Question: Should the inspection of the heat-affected zone be carried out according to the standards for inspecting the base material or those for inspecting welds?
Thread Content
A company purchased a batch of steel plates with the grade P265GH. Tests showed that they met the EU standard 10160 for flaw detection at level s3e4. However, when inspected using the EU standard 1712 for oblique flaw detection, defects with diameters ranging from 1 millimeter to 3 millimeters and depths of 20 millimeters were found; these defects were located precisely on the weld seams. The supervisor deemed the steel plates to be substandard and requested their return. Yet the supplier argued that the base material is suitable only for straight-flaw detection according to standard 10160, not for oblique-flaw detection per standard 1712, and therefore there was no reason for returning the goods. The supervisor believes that the defects on the weld seam will be considered as weld defects during inspection of the weld after welding is completed. After all, the heat-affected zone within 10 mm on either side of the weld seam also needs to be evaluated in accordance with the weld inspection standards; therefore, it is deemed unacceptable and the material is not allowed to be used. My question is, how should such issues be handled?
Answer it yourself: According to Article 9 of standard EN1714, the heat-affected zone is inspected using ultrasonic direct testing, with evaluation carried out in accordance with EN1712. Oblique probing is not applicable. I’m not sure if this is the correct way to understand it; I hope fellow sailors can correct me.
Parent material inspection should comply with material inspection standards.
Is there any relevant evidence? Is there any relevant evidence?