ClickQualification ofstyles

to edit Master text Phased

Second
Arrayslevel
to ASME Section V
Click to edit
Third level
Master title style
Fourth level
Fifth level
Michael Moles

IPEIA 2006, Banff, Alberta.

01/02/2006 1
Presentation outline
Why phased arrays?
Why are codes needed?
ASME V Article 14
S-scans: are they acceptable with linear
scanning?
Other code activities
Where do we stand today?

2
How Phased Arrays Work
Beam Focusing
large range of
focal depth
(focusing)

adjustable
each pulse.

3
How Phased Arrays Work -
Beam Steering
large range of
inspection
angles
(sweeping)

multiple
modes with a
single probe
(SW, LW)
4
Electronic and Linear Scanning
Typical weld inspection using combined
electronic and linear scanning.
ASME-type 45o and 60o shear wave
inspections; much faster than raster scanning.
Need to cover weld, HAZ, any position errors
=> significant amount of coverage.

Works well for wide gap welds.

5
Why phased arrays?
Offer major benefits over conventional
manual UT
Much cheaper and easier than AUT
Fast (~5 times faster than MUT)
Reproducible
Good imaging
All data stored
Potentially reduces number of operators
required
6
Why are codes important?
Cover all construction welding, and
more ...
Probably half portable phased array
market

7
What the market wants
Market really wants one pass linear
scans
Many people prefer S-scans to
electronic scans (E-scans)

8
S-scan Imaging
Typical
geometrically
corrected true
depth S-scan
of weld.
Manual
display. With
encoder, can
show many
images.

Defect is clearly seen as full skip, i.e. weld crown with

diffracted tip for sizing. Data can
9 be stored.
Objective
To get portable phased arrays
approved for ASME inspections.

10
ASME Code Approvals
ASME the most used code for welds,
especially pressure vessels.
ASME Section V Article 4 T-421.2
specifically allows phased arrays as
CIT computerized imaging
technology.

11
ASME Performance Demonstrations
For qualification of new technology, best route
generally is Performance Demonstration.
In ASME, 2003 revision of Section V, Article 14
has been added. This is entitled Examination
System Qualification.
ASME Section XI Appendix VIII is probably the
best known.
European Network for Inspection Qualification
(ENIQ) methodologies also well known.

12
Other Performance Demonstrations
API and AWS also offer Performance
Demonstration approaches
API through UT1 and UT2
AWS through Annex K
EPRI gives approvals (including OmniScan)
through Performance Demonstration
approach

13
ASME Section V Article 4 Table T-422
Lists Essential Variables
Essential variables include: weld
configuration, personnel performance,
technique, angle and wave mode,
frequency, probe, sizing, scan pattern etc.
Non-essential variables include: couplant
brand, personnel qualifications, surface
condition etc.
In practice, most variables are Essential.
14
Performance Demonstration Samples
Article 14 requires inspection of samples
with known flaws
Typical NDT qualification welds were used
as manufactured qualification samples
Requirement: detection over the reference
level of all relevant imbedded flaws
Compared manual UT from ASME Sec. V
Limited range of test piece thicknesses and
geometries.

15
 Thicknesses and Geometries used
for Qualification
Thickness Form
13mm Plate
13mm Pipe 4.5 inch diameter
18mm Pipe 12 inch Diameter
25mm Plate

Note: Approved range is larger; these are the actual samples.

16
Technique reporting
last
- 0 +
last
Need to demonstrate
CL
angles, locations of
first first

array, coverage.
Ray tracing good
approach.

17
Procedure
For procedure, need to
document scan
patterns, offsets,
locations, dimensions
etc.
Used E-scans
(electronic raster
scans at fixed angles),
not S-scans.

18
Reporting
Typically, electronic instruments offer
major advantages in reporting and
storing all scan parameters
OmniScan offers built-in reporting
capability, including screen shots of
defects etc.
Removes a lot of subjectivity from the
inspection.
19
Calibrating PAs for delay and
attenuation differences
Operator needs
to calibrate
amplitudes for
different angles,
and compensate
Can compensate
for both E-scans
and S-scans
Used standard ASME calibration
TCG applied
20
Imaging and Displays
The operator has
the option to
display several
views
simultaneously
and in real time
Here, an A-scan,
E-scan and C-
scan are displayed

21
Acceptance
Critical aspect of qualification is detection of
all pertinent flaws.
Many different ASME procedures possible
Many acceptance criteria in ASME Code
Sections require that flaws exceed reference
level before length is assessed for accept or
reject; mostly workmanship-based

22
Defect height measurements
Several of the ASME Code Sections require
flaw height assessment.
Technique not usually specified.
In this application, used tip diffraction.
In practice, both detection and sizing similar
to MUT.

23
Summary of ASME Qualification
Phased arrays detected all relevant defects,
as expected.
ASME Section V Article 14 suitable venue for
approving new techniques and technology.
Need to follow processes properly, including
developing documentation, technique and
procedures.
Phased array E-scans similar to conventional
MUT, except use electronic rastering.
24
S-scans with linear scanning
Are these valid?
Major Encoded S-scan Issues with
Linear Scanning
Coverage at suitable angles
Calibration
Focusing

26
S-scans for welds
Can calibrate S-scans at any angle on ASME SDH
S-scan does not necessarily give best angles for weld
inspections, especially with single pass

27
Illustrates effect of bevel incidence angle.
Bevel Incidence Angle (BIA)
Defined as Angle of orientation away from
normal beam on weld bevel
To date, have found no consistent code
approach; essentially a rule of thumb
Current codes do not appear to follow BIA
rules, e.g. 45/60o incident and 37.5o bevel
Bad for notches; probably less serious for
defects and workmanship
Effect will depend on defect size.

28
 Schematic of Bevel Angle Dependence
Reflected
Signal amplitude (arbitrary)

amplitude depends
critically on
incidence angle. 5-
10o is enough for
amplitude to drop
off considerably but
limited data
available.

Mis-orientation of bevel incidence angle

29
5 Degree BIA

Requires three separate S-scans per side for

15 mm weld

30
10 Degree BIA

Requires only two S-scans per side for 15 mm weld

31
10 Degree BIA on thicker wall

Still only needs two S-scans for 30 mm weld;

scaleable.
Probably need more advanced
32
modeling in future.
BIA Primarily A Geometric Effect

33
Conclusions on Bevel Angle
Incidence
Current codes not consistent on BIA
Linear S-scans will need multiple scans, but
will need to decide BIA beforehand
5 degree BIA requires three S-scans
10 degree BIA requires two S-scans
More serious modeling recommended
At some stage, ASME should make a
decision, or a suitable phrase, to cover BIA
Currently doing experiments on BIA.
34
Solutions to encoded S-scan coverage

Multiplepasses
Add TOFD
Use multichannel
instrument

35
S-scans: calibration
E-scans (electronic scans at fixed angles)
present few problems with current code
concepts
S-scans have issues with both calibration
and focusing
Calibration still going through approval
Focusing has some limitations for TCG

36
S-scans: Calibrating on SDH

Issues:
1. Different metal path
gives different
attenuation values
2. No correction available
for near zone effects
3. Beam divergence a
major focusing issue
(see later)
16 element 0.6 mm pitch SW
in steel 37
S-scans: Calibrating on radius

Solutions:
1. Constant sound and
metal path
2. Attenuation constant
=> Much more uniform
sensitivity for S-
scans
Net result: Calibrating on SDH gives 10-12 dB more sensitivity
(gain) at high angles
38
Comparison of 45o and 70o Gains

-30dB -18dB Cylindrically focused

reflecting surfaces
provide larger

15 mm
amplitudes (smaller dB
drops) and will be
constant for the same
soundpath after
correction for echo-
-2dB
transmittance.
25mm -10dB

50mm
39
S-scan: Calibration recommendation
Recommend using curved radius, e.g. IIW
block for angle corrections
(Alternative solution is to use a series of
SDH, but this is not a standard block yet)
Set up ACG: Angle Corrected Gain
Then use Time Corrected Gain to calibrate
for all angles and distances
DAC is not possible with S-scans.

40
General: Focusing effects
Left: natural focus (~150 mm); right: focused at 15 mm

2.4 20
divergence divergence

Unlike conventional UT, it is easy to focus phased arrays.

Major difference between unfocused (left) and focused beams.
Effectively impossible to get good DAC or TCG at long distances
using short focus beams.
41
Other Code Developments
ASME
API
AWS
ASTM
Code activities S-scans
Realized limitations of single pass S-
scans and ASME Code Case 2235
Published paper in MatEval in January
2005 on S-scan limitations, based
largely on modeling
Showed limitations of S-scans,
especially for thick walls
Generated several comments, mostly
from people who didnt read it properly!

43
S-scan limitations
Modeling and
limited tests
performed with S-
scans
POD on single
pass S-scan is
low, especially for
midwall defects
and thick wall
Performed for
different
thicknesses, array From Materials Evaluation, January 2005
position etc.
44
S-scan recommendations
Use multiple S-scans, not single S-
scans, on thick sections.
Use TOFD and/or tailored inspections
as well as raster or S-scans for
midwall defects.
Discourage single S-scan inspections
for thick-walled construction welds.
Modify codes to ensure greater
reliability from S-scans.
45
ASME cautionary paragraph
Submitted cautionary paragraph on S-
scans to ASME
Currently on agenda for ASME Section V
Article 4
Recommends against single S-scans for
walls >25 mm (1)
Being superseded by proposed new PA
code case

46
ASME PA code cases
Preparing phased array code cases for
PAs
Single beam rastering, manual E- and
S-scans, encoded E-scans, and S-
scans.
PA group: Ed Ginzel (MRI), Mark Davis
(Davis NDE), Chris Magruder and MM
ASME UT Working Group supportive
Work in progress .manual E- and S-
scan code cases submitted.
47
ASME Phased Array Appendix
Working Group recommended full ASME
Appendix for phased arrays: manual and
encoded
Typically acceptance much slower than with
code case approach
Preparing Appendix concurrent with PA
Code Cases.

48
Code activities - API
Master plan with Davis NDE; has many
API-evaluated weld samples
Approach uses API UT 1 and UT 2
procedures, as is
Essentially scan known samples using
new technology/techniques
Scans performed; results to be
announced by API.

49
Code activities - AWS
Demonstrate AWS compliance thru Annex K
and NDT Innovations of Peru and Smith-
Emery in LA
Will be specials; plan on publishing
Major problem: each case requires the
Engineers approval
Final solution: wait until 2006 version => new
technology/technique approvals will be
codified.
50
Code activities ASTM
Prepared draft recommended practice
for phased array E- and S-scan set-up
(by Ed Ginzel, MRI)
Passed sub-committee vote; now main
committee voting
Will require full angle corrected gain
(ACG) over SDH calibration range
Requires TCG; DAC wont work
Limits to angular range based on
recommendations and calibration.
51
Code activities ASTM
From Insight
Under proposed
ASTM RP, this
angular range is
unlikely to be
calibrate-able
Overall image is
misleading

52
Code activities summary (1)
Phased arrays inherently accepted by
ASME, and other codes
But, need to get techniques and
procedures approved via Performance
Demonstration approaches
ASME Section V Article 14 good approach
for approvals done for variety of plates
and pipes
Working on Code Cases
Ultimately, will codify in new Mandatory
Appendix.
53
Code activities summary (2)
ASTM RP for PA set-up undergoing voting
API pending no technical problems
foreseen
AWS specials by late 2005; then wait for
codification in 2006
Objective: single pass, code-compliant
inspections using E- or S-scans, manual or
encoded

54
 Any questions?

Thank you
For copies of this presentation, contact:
jaskow@shaw.ca
heather@addleyndt.com
Michael.moles@olympusndt.com