15.

0 NON-DESTRUCTIVE EXAMINATION
OF WELDS
15.1 RADIOGRAPHIC TESTING
15.1.1 ADVANTAGES
01. Permanent record of result
02. Good for thin material
03. Wide verity of materials can be tested
04. No surface cleaning required
05. High sensitivity for volumetric defects
06. Radiographs are relatively easy to interpret
07. Medium level of personnel training and capability required
08. No power required for gamma rays

15.1.2 DISADVANTAGES
01. Hazardous to Human beings
02. Causes interruption of production
03. Both sides access is required for testing
04. High initial equipment cost
05. Gives only two dimensional information about defect size and position
06. Limited material thickness
07. Lamination and lack of sidewall fusion cannot be detected.
08. Consumables are expensive
09. Power source required for X-rays.
10. Not good for thick material.
11. High safety requirements

15.2 X-RAYS TESTING

15.2.1 ADVANTAGES
01. Permanent record of result
02. Very good for thin material
03. Wide verity of materials can be tested
04. No surface cleaning required
05. High sensitivity for volumetric defects
06. Radiographs are relatively easy to interpret
07. Medium level of personnel training and capability required
08. Higher sensitivity as compared to Gamma Rays

15.2.2 DISADVANTAGES
01. Hazardous to Human beings
02. Causes interruption of production
03. Both sides access is required for testing
04. Equipment is quite expensive
05. Gives only two dimensional information about defect size and position
06. Lamination and lack of sidewall fusion cannot be detected
07. Consumables are expensive
08. Power source required
09. Not good for thick material
10. High safety requirements
11. Lesser portability with increasing kilo voltage and radiation output
12. Not suitable for outside use (field application)

Page 1 of 5 Section 15 Non-Destructive Examination of Welds

15.3 GAMMA RAYS TESTING
15.3.1 ADVANTAGES
01. Permanent record of result
02. Good for thin & intermediate materials
03. Wide verity of materials can be tested
04. No surface cleaning required
05. High sensitivity for volumetric defects
06. Radiographs are relatively easy to interpret
07. Medium level of personnel training and capability required
08. No power source is required
09. Highly portable equipment
10. Lower initial equipment cost

15.3.2 DISADVANTAGES
01. Hazardous to Human beings
02. Causes interruption of production
03. Both sides access is required for testing
04. Gives only two dimensional information about defect size and position
05. Lamination and lack of sidewall fusion cannot be detected.
06. Consumables are expensive
07. Not good for thick material.
08. High safety requirements
09. Inferior quality radiographs as compared to X-rays
10. Limited useful lifespan
11. Regular emission of radiations

15.4 ULTRASONIC TESTING

15.4.1 ADVANTAGES
01. Non-hazardous
02. Access to only one surface is required for testing
03. Consumables are cheap
04. Suitable for all weld geometries
05. Gives accurate three dimensional information about defect size and position
06. No need power supply.
07. Good for thick material.
08. High sensitivity for planer defects
09. Reasonable sensitivity for volumetric defects
10. Highly portable

15.4.2 DISADVANTAGES
01. Manual UT provides no permanent record of results
02. Depends heavily on operator integrity
03. Highly skilled and trained operator is required
04. Surface defect cannot detected
05. Smooth and free from loose materials surface is required
06. Not good for thin material
07. Difficult to inspect large grain size material

Page 2 of 5 Section 15 Non-Destructive Examination of Welds

15.5.1 COMPARISON BETWEEN RADIOGRAPHIC TESTING AND
ULTRASONIC TESTING
RADIOGRAPHIC TESTING
Hazardous to Human beings
Good for thin material
Both sides access of component is required for
testing
Permanent record of result
High sensitivity to volumetric defects
Variable sensitivity for planer defects
Medium level of personnel training and capability
required
Not suitable for complicated weld geometries
Wide verity of materials can be tested
Gives only two dimensional information about
defect size and position
15.5.2 COMPARISON BETWEEN GAMMA RAYS TESTING AND ULTRASONIC
TESTING
GAMMA RAYS TESTING
Hazardous to Human beings
Special storage of source is required due to
emission of radiations
Consistent radiation monitoring of camera is
required before, during and after exposure
Good for thin material (up to 150 mm)
Both sides access of component is required for
testing
Permanent record of result
High sensitivity to volumetric defects
Variable sensitivity for planer defects
Medium level of personnel training and capability
required
Not suitable for complicated weld geometries
Wide verity of materials can be tested
Gives only two dimensional information about
defect size and position
Page 3 of 5 Section 15
ULTRASONIC TESTING
Non-hazardous
Good for thick material
Access to only one component surface is required
for testing
Manual UT provides no permanent record of
results
Reasonable sensitivity for volumetric defects
High sensitivity for planer defects
Highly skilled and trained operator is required
Suitable for all weld geometries
Difficult to inspect large grain size material
Gives accurate three dimensional information
about defect size and position
ULTRASONIC TESTING
Non-hazardous
No special storage is required
Consistent monitoring is not required (Mechanical
waves are used instead of electromagnetic
radiations)
Good for thick material
Access to only one component surface is required
for testing
Manual UT provides no permanent record of
results
Reasonable sensitivity for volumetric defects
High sensitivity for planer defects
Highly skilled and trained operator is required
Suitable for all weld geometries
Difficult to inspect large grain size material
Gives accurate three dimensional information
about defect size and position
Non-Destructive Examination of Welds
15.5.3 COMPARISON BETWEEN X-RAYS TESTING AND ULTRASONIC
TESTING
X-RAYS TESTING
Hazardous to Human beings
Less portable equipment (more suitable for
laboratory & shop applications)
Power Source (electricity) is required
Good for thin material (up to 60 mm of steel)
Both sides access of component is required for
testing
Permanent record of result
High sensitivity to volumetric defects
Variable sensitivity for planer defects
Medium level of personnel training and capability
required
Not suitable for complicated weld geometries
Wide verity of materials can be tested
Gives only two dimensional information about
defect size and position
15.5.4 COMPARISON BETWEEN X-RAYS TESTING AND GAMMA RAYS
TESTING
X-RAYS TESTING
Higher quality radiographs
Higher initial equipment costs
Medium level of personnel training and capability
required
Power source is required
Lesser portability with increasing kilo voltage and
radiation output
Not suitable for outside use (field application)
Comparatively better lifespan
Radiation are emitted upon energization
Page 4 of 5 Section 15
ULTRASONIC TESTING
Non-hazardous
Highly portable equipment
Power source is not required (equipped with
storage batteries)
Good for thick material
Access to only one component surface is required
for testing
Manual UT provides no permanent record of
results
Reasonable sensitivity for volumetric defects
High sensitivity for planer defects
Highly skilled and trained operator is required
Suitable for all weld geometries
Difficult to inspect large grain size material
Gives accurate three dimensional information
about defect size and position
GAMMA RAYS
Inferior quality radiographs
Lower initial equipment costs
Operating personnel must have sufficient
equipment maintenance and operating training
No power source is required
Highly portable equipment
Suitable for both shop and field applications
Limited useful lifespan (source decay)
Regular emission of radiations
Non-Destructive Examination of Welds
15.6 MAGNETIC PARTICLE INSPECTION
15.6.1 ADVANTAGES
01. Low equipment costs
02. Lower operator skills levels required
03. Rapid inspection rate
04. Applicable for Surface and Sub surface imperfections
05. Good sensitivity for small defects
06. Applicable over a wide range of temperature (0 – 300 °C)
07. Moderate level of surface preparation required
08. Inspection through thin coating is possible

15.6.2 DISADVANTAGES
01. No permanent record
02. Applicable to ferromagnetic materials
03. Demagnetization may be required after inspection
04. Can cause Arc Strikes (Prod Technique)
05. Power source is required

15. 7 DYE PENETRANT TESTING

15.7.1 ADVANTAGES
01. Low equipment costs
02. Lower operator skills levels required
03. Applicable to all nonporous metals and alloys
04. No power source required
05. Easy to interpret
06. Simple and highly portable equipment

15.7.2 DISADVANTAGES
01. No permanent record
02. Clean and smooth test surface is required
03. Process in slightly time consuming and messy
04. Applicable for nonporous materials only
05. Capable of detecting surface breaking imperfections
06. Applicable over a limited temperature range (5 – 60 °C)
07. Potentially hazardous chemicals
08. Post cleaning is required

15.8 COMPARISON BETWEEN DYE PENETRANT TESTING AND MAGNETIC

PARTICLE TESTING

DYE PENETRANT TESTING MAGNETIC PARTICLE TESTING

Applicable to all nonporous metals and alloys
Capable of detecting surface breaking
imperfections
Applicable over a limited temperature range (5 –
60 °C)
No power source required
Potentially hazardous chemicals
Post cleaning is required
Process in slightly time consuming and messy
Clean and smooth test surface is required
Applicable to all ferromagnetic materials
Capable of detecting Surface and Sub surface
imperfections
Applicable over a wide range of temperature (0 –
300 °C)
Power source is required
Can cause Arc Strikes (Prod Technique)
Demagnetization may be required
Rapid inspection rate
Moderate level of surface preparation required

Page 5 of 5 Section 15 Non-Destructive Examination of Welds