where expertise comes together

- since 1996 - - Login

Exhibition Archive Forum Jobs More

MyNDT Email Login

Technical Discussions 9105 views

Peter
Singapore, Joined Jan 2012, 113

07:06 Sep-10-2014
API RP 2X-ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA

We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
Dear Experts, Accept
 I need your advice regarding API RP 2X ED 2004 acceptance criteria and refer below for my
interpretation. Kindly correct me if I am wrong.

1. Level A Point h

h. Reflectors within the base metal of the main member (joint can) at welds shall be
evaluated as described in the following.

Are they referring to reflector located at base metal such as lamination, inclusions or
reflector between base metal and weld metal of main member such as lack of side wall
fusion? Refer figure 1.

2. Refer figure 45 of API RP 2X. What is T, D and W stand for?

3. Refer figure 2( Figure 44 in API RP 2X)

a) For thickness over 2 inch (Individual Reflector), do we need to make the line straight ( red
line) as per the attached picture and evaluate accordingly?

b) I draw amplitude at ½ inch thickness which is almost 25%DAC whereby 2” reflector is still
acceptable. Am I correct?

4. Refer figure 3( Figure 44 in API RP 2X)

a) All reflectors above 1/16” notch are unacceptable. This means we need to perform
separate sensitivity setting for root detection. So I need to set the sensitivity using
1/16”notch and set it to 80% in the screen. After that perform root scanning and any
indication above 50% then evaluated using figure 3 (Figure 44 in API RP 2X). Am I correct?

b) Figure 2 applicable for individual reflector and figure 3 applicable for accumulated length
of reflectors tat means multiple reflectors in line. Most of the time we will found individual
reflector in that case can I use figure 2 for root evaluation whereby any root indication about
disregard level his unacceptable.

c) Can explain the pointed question marked in figure 3 because I don’t really understand that
portion.

5. Note 1 in figure 3 mentioning that discontinuities in the root bead of Details C and D
Figure 12 are to be disregarded. In that case for Details C & Details D configuration root bead
indication not that serious?

Peter

           Reply 

Translate 
  We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
Peter
Accept
Singapore, Joined Jan 2012, 113
 g p , ,

10:59 Sep-12-2014
Re: API RP 2X-ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
In Reply to Peter at 07:06 Sep-10-2014 (Opening).

Hi,

Any experts can help on this.

Peter

           Reply 

Translate 
 
Peter
Singapore, Joined Jan 2012, 113

07:33 Sep-23-2014
Re: API RP 2X-ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
In Reply to Peter at 10:59 Sep-12-2014 .

Hi,

Any experts can help on this.

Peter

           Reply 

Translate 
 
Mario Talarico
NDT Inspector,
Italy, Joined May 2010, 407

01:31 Dec-03-2014
Re: API RP 2X-ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
In Reply to Peter at 07:33 Sep-23-2014 .

Peter,
Fig. 44 is passed through my hands and I remembered your old question.
.

1. Level A Point h
h. Reflectors within the base metal of the main member (joint can) at welds shall be
evaluated as described in the following.
Are they referring to reflector located at base metal such as lamination, inclusions or
reflector between base metal and weld metal of main member such as lack of side wall
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
fusion? Refer figure 1.
< ‘reflector within base metal of the main member can base metal’: who writes Accept
these things
d t bli h it i f t bilit d di t d t it h th b i fl ll
and establishes a criterion of acceptability dedicated to it has the obsession of lamellar
tearing and cracks on leg joint can >
2. Refer figure 45 of API RP 2X. What is T, D and W stand for?
< w = size defect through the thickness; D=diameter (if there is one); T, thickness of the
reference block: is to be defined. Weld body is evaluated using side-drilled holes. For root
examination maximize the response from the notch and adjust the amplitude to setting he
appropriate DAC curve. Best way to use the notches is the base metal of the weld to be
examined and the reference blocks thickness are not too different, so you can still cross the
DAC on a same range–setting >
3. Refer figure 2( Figure 44 in API RP 2X)
a) For thickness over 2 inch (Individual Reflector), do we need to make the line straight ( red
line) as per the attached picture and evaluate accordingly?
< yes, you have seen well >
b) I draw amplitude at ½ inch thickness which is almost 25%DAC whereby 2” reflector is still
acceptable. Am I correct?
< yes, amplitude is lower 50 percent DAC, then disregarder indication >
4. Refer figure 3( Figure 44 in API RP 2X)
a) All reflectors above 1/16” notch are unacceptable. This means we need to perform
separate sensitivity setting for root detection. So I need to set the sensitivity using
1/16”notch and set it to 80% in the screen. After that perform root scanning and any
indication above 50% then evaluated using figure 3 (Figure 44 in API RP 2X). Am I correct?
< During the examination of the root, indications > 100% notche are unacceptable. Minors
indications between 50% and 100% of notche DAC follow the two dotted lines (one for
individual and one for cumulative) >
b) Figure 2 applicable for individual reflector and figure 3 applicable for accumulated length
of reflectors tat means multiple reflectors in line.
< yes, crystalline! >
Most of the time we will found individual reflector in that case can I use figure 2 for root
evaluation whereby any root indication about disregard level his unacceptable.
< A bit of confusion! Use of Figure 2: dotted line for root (cumulative indications); for body
weld, continuous line (single indication) and dotted (cumulative indications) >
c) Can explain the pointed question marked in figure 3 because I don’t really understand that
portion.
< To decrypt, by exclusion!
First series of horizontal high numbers: weld thickness (note well: coincides with Fig.1: 1.5
to 2 inches). Second series of horizontal lower numbers: this is the trait welding (length) on
which to assess the cumulative indications: 3 to 12 inches and over.
Example: weld size 1/2 ", consider a length tract long 3 ": reject defects > 100% with
cumulative length 1/2" or reject cumulative defects amplitude between 50-100% with length
1 ".
Still another example: weld thickness 2”, consider tract of weld length 12 ", reject defects >
100% with a cumulative length 2" or defects amplitude between 50-100% with cumulative
length 4 ".
The defects accumulated must be considered on a total length of welding, tract, <= D / 2 if
there's diameter (then, if small diameters, D/2 condition is more restrictive condition).
Drops for migraine! Hope we hit the target! >
5. Note 1 in figure 3 mentioning that discontinuities in the root bead of Details C and D
Figure 12 are to be disregarded. In that case for Details C & Details D configuration root bead
indication not that serious?
< When you're hugging a node not need structural engineer concetture. We stay at the first
part of the sentence >.
I hope this contributes and stimulates some other API-RP-2X member.
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
greetings. Accept
mario
 mario

           Reply 

Translate 
 
Sri Krishna

15:21 Sep-09-2018
Re: API RP 2X-ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA
In Reply to Mario Talarico at 01:31 Dec-03-2014 .

Hi,

Can anyone tell me the following statement meaning in the API RP 2X

In the Acceptance criteria (A&C) it was mentioned Clause 7.10.1.h and Clause 7.10.2.i

Reflectors within the base metal of the main member (joint can) at welds shall be evaluated
as described in the following. In addition, any such reflector that exceeds the disregard level
shall be reported to the operator:
1. Individual reflectors exceeding the limits of Figure 45 are rejectable.
2. Accumulated reflectors exceeding 8 percent of the area under the weld in any 6-inch (150-
millimeter) or D/2 length (whichever is less) are rejectable.
3. Rejectable base metal reflectors shall be reviewed by the operator prior to any excavation
or attempted repair. Consideration should be given to the risk of causing fur-ther problems
(such as lamellar tearing) with the additional thermal strain cycles such excavation and
repair would entail.

"Can anyone please explain me weather i need to use this acceptance criteria only for the
HAZ area under the weld or all the scanning area (i mean 1.25* full skip)............

I am expecting that above clause is only applicable for the HAZ area near to the weld and for
the scaning area (1.25*full skip distance) need to check with the plate requirements like
ASTM A578 or BS EN 10160.

Please clarify"

           Reply 

Translate 
 
Email Address Notify Me

Product Spotlight

GEKKO - Portable Phased Array Testing with TFM in Real-Time

Stand KARL DEUTSCH
4 Showcases 5 Videos
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info

Accept
FD800 Bench Top Flaw Detectors
 Stand Elcometer NDT
3 Showcases

Navic - Steerable Modular Automated Scanner

Stand JIREH Industries
5 Showcases 5 Videos

AIS229 - Multipurpose Real Time System

Stand BALTEAU NDT
5 Showcases 3 Videos

more Showcases

Share...

Home Advertise
Exhibition Privacy Policy
Archive Contact
Forum About
Jobs
Members
Events
Directory
NDT A-Z

© NDT.net - Where expertise comes together. The Largest Open Access Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)- since 1996

We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info

Accept