A

Report on
“WELD QUALITY TESTING”
Submitted by
Vivek Deepak Marne
(2130331612030)
S.Y. B TECH IN MECHANICAL ENGINEERING

DR. BABASAHEB AMBEDKAR TECHNOLOGICAL UNIVERSITY,

LONERE, RAIGAD

1
 INDEX
SR NO CONTENT PAGE NO
1 ABSTRACT 4
2 INTRODUCTION 5
3 DESTRUCTIVE METHODS 6
TENSILE TEST
7-9
BEND TEST
9-11
IMPACT TEST
12-14
NICK BREAK TEST
14-15
HARDNESS TESTS
15-18
4 NONDESTRUCTIVE TEST 18
VISUAL INSPECTION
18-20
ULTRASONIC TESTING
20-22
XRAY RADIOGRAPHY TEST
22-23
MAGNETIC PARTICLE INSPECTION
23-25
LIQUID PENETRANT TEST 26-27
EDDY CURRENT TEST
27-29

2
SR NO CONTENT PAGE NO
5 CONCLUSION 29
6 REFERNCE 30-31

3
4
 1. Abstract

This study looks at major destructive and nondestructive techniques

used to evaluate weld quality in modern welding production. This paper
presents a general review and explanation of these methods, and
implements a more intensive research on destructive methods. Some
attention has been paid to find future trends in the development of
welding evaluation approaches. This study provides a good foundation
for learning and creates awareness among the metal industries to
evaluate their productivity and quality in the field of welding. KEY
WORDS: destructive methods, tensile test, bend test, impact test, nick
break test, hardness test, etch test.

Part 2 of this study looks at the major non destructive techniques used
This paper presents a general

to evaluate weld quality in production.

review and explanation of these methods. Some attention has been
paid to find future trends in the development of welding evaluation
approaches. This study provides a good foundation for learning and
creates awareness among the metal industries to evaluate their
productivity and quality in the field of welding.
KEY WORDS: nondestructive, visual inspection, ultrasonic test, ray
radiography tests, magnetic particle inspection, Liquid penetrant test,
eddy current test.

5
 2. Introduction
This paper looks at various methods of weld evaluation. There are two
main groups of tests that are performed in industry nowadays:
destructive and nondestructive tests. Destructive tests can reveal an
overall picture of the weld; however, specially prepared specimens are
required to be broken. Alternatively, non-destructive methods do not
affect the weld, but are often more complicated and less informative.
Modern production equally employs both types of weld evaluation,
since each method has its unique advantages, but also certain
limitations. This paper, Part 1, will examine the most common
destructive techniques, that is, the tensile test, the bend test, the
impact test, the break test, the hardness test and the etch test.
Considering nondestructive tests, there is a much greater variety of
tests in the market and some will be evaluated in Part 2. However, this
paper will look only at the most important ones, that is, visual
examination, the ultrasonic test, X-ray and gamma-ray radiography,
magnetic particle inspection, the liquid penetrant test and eddy current
testing. This study provides a good foundation for future research and
creates awareness among the metal industries to evaluate their
productivity and quality in welding.

6
 PART 1
3. Destructive methods
Destructive tests are applied to samples representative of the welded
joint under review, often made especially for test purposes. In a
destructive test, the test piece or specimen is destroyed, in most cases
by fracturing. After destructive testing the specimen remains no longer
applicable to further use. The following presents the most frequently
used destructive methods of evaluating welds.
3.1 Tensile test
One of the most common mechanical approaches of evaluating the
properties of a weld, the tensile test helps to reveal some properties in
the material, such as yield strength, stress-strain curve, tensile
strength, fracture strain and Young`s modulus [1]. Moreover, the
tensile test determines the ductility of a weld by obtaining two
measurements of ductility: the percent elongation and the percent
reduction of the area. Figure 1 shows the process of the test and the
resulting chart. The tensile test is performed by fixing one end of the
specimen in a vise and applying a smooth, steadily increasing pull at the
opposite end until the specimen breaks. The essential features of a
tensile testing machine are the parts that pull the test specimen and
the devices that measure the resistance of the test specimen. During
the test, the tensile load as well as the elongation of the specimen is
measured with the load dial of the machine and extensometer
correspondingly [1].

7
 At b

Fig. 1 The process of the tensile test (a) [2] and the resultant chart (b)
The strain in the test piece is also measured by an extensometer or
strain gauge. Moreover, there is a device that records and plots the
stress-strain curve for a permanent record [1]. There are two types of
tensile tests, which differ by the way of obtaining a specimen, and
therefore, the tests aim to evaluate different characteristics of the
welded metal. There are transverse and longitudinal tensile tests, the
specimens of which are shown in Fig. 2. In the transverse tensile test,
the specimen is a cut, oriented across the weld so that original
materials, the weld and heat-affected zones are included. When testing
welded tubes or pipes, the extra weld metal above the weld should be
machined off prior to the testing [2].

Fig. 2 a transverse tensile test specimen (a) [1] and a longitudinal

tensile test specimen (b) [3]

8
Sometimes it is necessary to check only the properties of the welded
metal in one part. In this case, along with the transverse tensile test, a
weld metal longitudinal tensile test should be used. This test is aimed
to determine the quality of the deposited metal in the welded joint.
Therefore, a specimen for the test is prepared from the weld metal by
machining a groove in a plate of steel and then completely filling it with
the weld metal. After that, the surrounding steel is machined away to
leave only a specimen of the weld metal [3]. Finally, after the test has
been completed, the two broken halves of the specimen are placed
together to measure the distance between the gauge marks and the
area at the place of fracture. The obtained data lead to the evaluation
of the properties of the welded material. In sum, it is clear that the
tensile test is better suited for testing small samples of parts, as it is
quite slow compared to nondestructive techniques. On the other
hand, it is still fast in terms of destructive tests. The main
advantages are the relative simplicity of the test and the ability to
provide quantitative information on weld quality [4].
3.2 Bend test
The bend test is a modest and inexpensive method that can be used to
assess various properties of the weld. Although it will not show the
quantitative values as the tensile test, the bend test will demonstrate
both the quality of the weld and its overall ductility. It also shows the
extent of the weld penetration, fusion, crystalline structure of the
fractured surface and strength. The bend test is a simple advance of
comparing one welded joint with another of the same type and
revealing irregularities and defects. Usually, bend tests are designed so
that the outer surface of the specimen is stretched to a ductility level
that approximates the minimum percent elongation required in a
tensile test. When defects exist in materials strained to these limits, the

9
material tears locally. When tearing exceeds a specific limit, the
specimen fails. It is frequently implemented as a quality control
evaluation for butt-welded joints, having the advantage of simplicity of
both specimens and equipment. No costly machinery or equipment is
required. It can be utilized using a tensile testing machine with
particular modifications. Test specimens can be easily prepared as well.
Therefore, the bend test can be performed in the field or on the
machine shop floor as a fast way to ensure consistency in the
manufacturing process. The process of the bending test is shown in Fig.
3 [5].

Fig. 3 A schematic view of a bend test (a) and an overview procedure

of the free-formed bending test (b) [5]
The bend test uses a sample that is bent in three points to a
specified angle. The outside of the bend is extensively plastically
deformed so that any defects in the material or embrittlement
thereof will be revealed by the failure of the specimen. Generally,
there are two types of bend tests: free-formed and guided. The free-
formed bend test is aimed to measure the ductility of the weld deposit
and the heat-affected zone. Moreover, it shows in the percentage of
elongation of the weld metal. To surpass the barrier criteria of the test,
minimum elongation should not exceed 15 percent and there should be
no cracks greater that 1.5875 mm on the face of the weld. The guided
bend test is performed by wrapping a sample weld around a specially
designed jig with a certain diameter. There are two types of tests. Face-
bend tests are made in the jig with the face of the weld in tension

10
(outside), whereas the root-bend test is performed with the root of the
weld in tension (outside). The specimen is positioned across the die. A
hydraulically operated plunge pushes the specimen into the die. To
meet the requirements of the test specifications, the specimen has to
be bent up to 180 degrees with no cracks larger than 3.5 mm on the
surface [1, 5]. Bend tests can be furthermore divided into the
transverse bend test, root bend test, face bend test, longitudinal bend
test and side bend test. To test the different properties of the weld,
bend samples can be orienting transverse or parallel to the welding
direction. A 12 mm thick transverse sample is typically tested with the
root or face of the weld in tension. A material over 12 mm thick is
normally tested along the whole thickness of the weld using the side
bend test [5]. When the material thickness is too great to let the
complete section to be bent, the sample should be divided into smaller
parts and tested separately. In general, most welding specifications
require two roots and two face bend specimens or four sides bend to
be taken from each butt welded test piece [1, 5, 6]. The transverse face
bend specimen will reveal any imperfections on the face, such as
excessive undercut or lack of fusion. It is also excellent at uncovering a
lack of root fusion or penetration. The transverse side bend test
examines the full weld thickness and is particularly good at revealing a
lack of side-wall and root fusion in double-V butt joints. Longitudinal
bend samples are machined to contain the complete weld, the heat-
affected zone and side metals. They may be bent with the face, root or
side intension and are used when there is a difference in mechanical
strength between the two parent metals or the parent metal and the
weld. The bend test and the ductility test are very common tests for
welded joints, piping products and reinforcing materials [1, 5].

11
3.3 Impact test
Impact testing is crucial in order to evaluate the behavior of welds
under dynamic loading. This test determines the behavior of welded
structures when subjected to high rates of loading. The test compares
the toughness of the welded material with the original one. Toughness
is defined as the resistance of a metal to fracture after plastic
deformation has begun. The purpose of impact testing is to determine
the amount of impact a specimen will absorb before fracturing [5].
Even though impact properties are not directly used in fracture
mechanics calculations, impact tests continue to be used as a quality
control method to assess notch sensitivity and to compare the relative
toughness of welded parts. Generally, there are two kinds of impact
tests, Chirpy and IPod. These are different by used specimens and
methods of fixing the specimens, but both tests are performed by using
a pendulum testing machine. During the test procedure, the specimen
is broken by a single hit using a specially designed machine. The impact
toughness of a metal is determined by measuring the energy absorbed
in the breaking of the specimen. This is simply obtained by noting the
height at which the pendulum is released and the height to which the
pendulum swings after it has struck the specimen. The height of the
pendulum times the weight of the pendulum produces the potential
energy. The difference in potential energy of the pendulum at the
start and the end of the test is equal to the absorbed energy [1]. A
typical machine for performing the impact test is shown in Fig. 4. One
of the most common impact testing techniques is the Chirpy method,
designed to measure impact energy, or the toughness of the metal.

12
 Fig. 4 A typical impact test machine [1]
Charpy tests show whether a metal can be classified as being either
brittle or ductile. This is particularly useful for ferritic steels that show
ductile or brittle properties at low temperatures. A brittle metal will
absorb a small amount of energy during the impact test, whereas a
tough ductile metal absorbs more energy [1]. Since toughness is
greatly affected by temperature, the Charpy or Izod test is often
repeated numerous times with each specimen tested at different
temperature conditions. The standard size of the specimen for the test
is 55 mm long, 10 mm square and has a 2 mm deep notch with a tip
radius of 0.25 mm machined on one face, as shown in Fig. 5, b [1]. The
Charpy piece is settled horizontally between two anvils, and the
pendulum strikes opposite the notch (Fig. 5, a, view A). The Izod piece is
positioned as a vertical cantilever beam and is struck on the free end
projecting over the vise (Fig. 5, a, view B)

13
 Fig. 5 Charpy and Izod testing
The test is intended to check whether any of the mechanical properties
of the base material have been affected by the welding process. The
perfect impact test would show that all the energy of the blow is
transmitted to the test piece. When reporting the results of a Charpy
test, the absorbed energy (in J) is always reported, while the
percentage crystallinity and lateral expansion are optional on the test
report. It should be emphasized that Charpy tests are qualitative,
the results can only be compared with each other or with a
requirement in a specification and they cannot be used to calculate
the fracture toughness of a weld or parent metal [7].
3.4 Nick break test
The nick break test is useful for determining the internal quality of the
weld metal. This test reveals various internal defects, such as slag
inclusions, gas pockets, lack of fusion, and oxidized or burned metal.
The test specimen is cut transversely to the welded joint and has
the full thickness of the plate at the joint. Slots are sawed at each
edge through the center of the weld of the specimen to be tested. The
depth of the cut should be about 6.5 mm [6]. The specimen is placed
upright on two supports, and the force on the weld is applied either by
a press or by the sharp blows of a hammer until a fracture occurs
between the two slots. The process is shown below in Fig. 6.

14
 Fig. 6 The nick breaks test procedure [6]
The weld metal exposed in the break should be completely fused, free
from slag inclusions, and contain no gas pockets greater than 1.5875
mm across their greatest dimension. The fractured specimen cross-
section is then visually examined for imperfections. If any defect
exceeds 1.5 mm in size or the number of gas pockets exceeds one per
square cm, the piece has failed the test [6]
3.5. Hardness test
The hardness test measures the resistance to wear of the weld metal.
Hardness values can give information about the metallurgical changes
caused by welding. In the case of premium and high carbon steels and
cast iron, the heat-affected zone or weld junction may become hard
and brittle because of the formation of martensite. Hardness values in
a welded joint are usually sensitive to such conditions of welding as the
process used, heat input, preheat or underpass temperature, electrode
composition and plate thickness. Hardness values indicate whether the
correct welding technique and heat treatments have been performed.
The hardness of welds is particularly important if the welds must be
machined. There are two most commonly used hardness test methods:
the Brinell Test and the Vickers pyramid. The welded specimen should
be polished and etched to show clearly the weld metal area. Hardness
is determined on specific areas of interest, including the weld central
line, face or root regions of the weld deposit, the heat-affected zone
and the base metal [1].

15
3.5.1 Brinell hardness test
The test comprises forcing a hardened steel ball indenters into the
surface of the sample using a standard load as shown in Fig. 7, a. The
diameter/load ratio is selected to provide an impression of an
acceptable diameter. The ball may be 10, 5 or 1 mm in diameter, the
load may be 3000, 750 or 30 kgf. The load, P, is related to the diameter,
D, by the relationship P/D 2. The load is applied for a fixed length of
time, usually 30 seconds. When the indentor is retracted, two
diameters of the impression d 1 and d 2 are measured using a
microscope with a calibrated graticule and then averaged as shown in
Fig. 7, b. [1].

A) Brinell indentation b) measurement of impression diameter

Fig. 7 the Brinell hardness test [5] The Brinell hardness number is found
by dividing the load by the surface area of the impression. The Brinell
test is generally used for bulk metal hardness measurements; the
impression is larger than that of the Vickers test, and this is useful as it
averages out any local heterogeneity and is affected less by surface
roughness. However, because of the large ball diameter the test can
hardly be used to determine the hardness variations in a welded joint
for which the Vickers test is preferred [1].

16
3.5.2 Vickers hardness test
The Vickers hardness test operates on similar principles to the Brinell
test; however, the major difference is the use of a square-based
pyramidal diamond indentor rather than a hardened steel ball. Also,
unlike the Brinell test, the depth of the impression does not affect the
accuracy of the reading. The diamond does not deform at high loads, so
the results on very hard materials are more reliable. The load may
range from 1 to 120 kgf and is applied for 10 to 15 seconds. [13]. The
basic principles of operation of the Vickers hardness test are illustrated
in Figure 8 where it can be seen that the load is applied to the indentor
by a simple weighted lever.

Fig. 8 Schematic principles of operation of Vickers hardness machine (a)

and Vickers hardness test (b) [1]
As shown in Fig. 8, b, two diagonals, d1 and d2, are measured and
averaged, and the surface area calculated and then divided into the
load applied. As with the Brinell test, the diagonal measurement is
converted to a hardness figure by referring to a set of tables. The
Vickers indentation is smaller than the Brinell impression and thus far
smaller areas can be tested, making it possible to carry out a survey
across a welded joint, including individual runs and heat-affected zones.
The small impression also means that the surface must be flat and

17
perpendicular to the indentor. To achieve the required flatness
tolerance and surface finish, surface grinding or machining may be
necessary. The specimen dimensions are important: if the test piece is
too thin, the hardness of the specimen table will affect the result. As a
rule of. Thumb, the specimen thickness should be ten times the depth
of the impression for the Brinell test and twice that of the Vickers
diagonal [8].

4. Non-destructive Methods
These tests neither break nor alter the structure or appearance of the
welded component. On destructive tests have the ability to detect
invisible subsurface defects? Although non-destructive tests do not
provide direct measurement of mechanical properties, they are
extremely useful in revealing defects in components that could impair
their performance when put in service.

4.1 Visual inspection

Visual inspection is the simplest, fastest, economical and most

defects on the surfaces of

commonly used testing method for detecting

welded objects. The weld surface and joint are examined visually;
however, sometimes a magnifying lens is employed. Visual weld
inspection has the benefit of being able to be done in-house, it
causes minimal production delays and provides immediate feedback to

18
welders and designers. Fig. 1 shows a robotic crawler which is used for
the internal inspection of pipe welds.

at b
Fig. 1 Remote visual inspection using a robotic crawler (a), and
equipment for the robot (b) [1)

Generally, visual inspection is aimed to reveal improper profile and

dimensional inaccuracy of welds. Such defects often include war page,
misalignment, incorrect joint preparation and weld size or profile
discrepancies, that is, porosity, blowholes, pipes, exposed inclusions,
unfused welds or unfilled craters. The number, size and distribution of
surface cracks in the weld metal, the heat-affected zone or the parent
metal directly determine the weld strength. No cracks in the surface of
the welds shall be allowed. If a crack is found, the crack must be
removed and magnetic-particle inspection performed to ensure the
entire crack has been removed before re-welding; the opposite of
insufficient throat is excessive convexity. Often, this convexity has a
sharp approach into the toe of the weld (angles greater than 45
degrees.) In some cases, the weld material can approach at nearly a
perpendicular angle; arc strikes are areas where the welding electrode
comes into contact with the base metal outside the final weld. Arc
19
strikes result in heating and very rapid cooling. They may cause
hardening or fatigue cracking, and serve as potential sites for fracture
initiation. The greatest value of visual inspection is the prompt
feedback to the welder to recognize good quality and enhance quality

in the future. Additionally, weld rejection during visual inspection

avoids added further expense. Fig. 2 illustrates typical welding defects,
which can be examined by visual inspection.

Fig. 2 Common welding defects that can be examined by visual

inspection [2]

4.2 Ultrasonic test

Ultrasonic flaw detection has been preferred method for non
destructive testing in welding applications. This safe, accurate and
simple technique has pushed ultrasonic to the forefront of inspection
technology. It can reveal a majority of the commonly occurring defects

20
in welded joints, such as porosity, slag inclusions, a lack of side-wall and
inter-run fusion and root penetration, undercutting, and longitudinal or
transverse cracks. Most of the applications are for low-alloy
construction quality steels, however, welds in aluminum can also be
tested. Ultrasonic weld inspections are typically performed using a
straight beam transducer in conjunction with an angle beam transducer
and wedge. A straight beam transducer, producing a longitudinal wave
at normal incidence into the test piece, is first used to locate any
laminations in or near the heat-affected zone. This is important because
an angle beam transducer may not be able to provide a return signal
from a laminar flaw [3]. This situation is shown in Fig. 3, a. Secondly, the
inspection involves using an angle beam transducer to inspect the
actual weld. Angle beam transducers use the principles of refraction
and mode conversion to produce refracted shear or longitudinal waves
in the test material. This inspection may include the root, sidewall,
crown and heat-affected zones of the weld. The process involves
scanning the surface of the material around the weldment with the
transducer. This refracted sound wave will bounce off a reflector in the
path of the sound beam. With proper angle beam techniques, echoes
returned from the weld zone may allow the operator to determine the
location and type of discontinuity, as illustrated in Fig. 3, b [3]. To
determine the proper scanning area for the weld, the inspector must
first calculate the location of the sound beam in the test material. Using
the refracted angle, beam index point and material thickness, the V-
path and skip distance of the sound beam is found. Once these have
been calculated, the inspector can identify the transducer locations on
the surface of the material corresponding to the crown, sidewall and
root of the weld [3]. The advantages of ultrasonic examination include
low testing costs, mobility, and availability of equipment, basic
standardization and simplicity. It means that this method is used most

21
often and in the widest range of applications. Besides the mentioned
advantages of ultrasonic examination of welds, the method has a
shortcoming which is that not all welds can be tested
With it [4]. The procedure of ultrasonic testing is generally described in
Fig 4

Ultrasonic flaw detectors are used to inspect piping, vessels and field
weld discontinuities. Ultrasonic testing with portable flaw detectors and
angle beam transducers is the most commonly utilized technique for
weld inspection, and is mandated by many welding codes and
procedures.
4.3 X-Ray and gamma-ray radiography test
This radiographic test method is used to reveal the presence and nature
of internal defects in a weld, such as cracks, slag and blowholes, and
22
zones where proper fusion is lacking. In practice, an X-ray tube is placed
on one side of the welded plate and an X-ray film, with a special
sensitive emulsion, on the other side. Radiography using X-ray and
gamma γ-ray on welds radiography is one of the most useful of the
nondestructive tests which can be applied for assessing the quality of
the welded joints. Radiography has been used for the inspection of
welds of all types and thicknesses ranging from minute welds in
electronic components to welds up to 50 cm thick employed in
heavy fabrications. Radiography can detect flaws or discontinuities in
welds, such as cracks, porosity and blow holes, slag, flux or oxide
inclusions, a lack of fusion between the weld metal and the parent
metal, and incomplete penetration. The radiography technique is based
upon exposing the components to short wavelength radiation in the
form of X-rays from a suitable source, such as an X-ray tube. The
characteristic feature of X-ray and gamma-ray which makes them to
work is their power to penetrate matters opaque to light. X-rays
operating at 400,000 volts can inspect steel objects with a thickness of
up to 62 mm [5]. Gamma-rays given off by radium and radioactive
isotopes such as cobalt-60, iridium-192 and caesium-167 can penetrate
and thus inspect joints of bigger thickness than examined by X-rays.
When developed, the defects in the metal show up as dark spots and
bands, which can be interpreted by an operator experienced in this
inspection method. X-ray testing is used for most radiographic
inspections, but gamma-ray equipment has the advantage of being
portable [6].
4.4 Magnetic particle inspection
This method of nondestructive testing tends to supplement rather than
displace radiography. For example, radiography ordinarily cannot
detect small cracks, especially when they are too small to be seen by

23
the naked eye. Magnetic particle inspection is a relatively simple and
easy technique. It is almost free from any restriction as to size, shape,
composition and heat-treatment of a ferromagnetic specimen. This
method is used on magnetic ferrous weldments for detecting invisible
surface or slightly subsurface defects. Deeper subsurface defects are
not satisfactorily detected because the influence of the distorted lines
of the magnetic flux on the magnetic particles spread over the job
surface becomes weaker with the distance, so that sensitivity decreases
rapidly with the depth. The defects commonly revealed by magnetic
particle inspection are quenching cracks, thermal cracks, and seams,
laps, grinding cracks, overlaps, non-metallic inclusions, fatigue cracks
and hot tears. When a piece of metal is placed in a magnetic field and
the lines of the magnetic flux get intersected by a discontinuity, such as
a crack, or slag inclusions in a job, the magnetic poles are induced on
either side of the discontinuity [7]. The discontinuity causes an abrupt
change in the path of the magnetic flux flowing through the job normal
to the discontinuity, resulting with a local flux leakage field and
interference with the magnetic lines of force. This local flux disturbance
can be detected by its effect upon the magnetic particles which are
attracted to the region of discontinuity and pile up and bridge over the

discontinuity, as shown in Fig. 5.

Fig. 5 A schematic view of the magnetic particle test [7]

24
 . A surface crack is indicated by a line of fine
particles following the crack outline. Steps involved are:
magnetizing the component part, ii) applying magnetic particles
on the component part and iii) locating the defects. A variety of
equipment exists to establish the magnetic field for the test. Some
equipment is designed to be portable so that inspections can be
made in the field and some is designed to be stationary for ease
of inspection in the laboratory or manufacturing facility. Today,
most of the equipment employed to create the magnetic field
used in MPI are based on electromagnetism that is using an
electrical current to produce the magnetic field. An
electromagnetic yoke is a very common piece of equipment that
is used to establish a magnetic field [1]. It is shown in Fig. 6.

Fig. 6 the approach of creating a magnetic field based on

electromagnetism [1]
This type of magnet generates a very strong magnetic field locally
where the poles of magnet touch the part being inspected. Magnetic
particle inspection is quite a popular method of non-destructive testing
nowadays and it has a lot of potential.

25
4.5 Liquid penetrant test
Liquid Penetrant method is used to inspect metals for surface defects
that are similar to those revealed by magnetic particle inspection.
Unlike magnetic particle inspection, which can reveal subsurface
defects, liquid penetrant inspection reveals only those defects that
are open to the surface. Three groups of liquid penetrants are
presently in use: I) non water-washable, ii) water-washable, and iii)
fluorescent dye penetrants. Before using a liquid penetrant to inspect a
weld, all slag, rust, paint and moisture must be removed from the
surface. Except where a specific finish is required, it is not necessary to
grind the weld surface as long as the weld surface meets applicable
specifications. The weld contour must blend into the base metal
without under-cutting. After the surface has been cleaned, all traces of
the cleaning material have to be removed. It is extremely important to
remove all dirt, grease, scale, lint, salts, or other materials and to make
sure that the surface is entirely dry before using the liquid penetrant
[8].

Fig. 7 The liquid penetrant test procedure [8]

A liquid penetrant should always be used when the temperature range
is 10-40 Degree Celsius. After thoroughly cleaning and drying the
surface, the surface is coated with the liquid penetrant which is allowed

26
time to soak into all the cracks, crevices, or other defects that are open
to the surface. The surface of the test piece is kept wet with the
penetrant for a minimum of 15 to 30 minutes. After this, any excess
penetrant should be removed. Next, the test surface is allowed to dry
by normal evaporation or it is wiped dry with a clean, lint-free
absorbent material. After the surface has dried another substance
(powder or liquid), called a developer, is applied and allowed to stay on
the surface for a minimum of 7 minutes before starting the inspection.
The literature provides examples of the liquid penetrant test [9].

4.6 Eddy current test

As eddy current is best used for detecting surface breaking cracks, its
most practical applications relate to the in-service inspection of welded
structures that are subject to a cyclical loading that can lead to fatigue
crack propagation in critical welded areas. In eddy current testing, a
sinusoidal AC voltage is applied across the eddy current probe or
inspection coil (Fig. 8).

Fig. 8 a schematic view of the Eddy current [1]

27
This coil creates an electromagnetic field, which in turn causes current
flow on the surface of the material being inspected. When the coil or
probe is scanned across the material surface, changes in the
material's physical properties, i.e., geometry, temperature,
conductivity, material type and flaws, affect the current flow generated
by the electromagnetic field induced in the material by the probe.
These changes reflect back to the probe. If the voltage response of the
eddy current probe is monitored, then changes in voltage amplitude
and phase angle shift can be used to show changes in material
properties. These changes in magnitude and phase angle are displayed
on what is known as the impedance plane display [1]. By far the widest
use of eddy current weld inspection occurs in the offshore industry.
Offshore structures such as drilling platforms are subject to cyclical
loads twice daily and, more unpredictably, by severe weather. Fatigue
crack propagation can occurred topside or underwater and periodic
inspection of critical weld areas is required. Frequently, topside
inspections are only possible by rope access. Underwater inspections
and repairs are often done by divers at acceptable depths. At more
extreme depths in cold water areas, remote-operated vehicles have
been developed to carry out surface preparation, eddy current weld
inspection, weld repair and repair inspection in one unit. Moreover,
eddy testing is often used in evaluating bridges and other structures,
which are subject to cyclical loading on their welded structures, as well
as weather-related loading. Eddy current inspection offers several
benefits over other rivaling non-destructive inspection techniques.
Traditionally, a suspect weld is stripped, cleaned, and a magnetic
particle or liquid penetrant inspection is performed to detect any
surface-breaking cracks. Beyond offering effective surface-breaking
flaw detection for various welded structures, the eddy current

28
technique offers a higher flaw detection hit rate, reduced costs and
down time, lower inspection consumables costs,
Minimal or no surface preparation and the capability to be done
underwater [10].

5. Conclusion
This paper presented the most potential and profitable techniques of
evaluating weld. Considering destructive tests, there are several quite
similar methods which are aimed to reveal different types of welding
defects. Also, to perform successful production it is not only important
to evaluate welds afterwards, but also to carefully check all the starting
conditions and equipment. Moreover, nowadays some welding
evaluation techniques tend to be used as real-time welding evaluation.
It seems that this application will be develop in the near future. All in
all, a number of weld evaluation techniques can be used in evaluating
weld quality, all based on physical model analysis.
Ultrasonic testing is considered as one of the most common, cheap, fast
and convenient methods to use. Considering destructive tests, there
are several quite similar methods which are aimed to reveal
different types of welding defects. Also, to perform successful
production it is not only important to evaluate welds afterwards, but
also to carefully check all the starting conditions and equipment.
Moreover, nowadays some welding evaluation techniques tend to be
used as real-time welding evaluation. Non-destructive methods are
highly valuable techniques that can save both time and money in
evaluating welds and conducting research in metals welding.

29
6. References

1. NDT resource center. – Pipeline inspection, NDT resource center,

www.ndt-ed.org,
2. Inspection. –Teasel Engineering, tafaseel-eng.com, 2010.
3. Lopez, B. Weld inspection with EMAT. – NDT, the nondestructive e-
Journal, 2008, p 1-5.
4. Michnowski, W., Miz, R., Mierzwa, J., Latarowski, J. Ultrasonic
examination of Difficult welds. – Thin weld
Testing, 2001, p. 1- 6.
5. What is a welding certification? – Gowelding.org/Welding
Certification.html.
6. Ultrasonic welding, cast iron filler metal, stress relieving – Practical
welding letter, 2004, issue 8.
7. Magnetic particle inspection. – Welding technology Machines, 2001.
8. Welding quality control. Fundamentals of Professional welding. –
Published by Sweet Haven Publishing Services,
2003.
9. Antaki, G. A. Piping and Pipeline Engineering Design, Construction,
Maintenance, Integrity, and Repair. – EBook
ISBN: 978-0-203-91115-0, 2003, chapter 16.

30
10.Smith, C. H., Schneider, R. W., Dogaru, T. Smith, S. T. Eddy-current
testing with gmr magnetic sensor arrays. –
Presented at the Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation Conference,
Green Bay, WI, and July 28, 2003. Published in
Review of Progress in Quantitative Nondestructive Evaluation, vol.
2323, Ed. By D. O. Thompson and D. E.
Chimenti, (American Institute of Physics, Melville, NY, 2003), p. 406-
413.

31