Will you meet the requirements put forward by the on-site supervisor?
Thread Content
The company has received a batch of heat exchange equipment, and the user party has assigned an on-site supervisor. During the leak detection of the heat exchangers, leaks were found due to sand holes in the tubes. Based on this, the on-site supervisor and the user party have requested that the company conduct a 5% re-inspection of all materials that enter the factory. Is this reasonable? Who will bear the additional cost? Thank you.
Due to leaks occurring at the sand holes in the heat exchange tubes during leak detection, the on-site supervisor and the user entity requested that the company conduct a 5% re-inspection of all materials entering the factory; this requirement is reasonable. If problems are found in another 5% sample inspection, it will likely have to be increased to 100%. If no issues are found upon retesting 5% of the materials, the additional costs shall be borne by the heat exchanger manufacturer. If a problem is found, the manufacturer can seek compensation from the pipe supplier.
What does this concept of \"retesting 5% of all materials\" mean? In any case, heat exchange tubes are supposed to undergo pressure tests upon leaving the steel plant; if sand holes are detected during incoming inspection, then each tube should be checked individually and subjected to another pressure test. The request is reasonable!
This post was last edited by zjq1962 on 2018-5-11 at 16:22. The original poster did not clarify what exactly needs to be rechecked regarding the 5% takeover rate; the purpose of such rechecking should be to address the issue of sand holes. Surface inspection plus pressure resistance testing seem to be reasonable approaches, while there is no need to recheck mechanical properties and chemical composition. As for the cost, if it is a quality issue with the materials, you can claim compensation from the dealer.
The specific re-inspection items should be clearly explained by the supervisor, and it is necessary to agree on who will bear the costs in order to avoid disputes.
This post was last edited by 68ZCW on 2018-5-13 at 13:06 to check other materials and mechanical properties, as well as conduct eddy current testing on the heat exchange tubes.
Eddy current testing of heat exchange tubes, other materials and mechanical properties.
I have learned, gaining knowledge. Re-testing is necessary.
There is some truth to it; at least eddy current testing makes quite sense
During the leak detection of the heat exchanger, a leak was detected due to a sand hole in the middle of the heat exchange tubes. The on-site supervisor submits a request for re-inspection as required (5% for the first time). The pipes shall undergo pressure tests and eddy current tests in accordance with the requirements specified in the warranty certificate (depending on the type of tests listed in the warranty certificate); if they pass these tests, they may be used further. If they fail, the inspection rate shall be increased to 100%. If the failure rate exceeds the standard requirements, the material is returned. The cost for the formal testing has to be borne by the client; if a return is necessary (with the test results serving as the basis for such a return), then a claim can be made in accordance with your contract.