You are on page 1of 15

Recent achievements in sizing and characterization of weld defects with

Pulse echo, TOFD and Phased Array in the frame of ASME and EN
standards
Speaker’s name: Giuseppe Nardoni, I&T Nardoni Institute
Paper Details: P. Nardoni (1), D. Nardoni (2), M. Feroldi (3), M. Certo (4), L. Possenti (5), A. Filosi
(6), S. Quetti (7)
I&T Naroni Institute
ATB Riva Calzoni
ABSTRACT:
This paper highlights the results in sizing and characterization of discontinuities in heavy wall
thickness welds.
The results come from more than 50 years of experience in ultrasonic examination of welds.
The discover and application of the diffracted echo in Pulse echo and Phased Array has taken a
great advance in sizing discontinuities smaller than the crystal size with an accuracy ranging
between 0.2 to 0.5 mm.
In addition, the ratio between the diffracted echoes has been experimental demonstrated to be a
very helpful criteria to differentiate planar from volumetric discontinuities.
Two other items have been included in the paper.
The classification of the TOFD image to improve the reliability and POD (Probability of detection) of
TOFD technique and the importance of focusing in the near field of Phased Array probe.
To achieve and verify the focusing of the beam a new test block named IIW-V3/PA has been
designed with three path distances: 25, 50 and 100 mm.
KEYWORDS:
Sizing, Characterization, Planar, Volumetric, Phased Array, TOFD, Ultrasonic, Diffracted echo,
POD, Welds, Focusing
AUTHOR DETAILS:
Giuseppe Nardoni, I&T Nardoni Institute Director and Quality Manager, I&T Nardoni Institute,
Folzano (Brescia), Italy
Pietro Nardoni, I&T Nardoni Institute General Manager, I&T Nardoni Institute, Folzano (Brescia),
Italy
Diego Nardoni, I&T Nardoni Institute Managing Manager, I&T Nardoni Institute, Folzano (Brescia),
Italy
Mario Certo, Master Degree in Mathematics, Research Manager, I&T Nardoni Institute, Folzano
(Brescia), Italy
Luca Possenti, ATB Riva Calzoni, Brescia, Italy
Alessandro Filosi, Engineer, ATB Riva Calzoni, Brescia, Italy
Stefano Quetti, ATB Riva Calzoni, Brescia, Italy

a classification of phase contrast has been introduced.discrete contrast. Fundamental in this technique is the quality of the image in terms of contrast phase and tip resolution. The contrast phase is depending from the correct choice of the scanning parameters.5 mm and in the range of 2-5 mm for the length. It has to be determined experimentally during the validation test. class 3 where the phase color (black and white) are no more distinguishable. TOFD results may be comparable giving the highest POD which is proper for TOFD technique. TOFD and Phased Array are the dominant techniques in this field. class 2 . TOFD.The last achievements in sizing and characterization of weld defects with Pulse echo. class 1. Defining the depth zone it should be guaranteed the overlap of the detection capability. Mandatory to apply this Code Case to give for each relevant indication the size in term of metric unit and not in terms of amplitude as indicated in Tab. through the Code Case 2335. TOFD TECHNIQUE TOFD technique is a non amplitude based technique in evaluation of indications. This statement has opened great researches and experimental tests to set up computerized equipment. 1 and Fig. In the Fig. software for scanning and data acquisition in terms of geometric data of the findings and their characterization. 3 an example of a validation procedure applying this criteria of image classification is presented. In Tab. Phased Array and C-B scan in the frame of ASME and EN standards ULTRASONIC COMPUTERIZED TECHNIQUE INTRODUCTION In the nineties the ASME. introduced the possibility for the manufacturer of pressure vessel to use ultrasonic examination in lieu of radiography. The sizing and detectability of the indications are compromised. Following these simple criteria. This data are fundamental in writing the procedure and in its validation. The tip resolution is more depending on the frequency of the probe and it is a constant parameter for a fixed frequency. 2 . In order to make comparable two TOFD results made on the same welds. the tip diffraction from the frequency. good contrast. After 15 years’ experience in applying these computerized system a great step in the ultrasonic advanced technique has been reached. 23 and 24 examples of phase contrast of 1. Through the software the height and length of indications can be estimated with an accuracy in the height less than 0. The second criteria we introduced is the tip resolution.2 and 3 class are represented together with the tip resolution resolved and not resolved. 5. scanners.

To adjust the ultrasonic beam in the near field at different depth: 25. 11-12). named V3-PA block with flat bottom holes positioned at different distances (20.direct path The accuracy in determining the diameter of cylindrical holes is in the range of 0. Fig. During this research we discovered that pulse echo technique generates. the focusing calibration can be verify on the side drilled holes present in the block. In the far field it is not necessary the focalization.5 mm. lack of fusion or penetration. In general according to the number of elements present in the different Phase Array probes we can consider the near field in the maximum range of 100 mm. In the evaluation of the indications it has been an amplitude based technique. From planar indications as cracks. Related to the focus distance requested. 1316). 50. 21.2 ÷ 0. the diffraction is generated by spherical waves when the wave hits the upper and lower tip of the planar discontinuity (see Fig. 22 it is possible to see the differences between the image shapes of the hole for focused and unfocused ultrasonic beam. In Fig. To comply with the ASME request it was necessary to submit the height and not the amplitude of a defect. In this case.depth tip1 For volumetric indications. The analytical formula to calculate the height of the indication become the following: the height is determined directly measuring with the cursor the depth of the two diffracted echoes (Fig.5 (half π ) (height) diameter = diffracted path . a special test block has been set up . 45 and 95 mm) as in Fig. The mechanism of the diffraction phenomena is different from planar to volumetric indication. for example a cylindrical hole. the diameter (height) is determined by the difference of the diffracted path and the direct path divided by 1. as in TOFD technique a diffracted echo.PHASED ARRAY TECHNIQUE Phased array technique is a multiple pulse-echo technique with different angles of incidence. Beam focalization in Phased Array The near field is the zone where focusing is necessary to have a uniform beam to produce images for the correct evaluation of the size of discontinuities. Height = depth tip2 . 8-10). it comes automatically from the software. The research for size estimation in Phase Array started immediately and the first step was to apply the echo dynamic curve represented in this technique by the extension of the images with its different colors representing the reflection of the defect under different angles. 19 and 20 and Tab. 2 are example of sizing of 4 mm slit on 300 mm thickness weld. 3 . 100%. the diffracted echo is generated by the creeping wave that travels around the hole and returns as shear wave to the transducer (see Fig.

Experimental tests have been carried out on five different type of reflectors represented by a side drilled hole and intermediate reflectors shaped gradually up to a crack like defect (see Fig. with a ratio between 1 and 4 b) Full Volumetric indications between 7 and 13 4 . 7). the results indicate that two families of reflectors can be identified: a) Planar indications. 26) the ratio of the first and second diffracted echo versus the width of each artificial reflectors. 17). Plotting in a diagram (see Fig.PLANAR AND VOLUMETRIC The use of diffracted echo has introduced a new criteria to distinguish planar from volumetric indications (see Fig.

Fig. 1 : Hydrocracking units during construction Fig. 4: Automatic scanner with phased array probes during nods weld examination on 300 mm th welds 5 . 3: Cluster of inclusion detected with Fig. 2: Large crack detected with Phased Array TOFD Fig.

715 1.33 1.675 4.31 2.995 2.005 a (mm) Fig.15 3.SIZING OF INDICATIONS Tab.505 1. 1: size of indications detected by ultrasonic relevant to the thickness of the weld examined Fig.305 5. 5: Examples of defect configuration to establish dimension (length and height) CODE CASE 2235-9 (subsurface flaw) DIAGRAM a/l for thickness 35mm 30 l (mm) 25 20 15 10 5 0 a 1. 6: Example of acceptance criteria relevant to a thickness of to determine the length of the indication depending on the height 6 .73 3.

the thickness of the throat of the fillet shall be included in t. If a full penetration weld includes a fillet weld. lack of fusion.APPENDIX 12 ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION OF WELDS (UT) Indications characterized as cracks. Other imperfections are unacceptable if the indications exceed the reference level amplitude and have lengths which exceed: (1) ¼ in. For a butt weld joining two members having different thickness at the weld. Where t is the thickness of the weld excluding any allowable reinforcement. (6mm) for t up to ¾ in. (19 mm to 57 mm) (2) (3) ¾ i n. t is the thinner of these two thicknesses. ( 1 9 m m ) fo r t o ver 2 ¼ i n. 7: Examples of volumetric defects (A-B-C) and planar defects (D-E-F) in welding ASME 2010 SECTION VIII -DIVISION 1. or incomplete penetration are unacceptable regardless of length.PLANAR AND VOLUMERTIC INDICATIONS A D B E C F Fig. 7 . (19 mm) 1 / 3 t for t from ¾ in. to 2 ¼ in. ( 5 7 m m ) .

11: Image of diffracted echo due to spherical waves generated at the tips with Phased Array Fig. 10: Image of direct reflected echo and diffracted echo from creeping waves with Phased Array Fig.DIFFRACTED ECHO GENERATED BY VOLUMETRIC SIDE DRILLED HOLE (SDH) IN PHASED ARRAY AND PULSE ECHO TECHNIQUES (VOLUMETRIC DICONTINUITIES) Fig. 12: Image of diffracted echo due to spherical waves generated at the tips with Pulse Echo 8 . 9:Schematic drawing of a test block used for experiment with side drilled hole Fig. 8: Physical phenomena of diffraction on cylindrical hole generated by creeping wave Fig.

14: Diffracted spherical wave generated when wave hits upper tip Fig. 16: Mode conversion when longitudinal beam reflects on the boundary: s=shear l=longitudinal Fig.DIFFRACTED ECHOES GENERATED BY SLIT Fig. 15: diffracted spherical wave when the wave The incident lower tip Fig. 13: Ultrasonic wave travelling versus the linear slit Fig. 17-18: Theoretical presentation of diffracted eco 9 .

5 -0.1 -0.1 152.8 36.9 -2.9 +12.90 543.7 -0.2 4.5 34.1 4 0.9 -0.5 95.6 66.00 319.8 -3.8 3.1 3. 20 10 .7 3.3 216.0 8 210 410 1 212.3 4 0.90 450.3 -5.3 2 30 680 2 21.0 5 120 545 1 131.9 Tab. 2: estimated values of heights relevant to the slit in test block of Fig.4 -0.9 151 +1. 19: Beam focusing and calibration on 3 mm holes (SDH) for sizing the slit of test block in fig.85 +1. 20 Fig.05 -5.85 628.7 +0.7 -0. real data defect ID center depth [mm] ultrasonic examination position channel [mm] num.00 502.15 +3.3 -1.9 +9.4 95.6 4 0.0 134.1 63.3 214.6 244.7 272 +2.15 +4.1 +1.7 4 90 590 2 91.95 674.65 +5.45 +3.7 3.45 581.4 -4.6 11 294 284 1 295.5 4 90 590 1 93.9 3.1 7 180 455 1 187.2 10 270 320 1 270.3 +4.65 592.50 362.5 +4.6 +4.5 4 0.3 273.9 191.6 297.5 -6.8 97.60 640.5 93.6 64.7 3 60 635 1 62.5 4.30 408.9 189.1 -0.9 3.9 -9. 20: Test block with calibration slits of 4 mm height to evaluate the sizing capability of Phased Array technique.0 9 240 365 1 242.15 282.8 132.0 3 60 635 2 60.4 24.6 61.7 -2.2 +0.5 -5. upper tip depth [mm] lower tip depth [mm] center depth [mm] estimated error position [mm] estimated error height [mm] estimated error 1 4 725 - - - - - - - - - 2 30 680 1 31.1 6 150 500 1 149.15 681.9 3.4 246.7 298.7 26.8 -2.1 -1.SIZING IN PHASED ARRAY TECHNIQUE Fig.9 -0.

FOCUSING IN PHASED ARRAY Fig. 22: Beam focusing in the near field in Phased Array technique 11 . 21: IIW-V3/PA block calibration Figure 10: Unfocused 32 element probe at 95 mm Figure 11: 32 element probe focused at 95 mm Figure 12: Unfocused 24 element probe at 95 mm Figure 13: 24 element probe focused at 95 mm Figure 14: Unfocused 16 element probe at 95 mm Figure 15: 16 element probe focused at 95 mm Fig.

5 MHz Ø18mm Height Depth Image 3-C 5.9 30 2-A NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI Probe 52°pcs160 3.2 240 1-A 4.5 210 2-B 4.8 90 1-A 3.0 270 1-A 3.3 180 2-B 3-C NVI NVI NVI 1: Very good 2:Good phase contrast A: Good resolved B:Slightly resolved tips resolutions Example: best image: images 1-A worst image : 3-C (Sensitivity Not acceptable) NVI.8 120 1-A 4.2 60 1-A NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI Probe 45° pcs300 2.2 294 1-B 3: Poor C: Not resolved .0 30 2-B 4.2 60 2-C 4.5 6 1-B 3.2 MHz Ø24mm Height Depth Image NVI 3-C 5. 3: Validation table relative to class of phase contrast and tip resolution N of slits 1 2 3 4 5 6 7 8 9 10 11 Probe 70° pcs 80 5 MHz Ø6mm Height Depth Image 4.2 180 2-B 4.2 MHz Ø24mm Height Depth Image NVI NVI NVI NVI NVI 3-C 5.TOFD TECHNIQUE Tab.1 150 1-A 4. : Slit Image Not Visible 12 Probe 35°pcs370 2.

Indication quality of image B and C are not acceptable 13 . 23: TOFD MAP of lack of fusion. 24: TOFD MAP – A) Phase contrast class 1. tip resolved – B) and C) Phase contrast class 3. phase contrast class 2. tip not resolve C) PHASE CONTRAST: CLASS 3 B) PHASE CONTRAST: CLASS 3 A) TIPS RESOLUTION UPPER AND LOWER TIPS RESOLVED PHASE CONTRAST: CLASS 1 Fig. tip not resolved.TIPS NOT RESOLVED PHASE CONTRAST: CLASS 2 Fig.

17: Sketch of the test block used for the experimental work. 28: A-Scan from full planar indication.VOLUMETRIC AND PLANAR DEFECTS VOLUMETRIC DEFECT PLANAR DEFECT Fig. A B Fig. 27: A-scan presentation from a side drilled hole (SDH) using 45° angle beam. A) Diffracted echo from upper tip B) Diffracted echo from lower tip 14 B . Fig. 26: Diagram showing the behavior of planar and volumetric defects defined on the basis of diffracted echo.creeping waves – shear waves R= Amplitude Ratio between amplitude of echo A and amplitude of echo B A Fig. A) Direct reflection echo: shear waves – shear waves B) Diffracted Echo: shear waves .

IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics. 2008. and Frequency Control. Caroline Holmes and Bruce W. REFERENCES [1] Sharp R. V. Vol. No.Jun-ichi Takabayashi (Keihin). IV. Krautkramer 15 . 4. Prof.54. Satoshi Nagai (Toshiba). “Research Techniques in Non Destructive Testing”. [6] Lafontaine. Klyuev [11] Encyclopedia of Acoustics Edit by Malcolm J. 2004. Vol. G.9: From acceptance criteria based on amplitude of signal to acceptance criteria based on size. Cancre. Germany. 1997 [3] ASME Code Sec.9. Canada. “CB-Scan Technique with Phased Array Probe: Sizing procedures using diffracted echoes”.Edited by V. "Potential of Ultrasonic Phased Arrays for Faster. Proceedings of the 25th MPA Seminar. Crocker. MPA Stuttgart. Krautkramer H. Quebec City. “ Encyclopedia of Acoustics”. Moscow. R/D Tech. Vol.8. art.V. Crocker [12] Ultrasonic Testing of Materials – J.net. Better and Cheaper Inspections. 1999 [5] R/D Tech.. August 2007 [9] ASME Code Case 2235. [10] Nondestructive testing and diagnostics-Handbook . Conference on ASME Code Case 2235. [4] Ichiro Komura. Use of Ultrasonic Examination in Lieu of Radiography. October 7 . One. 5. <www. 10. ferroelectrics." NDT. Code Case 2235. 1980 [2] Malcolm. Katsuhiko Naruse (Isogo Nuclear) “Crack Detection and Sizing Technique by Ultrasonic and Electromagnetic Methods”. and F.8. [7] Nardoni G. Laura Mattei for her help in preparing and editing this paper.. Vol. [8] Paul D. “Introduction to Phased Array Ultrasonic Technology Applications: R/D Tech Guideline”. October 2000.net/article/v05n10/lafont2/lafont2. J. Drinkwater “Advanced Reflector Characterization with Ultrasonic Phased arrays in NDE Applications”.htm>. S. Taiji Hirasawa.9. N.ndt.ACKNOWLEDGMENTS Special thanks to Dott. Wilcox.