Society of Petroleum Engineers
SPE 46023
RESULTS FROM NDE INSPECTIONS
Roderic K. Stanley, SPE, Quality Tubing, Inc.
Copyright 1S9S Scciety of Petroleum Engineers, Inc
This paper was pns>~ for praswM”on
held m Houston. Texas. 15-16 April 1996
at the W96 SPE/lCoTA Coiled Tubing Roundtable
Thts paper was selected for presentation by an SPE Program Commdtee followng rewew of
Information coniimd in an absbacf submiltsd by the author(s) Contents cd the paper, as
presented, have not ken rw”ewed by the Scciefy of Petroleum Engineers and are subje~ to
corrmon by the author(s) The material. as presented, does not necessarily reflect any
posibon of the society of Petroleum Engineers, its officers, or members Papers presented at
SPE meetings are subjecf to pubficafion revieW by Eddorml Committees of the Society of
Petroleum Engmee!s Eiemomc reproduckm, distribution, or storage of any part of th!s paper
for cemmercral purposes wthout the wmtten consent of the SCCiety of Petroleum Engineers is
prohibited Permission to reFriXuCe~ _ restricted to an abstract of not more than 3C0
vvvrds. dlustratmns may not be copd
ment bf Mere
The abstract must contain conspicuow ackncwfedg-
and by w+mm the paper was pr=nted Wrde Llbrar!an, SPE. P O S@
.%23636, Richardson. TX 7S083-3636. U S.A, fax 01-972-952.9435
Abstract
Service Centre nondestructive inspections of used coiled tub-
ing are being performed in Scotland, This paper outlines the
development of an NDE tod for coiled tubing inspection,
explaining the principles of o~ration and presenting some
interesting results from several recent inspections, including
results on a recent certification test. The current tool performs
the following operations for 100°%of the tube: de(ecfs ID and
OD pitting, transverse OD damage and longitudinal damage;
locates the areas of heavy cycling; measures ovality and local
wall thickness. All detections and measurements are per-
formed by non-contact electromagnetic methods which
include magnetic reluctance (MR), magnetic flux leakage
(MFL), and eddy current methods for Longitudinal flaws,
ovality, and the detection of heavily cycled areas. Technique
sensitivities are presented,
Data from each inspection can be saved for comparison
with fiture inspections. Such fill length NDE, along with
fatigue q“ding results from flaw removal regions have per-
mitted strings to be managed by remov”alof isolated flaws or
flawectlworn areas.
Ancilku-y techniques such as compression wave wall
thickness measurement, ultrasonic shear wave and radio-
graphic techniques for the volumetric checking of tube-to-
tube welds, and magnetic particle and liquid penetrant tech-
niques for two dimension imperfection detection are also
discussed. Evaluation of NIX results will feed into a pro-
posed new API Recommended Pracfice for Care,
Maintenance and Inspection of Used Coiled Tubing in order
to provide for standard ways of managing used coiled tubing.
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024
OF COILED TUBING
Introduction
Carbon steel coiled tubing (CSCT) is manufactured to high
quality standards using nondestructive techniques as part of
an overall quality plan. Recently the full-body inspection of
used coiled tubing (UCT) has also begun in earnest. This pa-
per outlines the manufacturing NDE but concentrates on
techniques and results from UCT inspections. It goes on to
suggest how such inspections may be used in an overall pIan
for accurately monitoring the life of such materials.
Manufacturing Inspections
Carbon steel coiled tubing is generally manufactured from flal
or tapered strip purchased in coils. This strip is inspected
visually after pickling but before oiling, After slitting to size,
the strips are joined end to end with strip-bias welds that are
made at an angle to the strip axis (Fig. 1).
These welds are inspected by radiography for volumetric
imperfections using a 2T hole in a No 10 ASTM penetrame-
ter as the reference standard. They may also be inspected by
magnetic particle inspection (MM) for two dimensional weld
flaws. The weId is heat treated and finished by removing the
crown and then polishing to provide an even junction.
It has been found by fatigue cycle testing that well made
strip bias welds will cycle to failure by as much as = 90°A of
the cycle Iife of the virgin tube. One purchasing specification’
requires that a typical strip bias weld pass a bend test.
The strip is then milled by the high frequency induction
(HFI) method into tube, the specified wall thickness toler-
ances being as shown in Table 12. However. rarely is the wall
thickness more than a few thousands of an inch from the
specified value, t The body and weld-line are currently gen-
erally inspected by eddy current (ET) inspection to ASTM E-
309, the standard being a 1/32” or 1/16” through-drilled hoIe
(TDH9. See Fig. 6. Flaws detected during this inspection are
removed with sandpaper to intema13 or purchaser speGfica-
tions’”.
Indications from the inspection record are reinspected by
liquid penetrant (PT) or magnetic particle (MT) metlods to
assure compIete removal from the OD suflace, or radiography
(RT) for the detection of internal surface flaws. The major
reasons for removing minor flaws are that (a) they may oth-
erwise contribute to lack of cycle life, and (b) they may
91
2 R. K. STANLEY
provide local regions for accelerated corrosion or the ingress
of hydrogen.
In cases where tube-to-tube welds are permitted, these
weldsare inspected with either doubIe-wall RT or ultrasonics
(UT) for vohunetric imperfections, and either PT or MT for
outer surface hvo dimensional imperfections. The former
requires two shots at different angles. The latter requires
sending ultrasound axially through the weld, and is better
suited to thicker-walled material. Removal of the outer crown
helps eliminate unwanted reflections.
Occasionally, when specified for pipeline material, the
HFI weld-line can be reinspected tier final hydrostatic test-
ing in accordance with Special Requirement SRI 7 of API
Specification 5LS. 5L permits this inspection to be performed
by with either ultrasonic or electromagnetic methods.
Bias Weld Radiography. This inspection is performed by
directing kilovolt x-rays through the weld and either exposing
film or capturing the image digitally. The digital method
offers image enhancement techniques such as blacldwhite
reve~l, pixel gray-shade changes, and edge enhancement so
that a weld image can be viewed rapidly in several ways in
red time.
MaWetic Particle Inspection. This inspection is performed
with an AC yoke, the inspection area being the middle one
third of the distance between the legs of the yoke. In the case
of bias welds, the inspection is performed atler the weld is
dressed and polished, with particular attention paid to the
strip edges.
Eddy Current Inspection. Since the penetration of eddy
currents into the tube wall is governed by the “skin depth’ (5)
equation 8 = l/~(xvcrf), the tube is passed through a coil
which magnetizes it longitudinally to place the AC magnetic
permeability (p) of the steel at a low and constant value, and
the frequency (f) of the eddy currents is kept as low as possi-
ble. e.g. 5-10 ld-lz. (cs = electrical conductivity of steel). The
eddy currents are induced with a surrounding coil, and thus
flow circumferentially. Two forms of detector are currently
used: either a sector coil for scanning the weld-line and its
heat-tiected zone, or a full encircling differential coil assem-
bly for scanning the entire tube including the weld-line.
Standardization of the system involves running the test stan-
dard with the TDH at the 12, 3, 6, and 9 o’clock positions;
this assures that the detector is equally sensitive over 360 deg.
i.e. the tube is centered in the bore of the detector. The system
detects material imperfections in strip.
Liquid Penetrant Inspection, In this inspection, the area is
sprayed with fluid which penetrates to the root of two dimen-
sional imperfections under its own surface energy. Some of
the fluid is then leached back out and developed to form a
contrasting indication. Complete removal of such flaws can
92
SPE 46023
be checked by application of MT.
SR17 Inspection for Pipe Lines. One would normally in-
spect HFI pipe welds with ultrasound, but standard tubular
electromagnetic inspection (EMI) equipment, which inspects
100?4oof the pipe, has been used because there is then no need
to locate the weld-line. The longitudinal and transverse
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024
magnetic flux leakage (MI%) inspections in EMI are ade-
quate, and a good assessment of the wall thickness can be
made from the gamma-ray wall gauges built in to most sys-
tems. Standardization of each MFL sensor is performed using
a l/16ti in. TDH.
Wall Thickness Measurement. Continuous 100?40wall
thickness measurement is not currently performed during
manufacture, and would be difEcult to implement with ultra-
sonics; however, electromagnetic methods are now available.
Spot UT measurements are made during prove-up, and are
accurate when the compression-wave ultrasound gauge is
calibrated on test blocks which have the same curvature as the
outer surface of the tube. Such bIocks should also permit the
gauge to be accurate at thicknesses on either side of the
thickness to be measured.
Ovality. One suggested requirement (API RR5C7) for oval-
ity prior to spooling is * 0.010 in, there is howe~er no
requirement after spooling. Ovality may, however, be de-
tected and measured by recently introduced NDE inspection
equipment which uses the eddy-current lift-off concept, as
described later.
Manufacturing String Records
In addition to a material test certificate/weld location record.
complete string records, including all x-rays, eddy current
records, tensile and microhardness records, the hydrostatic
test chart, and inspection prove-up sheets can be provided to
the customer. These have proved very uset%l when re-
inspecting the string tier use.
The Need for Used Coiled Tubing Inspection
The introduction of theoretical “fatigue life” programs for
UCT created situations in which many reported failures in
coiled tubing occurred with apparently low amounts of theo-
retical fatigue life consumed. Analysis of such failures~
attribute them to the following causes: corrosion, erosion,
surface damage, over-pull, ovality, and often to combinations
of such damage arising out of repeated heavy usage of tubing
with no atlowance built into the tubing operation for the ac-
cumulation of damage from prior jobs. End user response to
this situations has been to (a) limit string usage by specifying
a maximum theoretical fatigue life consumed, and more re-
centty (b) to require full body NDE inspection.
Prior history with inspection of oilfield tubular product
teaches that electromagnetic methods’ can be used to measure
SPE 46023 RESULTS FROM NDE INSPECTION
wall thickness and ovality, and detect internal and external
pitting, and other localized problems which reduce the wall
thickness. The advantage here over ultrasonic methods is
that all readings are non-contact, so that problems arising
from uncertain surface conditions are avoided. QTI therefore
worked an equipment manufacturer to develop an electro-
magnetic CSCT inspection system, based on oil country
tubular goods inspection techniques, and has been using such
as system in Scotland since 1997.
Coiled Tubing Inspection Systems
The basis for design of a CSCT inspection system is to be able
to detect unambiguously all of the flaw conditions found in
the material. For used coiled tubing, this is quite a problem,
but not a new or insurmountable one. A study of problems
associated with used CSC~ lead to the needs and soIutions
that are presented in Table 2.
Review of Inspection Techniques. One optimum route to
acceptable inspection of used CSCT, which accounts for de-
tection of all common UCSCT imperfections is to include
magnetic reluctance wall measurement, magnetic flux leak-
age (MFL) for flaw detection, eddy current surface scanning
for longitudinal flaws and strain detection, and eddy current
lift-off measurement into one-package as follows. First, how-
ever. the magnetic flux in the tube wall must be fixed.
Magn&”c Conditioning of the l%pe. The pipe is passed
through a magnetizing system that raises a short part of it to
magnetic saturation in the longitudinal direction. This is in
the region of 1.6-2.0 Tesla (16-20 kGauss), The magnetizing
system can be either an encircling coil (Fig. 2) or a suitably
designed array of permanent super-magnets. Raising the
magnetic field level provides directly for the following two
inspections. and holds the magnetic permeability of the steel
constant at 20-30 for the eddy current tests, permitting the
eddy currents to penetrate into the pipe wall.
Magn&”c Flux Leakage (MFL) Inspection. Here the
high flux in the material causes MFL when a discontinuity is
encountered. The MFL field topography for many flaw types
has been documented from the 60s. Detection of the MFL
fields is performed by rings of Hall sensors mounted above
the pipe surface at fixed lift-off (Fig. 2). Thus magnetic field
perturbations caused by any flaw with a transverse or three-
dimensional component will pass through the sensor, along
with the ambient field from the magnetizing system (Fig. 3).
The amplitude of the flaw signal developed in the sensor is
not proportional to the flaw depth, since other geometrical
factors such as flaw width, orientation and remaining wall are
involved, and the inspector must therefore currently stop the
inspection and perform prove-up of the indications. Notwith-
standing this. the sen.rifivily of the sensing system is set using
standard flaws in test standards.
For the purpose of presentation, the largest signals from
each ring are presented on hvo channels, with the quadrant
93
OF COILED TUBING 3
—.
on the pipe from which the Iargest signals originate indicated
by one of four lights on the inspection console. This can be
seen on channels 1 and 2 of the “windaq” display shown in
Figs. 10 and 11.
The four lights assist in rapid location of the origin of the
indication during prove-up, especially when it originates from
the ID. The light is turned on above an electronic threshold
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024
that is controllable by the inspector in relation to the ampli-
tude from standard flaw signals. (i.e. a 10”Astandard pit may
give an 8094.screen height signal, while the light may be set
to illuminate at 50V0of screen height).
Magn&”c Wall Measurement’. The magnetic lines which
pass through the sensor may not pass through the pipe mate-
rial, although they are in equilibrium with them. The field
strength of such lines rises as the pipe wall thins, and vice
versa (Fig. 4), thus the ambient tangential signal contains
information regarding the average wall immediately below
the sensor. The largest signal occurs in the sensors when no
pipe is present.
This can be explained in a general way in terms of the in-
creasing number of magnetic poles created where the field
lines leave (PI) and enter (PJ the tube wall; the thicker the
wall, the more poles are created, the larger is the demagnet i-
zation field (1%) and the lower is the field tangentially
through the sensor. (See Fig. 2).
In order to eliminate noise so that only the more gradually
changing wall variations are detected by this method, the sig-
nals may be averaged out by boxcar averaging. This also
eliminates the effect that the MFL signals from flaws would
otherwise have on the wall thickness signal. Further averag-
ing of signals into quadrants around the 360° circumference
of the tube provides for suftlcient sensitivity to detect wall
losses over larger areas, such as might occur due to erosion,
corrosion, and frictional wall loss from buckling or tubing
wear.
The information is presented on two channels which are
standardized from a known percent wall loss region in a
standard tube. See channels 3 and 4 of the display shown in
Figs. 10 and 11.
Diameter Change Measurement. Standard eddy current
lift-off sensors (Fig. 5a) are employed in a ring around the
tube to measure across two diameters (Fig. 5b). Each lift-off
sensor measures the change in impedance as the distance
between the face of the sensor and the tube changes due to
variations in diameter. Differences in signals from sensors
that are mounted 180° apart gives diameter measurements
and reduces spurious signals from pipe vibration.
Standardization is effected using machined standards, and
data presentation is on two channels which present positive
and negative variations from the standard diameter. See
channels 5 and 6 in Figs. 10 and 11.
Longitudinal Flaw Deteti”on. Holding the permeability
constant with a high magnetic field permits variations in
magnetic permeability to be minimized and controlled. As
4 R. K. STANLEY
with standard new CSCT inspection, the tube is encircled by
a differential eddy current coil system operating at a few kHz.
Flaws of a three dimensional or longitudinal nature cause
perturbations in the magnetic fields that are associated with
the circumferential eddy currents in the tube wall. Detection
occurs via changes in the impedance of the coils using stan-
dard ET bridge circuits.
Standardization of the signals occurs via a longitudinal
slot in the test standard The output is displayed on channel 7
of the “windaq” display. (See channel 7 in Figs. 10 and 11).
Highly Strained Areas. Since eddy currents respond to
changes in electrical conductivity (cr), magnetic permeability
(I.%) and fill factor, the system will also detect areas of high
strain in the tube wall. The strain changes the electrical con-
ductivity permanently as a result of modification of the Fermi
Surface (i.e. the electron-crystal lattice interaction in wave
vector space). The longitudinal flaw system also responds to
changes in diameter (ovality, fill-factor) and detects welds.
Prescntah”on and Storage. All of the information de-
scribed above. along with a channel for length from the tube
end. is presented on a “windaq” display which scrolls the
eight information channels by on a digital chart recorder on a
laptop screen. The entire string data can be stored and
downloaded to disc or tape. Further. thresholds can be
changed after the data are collected, so that it can be re-
evaluated in different ways.
System Sensitivity and Validation
Tests on system capability were conducted in 1997 by an in-
dependent laborato~ using test flaws in 2 in. x 0,156” CT-80
material. Test flaws consisted of the following:
(a) Transverse 5%t, IO%t, 12.5%t, 15%t and 20’%t EDM
notches on the OD
@) Tranm’erse 5%t and 10%t EDM notches on the ID
(c) 5%t, 10%t, 12.5°/’t, 150/d and 20°At 45° EDM notches
on the OD
(d) 5%t spherical pitting on the OD of diameters 1.0, 2.0
and 3.0 mm
(e) 10%t spherical pitting on the OD of diameters 1.0, 2.0
and 3.0 mm
(f) 12.5%t spherical pitting on the OD of diameter 1.0, 2.0
and 3.0 mm.
(!3) 15%t spherical pitting on the OD of diameter 1.0, 2.0,
and 3.0 mm.
(h) 12,5%t and 20%t longitudinal flaws in the HFI seam
(i) 12.5%t and 20%t longitudinal flaws in the HFI HAZ
region
0) HFI 12.5%t and 20%t longitudinal flaws at 180° from
the seam,
(k) Wall thickness reductions of 5%t, 10%t, 12.5%t, 15%t
and 20°Aton the OD.
(1) Ovality of 5%t, 10%t, 15%t and 20%t difference be-
tween the maximum and minimum diameters.
(m) Region of 100 mm internal flash removal
94
SPE 46023
..—. ..
(n) Manufactured fatigue cracks
(o) Pipe bent 90° & over-stressed to 22 Tonnes.
(P) A transverse crack in a tube-to-tube weld.
(q) Wear marks from an injector.
(r) Soft round dents from hammer impacts.
(s) Longitudinal grooves in and 180° to the HFI weld.
(t) Wear marks from wireline. ,
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024
(u) Internal corrosion from acid.
(v) 1.5” tube section inside 2.0” tube.
(w) Coated and uncoated cable inside tube with 5094.of the
strands removed.
(x) Sharp scratches in the outside surface.
The general results from this comprehensive test were as fol-
lows:
(a) All pitting was detectable, depending upon the pit vol-
ume, with increasing signal for increasing material
volume loss, (Note that MFL theow indicates that pit
topography and the steel permeability around the pit
wall tiect the pit signal amplitude. )
0) All transverse notches were clearly detectable, and
should give greater signals with increasing depth.
Notches filled with ceramic materials were also de-
tected. (MFL theory indicates larger signals for deeper
and wider cracks, up to 0.040 in. widex and no change
in detectability when filled with nonmagnetic material.)
(c) 450 cracks, were detectable, depending upon depth.
(Here MFL theory indicates that under the same condi-
tions of flaw size and magnetization level as for
transverse notch detection, the MFL signal should be
one half of the transverse notch signal. )
(d) Fatigue cracks were detected even though their width is
small in comparison with transverse test notches. This
occurs because the change in magnetic permeability that
is associated with the strain area at the crack tip as it
progresses into the steel effectively widens the crack
magnetically if not physically.
(e) Longitudinal cracks and (ID gouges were detectable at
raised sensitivity. (The instrument had originally been
standardized for a 100°/0through-wall crack, so this was
no surprise.)
(f) Reductions in wall thickness were detectable both on the
wall channels and, for shorter reductions, from the MFL
they emit (i.e. if they can be considered to be elongated
pits.)
(g) Uvality was detectable to 1’%.as determined by the for-
mula ~m - Dmm]~sPeclfied.
(h) The internal weld~ush removal area was detected both
as a change in wall thickness and in MFL in the sensors
that scanned over the weld area.
(i) Transverse cracks in the tube-to-tube weld were not un-
ambiguously detected on the MFL channeIs; this is most
probably due to the fact that the MFL from the weld
swamps that from the much smaller crack. (Note that
SPE 46023 RESULTS FROM NDE INSPECTION OF COILED TUBING
this is a difficult inspection situation for conventional
Ml% at the stand-off used in this type of inspection.)
0) The internal corrosion was detected; this occurs because
the tube waII is saturated with magnetic flux. Here the
flu. lines can not be pushed any closer together, and so
emerge from both internat and external tube surfaces.
(k) Bent and over-stressed areas were detected via their
eddy current signals. The same effect is found in sucker
rod inspection.
(1) A piece of 1.S” steel tube inside a 2” tube was detected
through an apparent increase in wall thickness. Simi-
larly. the presence of internal cable appears as an
apparent wall increase.
(m) Broken strands in cable were detected where there was
a sufficient change in magnetic flux associated with in-
terfaces between the ends of the cable and air.
With regard to item (k), damage to the crystal structure
caused by other effects such as the permeation of hydrogen
into the steel will also lower the electrical conductivity of the
steel over the area in which the ~ is released, and therefore
lends itself to detection by eddy currents. So long as the eddy
currents can penetrate the tube wall, such damage is detect-
able.
Field Test Standards
There is no need for field test standards to contain all of the
test imperfections described above. However. several basic
test flaws are needecl and the range of phenomena that we
have seen can be detected indicates the need for highly
trained inspection personnel.
Conventional wisdom with test standards indicates that
they should be made from the same material grade as the tube
under inspection, and of course have the same OD and wall
thickness. This is to ensure that the saturation flux density in
the test standard and the tube under inspection should be the
same so that comparable results may be obtained between the
standard and the inspection, and between inspections.
A minimum set of test imperfections is as follows:
(a) a wall loss area representing 5% of the specified wall
machined all the way around the tube. This may be used
to standardize both the wall channels and the ovality
channels over the small ranges of ovality expected.
(b) a transverse 10%t notch of length 0,375 in, and width
no greater than 0,020 in,
(c) an area of 10’%spherical pitting.
Field Experiences
The coiled tubing inspection tool has been used in two roles.
First, monitoring the aging of strings in Service Centres has
become popular in areas such as the North Sea, Typical ex-
amples of field data are given in Table 3, which presents the
results of the inspection of two strings. Second, companies
have used the tool in a basic “receiving inspection”’ timction;
95
5
this detects damage caused in transit and while respooling
onto work reels.
Weld Locations. In used CSCT inspection, with rcg=rd to
welds, detection of the bias and tube-to-tube welds provides
essential mileposts for strings that may have stretched or oth-
erwise been repaired. Our general observations are that:
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024
(a) most bias welds are detected via the MFL emitted from
either permeability changes in the weld area, or the step
taper in conventionally tapered strings.
(b) occasionally the stress relief of the bias weld between
same-thickness tube sections has been performed in a
manner that does not emit sufficient Ml% to permit the
weld to be detected.
(c) all tube-to-tube welds are easily detected via their MFL
and ET signals. However, the situation with the test de-
scribed above indicates that, once detected, tube-to-tube
welds should be inspected by magnetic particle inspec-
tion, or liquid penetrant inspection for the detection of
OD transverse cracking, or shear wave ultrasound or ra-
diography for volumetric imperfections.
(d) there are more tube-to-tube welds than string records
show, indicating that it is easy to forget to do the pa-
perwork associated with adding a weld. Since many
such welds have been performed in the field, and may
be of uncertain quality, inspection may then lead to a re-
weld performed under more controlled conditions.
Wall Thickness. For the wall thickness channels, various
wall changes are detected including those associated with
conventional tapering and the use of “True-taperTM” strip.
Wall losses associated with erosion and wear have been
found. When these losses stretch substantially around the
tube circumference, they contribute to a general loss of cross-
sectional area and the tensile force that can be safely applied
at that point on subsequent jobs. Wall losses associated with
severe corrosion have also been found.
Flux Leakage Information. For the MFL channels, internal
and external pitting is easily detected at the 10°/0level, and
visual inspection confirms the location. Many types of pit-
ting, from small hemispherical pits to larger lake-like pits,
are detected. Such general pitting at the 5- 10°/0level does not
contribute substantially to the loss of cross-sectional area of
the tube wall, However, tubing has been observed to break
while spooling where internal pitting was present.
The Ml% channels are particularly useful in locating the
presence of internal pitting that may be attributed to fluids
remaining in spools under gravity at the 6 o’clock position for
extended periods. This has proved to be a major contributor to
the removal of corroded pipe sections.
Diameter Measurement Channels. Necking, ballooning
and ovality have all been detected by this tool. Detection of
6 R. K. STANLEY
such problems has also resulted in removal of sections of
UCT. The eddy current longitudinal split channel has proved
to be extremely useful in determining the extent of the sec-
tions to be removed, since this channel has been found to
locate the ends of the heavily cycled sections that are prone to
contain such problems.
Ancillary Prove-Up inspections
Dimensional Checks. A quick check with calipers deter-
mines the ovality and general wear at each point at which the
inspection is halted. Diameter measurements are taken at 45°
intervals around the tube in the A-A (HFI weld-line), B-B
(900-2700), C-C (450-2250), and D-D (1350-3 15°) positions.
This permits necking and ballooning to be measured, and
ovality to be computed very accurately.
Ultrasonic Wall Thickness Measurements. Four UT wall
measurements are taken around the circumference of the
tube. (Fig. 6a) and in conjunction with the diameter read-
ings give an indication of the type of loss, Here, high
quality focused transducers (such as the Extra High Resolu-
tion transducers that were developed for oil country tubular
goods inspections) should be used or the results might be er-
roneous. EHR transducers are manufactured to give signals
from the bases of pits rather than the ambient back-wall.
Radiography. Double wall radiography (Fig. 7) is one tech-
nique that may be performed after a tube-to-tube weld has
been manufactured and the surface dressed to be integral with
the two tube surfaces. This inspection involves at least two
shots at an angle to the finished weld, using the most sensi-
tive penetrameter that the inspector can comfortably work
with, Since the method depends of detecting density differ-
ences on film in a double wall situation through at least 2t~2
of wall. then sensitivity to small three-dimensional imperfec-
tions is not so high as it would be for RT strip inspection
(which is an ideal situation for RT), and is virtually zero for
crack-like imperfections unless they exhibit a detectable three
dimensional content,
Magnetic Particle Inspection.Once the weld is dressed to
be flush, the most sensitive inspection for two dimensional
OD surface cracks is wet fluorescent magnetic particle in-
spection, In this inspection, optimally performed in a light
level of less than 2 ft-candles (20 lux), ultraviolet light of
surface intensity Y 2000 w’atts/cm2 illuminates the inspection
surface while the magnetic field from an AC yoke is applied
across the weld and fluorescent particles are applied. Weld
cleanliness and lack of transverse sanding marks are both
essential.
Ultrasonic Shear Wave Inspection. This is typically per-
formed when searching for transverse cracks on the ID
surhce of used drill pipe, and for all volumetric weld flaws.
96
SPE 46023
In the hands of a good inspector, the technique is quicker
than RT, but interpretation from an oscilloscope screen is
often more difficult.
In this technique, sound in the range 5-10 MHz is fired at
a shallow angle tube, and weld flaws reflect sound back to the
transducer. Indications on a gated area of the flaw detector
screen, which is set up to represent the weld-line and the
Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024
heat-atfected zone on either side, are compared with a stan-
dard signal such as that from a test hole or notch. See Fig. 8.
Laboratory Experiences with Flaw Removal
Flaw induction and removal in UCT are revealing important
information regarding the effect of both the flaws and their
removal upon the remaining cycle life of the material. fig. 9
shows data collected during a flaw removal test with CT-80
material cycled on a 72 in. bend radius with interred pressure
3 kpsi. While virgin tube cycles over 700 times, 10”Atrans-
verse notches in the weld-line and at 180° from the weld-line
cycle only just over 100 cycles. Removal of such flaws (i.e.
removing 10°/0of the wall) at the weld-line and at 180° from
the weld-line raises to cycle life to almost 600 cycles. Similar
data have been collected on other tube sizes.
Such data show that the initiation of small transverse
notches in coiled tubing in well servicing applications is
clearly to be avoided. How their dimensions affect the pipe
wall are yet to be determined.
API Current and Future Requirements
Specific requirements for outer diameter, wall thickness. ten-
sile and yield strength, hardness, and other common pipe
properties at the manufacturing plant are being documented
by the American Petroleum Institute A specification for
coiled tubing as line pipe (proposed API 5LCP) in the size
range 0.500-6.625 in. and including all common current CT
ODS and walls was presented to API management in Dec 97.
API committees are also working on a Specification for
Coiled Tubing, to include coiled tubing grades from CT-55 to
CT-1OO.
However, of major importance for UCSCT is a Recom-
mended Practice for Care, Maintenance and Inspection of
Used Coiled Tubing. This document will contain information
on what the industry has found to be the best practices for
cleaning, inspecting and protecting used coiled tubing.
Conclusions
1. NDE at strategic locations during manufacturing con-
tributes significantly to the production of high quality
CSCT. The use of NDE will carry over into the production
of other coiled tubing.
2. Field NDE devices should contain all of the necessary
techniques to provide such measurements as wall thickness,
ovality and ballooning, and the detection of flaws on the ID
and OD surfaces, and the location of highly cycled regions.
3. NDE is essential in determining the true life of various
SPE 46023 RESULTS FROM NDE INSPECTION OF COILED TUBING 7

sections of a string, and for making such decisions as (a)
when to remove or repair a seetion, and (b) when to con-
struct strings from other strings. NDE ovality measurements
will prove very usefid in determining actual collapse pres-
sures at all points along a string, but must form only part of
the overall picture of UCSCT assessment,
4. Transverse 2 dimensional flaws in the outer surface of
7. “Advanced Electromagnetic Tubular Inspection During Well
Servicing,” R. K. Stanley, Proc. 13th World Con$ On Nonde-
structive Testing, Sao Paolo, Brazil, Oct. 1992.
8. See for example Nondestructive Evaluation - A Tool in Design,
Manufacturing and Service, by Don E Bray and Rodent K
Stanley, pub. CRC Press 1997., and references therein.
9. “The Inspection of Used Coiled Tubing,” S. Papadimitriou
and R, K. Stanley, Proc .2ndIntl. Conf on Coiled Tubing Op-

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024

coiled tubing severely reduce the cycle life of the coiled tub- erations, Houston, Mar 1994, pub. Gulf Publishing.
ing. The effect of the topography of such flaws has yet to be
determined for the various types of steel that are used in the
production of work strings.

Nomenclature —
Table l—Wall thickness tolerances
CSCT = Carbon steel coiled tubing Wall Thickness t Minus m
EHR = Extra high resolution <0.110” 0.005” 0,010”
EM] = Electromagnetic inspection 20.110” 0.008” 0.012”
ET= Eddy current inspection
HAZ = Heat affected zone
HFI = High frequency induction
ID = Inside diameter
A4FL = Magnetic flux leakage
Table 2—UCSCT Problems and Solutions
.i~PI = Magnetic particle inspection
Imperfection Cause Detection Method
34T = Magnetic particle
Ovality Cycling, initial Eddy currents
OL) = Outside diameter Ovality
PT = Liquid penetrant inspection Ballooning Pressure & cycling Eddy currents
RT = Radiographic inspection ID Corrosion HC1, KC1, NaCl, Magnetic flux
t = Specified wall thickness pits COZChromates leakage
TDH = Throughdtilled hole OD Corrosion HC1, KCI, NaCl, Magnetic flux
[ICSCT = Used carbon steel coiled tubing pits C02 Chromates leakage
LY2T = Used coiled tubing Transverse Cycling tube wall Magnetic flux
[JT = Ultrasonic Inspection leakage
WFMPI = Wet Fluorescent Magnetic Particle Inspection Pressure loss,
Eddy currents
References I draulic hammering
Loss of Yield I Crystal transfor- Eddy currents
1. Specijleation for Coiled Tubing,” Transocean Specification /conductivity
TPT-17-SF-01,Rev 4. Magnetic flux
2, API Recommended Practice for Coiled Tubing Operations, RP leakage
5C7, First Ed., Jan 1997, pub. American Petroleum Institute, Magnetic flux
WashingtonDC. leakage
3. TechnicalCatalog,QualityTubingInc., see hternet site Erosion (OD) I Rubbing Tubing Magnetic wall
http:l&ww.qualiptubing. corn. measurement
4. Specl~cations for Coiled Tubing, HalIiburtonEnergyServices.
5 SpeclJlcationJor Line Pipe, API Spec 5L Magnetic wall
6. See for example “Failures in Coiled Tubing,” R. K. Stanley, measurement
Proc. S’h Intl. Conf On Coiled Tubing and Well Intervention, Necking Force too large Eddy currents,
Houston, Texas, Feb. 4-6, 1997, and “An Analysis of Failures Magnetic wall
in Coiled Tubing, R, K, StanIey, IADC/SPE paper 39352, measurement
Proc, L4.LWSPEDrilling ConJ, Mar 3-6, 1998, Dallas, Tx.

97
8 R. K. STANLEY SPE 46023

Table 3—Typicai Coiled Tubing Inspection Reports

TUBING DESCRIPTION
Size 1.50in Wall Tauered Grade CT~ string No: xxxx On w
Material Wood Diameter Weight Footage_ 12610

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024

Bias weld = * Tube-to-tube weld = // A-A = HFI weld if possible

Ft Diameter (inches) Ovality Wall Thickness

A-A B-B c-c D-D %0 (roils) Comments

o 1.506 1.501 1.498 1.507 0.6 96 99 98 98 Corrosion Pitting

1020 1,506 1.549 1.506 1.502 3.1 100 95 102 102 Corrosion pitting
2054 1.511 1.500 1.501 1.506 0.7 102 100 109 109
3950 1,505 1.500 1,501 1.507 0,5 102 101 103 103
4859* 1,505 1.493 1.496 1.507 0.9 100 102 104 104 Bias weld
4860* 1.506 1.501 1.502 1.505 0.3 115 112 114 114 Bias weld
5287 1.501 1,501 1.503 1.505 0.3 111 109 111 111 Corrosion pitting
5839 1.501 1.503 1,501 1.501 100 111 112 112 Score
6000 1.507 1.506 1.503 1.511 0.5 114 116 113 111 Corrosion pitting
6250 1.507 1.508 1.504 1.500 0.5 115 117 111 114 CP. Score 0.005”
6650 1.506 1.505 1.502 1.503 0.3 119 120 125 124 CP 0.007”
6820 1.505 1.503 1.501 1.501 0.3 121 123 126 126
7000 1.503 1.505 1.503 1,502 0.2 123 125 124 124 Galling
7300 1.509 1.504 1,508 1.505 0.3 124 126 126 124
8080 1.510 1.509 1.504 1.504 0.4 123 125 125 123 Corrosion pitting
8303 1.505 1.506 1.503 1.506 0.2 130 130 133 131
8575 1.505 1.509 1.507 1.507 0.3 131 130 128 131 Light score
8827 1.511 1.504 1.509 1,507 0.5 130 130 137 131 Light score
9100 1.510 1.503 1.509 1.509 0.5 131 130 128 131 Light score
9374 1,511 1.503 1.510 1.509 0.5 133 131 131 133 Light score
9555 1.511 1.500 1.509 1.504 0.7 131 132 133 137 Light score
9760 1.504 1,504 1.506 1.505 0.1 131 134 140 134
Additional Comments

[nspector GK Date 8/9/97

98
SPE 46023 RESULTS FROM NDE INSPECTION OF COILED TUBING 9

Table 3, continued

TUBING DESCRIPTION

Size u Wall 0.190’’-0.102” Grade CT70 string No: 2674-2673 on l@!

Material Diameter Weight Footage

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024

.
Comments

Bias weld = * Tube-to-tube weld = // A-A = HFI weld if possible

I
Ft Diameter (inches) Ovality Wall Thickness
A-A I B-B I C-C I D-D I YO (roils) Comments
o I 1.757 I 1.753 I 1.753 I 1.756 I 0.2 I 108 I 108 I 109 I 109
189 I 1.758 ] 1.757 I 1.756 I 1.752 I 0.3 1107 I 107 I 107 I 107 Inj. Mks 0.009”
1123 1,768 1.759 1.738 1,730 1.7 109 109 109 107 Corrosion Pitting
1128 Inj. Mks 0.007”
2000 1.762 1.761 1.761 1.759 0.2 115 116 117 116 Ini. Mks 0.007”
3226 I 1.757 I 1.752 ] 1.750 I 1.756 I 0.3 ! 117 I 113 I 112 \ 114 Corrosion Pitting
3235 I 1.737 ! 1.741 I 1.769 I 1.729 ! 2.3 I 115 I 115 I 115 I 114 Inj. Mks 0.007”
5ooo I 1.739 I 1.754 I 1.743 I 1.738 I 0.9 I 113 I 108 \ 111 I 110 Inj. Mks 0.007”. CP
7500 1.752 1.738 1.752 1.738 0.8 112 113 115 115 Score 0.004”. CP
11000 1.749 1.740 1.738 1.738 0.6 113 112 111 113 Inj. Mks 0.009”, CP
13000 1.754 1.750 1.749 1.748 0.3 113 115 111 112 Corrosion Pitting
14100* 1.74 1.740 1.753 1.749 0.7 115 117 114 114 Bias weld
14101* 1.75 1.748 1.749 1.752 0.2 126 130 131 126 Bias weld
14402 1.752 1.750 1.758 1.756 0.5 127 127 129 123 Injector Marks
15275* 1.76 1.742 1.735 1,755 1.4 137 136 136 136 Iniector Marks 0.004”
15276* 1.75 1,752 1.749 1.748 0.2 159 152 157 158 Bias weld
16350* 1.75 1.740 1.752 1.751 0.7 161 157 159 159 Bias weld
16351* 1.76 1.752 1.748 1.750 0.7 180 178 179 180 Bias weld
17432 1.753 1.753 1,749 1.750 0.2 182 177 181 178 Iniector Marks 0.009”
J

20175 I 1.749 I 1.748 I 1.750 I 1.750 I 0.1 I 189 I 189 I 189 I 188
21750* 1.76 1.752 1.754 1.750 0.6 189 187 186 189 Injector Marks 0.005”
22020 1.751 1.753 1.752 1.750 0.2 195 197 197 198 Injector Marks 0.008”
23059 ] 1.749 ] 1,752 ] 1.750 I 1.751 I 0.2
Additional Comments: Injector marks & light corrosion throughout the fill length of the string. Bed-
wap not removed from reel.

[nspector GK Date 4 Sept 97

99
10 R. K. STANLEY SPE 46023

r---l’””’

D
Figure l-i3ias weld AC
con source

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024

EddyCurrent MfGo~ measurement

Figure 6a-Principle of Eddy Current Iift+ff measurement used to

measure ovality of used coiled tubing.

Figure 2—Magnetizing system wttfr fields H., Hd shown

8 eddy current
lift-off sensors
at fixed dist.
Sensor Field Sensor
Siglul contains wall from tube /

X“
h
J
I Wlm

Dlstaoce

Figure 3: Ambient wall and flaw signai recorded by hall sensor.

OVALITY MEASUREMENT FOR
OVALLED COILED TUBING

Figure 6b-Schernatic for Ovality measurement using eddy current

iift4Mf sensors.

*I ‘“=
WALL THICKNFSS

Figure 4-The concept of wali thickness

nai field strength measurement.
measurement from exter-
w ‘c”=”’
Figure S-Eddy Current Method For Longitudinal Flaws.

100
SPE 48023 RESULTS FROM NDE INSPECTION OF COILED TUBING 11

Chart Recorder

b.
10.156 I
I
- ‘ D
❑lncl

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024

Elncl
Ilrlrl
Figure 8-Ultrasonic method for tube welds

FLAW REMOVAL- CYCLE DATA, 1.75 X 0.134 CT80

Figure 6a-Ultrasonic wall thickness measurement

800.0

700.0 m

8M.O
500.0

T’” TUBE-TO-TUBE
400.0
300.0
200.0
100.0
..,,,.,,,.-. ...

. . . .. . ... .
——-.

\\ WELD
0,0
VIRGIN PIPE 10% REMOVED 10% NOTCH

[ \ \
\’ FILM Figure 6-Cycle data at 3 kpsi on virgin 1.75 in. x 0.134 in. CT80
\
material. with 10% deep transverse EDM notches, and IOYDremoval
areas to”simulate flaw &noval.
Figure 7-Double wall Radiography for Tube-to-tube weld flaws.

101
 Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024

._
—<__—,
.
—-.
—.
— -. — — .-
OF COILED TUBING
FROM NDE INSPECTION

102
and a gouge 0.026 in. deep.
RESULTS

Fig. 10b--Piilng
SPE 46023
——
 R. K. STANLEY SPE-4k023
_

1.1 %

.109 /. 8 .-* . . .:.. .! .!. ,. .: . !.

.:..—. -., .-L&.+... - ,. -.. . ..s .. . . .:. .....
2-2 x

Downloaded from http://onepetro.org/SPECTWI/proceedings-pdf/98CTR/All-98CTR/SPE-46023-MS/1927953/spe-46023-ms.pdf/1 by Repsol Services Company user on 27 May 2024

. _.:. -:—.____-.. :
1-3

1.4

,0082 ‘
+.. , ——
..-=
. . . . . . !.. i:.
~IAH~:TtiP
---.-, ... .. .. . ..~
.. :
;. ....+-.- :. .,,: ._.,..- :.. . . . . :.. 1:~’:!ii;~
,-5 , , .- ---- ------ --k--, --- ---, —-.V-— - f
LUA+ ;::.;’ ::;:: ,,: :,
.&j .: ‘ I
.1347 ‘: “ : P“’ ~“”’~’”’”i’ ““!’ ~ ! ““ ““ ~ ; ‘~ “’~ ““ !’” ‘ “:’ “~ ‘“”~ “~ ‘“: ““: “:” ““i” ““ !“”’”!’ ! : ~ ‘“ ;“ ;
,08 J3,:..: .i, .,; ..,. !.i. .i .,,,,: : ; : ; ,.~. ;.{ : ;. ..: : ! .’ ,..
; f. ..:..;..:.; :
~1 AM.EJEJL’..J --:-- . . . . .. :,-.:.-:- . .. . . “._ .:.. LfJ.Lf4’LI’TfiZEFIAMTT
;... .- , -. . -. ~~ ,.
.-, ... L_. .- ..; ~ . . . ..
= DIA-_i---
,2120;...,,.:.
;“. ..,.:. : i ~ .,,;,,:
.. f.. :. ..1 .,
;
;..:
; ,;, , :
: .:..
~
:: ~ :
!“ ;-’~’”=”’’:-:-
“
~“-”’”-””;
~~ ‘ “:
:; ;
““_:_
,
:
.,, ...!.:
:
: .:!
, :

9870:: ;..:..:: . . . . . . :.:.:. . . . . “../. . . . .

.-- ...-: ::- . . . . . . ... i: . . -. . . . ...-. --., .
.7 %lt: ;.:::;.
-1 S30 —-
3S 652 .;. , .~’. : ,.;. ,,; . ,: :.,, : ~. :
-——— .
:.
_T hL\.S.P.e.cJ .-~ :1..;.Q,. .:. ,: ___ ;
3.9 ,.

-4 348 ‘:”: ~”’.:’:’; —

3A-SE 4-22- 7 16:00:43
?.. . . ~:,y,,,”,,i;,,,;.,,. ..+ .,:.,.,..:,,’.:i:~.~
_ . . . . .. !~!$i%%%<:%?::a:f$” .,, :,.! .-. k.! .+:,..’...;: : .,., ; . .-.

Fig. 1la-Diameter variations, welds, and transverse flaws detected on test pipe.

,:.,
1.1 :<
-.380
—--
:
~ “-”-i--:--:-
:+ :
‘!’’i!”~’
-.
l-l L
,.. . . .. . !.. . ,. ,.

Fig, 1l~degree test flaws on test pipe OD. (Large signals are welds, also detected by eddy current.)

103