AWS D1.1-2010- 6.11-NDT- Clarification Required

Date 04-22-2015 22:30

6.11 NDT
Except as provided for in 6.18, all NDT methods including equipment requirements and qualifications, personnel
qualifications, and operating methods shall be in conformance with Clause 6, Inspection. Acceptance criteria
shall be as described in this section. Welds subject to NDT shall have been found acceptable by visual inspection
in conformance with 6.9.(shall be acceptable if the criteria of Table 6.1 are satisfied).

1- Visual Inspection not considered as a NDT Method, am i right?
2- Sequence If Inspection and Testing-Before Visual Inspection i want to proceed with UT or RT followed by MPI . Upong NDT Completion and acceptance i want to perform Final Visual Inspection. am i violating the code?
Is there is any specific AWS Interpretation on this issue?

3- UT or RT Repair - Upon completion and acceptance Re-UT/RT on failed joint , i will follow-up with MPI & VI together- am i violating the code?

Appreciate clarification.
Is there is any specific AWS Interpretation on this issue?

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 04-22-2015 23:09 Edited 04-22-2015 23:12

Yes and Yes... It's in the code... Look for it by going through your table of contents and the index in order to find it... But don't be afraid to really look for it because if you truly seek for it then you shall find it. :grin:

Respectfully,
Henry

By welderbrent (*****)

Date 04-23-2015 01:49

Nalla,

Technically VT is an NDT process. Last I knew, nothing was destroyed when VT was done. Now, AWS does not refer to it as VT but Visual Examination as the 'VT' goes with ASNT Visual terminology. But they are all the same thing. In the process of completing our jobs it is seen as a separate process from NDT when that term is used primarily to indicate the application of MT, UT, PT, RT, etc. But it is still 'TECHNICALLY' an NDT process.

Yes, as Henry said, it is to be done prior to the balance of NDT processes. But, there will be some fine lines within individual Job Specifications that may alter the order of inspections as well as who is doing what. In my case, many times we are tasked with doing all 'NDT' as the contractor either does not have the properly qualified personnel and/or there has been arrangements made that it only happens once and that is by the TPI company so that it is done by those the EOR/customer has hired and trusts to do the job. Often, this means it gets done without true VT by either QC or QA prior to the NDT.

The problem with that is that if there are visual discontinuities which are rejectable and the UT has been done but now some welding takes place to correct the other defects then in my opinion the UT must be done again. Who knows what you just put in the finished weld that may make a difference on it's structural integrity.

Are you "violating" the code? Yes...and No. The engineer can change, delete, add to, modify the code in any way he chooses. If he has signed off on this procedure then No...and Yes. Clear as mud right?

In a perfect world VT should ALWAYS take place prior to NDT. In an unperfect world it still should, but doesn't always and doesn't necessarily have to. If the NDT tech is also the CWI, then obviously he can do both at the same time and mark corrections prior to doing the UT, for example, and then come back when corrections are completed. If he isn't dual qualified or maybe just restricted by contract from doing both CWI and NDT then the CWI should go look at what is going on when they call for NDT on a member.

Is there an AWS Official Interpretation? Not that I remember but I will take a look through them, and so should you. They are easily available on the AWS Website and aws.org and then go to the correct NEW button. I'll have to find it. Used to know exactly where it was. I find the new site pretty easy, just have to forget everything I had in my mind from the old one because I keep trying to find things the same way.

He Is In Control, Have a Great Day, Brent

By Nalla

Date 04-23-2015 09:35

Dear Sirs
Yes, 6.11-NDT- VI shall be acceptable prior to NDT- It is clear is crystal.

But in reality it is not always practical.
1- If MPI and/or UT Technician is also a qualified and certified as a Visual Welding Inspector (VWI), then i can do both at the same. And the report indicate Visual Inspection Status. - Acceptable/Not Acceptable. In this case i dont have to have separate Visual Inspection Report, am i right?

2- Re-NDT after joint repair-Decided to perform UT followed by MPI( Both Technicians or one Technician qualified and certified in UT+MT+ VI )
In this cas i dont have to have separate Visual-R1 Report as long as NDT Report indicate VI Status, am i right?

Sincerly appreciate your contd input.

By ssbn727 (*****)

Date 04-23-2015 23:17 Edited 04-23-2015 23:19

Hi Nalla,

1.) My answer is based on the order regarding qualification where before any of the other methods of NDT are performed, VI must pass first... If not then do not proceed any further... Out in the field it does vary as Brent described... As far as the separate VI report is concerned I wouldn't use the code strictly in defending yourself for not writing a separate report from the other NDT... You would instead want to bring this up for clarification with whomever is responsible in decision making on the particular job you're referring to... And if you have access to the EOR then bring this up with him... But before you make any of these moves, you must check what the contract documents say pertaining to this discrepancy if any.

2.) Your conclusions are based on using only logic... However as you already know, real life doesn't work always on logic alone...
So, if a separate VI report is required then you should comply,but if you think you need to bring this to the attention to the head of QA/QC or the ER in order to CYA (Cover Your Anus). Ask if there's a specific reason as to why 2 separate reports must be filed for your situation... If you get clearance to go ahead and consolidate both reports then do it... But only do so via prior approval... Good luck. :roll:

Respectfully,
Henry

By 803056

Date 04-24-2015 14:15

It has been my experience that a written report is always in order as objective evident the required inspections have been performed. Since VT is a required inspection, and it is considered to be a nondestructive test method, I expect to see written evidence the contractor has performed VT as part of their quality control obligation.

Third party inspection does not relieve the contractor of their quality control obligations unless the Owner assumes full quality control responsibility. Let me say that any Owner willing to assume full quality control responsibility is a fool and should be avoided as a client. The Owner should (in my opinion) perform quality assurance functions to ensure the contractor is fulfilling their quality control obligations. As part of that QA function, the verification inspector should be reviewing the contractor's written reports to ensure the required VT is performed.

When functioning as the verification inspector, I compare my finding to that of the contractor's findings. If I (as the verification inspector) find major discrepancies, I report that the contractor's quality control is nonfunctional. In a few cases the situation was remedied by requiring the contractor to retain the services of a third party to act as their QC. I still maintained my position as the Owner's representative and carried on performing QA functions on behalf of the Owner.

It is never a good practice for the verification inspector (representing the Owner) to assume quality control functions. That is a conflict of interest because the third party is then serving "two masters." The verification inspector is placed into a position where he is responsible for and assuming liable for quality control. The outcome is never good for the verification inspector when legal action is taken by the Owner or the contractor. The contractor essentially is absolved of all responsibility once the Owner (through the verification inspector) accepts responsibility for quality control.

Best regards - Al