26 1 19MB
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
TABLE OF CONTENTS 1. INTRODUCTION .................................................................................. 4 2. SCOPE................................................................................................. 4 3. DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS................................................ 5 3.1
DEFINITIONS ...................................................................................................................................... 5
3.2
ABBREVATIONS ................................................................................................................................. 6
4. REFERENCE DOCUMENTS ............................................................... 7 4.1
CODES AND STANDARDS ................................................................................................................ 7
4.2
COMPANY REFERENCES ................................................................................................................. 7
4.3
CONTRACTORS REFERENCES ....................................................................................................... 7
5. PIPE CHARACTERISTICS .................................................................. 8 6. SUMMARY OF VALIDATION OPERATIONS ...................................... 8 6.1
INSPECTIONS for macro-sectioning scope ........................................................................................ 8
6.2
INSPECTIONS for comparison testing ................................................................................................ 8
7. RTR VALIDATION ............................................................................. 11 7.1
PERSONNEL QUALIFICATION ........................................................................................................ 11
7.2
EQUIPMENT ...................................................................................................................................... 11
7.3
PROCEDURES .................................................................................................................................. 12
7.4
MACRO SECTIONING SOW ............................................................................................................ 12
7.5
VALIDATION TESTS ......................................................................................................................... 12 7.5.1
General Comparison of RTR Techniques vs MACRO ...................................................... 13
8. CONCLUSION OF THE RTR VALIDATION REPORT....................... 16 9. APPENDICES .................................................................................... 16
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 2 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
Revision Tracking Rev.
Date
0
25/01/2019
Issued for Construction (IFC)
Description of Revision
B
17/12/2018
Issued for Approval (IFA)
A
17/10/2018
Original Issue for CONTRACTOR’s Internal Review (IDC)
Hold Record Specify Hold Nr..
Section
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
Description of Hold
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 3 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
1.
INTRODUCTION
The Barzan Pipeline Project includes decommissioning and installation of new pipeline to deliver sour gas from three well sites with unmanned wellhead platforms (BRZ-WHP1, BRZ-WHP2 and BRZ-WHP3), all located in the North Field Offshore of the State of Qatar, to an onshore Gas Plant located at Ras Laffan Industrial City (RLC), Qatar. The project will include also the installation of new MEG delivery system.
Figure 1 - Project Location
2.
SCOPE
This report presents the results of the validation of radiographic techniques intended for Barzan project. The validation was performed to demonstrate the capabilities of the RTR system and Conventional RT using specific radiographic techniques (both SWSI and DWSI), according to the project applicable RT procedures, to detect and size typical weld defects. Barzan RTR Validation Program was carried-out at Saipem Welding Laboratory in Ploiesti (Romania). The present report will serve to confirm and validate the capabilities of the RTR system and Conventional RT and to validate the specific project radiographic testing procedures. The RTR Validation has included the following activities:
Preparation of defective welds;
RTR inspection of the defective welds (both SWSI and DWSI);
Conventional RT inspection of the defective welds;
Selection of defects for destructive testing;
Macro-sectioning of the selected defects and areas;
Comparison between Conventional RT vs RTR vs macro sectioning.
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 4 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
3. 3.1
DEFINITIONS AND ABBREVIATIONS DEFINITIONS
COMPANY
Qatargas
CONTRACTOR
Saipem SpA.
SUBCONTRACTOR
All organizations selected and awarded by CONTRACTOR to supply a certain Project materials or equipment or whom a part of the WORK has been Subcontracted
PROJECT
Contract no.: 033884
DOCUMENTS
All incoming and outgoing correspondence (letters, faxes, telexes, e-mail, minutes of meetings), and Technical Documents.
PROJECT DOCUMENTS
Created and issued by the CONTRACTOR, include the following documents: Any document produced by a member of the CONTRACTOR team and needed for the execution of the CONTRACTOR’s scope, or which is a formal document required for submission to COMPANY or any other third party in the frame of the PROJECT, under the terms of the MAIN CONTRACT.
TECHNICAL DOCUMENTS
Drawings, calculations, specifications, procedures, technical reports, etc.
IBIS PAGE
CONTRACTOR’s Electronic Document Management System (EDMS)
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 5 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
3.2
ABBREVATIONS
CS
Carbon Steel
CRA
Corrosion-Resistant Alloy
DWDI
Double Wall Double Image
DWSI
Double Wall Single Image
FL
Fusion Line
FS
Film Side
GMAW
Gas Metal Arc Welding
GTAW
Gas Tungsten Arc Welding
HAZ
Heat Affected Zone
ID
Inner Diameter
IQI
Image Quality Indicator
NDT
Non-Destructive Testing
OD
Outer Diameter
RT
Radiographic Testing
SOD
Source to Object Distance
SS
Source Side
SWSI
Single Wall Single Image
WPQT
Welding Procedure Qualification Testing
WPS
Welding Procedure Specification
WQT
Welder Qualification Test
WPQ
Welding Procedure Qualification
WT
Wall Thickness
t
Thickness
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 6 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
4.
REFERENCE DOCUMENTS
4.1
CODES AND STANDARDS
Nr.
Document Name
Description
[1]
DNV OS F101
Submarine Pipeline Systems : October 2013
[2]
EN ISO 9712
Non-Destructive Testing. Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel
[3]
ISO 11699-1
Non-Destructive Testing – Industrial Radiographic Film
[4]
EN ISO 17636-1
[5]
EN ISO 17636-2
[6]
ASTM E 747
4.2
COMPANY REFERENCES Nr.
4.3
Non-Destructive Testing of Welds – Radiographic testing Part 1: X- and gamma-ray techniques with film Non-Destructive Testing of Welds – Radiographic testing Part 2: X- and gamma-ray techniques with digital detectors Standard Practice for Design, Manufacture and Material Grouping Classification of Wire Image Quality Indicators (IQI) Used for Radiology
Document Name
Description
[7]
BZOF-MT-SPC-00011
Specification for welding of CRA Steel Line pipe
[8]
BZOF-MT-SPC-00030
Specification for Pipeline Radiography and Other NDT Services
CONTRACTORS REFERENCES Nr.
[9]
Document Name
WI-SPA-WELD-001-E
Description
Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel
[10] WI-SPA-ENG-WELD-024-E
Calibration of Non-Destructive Testing Equipment
[11] B00-MT-PRO-00003
RT Procedure - Qualification SoW
[12] B00-MT-PRO-00023
RTR Procedure - Onshore SoW
[13] B00-MT-PRO-00044
RTR Validation Procedure (for Offshore and Onshore)
[14] BRZ-SSDR-002
SDR - Intermediate RT by RTR in DWSI Technique
[15] 033884-QRY-SAI-BGC-00072
TQ - IRT Assessment of Partial GTAW Manual Weld Deposit
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 7 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
5.
PIPE CHARACTERISTICS
The RTR Validation was performed on the pipe configurations in Tables 1 and 2 below. 2no. CRA partial defective welds have been further subjected to macro sectioning and 2no. CRA partial defective welds have been used solely for Conventional RT and RTR comparison testing.
Weld ID
OD [inch]
WT [mm]
BAR-KASH-IPW-RT-01
32”
22.2 + 3
BAR-IPW-T-01
28"
15.9 + 3
Welding Process SWS + IPW J-bevel SWS + IPW J-bevel
Remarks IRT - Partial Weld Root + HP + IPW
IRT - Partial Weld Root + HP + IPW
Table 1 - Pipe Configurations used for macro sectioning
Weld ID
OD [inch]
WT [mm]
BAR - EMAT - 02
32”
26.3 + 3
BAR-SAI-TIE-IN-IRT-01
28"
26.3 + 3
Welding Process
Remarks
SWS + IPW J-bevel
IRT - Partial Weld Root + HP + int. SAW
GTAW
IRT - Partial Weld Root + HP
V-bevel tie-in
IRT - Partial Weld Root+HP+F1+F2
Table 2 - Pipe Configurations used for comparison testing
6. 6.1
SUMMARY OF VALIDATION OPERATIONS INSPECTIONS FOR MACRO-SECTIONING SCOPE
RTR Validation / Verification Program has been agreed with Company according to the RTR Validation Procedure, Ref. [13], consisting of a total number of 10 observations which were collected from the 2no. defective welds listed in Table 1. The purpose of the welds with deliberately induced flaws was to demonstrate the sensitivity and the capability to detect defects of various types, sizes and locations. The defective welds for macro sectioning scope were initially assessed with conventional RT, and with RTR in SWSI and DWSI and finally compared with results of Macro sectioning. The overall results confirms the sensitivity, the detection and the sizing capabilities of both conventional RT with films and RTR.
6.2
INSPECTIONS FOR COMPARISON TESTING
Two additional defective welds with partial CRA deposit, as shown in Table 2, have been subjected to several tests and inspected by both Conventional RT and RTR for comparison purposes as follows:
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 8 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
A J-prep partial CRA defective weld (BAR - EMAT - 02) of 32" OD x 12 mm WT partial CRA deposit has been subjected to Conventional RT in SWSI, to RTR in SWSI and to RTR in DWSI. The indications inside this weld have been assessed by all three methods individually. No deference was noted in terms of detection or sizing over all indications, except several individual pores reported additionally by RTR. The results are included in Table 3 and Appendix 8. It was concluded that RTR performed in DWSI technique is equivalent in terms of sensitivity, defects detection and sizing with both Conventional RT and RTR performed in SWSI. Therefore RTR in DWSI can be carried-out instead of SWSI on Barzan CRA partial girth welds whenever SWSI is not feasible or available or when specifically required, as per Ref. [14].
RTR in DWSI vs RTR in SWSI vs Conv. RT in SWSI (Weld No. BAR - EMAT - 02) IRT on J-bevel partial weld - 32" OD x 12mm WT deposit Conventional IRT (SWSI)
RTR (SWSI)
RTR (DWSI)
Indication
Position
Position
Position
POR < 1 mm
579
583 (D=0.8mm)
558 (D=0.9mm)
670 (D=0.7mm)
668 (D=0.5mm)
POR
695 (D=0.8mm)
690 (D=0.5mm)
POR < 1 mm
POR 816
820 (D=0.6mm)
785 (D=0.5mm)
SP
1003 - 1008
1010 - 1015
970 - 975
INT LOF
1270 - 1319
1270 - 1328
1220 - 1279
LOP
1440 - 1467
1448 - 1474
1394 - 1420
LOF DS
1568 - 1575
1573 - 1579
1550 - 1555
INT LOF US
1600 - 1625
1605 - 1629
1545 - 1570
WH
1613 - 1620
POR
1620 - 1624
1560 - 1563
1702 (D=0.6mm)
1638 (D=1mm)
LOP
1754 - 1778
1758 - 1783
1690 - 1715
LOF DS
1885 - 1905
1895 - 1907
1827 - 1838
LOF US
2244 - 2275
POR LOF DS
2375 - 2430
2252 - 2287
2170 - 2205
2340 (D=0.8mm)
2256 (D=1mm)
2390 - 2436
2304 - 2356
Table 3 – RTR in DWSI vs RTR in SWSI vs Conv. RT in SWSI
A manual CRA defective partial defective weld (BAR-SAI-TIE-IN-IRT-01) of 32" OD with V30-bevel has been subjected to Conventional RT and RTR in both SWSI and DWSI techniques after a welded deposit of 4.5mm (Root + HP). The same inspections have been repeated after the weld deposit has been increased to 7.5mm with two additional weld layers (Fill 1 + Fill 2). Welding from Root to Fill 2 has been made with GTAW. All defects inside the weld have been properly detected and assessed by all methods on both partial deposits (after 4.5mm and after 7.5mm). No difference has been noticed in terms of sensitivity, detection and sizing. The results are included in Table 4 and Appendix 8. It was concluded that during Barzan project, the IRT in SWSI or in DWSI made by either Conventional RT or RTR can be carried-out on manual CRA welds in GTAW directly after Fill 1 + Fill 2 (7.5mm deposit), subjected to Company approval of Ref. [15]. COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 9 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
IRT after 4.5mm deposit vs 7.5mm deposit (Weld No. BAR-SAI-TIE-IN-IRT-01) IRT after R+HP (4.5mm deposit) Conventional IRT (SWSI)
IRT after R+HP+F1+F2 (7.5mm deposit) RTR (SWSI)
Conventional IRT (DWSI)
Indication
Position
Position
Position
Position
Position
Position
Position
Position
INT LOF US
161 - 210
160 - 180
161 - 208
160 - 208
168 - 215
155 - 201
165 - 212
149 - 195
TI
287 (< 2 mm)
295 (D=1mm)
278 (< 2 mm)
282 (D=0.8mm)
292 (< 2 mm)
278 (D=1.1mm)
285 (< 2 mm)
266 (D=0.8mm)
TI
302 (< 2 mm)
310 (D=1mm)
292 (< 2 mm)
297 (D=0.6mm)
305 (< 2 mm)
293 (D=0.8mm)
300 (< 2 mm)
283 (D=0.8mm)
INT LOF US
352 - 365
362 - 367
370 - 377
378 - 383
362 - 365
LOF US
396 - 415
373 - 387
380 - 390
388 - 404
382 - 418
TRANSV INDICATION
412 - 415
424 - 428
400 - 404
408 - 412
420 - 423
408 - 411
410 - 413
393 - 396
LOF DS
604 - 617
565 - 618
602 - 615
560 - 600
620 - 623
534 - 609
600 - 623
588 - 591
758 - 808
731 - 778
INT LOF DS + US
755 - 812
Conventional IRT (DWSI)
RTR (DWSI)
Conventional IRT (SWSI)
760 - 825
POR CP
RTR (SWSI)
744 - 800
941 (D=0.7mm) 974 - 1020
985 - 1040
733 - 788
950 - 998
753 - 778
763 - 817
905 (D=1.0mm) 973 - 1018
370 - 404
794 - 807
353 - 356 372 - 408
925 (D=0.7mm) 980 - 1030
POR
967 - 1020
1150 - 1175
CP
1185 - 1200
1167 - 1217
1140 - 1170 1175 - 1190
1124 - 1176
1160 - 1190 1205 - 1216
Elong POR
1150 - 1210
357 - 393
935 (D=0.5mm) 985 - 1035
1077 (D=0.8mm)
CP
RTR (DWSI)
938 - 958 1046 (D=0.8mm)
1160 - 1190
1124 - 1144
1203 - 1213
1160 - 1173
1215 - 1220
1125 - 1130
LORF US
1215 - 1222
1310 - 1317
1200 - 1208
1280 - 1290
1225 - 1230
1308 - 1315
1222 - 1227
1178 - 1183
CP
1325 - 1375
1358 - 1408
1325 - 1375
1318 - 1353
1350 - 1390
1338 - 1388
1358 - 1398
1317 - 1338
CP
1522 - 1580
1547 - 1607
1515 - 1570
1500 - 1555
1552 - 1600
1535 - 1600
1550 - 1598
POR LOP
1643 (D=1.1mm) 1733 - 1777
1762 - 1812
1734 - 1775
1702 - 1750
1760 - 1800
LOF
1922 - 1972
1914 - 1971
1884 - 1933
1951 - 1978
1937 - 1987
2142 - 2165
RC (2195 - 2209)
2120 - 2141
LOP (2098 - 2108) RC (2117 - 2130)
2165 - 2198
LOP (2155 - 2167) RC (2174 - 2190)
POR
2235 (D=0.9mm)
SP
2277 - 2295
LOP
1950 - 1975
2056 (D=0.7mm) LOP (2177 - 2189)
2340 - 2400
2372 - 2434
2332 - 2386
2291 - 2347
2362 - 2416
2356 - 2413
1691 - 1731 1772 - 1827
1866 - 1868 Oversaturated area (1880 - 2086)
POR INT LORF US + DS
1770 - 1808
1842 - 1844
LOF INT LORF US + DS
1746 - 1790
1493 - 1541 1591 (D=1.2mm)
1880 - 1905 1988 (D=0.7mm)
2170 - 2203
2083 - 2117 2160 (D=0.9mm) 2160 - 2179
2360 - 2415
2275 - 2333
POR
2450 (D=1.3mm)
2366 (D=0.7mm)
LOF
2436 - 2440
2360 - 2363
Table 4 – IRT after 4.5mm deposit vs 7.5mm deposit COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 10 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
7.
RTR VALIDATION
7.1
PERSONNEL QUALIFICATION
The RT technicians who performed evaluation during the RTR Validation Program have been qualified as ISO 9712 Level 2 minimum for the RT method. The certificates of personnel who performed the validation tests are presented in the Appendix 4 of this report.
7.2
EQUIPMENT
The RTR equipment used for project validation and intended for production comprises the High Definition Real Time Radiography (HDRTR) scanner-detector system mounted onto a customized motorized carriage and pipe band transport system. The proprietary Shaw Pipeline Services (SPS) scanner-detector incorporates a compact dual energy photon counting direct converting x-ray 12-bit detector, known as ‘TrueScan’. The pixel size is 100 μm. Radiographic line data is acquired constantly by the scanner-detector during translation movement across an object and then recompiled and displayed as a complete image by the computer and proprietary Shaw Pipeline Services (SPS) software system. Detector Characteristics:
Diagnostic width of 76.8mm maximum
Pixel Resolution of 100μm x 100μm
Operating temperatures between -20⁰C to 55⁰C
During the RTR Validation the radiation was generated by X-Ray Tubes with below characteristics: Directional X-Ray Tube: Manufacturer:
YXLON
Model:
SMART EVO 300D
Focal Spot Size:
3.0 mm
Max kV:
300 kV
Max mA (at max kV):
3 mA
Manufacturer:
GE
Model:
ERESCO 52 MF4-CL
Focal Spot Size:
0.5 mm x 5.5 mm
Max kV:
300 kV
Max mA (at max kV):
3 mA
Panoramic X-Ray Tube:
The conventional RT has been performed with combination of C3 (D4) and C4 (D5) films and X-Ray sources. The certificates of the X-Ray tubes used during the RTR Validation are included in the Appendix 5. COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 11 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
7.3
PROCEDURES
The RTR Procedure is detailed in document no. B00-MT-PRO-00023, Ref. [12], while the dedicated RTR Validation Procedure is detailed in document no. B00-MT-PRO-00044, Ref. [13]. The Conventional RT Procedure is detailed in document no. B00-MT-PRO-00003, Ref. [11]. During the Validation the X-Ray has been used as radiation source. The Conventional RT and RTR have been performed with all parameters and settings according to Class B of ISO 17636-1 and ISO 17636-2, respectively. Bothe SWSI and DWSI techniques have been included in the Validation Programme. The RTR Procedure Qualification was performed by running 2no. consecutive scans for each technique in order to establish the RTR parameters and to demonstrate that all requirements such as IQI sensitivity, Duplex IQI’s, and the SNR are in accordance to ISO 17636-2, Class B. For CRA intermediate inspection of partial welds, the sensitivity is considered out of normal specification requirements and was finally based on result achieved during Procedure Qualification Test. The same shall be considered in production phase when additional procedure qualification tests shall be performed using the exact equipment and technique available on site, and by checking the IQI sensitivity and duplex IQI. The results of the RTR Procedure Qualification are included in Appendix 7 of this report.
7.4
MACRO SECTIONING SOW
The RTR Validation included in total 10 defects subjected to macro sectioning as listed in Table 5 below. OD [inch]
WT [mm]
Welding Process
Remarks
Weld n˚
No. of defects for Macro-sectioning
32”
22.2 + 3.0
SWS + IPW
IRT - Partial Weld Root + HP + IPW
BAR-KASH-IPW-RT-01
6
28"
15.9 + 3.0
SWS + IPW
IRT - Partial Weld Root + HP + IPW
BAR-IPW-T-01
4
TOTAL no. of flaws for macro sectioning
10
Table 5 – Macro Sectioning SOW The purpose of the welds with deliberately induced flaws was to demonstrate the RTR and Conventional RT sensitivity and capability to detect defects of various types, sizes and locations.
7.5
VALIDATION TESTS
The RTR Validation activities were carried out at SHAW RTR Subcontractor facility in Great Yarmouth (UK) and at Saipem NDT Laboratory in Ploiesti (Romania). The validation consisted in preparation, inspection and macro-sectioning of defective welds. The defective welds were subjected to both RTR and Conventional RT inspections according to each applicable RT Procedure. The RT and RTR Reports for defective welds subjected to macro sectioning and for comparison testing can be found in Appendices 2 and 3 of this report. COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 12 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
7.5.1
GENERAL COMPARISON OF RTR TECHNIQUES VS MACRO
A total number of 10 flaws were selected for macro sectioning from the 2 defective welds (Table 5) in agreement with the Company Representatives. These flaws are highlighted green in Appendix 1 and denominated with the sequence number. The same numbers were hard stamped on the pipe before salami sectioning and also followed in the Macro Reports presented in the Appendix 6 of this report. An overview of results is presented in Table 6 and Figures 2 and 3. The purpose of the macro-sectioning was to confirm the type of flaw, its vertical height and length. The height is shown in the macro reports and the length is based upon ± 5mm tolerance. The following general guidance was provided to the macro sectioning laboratory:
If the start of the defect is not present, move in by 5mm increment until the defect is found. Then split the difference between the last two slices. Once the defect start is found within 2.5mm, follow increment specified between the two ends;
Move by 5mm increment until the defect disappears. Then split the difference between the last two slices. Then the defect end is found within 2.5mm;
For weld defects such as individual pores, the cutting shall be made longitudinally on weld on complete window from DS to US side. Milling shall be made until edge of weld, then starting from the edge of weld, the macro-slicing shall be made in increments of 0,5mm until defect will disappear. In such way the height, length and width of the defect can be provided. Width of defect will be given within 0.5mm (0.25mm each side).
Figure 2 - Comparison between Conv. RT, RTR and Macro Sectioning measurements (3D)
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 13 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
Figure 3 - Comparison between Conv. RT, RTR and Macro Sectioning measurements (2D)
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 14 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
CONVENTIONAL RT RESULTS
BAR-IPW-T-01
BAR-KASH-IPW-RT-01
RT Indication
Type of Indication
Position Length From
to
Remarks
RTR RESULTS - SWSI Technique Type of Indication
Position (Digital) From
to
RTR RESULTS - DWSI Technique
Length (Digital)
Type of Indication
Position (Digital) From
to
MACRO Results
Length (Digital)
Height [mm]
Depth [mm]
Length [mm]
Width [mm]
#2
LCP
280
320
40
IF
278.52
333.69
55.17
IF
277.28
321.37
44.09
0,9
18,6
55.0
-
# 10
LCP
472
505
33
IF
481.95
515.04
33.09
IF
448.80
481.15
32.35
1.0
18,5
40.0
-
# 17
LCP
770
785
15
IF
788.15
801.80
13.65
IF
733.17
744.43
11.26
1.9
16,3
15.0
-
# 36
POR
1315
≤ 2 mm
P
1352.08
1354.03
1.95
P
1240.41
1242.15
1.74
1.2
18,5
1.8
1.0
# 37
POR
1410
≤ 1 mm
P
1454.57
1455.17
0.60
P
1333.41
1334.01
0.60
0.5
14,5
0.5
0.5
# 47
LOP+LCP
1750
1811
61
IP
1804.86
1872.65
67.79
IP
1646.66
1710.51
63.85
2.1
19,9
60.0
-
#3
HB
486
488
2
HB
500.15
502.42
2.27
HB
482.08
483.88
1.80
0,9
23,5
5.0
-
# 15
POR
1829
P
1858.08
1859.30
1.22
P
1751.16
1752.32
1.16
0,2
23,1
1.0
1.0
# 17
HB
1865
1874
9
HB
1894.61
1902.78
8.17
HB
1783.77
1793.08
9.31
0,9
23,6
10.0
-
# 21
HB
2385
2430
45
HB
12.05
55.53
43.48
HB
2275.97
2317.12
41.15
0,8
23,5
35.0
-
< 1 mm
Table 6 - Comparison between Conv. RT, SWSI RTR, DWSI RTR and Macro Sectioning results
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 15 of 16
RTR VALIDATION REPORT (FOR OFFSHORE AND ONSHORE) BARZAN PIPELINE PROJECT EPC
8.
CONCLUSION OF THE RTR VALIDATION REPORT
The Barzan specific project RTR Validation campaign has led to compare the RTR and Conventional RT weld assessments with macro sectioning for 10 flaws of different types distributed through the CRA partial deposit of 2no. defective welds. The overall results, as presented in Table 6, confirms that both Conventional RT and RTR performed in SWSI and DWSI radiographic techniques are suitable for actual project purpose. The intended radiographic inspection methodologies, either RTR or Conventional RT with films, are validated for project use in onshore and offshore scopes and can be applied for the inspection of both automatic J-prep and manual V-prep CRA partial welds, for IRT purpose. The project radiographic inspection methodologies with RTR and Conventional RT with films have been subjected to comparison tests in SWSI and DWSI on both J-prep and V-prep partial welds and on different partial weld deposits (4.5mm and 7.5mm), proving successful reliability in each condition and suitable defects detection. Therefore, the radiographic specific inspection techniques with Conventional RT and RTR and in particular the RTR TrueScan System have achieved good results in terms of sensitivity, detectability and assessment capability of typical project weld imperfections and are considered validated for Barzan project onshore and offshore scopes.
9.
APPENDICES
Appendix 1 – Conventional RT vs RTR Comparison Data ; Appendix 2 – RTR reports ; Appendix 3 – Conventional RT Reports ; Appendix 4 – NDT Personnel Certificates ; Appendix 5 – RT Equipment Certificates ; Appendix 6 – Macro Reports ; Appendix 7 – RTR Procedure Qualification Reports ; Appendix 8 – Comparison Tests Results.
COMPANY DOC NO.: B00-MT-PRO-00045
REV:0
CONTRACTOR
DOC
NO.:
033884-Z-Z-SAI-MT-30-R-03119-00
PAGE: 16 of 16