What Is Risk Based Inspection
What Is Risk Based Inspection
Condition assessment
Instead of corrective breakdown maintenance or time based preventive programs,
many owners of installation turn to condition based approaches [1]. Maintenance
effort should be aimed at those parts, where it is required most. Condition
assessment of the actual piece of equipment provides adequate data to optimise
maintenance planning. Action can be taken immediately where needed or
postponed where possible.
Inspection planning
Most inspection regimes are not in line with the maintenance
requirements, but based on fixed inspection intervals
prescribed by governmental regulations. Duration of these
intervals is mostly determined historically or based on
generic rules for certain types of equipment. These criteria
may not always be optimal for a specific installation.
Operational integrity of installations should be judged on
more individual basis.
Fig 2: off shore production
"On stream" inspections can be conducted in service to
platform
provide information about the actual condition of the object.
Off stream inspection can be based on the actual condition of the moment and
interval duration may be made flexible.
In view of condition monitoring programs, it is necessary to establish the baseline
condition of any installation. This may be done at any moment in time, but should
preferably be implemented directly after construction. In an early stage, one should
consider using a type of inspection, which may be applied in an equal fashion in a
later stage during service time. Periodic condition assessment allows trending and
prediction of the remaining time-to-failure (MTTF). Operational lifetime extension
may be agreed upon with authorities and increased plant availability is the result.
Risk Based Inspection
Inspection planning itself may be optimised to obtain maximum result from
as little effort as possible. A study of applied construction and process
materials, degradation mechanisms, inspection history and operational
conditions allows risk assessment for each individual piece of equipment.
Inspection activity is then prioritised based on a number of operational
parameters, e.g. operation pressure and temperature, consequential loss,
personnel safety, environmental damage etc. Risk assessment for each
individual asset leads to a risk based inspection (RBI) approach.
In Service Inspection(ISI)
Preferably, NDT shall be performed before a planned shutdown, while the
equipment is in service. Ample time is then available to plan the necessary
maintenance work long before the actual shutdown takes place. Since the
inspection work has been done before shutdown and the maintenance work
is well planned, total downtime for the installation is reduced.
NDT requirements
Lifetime calculation models may predict the remaining service time of any
asset. These calculations require input data provided by the assets' history
and available NDT data. The outcome can only be as reliable as the input.
High probability of detection (POD) is required to ensure reliable operation
until the next shutdown and low false call rate (FCR) is desirable to avoid
unnecessary maintenance work. Accurate and highly reliable data result in a
reliable prediction of the remaining service time.
On stream inspection techniques
The number and methods of inspection are always a trade-off between the
minimum requirements for safe operation and the amount of information
needed for optimum maintenance management.
In a baseline inspection, it is important to establish very accurately the zero
condition of a piece of equipment. Therefore, precise methods should be
applied, mostly in an off line situation. Dedicated techniques are available
for full off stream inspection.
On the other side, ISI are faced with limitations such as access restrictions,
high temperatures etc. Most on stream methods are considered screening
tools, which assess general condition rather than exact defect locations and
dimensions. Qualitative techniques indicate trends in condition deterioration
but cannot deliver exact quantitative information.
Documentation
In signalling (monitoring) inspection, reproducibility is of high importance.
Many conventional ultrasonic methods are performed with hand held probes
and results are presented in hand written reports. The influence of the
particular inspector on the outcome is significant and hardly reproducible.
Mechanised scanning and automated reporting minimise this 'human factor'.
Access restrictions
Many inspection problems are associated with restricted access.
Conventional techniques fail at complex objects or locations that can hardly
be accessed such as inspection of nozzles on vessels, tapered pipes,
pipework under insulation or on sleepers, under reinforcement or repair
patches, etc. New inspection techniques have been developed to fill in the
gap in ancient problem areas.
New materials
Higher operational requirements demand higher performance of
Fi
g 6: TOFD inspection of
process pipework in a
petrochemical plant
Over the past years, the system has been used in a great variety of applications,
ranging from circumferential welds in pipelines (including joints of different wall
thickness and tapered pipes), weld inspection of heavy wall pressure vessels (up to
300 mm wall thickness). Also, the TOFD technique was successfully applied for
inspection of partially filled welds, which are hardly inspectable by any other
technique. Nozzle and flange welds (complex geometry) can be inspected with
prior computer simulation modelling to aid inspection planning and result
evaluation.
On stream inspection with TOFD
In contrast with radiography, for TOFD examination only external access to
the object is required. In the service phase of process installations and
pipework, TOFD may be applied to detect and monitor service induced
defects (stress or fatigue cracks etc). 'Fingerprints' of the object are recorded
during acceptance inspection of welds directly after construction and
periodically every number of years. Initial acceptable defects are monitored
and service induced defects are revealed and progressively monitored.
Critical reactor vessels with heavy wall constructions can only be adequately
inspected by means of TOFD. Other techniques such as high energy
radiography with Cobalt-60 sources or portable betatrons, are faced with
high safety requirements and extremely long examination times. Ultrasonic
meander scanning is often too cumbersome and time consuming. Spherical
gas tanks and steam generator headers may be surveyed for cracks.
Root erosion in flow lines
Selective erosion/corrosion in flow lines may be detected and sized by
regular TOFD inspection. Discrimination between single or two side wash
out is easily achieved from the TOFD images. Long stretches of pipeline
may be inspected rapidly with minimum preparation needed.
Mapscan is applied on vessels, pipework (bends), tank walls etc, for exact
documentation of corroded regions. It can be applied in service at temperatures up
to 250C. Corrosion phenomena such as general wall thinning, pitting corrosion,
flow accelerated corrosion (FAC), hydrogen induced corrosion (HIC) and hot
hydrogen attack have been revealed successfully by Mapscan.
For its high accuracy, Mapscan is accepted au lieu internal visual inspection
of vessels. Based on the on stream Mapscan results, off stream inspection
interval extension is often accomplished.
P-scan/Bandscan
P-scan
Ultrasonic mapping techniques prove to be very useful in wall thickness
measurement. The same advantages apply for weld
inspections. However, ultrasonic weld inspection is executed
with angle beam transducers and mapping algorithms become
more complex. This problem was solved with the
development of projection scanning (in short 'P-scan').
Dedicated scanners enable 3-dimensional presentation of the Fig 9: P-scan inspection of
a nuclear reactor
inspection object. This technique enabled extreme high
reliability inspection for monitoring of nuclear reactor vessels. Meander scanning
For weld inspection, the cross section of the weld is subdivided in several depth
zones, each of which is addressed with a combination of probes. Using focusing
techniques, the ultrasonic beam is so narrow at the focal position, that accurate
defect sizing is possible, even though only a single line scan is performed.
Improved inspection speed and direct sizing capability are great advantages for
application of Bandscan rather than meander scanning (P-scan). Especially for
large structures, such as spherical gas tanks, Bandscan is the preferred method.
Later on this concept was motorized for high inspection speed on pipeline girth
welds. Inspection cycles of several minutes in (off shore) pipeline construction can
now be achieved with the widely used "Rotoscan" systems.
For non-routine weld inspection, such as dissimilar metal welds (DMWs),
Bandscan may be equipped with special probes. Joints of carbon steel to
austenitic, duplex or high nickel alloy steel materials can be examined using
optimised probes. Due to the coarse structure of these materials, they can
hardly be inspected using conventional shear wave methods. Compression
wave angle beam probes are capable to penetrate these ultrasonic unfriendly
materials. In applications, where TOFD or shear wave ultrasonic techniques
fail, Bandscan may do the job. In this field, once again, Bandscan has
proven its merits
Ring transducers have been developed [7], which can generate waves in a
specific mode, optimal in range and sensitivity.
An extremely long inspection range is achieved for screening of on and
offshore pipework, detection of corrosion under insulation without removing
lagging other than for application of the probes, road crossings and other
hidden penetrations, lined pipework, etc.
Since very low frequencies are applied, the defect sensitivity is limited to
larger areas of (corrosion) wall loss. Welds cause reflection signals at regular
distance, providing reference for sensitivity settings. Internal features in the
weld such as weld root erosion may be discriminated in the reflection signal
by advanced signal processing techniques. In a similar way, guided wave
inspection could discriminate between corroded and unaffected pipes at
locations of supports. The full potential of the technique will become
evident when it is applied more widely.
Conclusions
1. Introduction
Pressure vessels, storage tanks and other safety critical components (including pipework and valves) are
designed to contain liquids, gases and solids such that a loss of containment does not occur. Leaks or the
mechanical or structural failure of these items of equipment may result in a major accident on-site.
|Top|
The presence of flaws in critical components may result in the integrity of such systems being compromised and
increase the likelihood of failure.
Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) is the application of measurement techniques in order to identify damage and
irregularities in materials. NDT often provides the only method of obtaining information about the current 'health'
of process plant.
If done well, NDT can provide useful information to assist in the management of plant safety. If inappropriate NDT
is applied or NDT is not applied correctly, then the results are likely to give a false impression of the integrity and
safety of the plant.
NDT is a measurement of a physical property or effect from which the presence of damage or irregularity can be
inferred. It is not a measurement of an absolute parameter such as temperature or pressure.
The distinction between what would be considered changes in material properties and what would be considered
a defect is not distinct. This can lead to NDT missing defects and also producing false calls i.e. a defect is
reported when in fact the signal is not produced by a defect. Also, NDT is applied to a greater or lesser extent by
human operators who introduce human error and subjectivity into the process.
NDT is rarely 100% effective at detecting defects of concern. Like all measurements, defect positioning and
sizing measurements with NDT techniques are subject to errors. As these techniques are often a combination of
separate measurements, these errors can be significant.
NDT techniques fall into two categories:
techniques which only detect and size defects/damage present on the surface of a component;
techniques which can detect and size defects/damage embodied within a component.
A brief description of the common techniques applied to process plant is given inTechniques. The basic NDT
techniques have changed little over the years but with improvements in technology and the demand to maximise
plant productivity new techniques and variations on old ones have been developed, along with various
approaches to NDT. These are clarified in Terminology and Current Trends below.
The quality of the NDT applied to a component cannot be easily assessed by subsequently observing the
component or the results obtained.
Extra steps are required in the development and application of the test to provide confidence in its ability to
identify the damage or irregularities of concern. TheInspection Process and its proper Management are discussed in more detail
below.
NDT is a primary recovery mechanism for errors in design, construction and operational activities.
Correct selection and application of an NDT technique can provide confidence that a component or piece of plant
does not contain defects of the type which the technique was capable of detecting.
When applied in a manufacturing environment it is used to provide confidence that there are no defects of
concern over a certain size which may have been introduced by the manufacturing process. In this case NDT is
just one of a number of quality control activities aimed at producing a component or piece of plant to a particular
specification.
In service NDT provides confidence that the operation of the plant is not causing deterioration in its integrity
beyond its design parameters.
If such deterioration is detected then NDT can quantify the damage and provide input to the justification for
maintenance or monitoring actions.
Ad hoc NDT can be used to check that unexpected damage mechanisms are not occurring.
All techniques have strengths and weaknesses regarding the types and parameters of the damage mechanism
they can detect.
Either the ad hoc NDT needs to be targeted at a hypothetical damage mechanism or the damage mechanism
that can be reported as not detected is defined by the capabilities of the technique.
The types of defect / flaw and degradation that can be detected using NDT are summarised as:
Planar defects - these include flaws such as fatigue cracks, lack of side-wall fusion in welds, environmental assisted cracking such as hydrogen cracking and stress
corrosion cracks; cold shuts in castings etc;
Laminations - these include flaws such as rolling and forging laminations, laminar inclusions and de-laminations in composites;
Voids and inclusions - these include flaws such as voids, slag and porosity in welds and voids in castings and forgings;
Wall thinning - through life wall loss due to corrosion and erosion;
The application of NDT to support the manufacturing requirements or the continued operation of plant is subject
to certain Regulations.
There are some common misconceptions regarding NDT which are still prevalent in industry:
2. Regulatory requirements
The requirements of the various general regulations can be summarised as:
Pressure Systems Safety Regulations 2000
Regulation 4 (2) states that plant should be "properly designed and properly constructed from suitable materials
so as to prevent danger."
Regulation 8 (1) requires the "owner or user must have a WSE for the periodic examination by a competent
person where:" according to Regulation 8 (1) (b) "a defect may give rise to danger."
WSE is a Written Scheme of Examination which specifies for each part of the pressure system the damage
mechanism that may be expected, the examination interval and the method of examination. Any NDT required
will be specified on the WSE. Further information on Written Schemes is given in the document Written schemes of
examination.
cover the manufacture of new pressure vessels in line with the European Pressure
Equipment Directive and apply to pressure equipment and assemblies with a maximum allowable pressure PS
greater than 0.5 bar. These regulations require:
The Pressure Equipment Regulations 1999
Pressure equipment must be designed and constructed so that all necessary examinations to ensure safety can be carried out;
Preparation of the component parts (e.g. forming and chamfering) must not give rise to defects or cracks
Permanent joints and adjacent zones must be free of any surface or internal defects detrimental to the safety of the equipment.
For pressure equipment, suitably qualified personnel must carry out non-destructive tests of permanent joints.
For pressure equipment of categories III and IV, the personnel must be approved by a third-party organisation recognised by a Member State pursuant to Article 13.
Pressure equipment must undergo a final inspection to assess - visually and by examination of the accompanying documents - compliance with the requirements of the
Directive. Tests carried out during manufacture may be taken into account.
The old British Standard (BS 5500) for the manufacture of pressure vessels has been superseded by a new
European Standard BS EN 13445 but the design requirements that were in BS 5500 have been kept as PD5500
.
This latter document sets defect Acceptance Criteria for the NDT applied at manufacture. The acceptance criteria
take into account the capabilities and limitations of the NDT techniques so for Radiography it states "No cracks
allowed" whilst for Ultrasonics it states conditions on planar indications based on the height, length and
amplitude.
put a general duty on every Operator to take all measures necessary to
prevent major accidents and limit their consequences to persons and the environment. The references to NDT
that may occur in the safety report are described in COMAH Safety Report.
The Control of Major Accident Hazards Regulations 1999
NDT although not specifically mentioned in the above regulations has a role to play as part of the Operator's
demonstration in respect of mechanical integrity, that all necessary measures have been taken. It provides
confidence that plant is constructed to the required standard and is in good repair. NDT can provide information
to confirm or otherwise that unexpected damage is not occurring.
The interval between examinations may be based on guidelines offered by such organisations as SAFed, CEOC and IoP.
However, HSE interpretation of the legislation does not always agree with the advice given in these guidelines. Also, care is required when interpreting these guidelines for
specific situations.
If it is not given sufficient consideration then it is unlikely to be planned properly, good access is unlikely to be provided and
contractors are likely to be under undue pressure which will prevent them performing the NDT properly. This is discussed further
Assess the plant owners' attitude to NDT.
Check that the requirements for the NDT are specified and that the records provide sufficient information on what NDT technique
was used and how it was applied. Is the technique likely to find the defects of concern and is the capability of the technique known?
Where NDT plays a key role in assuring the safety of the component then additional steps should be taken to ensure that all the
defects of concern are detected and that the NDT technique is applied correctly.
The presentation of the NDT results will often influence the subsequent actions. Some reports will just state no defects found or
that the NDT was acceptable i.e. there were no indications observed above a certain acceptance criteria. Other computerised
techniques allow apparently detailed, colour plots to be produced which create the impression of quality. Both these extremes can
disguise the fact that the NDT may have had limitations in defect type detectable or that an insufficient sample area/volume may
have been examined.
The plant owner should be able to show how the assessment of the NDT results has taken into account the limitations and errors
These issues are covered by the questions in the Checklist designed to help in the HSE on-site COMAH inspection.
Small companies are likely to buy in the competent person expertise and place reliance on the 3rd party's expert
judgement. The Operator should have the statutory records of inspection available, but may not have immediate
access to additional information about the examinations or the competence of the 'competent person'
organisation.
For pressure systems this will be detailed in the Written Scheme of Examination.
For non-pressurised but hazardous plant this should be output from the systems which 'ensure that safety critical plant and systems are examined at appropriate intervals
by a competent person'.
These two documents should also identify the damage mechanisms which could be expected to occur in the
plant item and hence should be detected, if present, by the NDT technique. As with any other purchase or
development (in line with ISO 9001) NDT should start with a specification of requirements. For NDT this is a
defect specification or description, which includes:
The size of defect which needs to be detected and the sizing errors that can be tolerated.
ECAs involve the solution of mathematical formulae and, as a consequence, answers are often quoted to a
number of decimal places. However, the errors on the input information obtained from the NDT results are likely
to be in the order of millimetres. It is important that the sizing errors in the NDT measurements are estimated and
taken into account in the ECA.
A number of codes can be followed to assess flaws and degradation. Many codes that have been prepared take
into account the accuracy of the NDT test methods, however, some do not and care should be taken when
interpreting the results.
Two of the more important codes are:
BS7910: 2000
(Guide on methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures) which superseded earlier standards, PD 6493: 1980 (Guidance on
some methods for the derivation of acceptance levels for defects in fusion welded joints) and PD 6493:1991 (Guidance on methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in fusion
welded structures).
The output from the ECA will determine the course of action the plant owner should take.
If an RBI process is used then the results should be fed back into the risk assessment and appropriate changes
made to the required action.
Information
This requires proper management and control. Plant owners who have a certified quality management system will have
procedures to control the instigation and purchase of NDT activities. They may also have procedures to cover the
application of the NDT although these will often be left to the NDT vendor.
Shows that NDT companies have the systems in place to adequately control the application of NDT.
Responsibility for the specification and control of the NDT is not always clearly defined between the plant owner and the
NDT vendor. An ISO 9000 plant owner can hire in bodies from a UKAS accredited NDT vendor with the result that the
operators work under neither quality system.
Errors are common in unplanned NDT activities: operators performing a planned job may be asked to 'inspect this item
whilst you are here'. In such a case the NDT performed is dependent on the operator's experience; its appropriateness
and capabilities are not stated and records to allow future assessment or repetition may not be produced. The control of
andRadiography.
The requirements for centrally administered schemes are laid down in BS EN 473.
) or an
).
Level 1 - qualified to carry out NDT operations according to written instructions under the supervision of
Level 2 or Level 3 personnel.
Level 2 - have demonstrated competence to perform and supervise non-destructive testing according to
established or recognised procedures. This includes the ability to define the limitations of application of the testing
method and to translate NDT standards and specifications into NDT instructions.
Level 3 - qualified to direct any NDT operation for which they are certificated This is a supervisory
qualification.
Full details are given for the PCN scheme in the Best Practice documents for Ultrasonics
, Surface Techniques
and Radiography.
This is one aspect which can be overlooked with inevitable consequences for the quality of the NDT performed.
Level 2 qualifications are specific to a NDT method and, in the case of ultrasonics, to a particular geometry. Generic
Site NDT should be under the supervision and support of a
qualifications such as PCN may need supplementation by job specific training for particular NDT technique applications.
industrial plant.
The NDT vendor should provide the plant owner with evidence to show that the personnel have sufficient experience and
Some techniques such as magnetic particle inspection or dye penetrant inspection are simple to apply in principle and
there is a temptation to just apply them without a procedure. Conversely operators who have a wide experience of the
All NDT should be controlled by a procedure approved by a
technique may apply advanced techniques and equipment and they may rely on that experience to adjust the many
Level 3, or equivalent.
It is not sufficient to state that a component was inspected in accordance with a standard. Most standards have options on
various technique parameters and a procedure or technique sheet should be produced to state what values are to be
NDT is often applied in compliance with a national or
used. Approval of the procedure by a Level 3 implies that the standard has been assessed in the light of the plant item to
international standard.
The harmonisation of standards across Europe has produced many standards which do not yet have a track record to
support them.
Some standards have been tried and tested over many
years but the data and expertise on which they were based
An exception is the Magnetic Particle Standard: "Method for Magnetic particle flaw detection", British Standard BS 6072:
1981 where the supporting information is available as "Magnetic particle flaw detection. A guide to the principles and
not available.
practice of applying magnetic particle flaw detection in accordance with BS6072.", British Standard PD 6513: 1985.
But only if all the parameters are recorded so that what has been applied can be subsequently assessed and if necessary
NDT can be applied without a written procedure.
repeated.
Where NDT plays a key role in guaranteeing the safety of the component, additional steps would be expected to be taken
to improve the reliability of the NDT, to ensure that all the defects of concern are detected and that the NDT technique is
applied correctly.
of component failure.
Such steps include:
auditing the NDT with independent operators performing repeat NDT on a sample of the volume inspected;
repeating all of the NDT with different personnel or with different NDT techniques;
The Best Practice documents also list other important measures that should be considered when looking to ensure a high
reliability of inspection.
This process is known as Inspection Qualification, Validation or Performance Demonstration. The amount of evidence
gathered and assessed can be tailored to the importance of the NDT and so need not be prohibitive. Further information
work.
, Surface Techniques
, and Radiography.
A brief summary is given below. Terminology other than that relating to specific techniques is given in the
Section. In each section the information is presented in alphabetical order.
Terminology
These techniques are more limited in their application by material type, accuracy of measurement, wall thickness
or geometry than ultrasonics but offer other advantages such as speed of application or the ability to inspect
under insulation.
those that can only detect defects on or near to the surface of a component (Surface Techniques);
those which can detect both surface and embedded defects (Volumetric Techniques).
Surface Techniques
Eddy Currents
This NDT method can only detect defects which are open to the inspection surface.
Dye penetrant is the preferred surface technique for non-magnetic materials.
Dye penetrant is better suited to the detection of volumetric defects like pits but is more susceptible to the surface
condition than magnetic particle inspection. Detection of tight cracks will require the dye to be left on the surface
for a long time.
The component surface needs to be cleaned prior to the application of dye penetrant inspection.
Mechanical cleaning methods can lead to crack openings being closed, subsequently preventing detection. Care
needs to be taken with any technique which requires the application of chemicals to plant to ensure that the
chemicals are compatible with the plant material. It is particularly important that only chemicals with low halogen
content are applied to stainless steel to avoid the initiation of stress corrosion cracking.
Fluorescent dyes are used to increase the contrast of indications making them more visible to the operator and
hence increasing the sensitivity of the technique.
The HSE's Best Practice document on the procurement of Surface Techniques
penetrant inspection.
Eddy Currents
When an alternating current is passed through a coil close to a component surface, eddy currents are induced
and produce a back EMF on the current in the coil.
Any defect in the component which restricts the eddy current flow alters the balance between the applied and
back EMFs and can be detected.
The skin depth, which is a function of the permeability of the material and the frequency, determines the depth of
penetration of the eddy currents.
In ferro-magnetic material the skin depth is very small and the technique will only detect surface breaking
defects. In non-magnetic material it provides some sub-surface capability and can give some indication of the
depth of a defect.
Eddy current techniques are widely applied in the NDT of heat exchanger tubing.
Volumetric techniques
Radiography
Ultrasonics
Radiography
Radiography is the detection of material loss by the variation in applied radiation, g or x-ray, passing through a
component and impinging on a film.
As it is sensitive to material loss, radiography is better suited to the detection of volumetric defects such as slag
or porosity. Detection of planar defects or cracks will depend on the gape or opening of these defects and the
misorientation of the radiation beam from the axis of the defect. In many cases, cracks will not be detected.
Radiography is liked because it produces a hard copy of the results - the film. It is unable to provide depth
information regarding defects without additional specialist techniques (eg profile radiography may give depth
information on large volume defects).
Defects are identified by abrupt changes in the density of the developed film: the film density is related to the
exposure it has received from the radiation.
The gradient of the curve of density against exposure determines how visible are small changes in exposure.
Such changes can arise from the presence of defects and so the ability to detect them through changes in film
density is of prime importance.
This characteristic of the film is its contrast. Contrast tends to increase with film density and so high densities are
beneficial in the detection of defects. However, viewing high density films requires good lighting conditions such
as high light intensity, low background light and film masking and there are practical limits on the level to which
density can be increased because of the reduction in transmitted light intensity. Density in the range 2.0 - 3.0 is
usually regarded as representing the best compromise between contrast and viewing requirements.
Image quality indicators (IQI) are commonly of the wire type, comprising straight wires of differing diameters
sealed in a plastic envelope, or ones which use holes or steps in a block of metal.
The IQI is placed on the object under test and imaged when the radiograph is taken. The smallest wire diameter,
hole diameter or step that is visible on the radiograph then gives a guide to the sensitivity achieved.
The IQI type and its position are specified in the appropriate radiographic standard. It should be recognised that
the sensitivity established by an IQI relates only to the ability to detect changes in section, wire size etc. This
sensitivity is only indirectly related to defect detectability.
The HSE's main concerns are that a significant number of NDT contractors fail to adopt routine working practices
capable of keeping radiation exposures of employees as low as reasonably practicable.
Incidents occur because of poor job planning (most notably with site radiography); failure to use adequate local
source shielding (collimation); or inadequate systems of work.
The quality and sensitivity of a radiograph are measured by the density of the film and the use of an IQI.
The HSEs information document on the Procurement of Radiography
Industrial Radiography is covered by the Ionising Radiations Regulations 1999 (IRR99) which mostly came into
force on 1 January 2000. Information regarding the requirements of the regulations is available from the HSE website.
Ultrasonics
Ultrasonics is the use of high frequency sound waves in a similar manner to sonar or radar: sound pulses are
reflected from interfaces or discontinuities.
In thickness checking the reflections from the wall surfaces are measured. In defect detection reflections from
cracks, voids and inclusions are detected and assessed.
The transfer of sound from the ultrasonic probe to the component requires a coupling medium, which is usually
water or gel. The condition of the interface determines how much sound is transferred into the component, how
much is scattered and how much noise is produced.
Ultrasonics requires a relatively good surface finish.
Manual application over a large area is relatively slow and the technique needs to be tailored to the defects
requiring detection. However, ultrasonics is able to provide both length and through wall size information.
Some materials such as corrosion-resistant alloys (eg high nickel alloys and austenitic steels) cause additional
problems for ultrasonics and require special techniques and appropriately trained personnel.
Ultrasonics can be automated and hard copy results produced.
Acoustic Emission
Creep waves
Flash Radiography
Leak Testing
Pressure Testing
Radioscopy
Replication
Shearography
Thermography
Acoustic Emission
A passive technique in which an array of acoustic sensors are attached around the plant item under test.
Signals originating in the plant item, which are above a specified amplitude threshold, are recorded. Signals from
crack propagation, corrosion products and leaks may be identified and located by triangulation.
A common application is in monitoring above ground storage tanks with the sound being generated by the
spalling of corrosion products.
This is not a quantitative technique but gives a qualitative assessment of the condition of the tank.
When acoustic emission is used to detect crack growth it faces the challenge of detecting the signal generated by
the growth in the presence of operating noise.
Operational noise may not be present when conducting a hydraulic test but the stresses seen by the plant item
may be quite different to those seen in service.
Creep waves
This technique is another type of ultrasonic wave which travels along the surface of a component.
As it propagates it converts to a mode which travels into the component at an angle to the surface. This latter
wave will convert back to a surface wave if it hits a surface parallel to the surface on which it originated.
The technique is often used for the detection of near surface defects as a complement to the time of flight
technique.
Flash Radiography
Originally developed to image rapidly moving dynamic events, flash radiography has found application in the
detection of corrosion on pipe outside diameters under insulation.
It is normally applied to pipes up to 12" OD but can be applied to items with diameters up to one meter given
sufficient source to film distance and radiation output. The technique uses x-ray equipment with a low radiation
exposure time, fast x-ray films and intensifying screens, or digital detection media. It saves costs normally
attributed to the removal and re-instatement of insulation and associated scaffolding.
The beam is arranged tangentially to the pipe wall and corrosion of the external wall shows up as a variation in
the profile of the pipe.
It can also identify where lagging has become waterlogged. Contrast and resolution of the image are not as good
as that for conventional radiography because of the limited radiation available, the large grain film and the
relatively large focal spot of the sources.
Recent developments have complemented flash radiography.
These involve hand held radiographic systems using a source such Gadolinium-153 in combination with solidstate scintillator which converts the X-rays into electrons. The quality and output of the source determines the
maximum length of the beam path in the lagging when looking for under lagging corrosion. Special Gadolinium153 equipment can allow measurement of pipe wall thickness when shot through the centre of the pipe. The
limitations with regard to pipe and lagging diameter will depend on the particular instrument used, notably the
length of the fixed arm holding the source opposite the detector and should be known by the NDT vendor.
Leak Testing
This covers a variety of techniques which are used to identify leakage paths through containment.
They include:
Vacuum Box - a local vacuum is drawn over a small area in the containment. Any leakage path will prevent a full vacuum.
Tracer Gas Detection - relies on the detection of a tracer gas such as helium or a halogen gas. These techniques are semi-quantitative methods that detect the flow of the
tracer gas across a boundary.
Pressure Change Test - detection of a leak by the monitoring of absolute pressure, pressure hold, pressure loss, pressure rise, pressure decay or vacuum retention.
The high level of set up effort makes the technique susceptible to human error. Procedures need to be clear and
sufficiently detailed and operators need to be qualified and experienced in the application of the technique.
Pressure testing
Pressure testing is normally a requirement of design codes and is performed at the start of life and subsequently.
It is not always a non-destructive test.
It involves the over pressurisation of a plant item (typically 10 to 50 % over the design operating pressure) with a
fluid to see if it is able to withstand the applied stress. A pneumatic test carries more danger than a hydraulic test,
releasing 200 times more energy should anything go wrong.
Arguments for and against pressure testing are complex and beyond the scope of this document.
The test may be complemented by the application of acoustic emission with the objective of trying to detect any
crack growth, which may be generated during the test.
HSE have a Guidance Note GS4 on Safety in Pressure Testing, which is supported by Contract Research Report CRR168:
"Pressure Test Safety", 1998
.
Radioscopy
Radioscopy is a digital version of radiography.
The image is produced on a radiation detector such as a fluorescent screen, rather than film, and is then
displayed on a television or computer screen. Often such systems work in real time and can provide continuous
NDT of objects. The recent advances in detectors and computer technology mean that these systems can offer
advantages over the conventional film NDT technique.
Replication
This involves the application of a temporarily softened plastic film onto the prepared surface of the item under
test so that the surface profile is imprinted into the film.
The film is then removed and examined under a microscope. Details such as cracks, surface inclusions and
microstructure can then be observed remotely from the plant item. A hard copy of the results is also obtained.
Shearography
Shearography is used for detection and characterisation of delaminations, debonds, and other defects in fibre
reinforced composites, rubber, and rubber/metal parts.
Comparison of two sets of laser images produced before and after the application of a load (thermal, tensile,
pressure, vibratory) that causes the item under test to deform allows calculation of relative deformation at each
point on the object and highlights local variations in surface deflection. Local variations are characteristic of the
defects such as delaminations and debonds.
The diffracted tip wave is relatively small in amplitude so the sensitivity of the NDT needs to be high which can then lead to false calls;
As the weld thickness increases so does the number of probe separations which are required to cover the inspection volume;
Skilled operators are required to operate the equipment and interpret the images.
Thermography
An infrared camera or monitor is used to observe the actual temperature, or the variation over an area, of the
surface of a plant item.
Variations in heat transfer through the wall may be attributable to wall thinning or the build up of scale. It may
indicate the presence of wet insulation and the potential conditions for corrosion under insulation (CUI).
Alternatively, a heat source can be used to heat the surface and the dispersion of the heat observed.
Unexpected changes in the heat flow can be used to identify defects.
For containers containing hot or cold liquid it is possible to observe the level of the liquid in the item noninvasively.
The size of defect which can be detected will depend upon the optical parameters of the system and the
resolution of the camera. In assessing the results the emissivity of any paints or coatings on the component need
to be considered. Reflections of sunlight can also distort readings.
The technique is non-contacting and only line of sight to the surface under examination is required. It is quick and
easy to apply but can only detect defects and or faults which cause a change in heat flow or the surface
temperature of the item.
This is a thin flexible strip containing an array of ultrasonic transducers which can be permanently bonded to a component to provide continuous corrosion monitoring of
fixed locations.
Internal Rotary Inspection System - IRIS
An ultrasonic technique for the NDT of boiler and heat exchanger tubes consisting of a high frequency ultrasonic immersion probe inside a rotating test head. The system
provides coverage of the full circumference and full wall thickness as the probe is scanned axially along the tube. The head can be modified for defect detection if required.
LORUS
This is an ultrasonic technique which relies on bulk waves and was designed specifically for interrogating the plate under the shell on the annular ring of an above ground storage tank. The probe does not need to be scanned
backwards and forwards and so is suitable for use on the restricted surface available on the annular ring.
The sound floods the plate as it travels and is reflected from corrosion defects on the top or bottom surface. The working range is about 1 m but as the plate is flooded with sound it is unable to discriminate between top and bottom
defects.
Note: Although the acronym, LORUS, is derived from Long Range Ultrasonic System, when compared to more recent techniques referred to as long-range ultrasonics, the LORUS technique can only be considered medium range
(typically up to 1m).
The (SLOFEC) technique is very similar to the magnetic flux leakage technique. However, instead of detecting the flux leakage with a passive coil or a hall effect sensor, the SLOFEC technique has an eddy current sensor.
The fact that the eddy currents are used to sense the distortion of the magnetic field in a layer close to the surface of the component means that this NDT system is able to inspect a greater wall thickness and also able to cope with
thicker non-magnetic coatings than the magnetic flux leakage NDT system.
When the equipment is used on non-magnetic stainless steels the detection technique becomes solely an eddy current NDT technique.
This is a proprietary radiographic system which operates in a more controlled manner and hence a much smaller area than traditional radiography. Proper application of the system will reduce the controlled area to typically within 3
metres of the emission point. This has the advantages of minimal disruption to adjacent work areas and of reduced dose rates to classified workers
If RBI:
Is the procedure, which may be supplemented by a plant specific technique sheet, sufficiently detailed to define
the technique to be applied?
Is there evidence that the QA & NDT procedures are being implemented?
Practice can be different from the documentation.
Implementation
What additional steps have been taken:
e.g. different NDT techniques, repeat independent inspections or repeating all of the NDT with different personnel
or with different NDT techniques.
e.g. capability established through qualification or auditing with independent operators repeating sample of
volume inspected.
e.g. witnessing the inspection by independent third party, audits or measures listed in the Best Practice
document.
Are NDT personnel trained and certified?
(e.g. either a central certification scheme such as PCN or employer based such as ASNT)
Is the site NDT under supervision and support of a Level 3 operator?
Are PCN qualifications supplemented by job specific training for particular NDT technique applications?
Where a central certification scheme does not exist for the technique, can the NDT vendor or the plant owner
show evidence that the personnel have sufficient experience and training in the application of the technique?
Results
Do reports highlight any restrictions in the application of the technique?
Do they list any changes to the techniques which were required by the particular application?
Are sufficient parameters recorded so that what has been applied can be subsequently assessed and if
necessary repeated?
Are the sizing errors in the NDT measurements estimated?
Is appropriate action taken in response to the results obtained?
If the result is no defects found, there may still be the need for action taking into account the capability of the
NDT technique and the nature of defects which may not have been found.
Assessment of Results
How are the NDT results assessed?
Acceptance criteria
If manufacturing acceptance criteria are used is there justification for using them?
Are they compatible with the both the plant item and the NDT technique used?
Engineering Critical Assessment (ECA)
Has the assessment of the NDT results taken into account the limitations and errors inherent in the technique
applied?
The HSEs information document on Sizing Errors and their Implication for Defect Assessment
Non-invasive inspections
Inspection
Details
This can incur very high costs associated with releasing and emptying the vessel, isolating it and preparing for it for entry. The
Inspecting vessels for possible internal degradation
mechanical disturbances involved in preparing the tank for internal NDT and reinstating it may on occasions adversely affect
future performance of the tank. Also, the environment within the empty tank may be hazardous for man access requiring
If they are applied in lieu of internal NDT then evidence should be provided to show that they are capable of achieving the same
detection and sizing requirements. This may be in the form of results from both previous invasive and non-invasive inspections
showing good correlation or a report on the capability of the non-invasive inspection which can be compared with previous
significantly.
invasive results.
Alternatively, non-invasive NDT can be applied in addition to the internal NDT prior to an outage and during short shutdowns to
assist in the planning of internal NDT or to provide immediate information on an identified potential problem with the minimum of
interference with other operations.
Non-invasive NDT techniques are more complex than the internal NDT techniques and so require better planning, QA and project
management procedures. It is important to state the objectives of the non-invasive inspection as this is likely to have an impact on
the approach to the NDT.
The HOIS project produced a decision tree to establish if non-invasive inspection was acceptable, and the Mitsui Babcock project
HOIS2000 and Mitsui Babcock have carried out
detailed the requirement to ensure satisfactory inspection. Results from both of these projects are being reviewed by HSE prior to
Sample inspections
Rather than applying NDT to the total length of welds or number of components, NDT costs can be reduced by
inspecting a reduced percentage or sample of the items.
Often a figure of 10% is used. This doesn't necessarily have any scientific basis but is seen as being a
reasonable amount without incurring undue cost. Such an approach is only viable if the results from the 10%
inspected can be legitimately extrapolated to the 90% which wasn't inspected. i.e. if the damage mechanism is
equally likely to occur in all of the 100% and if it can be justifiably assumed that if no defects are found in the 10%
examined then there will be no defects in the remaining 90%.
This approach is not applicable if the damage can occur preferentially in one area over another or if random
defects can occur.
9. Case studies
NDT Case study 1
A process plant contained two stainless steel vessels which had been operating for 21 years. The contents of the
vessels were flammable, mildly toxic and contained 500 ppm of chlorides. The vessels were operated from full
vacuum up to 15 psi for 20 cycles per day. They contained an agitator which was used in part of the process.
Both vessels had been hydraulically tested to 70 psi when new but had not been subjected to a test since.
The company philosophy was 'Leak before break' but they didn't think that stainless steel would break. No leak
detection equipment had been installed and reliance was placed on plant operators noticing the smell or
observing drips.
The plant owners hired a Competent Person from a large insurance company who produced the Written Scheme
of Examination (WSE) for the vessels. There was no evidence of shared decision making between the plant
owner and the insurance company. A generic WSE was put into use. This followed SAFED guidelines on
periodicity of inspection which was specified as:
External visual examination supplemented by a hammer test every 2 years.
Was this suitable?
The combination of stainless steel and chlorides immediately raises concerns regarding the possibility of stress
corrosion cracking. Whilst the cracks were likely to initiate on the inner surface an external examination could
detect the presence of through wall cracks. However, stress corrosion cracks can be very tight and difficult to see
with the naked eye. The hammer test offers no benefit - who knows what a good vessel should sound like!
During a thorough examination of one of the vessels the Competent Person called for a small welded repair to an
external weld and for this to be followed by a hydraulic test. The vessel developed leaks at 40 psi. Further
investigation of the vessel found thousands of through wall cracks. The vessel had not leaked in service because
the contents were too viscous to pass through the tight stress corrosion cracks.
The competent person modified the WSE for the 2nd vessel:
Addition of internal dye penetrant examination using red dye on 10% of welds.
However, the examination of the second vessel did find two incidences of stress corrosion cracking (SCC): one
around the access way nozzle and a star crack in the plate. The nozzle was repaired by welding and the vessel
was hydraulically tested to 60 psi. The star crack was to be monitored at the next inspection in a year's time. No
further review of WSE was performed and the vessel was put back into service. The Competent person who put
the vessel back into service was not the regular surveyor for the site and it raises the question of whether they
fully understood the process.
When the poor inspection and quick return to service was questioned the following excuses were offered:
Conclusions
The client placed a high dependency on the competent person to satisfy the 'sufficient' aspect of the WSE.
When part of a large company, the Competent Person system relies on the surveyor feeding back information to Head Office which they will not be able to do if they lack
understanding.
The Competent Person had access to experts in various disciplines but these were not used.
No attempt was made to estimate critical crack sizes or growth rates and the NDT selected did not have a capability for measuring defect through wall size.
Finally, just because a leading competent person certifies the WSE it does not mean that it is sufficient: the WSE
should be scrutinised and the contents challenged wherever there is doubt on their suitability.
A test piece was manufactured, to simulate the main weld of the vessels with a number of defects representing
in-service defects and FHC. A number of NDT techniques were applied to the test piece, and manual ultrasonic
inspection gave the best results. An operator was then qualified on the test piece.
To evaluate the critical crack size, Engineering Critical Assessments were carried out on the vessels. The ECAs
assumed the fracture toughness of the material. As the material had a specified Charpy value at -50 C, this value
was converted to a fracture toughness and used for the low temperature analysis. A LPG vessel is required to
operate though a specific temperature range specified in the LPGA Code of Practice, so assessments had to be
made of the tolerable defect size at different temperatures and pressures. The fracture toughness at other
temperatures was taken from very limited data available from The Welding Institute. The size of the tolerable
defect was quite small, but the NDT trials had demonstrated that defects half the tolerable size could be detected.
o
A trial inspection was carried out on the smallest vessel. To obtain access to the vessel welds a mobile platform
was used, with a target set for inspection of 10% of the weld, in the hope that a greater coverage could be
obtained in the period that the mobile platform was available. In addition magnetic particle inspection was to be
carried out in the regions of the support legs.
The inspection was carried out in high winds, and the platform was not available for use on two of the days. Only
10 % of the weld length was inspected. The results for the inspection identified a number of planar defects which
exceeded the manufacturing ultrasonic acceptance criteria, but were smaller than the maximum allowable size.
Was this suitable?
The NDT of the vessel was performed from a mobile platform in windy conditions.
While the wind speed allowed the inspection to be carried out on 3 days, NDT requires a stable work platform to
ensure reliable results.
The ECA was based on material assumptions which had limited validity. The fracture toughness was based on
measurements on the parent plate and was then used for the low temperature assessment. For the assessments
carried out at different temperatures, parent plate data was taken from a limited database, but, to be
conservative, a lower bound value should have been used. If FHC had occurred it would have been in the heat
affected zone of the weld, which the work did not address.
Inspection on the other vessels used mechanised ultrasonic inspection, which was not affected by wind, and
provided inspection data to a computer, which was analysed later. Only 10% of the weld length was inspected on
each vessel. In one case the defect was sized at 4 mm high, compared with the maximum tolerable defect height
of 6 mm.
Was this suitable?
The use of mechanised ultrasonic testing was a considerable improvement over the manual technique. However,
no allowance was made for the sizing errors of the inspection. The sizing accuracy of the mechanised ultrasonic
inspection would have been +/- 2 mm. This means that the 4 mm defects detected could have actually been at
the maximum tolerable size of 6 mm. No justification was given for limiting the inspection to 10 % coverage of the
weld and this was not extended even when defects near the tolerable size had been detected.
Conclusions
The Competent Person changed the inspection strategy to non-invasive inspection without the benefit of information from prior invasive inspection or other evidence to
justify the decision.
By use of a test specimen it was demonstrated that the intended non-invasive NDT technique was capable of detecting and sizing in-service and manufacturing defects.
With no prior inspection data available, inspecting only 10% of the weld does not give a strong demonstration of the vessel integrity. Having detected defects that were on
the limit of the tolerable size, increased coverage should have been carried out.
Allowance should have been made for the sizing error of the NDT technique, and the acceptance criteria set accordingly.
The ECAs did not use lower bound material properties that may have been present in the welds.
BS EN 25817: 1992, ISO 5817:1992, Arc Welded joints in steel. Guidance on quality levels for imperfections.
BS 7910: 1999, Guide on methods for assessing the acceptability of flaws in metallic structures.
Accreditation
BS EN 45004:1995, General criteria for the operation of various types of bodies performing inspection.
Personnel qualification
BS EN 473:2000, Non-destructive testing. Qualification and certification of NDT personnel. General principles
PCN/GEN/2000, General requirements for qualification and certification of personnel engaged in Non-destructive testing, BINDT.
Inspection techniques
BS EN 1714: 1998, Non-destructive examination of welded joints - Ultrasonic examination of welded joints.
BS EN 1290 1998 Non destructive examination of welds: Magnetic particle examination of welds: Method
Information regarding these British Standards can be obtained from the BSI web Site.
American Petroleum Institute guides.
API 510 Pressure vessel inspection code: Maintenance inspection, rating, repair, and alteration
Energy Institute
Institute of Petroleum, Model Code of Safe Practice for the Petroleum Industry: Part 12: Pressure Vessel Systems Examination. 2 nd Edition. [Link] 0471 939366.
Institute of Petroleum, Model Code of Safe Practice for the Petroleum Industry: Part 13: Pressure Piping Systems Examination. 2 nd Edition. [Link] 0471 939374.
Guidelines for the Production of Written Schemes of Examination and the Examination of Pressure Vessels Incorporating Openings to Facilitate Ready Internal Access
Ref: PSG4 April 2003.
Pressure Systems: Guidelines on Periodicity of Examinations Ref: PSG1 (ISBN 1 901212 10 6). Date of Publication: May 1997
Shell Boilers: Guidelines for the Examination of Shell-to-Endplate and Furnace-to Endplate Welded Joints Ref: SBG1 (ISBN 1 901212 05)
Date of Publication: April 1997
Shell Boilers: Guidelines for the Examination of Longitudinal Seams of Shell Boilers Ref: SBG2 (ISBN 1 901212 30 0). Date of Publication: May 1998