Ultrasonic re-inspection after hydrostatic test
Thread Content
Why is the requirement stated in clause 8.5.1.2 of SH/T3074-2018, which says that \"for containers with a thickness greater than 38 mm, inspection methods combining radiation and ultrasound are recommended\"?
38mm; the X-ray image isn’t very clear, so an additional UT gives more peace of mind: lol
I flipped through the \"Training Manual for Pressure Vessel Design Engineers – Vessel Construction Techniques\", and I guessed the same thing. Thank you.
You’re welcome! At 38 mm, the X-rays become unclear at this thickness; either an accelerator must be used, but such accelerators are expensive. To ensure quality, it is necessary to opt for UT testing as a cheaper alternative to address the issues