Not speaking to compliance here... Just to my own personal opinion.
I see very little value to RT on austinetic stainless sheet or tube under .90 in thickness.
If something has gone wrong that isn't clearly found on the visual inspection, on thin material RT is pretty useless in my opinion...
For example: A tungsten inclusion that is large enough to be rejectable is prolly gonna be poking out of a piece of .035 coupon.
Destructive bend testing has more value here if you are trying to build quality into your systems....
Things like carbide precipitation or embrittlement will not be sniffed out by RT.
RT may be quick and easy, but again, I don't see it really boosting your quality system much.
Edit
Sometimes we get in "compliance mode" and look for the best/easiest ways to satisfy the code and can forget that the time we spend on testing should have *production value*. I'm NOT pointing fingers here... Just a thing I have dealt with and thought to share.
MRWeldSoCal,
Sect IX allows VT/Mech Test or RT for WPQ's but I don't see UT as an approved NDE method…
Also, on tubes that thin, the acceptance criteria will be more stringent so, IMO, bending the specimens will result in a higher pass rate.
QW-305.1 Examination. Welds made in test coupons
may be examined by radiography (QW-302.2) or by visual
and mechanical examinations (QW-302.1, QW-302.4).
Alternatively, a minimum 3 ft (1 m) length of the first
production weld(s) made entirely by the welding operator
in accordance with a qualified WPS may be examined by
radiography.
Look at the below table in Sect. IX for more info.
QW-452.1 Groove-Weld Test. The following tables identify the required type and number of tests and the thickness
of weld metal qualified.
QW-452.1(a)
Forum
