×
INTELLIGENT WORK FORUMS
FOR ENGINEERING PROFESSIONALS

Log In

Come Join Us!

Are you an
Engineering professional?
Join Eng-Tips Forums!
  • Talk With Other Members
  • Be Notified Of Responses
    To Your Posts
  • Keyword Search
  • One-Click Access To Your
    Favorite Forums
  • Automated Signatures
    On Your Posts
  • Best Of All, It's Free!

*Eng-Tips's functionality depends on members receiving e-mail. By joining you are opting in to receive e-mail.

Posting Guidelines

Promoting, selling, recruiting, coursework and thesis posting is forbidden.

Students Click Here

Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

(OP)
Is a pinhole considered a "rounded indication"?

As per ASME VIII Division 1 Mandatory Appendix 8:
"Rounded indications: any relevant indication (it means if its major dimension is greater than 1/16 (1.5 mm) ) shall be considered rejected if it is greater than 3/16 in (5 mm)"

As per ASME VIII Division 2 Part 7:
"(2) Relevant rounded indications greater than 5 mm (3/16 in.)"

Case: A tube-to-tubesheet weld failed during tubeside hydrotest and later discovered this failure was caused by a pinhole on the tube-to-tubesheet weldment. Fabricator argued that the pinhole was acceptable as per Code since the pinhole was very much less than 5 mm, which was why the NDT technician did not report this indications.

I argued that any surface openings has to be investigated and removed.

Appreciate your opinions on this.

RE: Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

Quote (Hansac)

Is a pinhole considered a "rounded indication"?

Not speaking as an inspector, but I would say the open indication qualifies as rounded if you can see the bottom of it. If you cannot, further exploration (or immediate remediation) is necessary.

"Everyone is entitled to their own opinions, but they are not entitled to their own facts."

RE: Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

Non rejectable indications shall be reported.

Quote (Hansac)

I argued that any surface openings has to be investigated and removed.
Not going to see much more than surface defects with this NDE.

RE: Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

A pinhole is a rounded indication but need not be reported as such if <or= 1/16" diameterr. Since the joint failed hydro the NDE ispecyor should know that tube to tube sheet sigle pass fillet weld and seal weld joints are rather susceptible to leakage due to pinholes especially at the tie in location.

RE: Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

I would add that in my engineering/purchasing specs, pin holes were not permitted on tube to tube sheet welds.

RE: Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

Appendix 8 paragraph 8.3(b) defines a rounded indication as an indication having a length to width ratio less than 3:1. Keep in mind Appendix 8 is PT criteria. The 1/16 and 3/16 dimensions mentioned are the size of the bleedout, not the size of the visible pinhole. If the pinhole has significant depth, the bleedout size will be quite a bit larger than the visible pinhole.

JR97

RE: Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

Hansac,

Have a read of UW-38, and also, have your client read it.

The devil is in the details; she also wears prada.

RE: Rounded Indications vs Pinhole on Weld Surface

The type of defect does not matter. All defects must be repaired and again undergo hydraulic testing.

Regards

Red Flag This Post

Please let us know here why this post is inappropriate. Reasons such as off-topic, duplicates, flames, illegal, vulgar, or students posting their homework.

Red Flag Submitted

Thank you for helping keep Eng-Tips Forums free from inappropriate posts.
The Eng-Tips staff will check this out and take appropriate action.

Reply To This Thread

Posting in the Eng-Tips forums is a member-only feature.

Click Here to join Eng-Tips and talk with other members! Already a Member? Login



News


Close Box

Join Eng-Tips® Today!

Join your peers on the Internet's largest technical engineering professional community.
It's easy to join and it's free.

Here's Why Members Love Eng-Tips Forums:

Register now while it's still free!

Already a member? Close this window and log in.

Join Us             Close