inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
(OP)
I have a sign pole (welded to a base plate) that was hit by a car. It "looks" OK but is visual examination adequate to determine if it is structurally sound?
I am expecting that it is not enough.
What level of examination is generally enough? Are non-destructive tests required?
The local building dept wants and engineer's opinion but I don't want to just look at it and say something and I don't know how much testing $ to authorize.
Any thoughts?
I am expecting that it is not enough.
What level of examination is generally enough? Are non-destructive tests required?
The local building dept wants and engineer's opinion but I don't want to just look at it and say something and I don't know how much testing $ to authorize.
Any thoughts?





RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
Zyglo, for non ferrous and, Magnaflux for ferrous is acceptable for surface crack testing and is usually definitive for that purpose.
X-ray or Ultrasonic testing is what you need to detect anything other than surface cracks. Takes a little longer, requires a professional operator and, is not always cheapest method, but---it is definitive for nearly all defects.
Rod
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
Granted, magnetic particle examination can detect discontinuities such as cracks, incomplete fusion, etc. that are slightly subsurface, but the depth of detection will be a function of the size of the discontinuity and the depth of the discontinuity. I typically tell my clients that MT with an AC/DC yoke is limited to about 1/16 inch or less if small discontinuities are a concern. Very small discontinuities, such as fatigue cracks must be surface breaking and require wet fluorescent magnetic particles or fluorescent dye penetrant to be detected in their early stages of formation.
Check the qualifications and certifications of the individual that is performing the NDT to verify they were trained, have adequate experience, and took both written examinations and performance examinations as part of the qualification process. They should also provide you with a copy of their Written Practice and NDT procedure.
Best regards - Al
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
Hg
Eng-Tips policies: FAQ731-376
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
Re reading my post, I realized that I have personally supervised some pretty stupid NDT on Gov't. jobs in the past...Taxpayer's money at work.
Rod
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
A case like this is when a Level III earns his money by recommending the appropriate NDT method. The Level III should visit the site and review the drawings with an engineer to determine the best approach to evaluating the welds.
Best regards - Al
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
Hg
Eng-Tips policies: FAQ731-376
RE: inspection of (possible) weld damage to sign post
Would a proof test be easier than NDT and be adequate?
If you could estimate the maximum load likely to be endured and proof test it to slightly above that, without damaging it, perhaps it's an easier way.
I've never dealt with building codes etc and doubt my idea would be acceptable but I have used proof test instead of NDT of weld before when it made functional and economic sense.