API Bull 587-2021 pdf download

API Bull 587-2021 pdf download.Guidance for the Development of Ultrasonic Examiner Qualifcation Programs.
1 Purpose The purpose of this publication is to provide owner/users with guidelines for developing basic in-house qualifcation programs to identify industry-qualifed ultrasonic testing (UT) angle beam examiners that are equivalent to those possessing an ultrasonic angle beam qualifcation from API (e.g. API QUTE/QUSE detection and sizing tests) for inspection of pressure equipment and piping as required by API 510 and API 570. The availability of high- quality and accurate UT data is often the cornerstone for weld and base metal discontinuity detection and sizing for equipment integrity assessments. As a result, API has implemented several certifcation programs to assist in defning the minimum criteria for assessing the performance of UT technicians. Examinations for these programs are administered diferently than other Individual Certifcation Program (ICP) certifcations in that they are based on hands-on performance demonstration tests. It should be noted that UT certifcations are issued by accredited NDE certifcation authorities, such as the American Society for Nondestructive Testing (ASNT), and these API UT ICP certifcations are considered performance demonstration qualifcations by such NDE certifcation schemes. 1.1 Scope This publication outlines the general guidelines for the development of owner/user ultrasonic examiner qualifcation programs that are consistent with API performance demonstration programs for detection, characterization, and crack height sizing of weld discontinuities in weldments. The performance demonstration programs covered in this publication include the following: 1.1.1 Qualifcation of Ultrasonic Testing Examiners for Detection and Characterization of Flaws Using Manual Angle Beam Testing: QUTE QUTE exam description: Exam candidates use manual ultrasonic faw-detection instruments to examine new construction carbon steel pipe and plate welds manufactured to ASME code requirements.
3 Terms, Defnitions, Acronyms, and Abbreviations 3.1 Terms and Defnitions For the purposes of this document, the following defnitions apply. 3.1.1 centerline crack A crack that occurs longitudinally in the center of a weld bead during solidifcation. 3.1.2 crack A fracture of the material structure that separates the material without complete separation. 3.1.3 incomplete root fusion A weld defect where the root of the weld is unfused. 3.1.4 incomplete root penetration A weld defect where the depth of weld metal fused is incomplete. 3.1.5 grading unit A length of a weld that may contain a weld discontinuity on either side of the weld in the QUTE and QUPA performance demonstration specimens. (e.g. 2 in.–3 in.). A designated grading unit for a given exam may or may not be from the same exam specimen. 3.1.6 lack of sidewall fusion (LOF) A non-standard term indicating a weld discontinuity in which fusion did not occur between weld metal and fusion faces or adjoining weld beads. 3.1.7 owner/user An owner or user of pressure vessels or piping who exercises control over the operation, engineering, inspection, repair, alteration, maintenance, pressure testing, and rerating of those pressure vessels and piping systems.
4.4 Alternate Specimen Designs To address specifc site applications, the owner/user may choose to conduct performance demonstration tests on specimen designs and materials diferent than those shown in Figures 2–12. When alternative designs and materials are used, the owner/user is responsible for developing protocols consistent with this guideline. 4.5 Test Set Validation Whether purchased or manufactured by the owner/user, each specimen in a test shall be given a validation assessment to determine the types of defects present and their locations prior to utilization in a performance demonstration test program. The purposes of this validation assessment are: a) to test and validate that each faw can be correctly assessed by the type of ultrasonic equipment and methods for each examination; b) to disqualify faws that have not been properly manufactured to produce an unambiguous test signal; and c) to establish the ultrasonic ground truth for the performance demonstration specimens. 4.5.1 These validation assessments should be conducted by a minimum of three experienced personnel for the ultrasonic methods, equipment, and procedures that are typical and available for use during candidate testing. The results from these examinations should be averaged or agreed by the consensus of the expert personnel. The ground truth shall be documented by the program administrator. 4.5.2 Radiography or other non-destructive tests may be used to help defne defect location and length. 4.5.3 To the degree practicable, care should be taken to ensure that no single test is signifcantly more difcult to examine than any other test set. The determination of the difculty of the test sets shall be assessed by the owner/user during the test set validation activities.