Proceedings of the National Seminar & Exhibition

on Non-Destructive Evaluation
NDE 2011, December 8-10, 2011

STUDY AND COMPARISON OF DIFFERENT FABRICATION AND NDT

REQUIREMENTS FOR PRESSURE VESSEL, BOILER, PIPING, STRUCTURE &
NUCLEAR COMPONENT MANUFACTURING WITH RESPECT TO VARIOUS CODES &
STANDARDS
Kamal H.Dhandha1, A.D.Bhathena2, Manas Ghosh3 and Dr.Sanjay Soman4
3

1,2
Modular Fabrication Facility, E & C Division;
Heavy Engineering Division, Larsen & Toubro Limited, Hazira Manufacturing Complex, Surat, Gujarat, INDIA
4
Metallurgical & Materials Engineering Department, Faculty of Technology & Engineering,
The Maharaja Sayajirao University of Baroda, Vadodara, Gujarat, INDIA

ABSTRACT
Non-Destructive Testing (NDT) is the application of measurement techniques in order to identify damage and
irregularities in materials. Different non-destructive examination methods are called for at various stages viz. InManufacture Inspection (IMI), Pre-Service Inspection (PSI) and In-Service Inspection (ISI). The presence of flaws in
critical components may result in the integrity of such systems being compromised and increase the likelihood of
failure. Correct selection and application of an NDT technique can provide confidence that a component or piece of
plant does not contain defects of the type which the technique was capable of detecting. The capability of an NDT
technique to detect and size specified defects can be assessed by the gathering of evidence based on physical reasoning,
theoretical modelling, experimental work and previously published work. In this case NDT is just one of a number of
quality control activities aimed at producing a component or piece of plant to a particular specification. The NonDestructive Testing methods to be used and the maximum size of flaws which can be tolerated are given in the flaw
acceptance clauses in various codes. In this liberalized and global market, it is necessary for an industry to manufacture
product (viz. pressure vessels, boilers, piping, structure & nuclear components etc.) according to various national/
international codes & standards and hence, it is necessary to know, understand & interpret various acceptance criteria.
Study of this acceptance standards & comparison between them is the need for todays Fabrication industries aspires
to be globalized.
Keywords : Integrity, Flaws, Interpretation, Reliability, Globalize
INTRODUCTION

THEORY

In order to control the welding work and to have uniformity

in the material selection, welding processes, testing and
inspection, standards have been evolved based on long
experience and critical experimentation. These codes are given
for different categories of work such as Boiler, Pressure
vessels, Pipe lines, Oil storage tanks, Structural works etc.
Conformity to the particular norm or code laid down for each
work is required for satisfactory functioning of the welded
joints.

Codes & Standards are the authentic documents, usage of

which give a products / services of National / International
standards with respect to quality, reliability etc. also this give
uniformity of various manufacture to manufacture the product
/ service. Codes are mandatory, where as Standards are
recommended and reference documents.

A comprehensive knowledge about acceptance standards of

various NDT methods according to various manufacturing
codes & standards is mandatory for Welding/QA/QC Engineers
today.

Acceptance Criteria:
Limit of shape, size and position of discontinuities acceptable
within the context of the specific design requirements.
Many codes are having common acceptance criteria. Therefore,
it become unambiguous for inspector to identify the defects,

388

Kamal H.Dhandha et.al : Proceedings of the National Seminar & Exhibition on Non-Destructive Evaluation

which exceeds acceptance criteria irrespective of availability

of acceptance codes if abstract of it has been kept tip of the
tongue. In some codes additional requirements are specified
based on severity of application.
ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR MAJOR NDE
METHODS
Acceptance criteria for Ultrasonic Examination
As per ASME Sec.VIII Div.1, Div.2, Sec.I, Sec.III NB, ASME
B31.1, ASME B31.3 ((b) only), are
(a) Indications characterized as cracks, lack of fusion, or
incomplete penetration are unacceptable regardless of
length.
(b) Other imperfections are unacceptable if the indications
exceed the reference level amplitude and have lengths
which exceed:
(1) 1D 4 in. (6 mm) for t up to 3D4 in. (19 mm);
(2) 1D3t for t from 3D4 in. to 2 in. (19 mm to 57 mm);
(3) 3D4 in. (19 mm) for t over 2 in. (57 mm).

(a)&(b) Same as Ultrasonic Examination

(c) any group of aligned indications that have an aggregate
length greater than t in a length of 12t, except when the
distance between the successive imperfections exceeds
6L where L is the length of the longest imperfection in
the group;
(d) rounded indications in excess of that specified by the
acceptance standards given in as below.

Rounded indications
Relevant Indications
Only those rounded indications which exceed the following
dimensions shall be considered relevant.
(1)

1D10t for t less than 1D8 in. (3 mm)

(2)

1D64 in. for t from 1D8 in. to 1D4 in. (3 mm to 6

mm), incl.

(3)

1D32 in. for t greater than 1D4 in. to 2 in. (6 mm

to 50 mm), incl.

(4) 1D16 in. for t greater than 2 in. (50 mm)

Acceptance criteria for Radiographic Examination

As per ASME Sec.VIII Div.1, Div.2, Sec.I, Sec.III NB, ASME
B31.1, API620 & API650 are

Maximum Size of Rounded Indication.

The maximum permissible size of any indication shall be 1D
4t, or 5D32 in. (4 mm), whichever is smaller; except that an

COMPARISON BETWEEN ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR VISUAL EXAMINATION OF WIDELY USED CODES
Table 1 : Comparison between Acceptance standard for AWS D1.1, ASME Sec.VIII Div.1 & ASME B31.3

Table 2 : Comparison between Acceptance standard for ISO 5817, ASME Sec.VIII Div.1 & AWS D1.1

NDE 2011, December 8-10, 2011

389

COMPARISON BETWEEN ACCEPTANCE CRITERIA FOR RADIOGRAPHIC EXAMINATION OF WIDELY USED CODES

390

Kamal H.Dhandha et.al : Proceedings of the National Seminar & Exhibition on Non-Destructive Evaluation

NDE 2011, December 8-10, 2011

391

isolated indication separated from an adjacent indication by 1

in. (25 mm) or more may be 1D3t, or 1D4 in. (6 mm),
whichever is less. For t greater than 2 in. (50 mm) the maximum
permissible size of an isolated indication shall be increased to
3D8 in. (10 mm).

REFERENCES

Aligned Rounded Indications. Aligned rounded indications

are acceptable when the summation of the diameters of the
indications is less than t in a length of 12t.

2.

ASME Sec. VIII Boiler & Pressure Vessel Code:2010

Div.1 Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels, Div.2
Alternative Rules Rules For Construction Of Pressure
Vessels
AWS D1.1/D1.1M:2010 Structural Welding CodeSteel

3.
4.

ASME B31.1-2004 Power Piping

ASME B31.3-2006 Process Piping

Clustered Indications. The illustrations for clustered

indications show up to four times as many indications in a
local area, as that shown in the illustrations for random
indications. The length of an acceptable cluster shall not exceed
the lesser of 1 in. (25 mm) or 2t. Where more than one cluster
is present, the sum of the lengths of the clusters shall not exceed
1 in. (25 mm) in a 6 in. (150 mm) length weld.

5.

ASME B31.4-2002 Pipeline Transportation Systems for

Liquid Hydrocarbons and Other Liquids
ASME B31.8-2007 Gas Transportation and Distribution
Piping Systems

Rounded Indication Charts relevant rounded indications

characterized as imperfections shall not exceed those shown
in Figures, which illustrate various types of assorted, randomly
dispersed and clustered rounded indications for different weld
thicknesses greater than 3 mm (1/8 in).

Acceptance criteria for Liquid Penetrant Examination

As per ASME Sec.VIII Div.1 (a) only), Div.2 (a) &b) only),
Sec.I (a) only) API 620 & API 650 (a) only), Sec.III NB, ASME
B31.1, are
(a)

Only indications with major dimensions greater than

1D16 in. (1.5 mm) (2 mm in ASME B31.1) shall be
considered relevant.
All surfaces to be examined shall be free of:
(1) relevant linear indications;
(2) relevant rounded indications greater than 3D16 in.(5
mm);
(3) four or more relevant rounded indications in a line
separated by 1D16 in. (1.5 mm) (2 mm in ASME
B31.1) or less (edge to edge).

(b) Crack like indications detected, irrespective of surface

conditions, are unacceptable.
(c) ten or more rounded indications in any 6 sq. in. (3870
mm2) of surface with the major dimension of this area
not to exceed 6 in. (150 mm) with the area taken in the
most unfavorable location relative to the indications being
evaluated.

Acceptance criteria for Magnetic Particle

Examination
As per ASME Sec.VIII Div.1(a) only, Div.2 (a) &b) only),
Sec.I (a) only) API 620 & API 650 (a) only), Sec.III NB, ASME
B31.1 (a) only), are same as for Liquid Penetrant Examination

1.

6.
7.
8.

API 1104 Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities,

20th Edition, Nov 2005
ASME Sec.III Division 1 Subsection NB:2007 Rules
for Construction of Nuclear Facility Components, Class
1 Components

9.

ASME Sec.I:2010 Rules for Construction of Power

Boilers
10. API Specification 2B Specification for the Fabrication
of Structural Steel Pipe, 6th Edition, July 2001
11. API Specification 5L Specification for Line Pipe, 43rd
Edition, March 2004
12. API Recommended Practice 2A-WSD Recommended
Practice for Planning, Designing and Constructing Fixed
Offshore Platforms-Working Stress Design, 21st Edition,
December 2000
13. API Recommended Practice 2X Recommended Practice
for Ultrasonic and Magnetic Examination of Offshore
Structural Fabrication and Guidelines for Qualification
of Technicians, 2004
14. ASME Sec.II Part A:2010 Materials - Ferrous Material
Specifications
15. NBIC National Board Inspection Code : 2007
16. API 650 Welded Steel Tanks for Oil Storage, Tenth
Edition, November 1998
17. API 620 Design and Construction of Large, Welded,
Low-pressure Storage Tanks, Tenth Edition, February
2002
18. ISO 3834:2005 Quality requirements for fusion welding
of metallic materials, Benefits and Implementation
Revision 1 1 August 2008, WTIA
19. ISO 5817-2003 Welding-fusion welded joints in Steel,
Nickel, Titanium and their alloys (beam welding
excluded) Quality Levels for Imperfections
20. ISO 6520-1:2007 Welding and allied processes Classification of geometric imperfections in metallic
materials - Part 1: Fusion welding
21. EN ISO 13920 General tolerances for welded
constructions, Tolerances for lengths, angles, shape and
position

392

Kamal H.Dhandha et.al : Proceedings of the National Seminar & Exhibition on Non-Destructive Evaluation

22. BS EN 12517-1:2006 Non-destructive testing of weldsPart 1: Evaluation of welded joints in steel, nickel,
titanium and their alloys by radiography Acceptance
levels
23. PD 5500:2009 Specification for Unfired fusion welded
pressure vessels
24. AD 2000-Merkblatt HP 5/3 Manufacture and testing of
joints, Non-destructive testing of welded joints, January
2002 edition
25. BS 5289:1976 (1983) Code of Practice. Visual inspection
of fusion welded joints
26. BS 970:1997 Non-destructive examination of fusion
welds Visual examination

27. BS 5950-2:2001 Structural use of steel work in building

Part 2:Specification for materials, fabrication and
erection Rolled and welded sections
28. IS 2825:1969 Code for Unfired Pressure vessels, BIS,
New Delhi
29. IS 7215:1974 Tolerances for Fabrication of Steel
Structures, BIS, New Delhi
30. IS 803-1976 Code of Practice for Design, Fabrication
and Erection of Vertical Mild Steel Cylindrical Welded
Oil Storage Tanks, BIS, New Delhi
31. NORSOK Standard M-101, Structural Steel Fabrication,
Rev.4, Dec.2000
32. PFI Standard ES-3,2000 Fabricating Tolerances, Pipe
Fabrication Institute