 3.2
Material Steel Copper or high nickel copper Aluminum Iridium192 Cobalt 60 0.75 in 0.65 in 2.50 in 1.50 in 1.30 in --

The maximum thickness for the use of radioactive isotopes is primarily dictated by exposure time, therefore; upper limits are not shown. The minimum Recommended thickness limitation may be reduced when the radiography techniques are used to demonstrate that the required radiographic testing sensitivity have been obtained, by purchaser approval. 4. RADIGRAPHIC FILMS Any commercially available industrial radiography films may be used in accordance with SE 1815(ASTM) standard test method for film system in industrial radiography. Radiography film shall be fine grain high definition, high contrast film (Kodak type AA 400, FUJI 100 or AGFA D7). 5. SCREENS Any commercially available intensifying screen, except those of the fluorescent type, may be used. Intensifying screen for x-ray or Gama ray method divided in two categories: 1-front screen 2-back screen. Commonly lead screens use with 27 micron thickness. (Front screen) 6. PENETRAMETER (I.Q.I) Penetrameters shall be either the whole type or the wire type and shall be manufactured and identified in accordance with the requirements or alternatives allowed in SE 142 or SE 1025 (for whole type) and SE-747 (for wire type), and appending. ASME V 2007 ED & ASME Sec VIII Div I ED 2007. Penetrameters shall consist of those in table 233.1 for hole type and those in table 233.2 for wire type. (Wire type IQI shall be used for welds.)

7. SELECTION OF PENETRAMETER (I.Q.I) 7.1. Material. IQIs shall be selected from either the same alloy material group or grade as identified inSE-1025, or SE-747, as applicable, or from an alloy material Group or grade with less radiation absorption than the material being radiographed. 7.2 Size. The designated hole IQI or essential wire listed in Table T-276 provided an equivalent IQI sensitivity is maintained. See T-283.2.shall be as specified in Table T-276. A thinner or thicker hole-type IQI may be substituted for any section thickness (a) Welds With Reinforcements. The thickness on which the IQI is based is the nominal single-wall thickness plus the estimated weld reinforcement not to exceed the maximum permitted by the referencing Code Section. Backing rings or strips shall not be considered as part of the thickness in IQI selection. The actual measurement of the weld reinforcement is not required.

(b) Welds Without Reinforcements. The thickness on which the IQI is based is the nominal single-wall thickness. Backing rings or strips shall not be considered as part of the weld thickness in IQI selection. 7.3 Welds Joining Dissimilar Materials or Welds with Dissimilar Filler Metal. When the weld metal is of an alloy group or grade that has a radiation attenuation that differs from the base material, the IQI material selection shall be based on the weld metal and be in accordance with T-276.1. When the density limits of T-282.2 cannot be met with one IQI and the exceptional density area is at the interface of the weld metal and the base metal, the material selection for the additional IQIs shall be based on the base material and is in accordance with T-276.1

8. PLACEMENT OF RADIOGRAPHIC TESTING PENETRAMETER (I.Q.I) 8.1- Source side penetrameters: The penetrameters shall be placed on the source side of the part being examined, except for the condition described in chapter 8.2. 8.2- film side penetrameters: Sensitivity: The sensitivity required using wire type IQI shall be 2%. Sensitivity:(Diameter of thinnest wire visible on radiograph / Part thickness at IQI location) x

100 Where inaccessibility prevents hand placing the penetrameter (s) on the source side, it shall be placed on the film side in contact with the part being examined. A lead letter F shall be placed adjacent to or on the penetrameter (s).

9. NUMBER OF PENETRAMETER (I.Q.I) When one or more film holders are used for an exposure, ate least one penetrameter imager shall appear on each radiograph. If the requirements of T-282 are met by using more than one penetrameter, one shall be representative of the lightest area of interest and the other the darkest area of interest. The intervening densities, on the radiograph, shall be considered as having acceptable density. Number of I.Q.I shall be according to ASME SEC V.T.277.2.

10. RADIOGRAPHIC TESTING TECHNIQUE

A single-wall exposure technique shall be used for radiography whenever practical. When it is not practical to use a single-wall radiographic testing technique, a double-wall technique shall be used. An adequate number of exposures shall be made to demonstrate that the required coverage has been obtained.
10.1 Single-Wall Technique. In the single-wall radiographic testing technique, the

radiation passes through only one wall of the weld (material), which is viewed for acceptance on the radiograph.

10.2 Double-Wall Technique. When it is not practical to use a single-wall technique, one of the following double-wall techniques shall be used. (a) Single-Wall Viewing. For materials and for welds in components, a technique may be used in which the radiation passes through two walls and only the weld (material) on the film-side wall is viewed for acceptance on the radiograph. When

complete coverage is required for circumferential welds (materials), a minimum of three exposures taken 120 deg to each other shall be made. (b) Double-Wall Viewing. For materials and for welds in components 312 in. (89 mm) or less in nominal outside diameter, a technique may be used in which the radiation passes through two walls and the weld (material) in both walls is viewed for acceptance on the same radiograph .For double-wall viewing, only a sourceside IQI shall be used. Care should be exercised to ensure that the required geometric unsharpness is not exceeded. If the geometric unsharpness requirement cannot be met, then single-wall viewing shall be used. (1) For welds, the radiation beam may be offset from the plane of the weld at an angle sufficient to separate the images of the source-side and film-side portions of the weld so that there is no overlap of the areas to be interpreted. When complete coverage is required, a minimum of two exposures taken 90 deg to each other shall be made for each joint. (2) As an alternative, the weld may be radio graphed with the radiation beam positioned so that the images of both walls are superimposed. When complete coverage is required, a minimum of three exposures taken at either 60 deg or 120 deg to each other shall be made for each joint.

11. SOURCE TO OBJECT AND OBJECT TO FILM DISTANCE (SOD & OFD) According to geometric unsharpness formula (Ug = f *OFD/FOD) for minimizing the Ug value, OFD value shall be minimizing therefore object to film distance shall be minimum. Source to object distance (SOD) shall be set according radiographic technique, object shape and strength of source.

12. RADIOGRAPHIC TESTING IDENTIFICATION SYSTEM The method shall be used to produce permanent identification to the radiographies traceable to the contract, components, welds or weld seams, or part numbers, as appropriate. This identification mark shall not obscure the area of interest. 13. RADIOGRAPHIC TESTING ACCEPTANCE STANDARD Refer to ASME Sec VIII, Div. I a) Butt welded joints surfaces shall be sufficiently free from coarse ripples ,grooves , overlaps and abrupt ridges and valleys to permit proper interpretation of radiographic and the required non-destructive examinations. If there is a question regarding the surface condition of the weld when interpreting a radiographic film, the film shall be compared to the actual weld surface for determination of acceptability. b) Indications shown on the radiographies of welds and characterized as imperfections are un-acceptable under the following condition: 1) Any indications characterized as a crack or zone of incomplete fusion or penetration. 2) Any other elongated indication at radiography, which has length greater than: (a) 1/4 in. (6mm) for t up to 3/4 in. (19mm) (b) 1/3 t for t from 3/4 in. (19mm) to 2 1/4 in. (57mm) (c) 3/4 t (19mm) for t over 2 1/4 in. (57mm) Where: t= thickness of weld excluding any allowable reinforcement. 3) Any group of aligned indications that have an aggregate length greater than t in a length of 12t , except when the distance between the successive imperfections exceed 6L where L is the length of the longest imperfection in the group. 4) Rounded indications in excess of that specified by the acceptance standards given in ASME sec. VIII, DIV I, appendix 4 fig. 4-2 to 4-8

Note: spot RT shall be done as per ASME Sec. VIII, Div. 1 UW-52; however the acceptance criteria shall be according to UW-51 (as specification). 14. DEFECT REMOVAL Repair area shall be located on the weld line after evaluation & interpretation of radiograph .defects shall be removed by suitable method such as grinding, chipping or gouging (if permitted).welding of the repair area shall meet the requirement of related WPS,PQR. 15. CERTIFICATION AND PERSONNEL QUALIFICATION IN RADIOGRAPHIC TESTING. Personnel performing radiography examination to this procedure shall be qualified and certified by XXX also shall meet the requirements of ASNT-SNTTC-1A-2001 EDITION at least level II and on ASNT-SNT-TC-IA for code section I and sec VII div 2. Film interpreter shall have level II as a minimum.

IMPORTANT LINKS:
http://www.inspection-for-industry.com/third-party-inspection-for-shell-and-tubeheat-exchanger.html http://ndt-samplequestions.blogspot.com/