|
|
I currently test welds with Magnaflux Penetrant dye solution and a developer. The problem with this is the mess it creates and I question its accuracy. Are there any other methods of testing welds on sprinkler pipe besides this procedure or testing with air. Air testing takes too long though I am confident with the accuracy. Any other ideas?
Reply:Ummm...turn the water on.Sorry, I've been drinkingLincoln PowerMig 180cVictor O/ABandaids and aspirinI don't know what I don't know!?
Reply:Well hydrotest or x-ray, but if you think that dye penetrant is too difficult then you won't like these either.But on a positive note, once all the welds are done you can hydrotest the whole system at once (I go 1.5 times the service pressure usually), but if you have a drop in pressure you still have to find the bad weld (or most of the time fitting for high point, or test equipt, etc). Pressuring up the whole system with air and soapy water test seems to be your best bet.
Reply:The system isn't in service or even hung at the time of testing. It is still in the shop. We are not a big company. There are only two of us in the shop. I am welding on a Cypress welding maching, then I cover the weld with a weld sealant, then test it with the Magnaflux, let it cool and then paint it. That's a lot of steps. I am just trying to speed up the process a bit. The largest size I can weld on the machine is a four inch weldlet. Anything larger I weld by hand. I air test these larger sizes. The most common size outlet I weld is 1 inch and 1 1/4 inch. I think I will just stick with the dye testing solution for now. Thanks for the input.
Reply:JB weld it
Reply:Originally Posted by jimbob669The system isn't in service or even hung at the time of testing. It is still in the shop. We are not a big company. There are only two of us in the shop. I am welding on a Cypress welding maching, then I cover the weld with a weld sealant, then test it with the Magnaflux, let it cool and then paint it. That's a lot of steps. I am just trying to speed up the process a bit. The largest size I can weld on the machine is a four inch weldlet. Anything larger I weld by hand. I air test these larger sizes. The most common size outlet I weld is 1 inch and 1 1/4 inch. I think I will just stick with the dye testing solution for now. Thanks for the input.
Reply:Originally Posted by jimbob669The system isn't in service or even hung at the time of testing. It is still in the shop. We are not a big company. There are only two of us in the shop. I am welding on a Cypress welding maching, then I cover the weld with a weld sealant, then test it with the Magnaflux, let it cool and then paint it. That's a lot of steps. I am just trying to speed up the process a bit. The largest size I can weld on the machine is a four inch weldlet. Anything larger I weld by hand. I air test these larger sizes. The most common size outlet I weld is 1 inch and 1 1/4 inch. I think I will just stick with the dye testing solution for now. Thanks for the input.
Reply:Originally Posted by jimbob669I currently test welds with Magnaflux Penetrant dye solution and a developer. The problem with this is the mess it creates and I question its accuracy.
Reply:When we do dye penetrate testing we spray the dye in a painter mixing cup, then brush on. Prevents the mess from the spray can.
Reply:If you are doing alot of this then i would suggest that you invest in a set of magnetic yokes and some magnetic particles---not very expensive and not real messy either. you can also get wet visible particles that produce no dust and come in a spray can. Much faster and cleaner than dye penetrant testing.6 Miller Big Blue 600 Air Paks2 Miller 400D6 Lincoln LN-25's4 Miller Xtreme 12VS2 Miller Dimension 812 4 Climax BW-3000Z bore welders Hypertherm 65 and 85Bug-O Track BugPair of Welpers
Reply:Originally Posted by ExpatWelderIf you are doing alot of this then i would suggest that you invest in a set of magnetic yokes and some magnetic particles---not very expensive and not real messy either. you can also get wet visible particles that produce no dust and come in a spray can. Much faster and cleaner than dye penetrant testing.
Reply:test in the shop wont test the field joints. put it together and turn it on. i have seen small leaks wrapped in a pissy rag, overnite it rusts up and holds pressure. not proper, but ive seen it.
Reply:Originally Posted by Rick VAll true... but...Magnetic Particle (MT) is great for detecting 'linear' indications like cracks - if you can get the magnetic field oriented normal to the cracks. Unfortunately, MT is terrible at finding non-linear (round) indications like pores in a weld - and that is most likely the cause for leaks in these welds.Rick V
Reply:jimbob669---You're doing 2 separate forms of testing,and one will not take the place of the other, for a bunch of reasons.1-Leak test the assembly via hydrostatic or air pressure. Final acceptance afterfield installation is normally via hydrostatic testing.2-Test the integrity of the weld via mag. particle inspection or dye penetrantDon't you have any formalized or contractural test procedures that you are to conformand certify to? (I'll bet there's some industry standards for compliance, in any case.)What ExpatWelder sez is so. Note that he is an experienced, trained, tested,certified inspector.Blackbird
Reply:Ah well - we have a distinct difference of expert opinions. I hold Government of Canada certification at Level 3 in MT, PT and UT. Unlike a variety of company-based qualification like ASNT's written practice SNT-TC-1A, Canada certifies inspectors by making all candidates do the same written and practical exams at one of ten federal government approved examination centres. The NRCan/CGSB certification is portable; you don't lose your your certification when you depart your company - because it was not issued by the company. Until I retired in September 2009, I was the NRCan manager responsible for the NDT certication of 4500 inspectors under the International Standard ISO 9712:2005. I say, it's damn near impossible to see pores with MT. You want to detect surface-open pores - use liquid penetrant.Rick V
Reply:ihave seen fire protection sprinklers going in for 40 years and a hydrotest is the norm.usually at 50% over the working pressure.
Reply:Originally Posted by Rick VAh well - we have a distinct difference of expert opinions. (snip) I say, it's damn near impossible to see pores with MT. You want to detect surface-open pores - use liquid penetrant.Rick V |
|
发表于 2021-9-1 00:32:51