Professional Documents
Culture Documents
Pulse echo, TOFD and Phased Array in the frame of ASME and EN
standards
Speakers 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
INTRODUCTION
In the nineties the ASME, through the Code Case 2335, introduced the possibility for the
manufacturer of pressure vessel to use ultrasonic examination in lieu of radiography.
This statement has opened great researches and experimental tests to set up computerized
equipment, scanners, software for scanning and data acquisition in terms of geometric data of the
findings and their characterization.
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. 1 and Fig. 5.
After 15 years experience in applying these computerized system a great step in the ultrasonic
advanced technique has been reached.
TOFD and Phased Array are the dominant techniques in this field.
TOFD TECHNIQUE
TOFD technique is a non amplitude based technique in evaluation of indications.
Through the software the height and length of indications can be estimated with an accuracy in the
height less than 0.5 mm and in the range of 2-5 mm for the length.
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; the tip
diffraction from the frequency.
In order to make comparable two TOFD results made on the same welds, a classification of phase
contrast has been introduced; class 1, good contrast, class 2 ,discrete contrast, class 3 where
the phase color (black and white) are no more distinguishable.
The sizing and detectability of the indications are compromised.
The second criteria we introduced is the tip resolution.
In the Fig. 23 and 24 examples of phase contrast of 1,2 and 3 class are represented together with
the tip resolution resolved and not resolved.
This data are fundamental in writing the procedure and in its validation.
Defining the depth zone it should be guaranteed the overlap of the detection capability.
The tip resolution is more depending on the frequency of the probe and it is a constant parameter for
a fixed frequency. It has to be determined experimentally during the validation test.
Following these simple criteria, TOFD results may be comparable giving the highest POD which is
proper for TOFD technique.
In Tab. 3 an example of a validation procedure applying this criteria of image classification is
presented.
Fig. 4: Automatic scanner with phased array probes during nods weld examination on 300 mm th
welds
5
SIZING OF INDICATIONS
Tab. 1: size of indications detected by ultrasonic relevant to the thickness of the weld examined
l (mm)
25
20
15
10
5
0
a
1,33
1,505
1,715
1,995
2,31
2,73
3,15
3,675
4,305
5,005
a (mm)
Fig. 6: Example of acceptance criteria relevant to a thickness of to determine the length of the
indication depending on the height
F
Fig. 7: Examples of volumetric defects (A-B-C) and planar defects (D-E-F) in welding
ASME 2010 SECTION VIII -DIVISION 1- APPENDIX 12 ULTRASONIC EXAMINATION OF WELDS (UT)
Indications characterized as cracks, lack of fusion, or incomplete penetration are unacceptable
regardless of length. Other imperfections are unacceptable if the indications exceed the reference level
amplitude and have lengths which exceed:
(1)
in. (6mm) for t up to in. (19 mm)
1 / 3 t for t from in. to 2 in. (19 mm to 57 mm)
(2)
(3)
i n. ( 1 9 m m ) fo r t o ver 2 i n. ( 5 7 m m ) .
Where t is the thickness of the weld excluding any allowable reinforcement.
For a butt weld joining two members having different thickness at the weld, t is the thinner of these two
thicknesses. If a full penetration weld includes a fillet weld, the thickness of the throat of the fillet shall be
included in t.
Fig. 10: Image of direct reflected echo and diffracted echo from creeping waves with Phased Array
Fig. 11: Image of diffracted echo due to spherical waves generated at the tips with Phased Array
Fig. 12: Image of diffracted echo due to spherical waves generated at the tips with Pulse Echo
8
Fig. 19: Beam focusing and calibration on 3 mm holes (SDH) for sizing the slit of test block in fig. 20
Fig. 20: Test block with calibration slits of 4 mm height to evaluate the sizing capability of Phased
Array technique.
real data
defect
ID
center
depth
[mm]
ultrasonic examination
position channel
[mm]
num.
upper tip
depth
[mm]
lower tip
depth
[mm]
error
position [mm]
estimated
error
height [mm]
estimated
error
725
30
680
31.8
36.5
34.15
+4.15
681.1
+1.1
3.7
-0.3
30
680
21.7
26.4
24.05
-5.95
674.5
-6.5
4.7
+0.7
60
635
62.6
66.6
64.6
+4.60
640.5
-5.5
0.0
60
635
60.1
63.6
61.85
+1.85
628.3
-5.7
3.5
-0.5
90
590
93.8
97.5
95.65
+5.65
592.9
-2.9
3.7
-0.7
90
590
91.4
95.5
93.45
+3.45
581.9
-9.1
0.0
120
545
131.0
134.8
132.9
+12.90
543.1
-1.9
3.9
-0.1
150
500
149.1
152.9
151
+1.00
502.8
-2.8
3.9
-0.1
180
455
187.9
191.9
189.9
+9.90
450.4
-4.6
0.0
210
410
212.3
216.3
214.3
+4.30
408.7
-2.3
0.0
240
365
242.4
246.6
244.5
+4.50
362.8
-3.2
4.2
+0.2
10
270
320
270.3
273.7
272
+2.00
319.1
-0.9
3.4
-0.6
11
294
284
295.7
298.6
297.15
+3.15
282.3
-1.7
3.1
-0.9
Tab. 2: estimated values of heights relevant to the slit in test block of Fig. 20
10
Fig. 22: Beam focusing in the near field in Phased Array technique
11
TOFD TECHNIQUE
Tab. 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 6mm
Height Depth
Image
4,5
6
1-B
3,9
30
2-A
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
Probe 52pcs160
3,5 MHz 18mm
Height Depth
Image
3-C
5,0
30
2-B
4,2
60
1-A
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
Probe 45 pcs300
2,2 MHz 24mm
Height Depth
Image
NVI
3-C
5,2
60
2-C
4,8
90
1-A
3,8
120
1-A
4,1
150
1-A
4,3
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)
12
Probe 35pcs370
2,2 MHz 24mm
Height Depth
Image
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
NVI
3-C
5,2
180
2-B
4,5
210
2-B
4,2
240
1-A
4,0
270
1-A
3,2
294
1-B
3: Poor
C: Not resolved
Fig. 23: TOFD MAP of lack of fusion; phase contrast class 2; tip not resolve
C) PHASE CONTRAST:
CLASS 3
B) PHASE CONTRAST:
CLASS 3
Fig. 24: TOFD MAP A) Phase contrast class 1; tip resolved B) and C) Phase contrast class 3; tip
not resolved.
Indication quality of image B and C are not acceptable
13
VOLUMETRIC DEFECT
PLANAR DEFECT
Fig. 26: Diagram showing the behavior of planar and volumetric defects defined on the basis of
diffracted echo.
B
Fig. 17: Sketch of the test block used for the
experimental work.
Fig. 27: A-scan presentation from a side drilled hole (SDH) using 45 angle beam.
A) Direct reflection echo: shear waves shear waves
B) Diffracted Echo: shear waves - creeping waves shear waves
ACKNOWLEDGMENTS
Special thanks to Dott. Prof. Laura Mattei for her help in preparing and editing this paper.
REFERENCES
[1] Sharp R. S., Research Techniques in Non Destructive Testing, Vol. IV, 1980
[2] Malcolm, J. Crocker, Encyclopedia of Acoustics, Vol. One, 1997
[3] ASME Code Sec. V, art. 4, Code Case 2235.9. Use of Ultrasonic Examination in Lieu of
Radiography.
[4] Ichiro Komura, Taiji Hirasawa, Satoshi Nagai (Toshiba),Jun-ichi Takabayashi (Keihin), Katsuhiko
Naruse (Isogo Nuclear) Crack Detection and Sizing Technique by Ultrasonic and Electromagnetic
Methods, Proceedings of the 25th MPA Seminar, MPA Stuttgart, Germany, October 7 - 8, 1999
[5] R/D Tech, Introduction to Phased Array Ultrasonic Technology Applications: R/D Tech
Guideline, Quebec City, Canada, R/D Tech, 2004.
[6] Lafontaine, G. and F. Cancre, "Potential of Ultrasonic Phased Arrays for Faster, Better and
Cheaper Inspections," NDT.net, Vol. 5, No. 10, October 2000,
<www.ndt.net/article/v05n10/lafont2/lafont2.htm>.
[7] Nardoni G., CB-Scan Technique with Phased Array Probe: Sizing procedures using diffracted
echoes, Conference on ASME Code Case 2235.9: From acceptance criteria based on amplitude of
signal to acceptance criteria based on size, Moscow, 2008.
[8] Paul D. Wilcox, Caroline Holmes and Bruce W. Drinkwater Advanced Reflector Characterization
with Ultrasonic Phased arrays in NDE Applications;
IEEE Transactions on Ultrasonics, ferroelectrics, and Frequency Control, Vol.54, N.8, August 2007
[9] ASME Code Case 2235.9.
[10] Nondestructive testing and diagnostics-Handbook .Edited by V.V. Klyuev
[11] Encyclopedia of Acoustics Edit by Malcolm J. Crocker
[12] Ultrasonic Testing of Materials J. Krautkramer H. Krautkramer
15