Notches vs. Side-Drilled Holes 
Chapter 3 – Crack Detection Sensitivity
A lonely crack, with no weld to call home

Notches vs. Side-Drilled Holes Chapter 3 – Crack Detection Sensitivity

Introduction

In previous chapters, we introduced some of the differences between side-drilled holes (SDH) and notches from a theoretical point of view, then we touched upon the major practical differences when it came to calibration sensitivity. Now, in the culmination of the trilogy (riveting, I know), we disarm the rumour that notches are somehow better than SDHs for crack detection.  Notches are not “better for cracks”. I assume phased array UT, but the same principles apply for conventional UT.

Notches Look More Like Cracks, So Why Aren't They Better?

The fact that a notch might look like a crack more than an SDH means almost zero when it comes to the probability of detection because real weld flaws are fractal and wiggly and reflection characteristics vary significantly with angle.

If you calibrate on notches because they're "better for cracks", then you assume the following baggage that comes along with it:

  1. You've assumed the crack you’re looking for is oriented straight vertical (not 80°, not even 85°) and…
  2. You accept the fact that the calibration sensitivity will be skewed to boost everything (slag, cracks, LOF, etc.) starting at around 60°. 

If you pass a basic sectorial focal law over a notch, the signal will wimp out right around 60° due to mode conversion losses…

No alt text provided for this image

… so the TCG curve works extra hard around 60° to bring everything up to a consistent level…

No alt text provided for this image

… and in the end the signal from the notch sits happily at your reference level.

No alt text provided for this image

Ok, so you calibrated on notches and now you say “I’m perfectly sensitive across all angles!”. Well sure, this is great ONLY IF THE FLAW IS PERFECTLY VERTICAL.... which it isn't... unless it's a notch, and then it's not a weld flaw. It's your calibration block. You're looking at your cal block. Move over to the weld, and it's a completely different ball game.

What if the flaw is cockeyed by a measly 5° or 10°? Here's an example showing a crack skewed 10°, which doesn't look like a lot...

No alt text provided for this image

Just a few degrees can make a massive difference in signal response. Remember the chart from Part 1 with the precipitous plunge for a notch reflector at 60°?  There was a drop from 100% screen height to about 10% screen height between 55° and 60°. That’s about 20 dB.  

Are you okay with a calibration based on the assumption that a measly 5° or 10° tilt on your crack could reduce the amplitude by 20dB?  Probably not.

What Did Notches Ever Do To Me?

I don’t hate notches; I just take issue with the fact that they get to be the de facto reference reflector when, in most cases, physics fails to show the benefit.

To prove there's at least a thread of ambivalence on my part I will say this… given ASME rules you’re better off using notches in the following cases:

  • If the outside diameter of the pipe is less than about 3.5 inches (plus wall thickness considerations), you simply won’t have enough real estate to make a 1-? inch (38 mm) long SDH through the ? T thickness anyways:
No alt text provided for this image
  • The minimum diameter for an SDH according to ASME is 3/32 inch (2.5 mm).  On thin wall (less than 5/16 in or 8 mm) the holes occupy a pretty substantial percentage of the overall thickness.  The ASME code lets you freely choose notches or side-drilled holes, so for really thin sections it's probably best to go with a 10% notch.
No alt text provided for this image

So What?

Notches have been used for a bazillion UT inspections, helping find and size every weld flaw under the sun. Would side-drilled holes have changed anything? Absolutely! But so would a pile of other things… did you do a transfer correction? What couplant did you use? Was your wedge angle exactly nominal? How about surface prep? How hard did you push on the wedge?

There are lots of variables at play and we should try to control them as best we can. This is why there are codes and procedures. But we should do this without imparting other effects onto our inspections.

The shapes and orientations of weld flaws are so varied that when thickness permits we should use a calibration reflector that does not impart angle-dependence. For that reason, side-drilled holes are the better all-around sensitivity calibration reflector for general weld inspection. Plus they're way easier to calibrate on. Way easier.

I promise I'll stop writing about notches and side-drilled holes now. Probably.





 


赫曼努茨大卫

加拿大驻华检查员 CGSB CWB API

4 年

Add through wall holes and thanks!

回复
David Bajula - CEng

Consultant - NDT & Solutions SME Speaker - ASNT/9712 NDT Level III

4 年

Well said Paul! Especially like the use of the technical term “wiggly” Of course I don’t anguish much over the use of holes or notches as much as I do over the D1.1 rules for accept / reject and attenuation values.

Jonathan Lesage, PhD

Application Engineer at Acuren

4 年

If you calibrate on SDHs there is little angular dependence of the target response and so you have effectively removed the angular dependence of the system + propagation losses. Unfortunately that doesn't change the fact that surface connected planar flaws have an angular dependence themselves, even correcting for your beam profile. This means that the drop at 60 degrees will still be there. If your flaw is tilted (ignoring the fact that this changes the angular dependence in more complex ways than simply shifting the location of the amplitude drop), the response will drop off at some new angle - calibrating on a SDH cannot save you from that. The closest standard calibration flaw to a crack is a notch, so if you want your sensitivity to a vertical-ish planar flaw to be roughly constant over all VPAs, then a notch is your only option. Also since the response of an SDH target will be less than a notch/crack in general, calibrating sensitivity on a SDH means that cracks and LOF will be highly saturated making dB drop or tip sizing impossible. SDHs are probably a better comprise for general weld inspection but maybe notches are more suitable for in-service inspection where sensitivity to cracks and accurate sizing is more important!

Richard Malenfant, P.Tech (Eng.)

Founder / Field Services Manager at Malenfant Technical Services LLC

4 年

This has still been a better trilogy than the new Star Wars movies... #SDHFTW

Jeffery Leak

NASA Physical Science - NDE Phased Array Ultrasonics | National Aeronautics and Space Administration | MSFC, Alabama

4 年

Love it!!

要查看或添加评论,请登录

社区洞察

其他会员也浏览了