PIPE

w
x ME BACK TO BASICS
From Materials Evaluation, Vol. 75, No. 6, pp: 664-669.
Copyright © 2017 The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc.

TEST
Inspection Programs for
Internal Corrosion in Piping
by Jack K. Staten

G
ood corrosion inspection programs utilize database tracking
systems and API 570 inspectors to determine the most suscep-
tible areas where corrosion may start in a piping system.
Programs include both radiography and ultrasonic inspections.
Computed radiography, although more expensive to get started, will save
money during a program over conventional film radiography. Ultrasonic flaw
detection instruments with an A-scan display provide quality results with
moderate start up costs. Thickness gages lower startup costs and provide
excellent single point reading accuracy, but are not designed with the proper
specifications for scanning and sizing of corrosion.
Corrosion inspection programs are designed to identify and monitor areas
of corrosion to determine the life expectancy of systems, flow rates, inhibitor
injection, and operating pressure. A good corrosion inspection program can
be established and maintained only by implementing a quality database,
well-defined inspection procedures, and personnel training to maintain
consistency and repeatability. The goal of this paper shall be to educate
personnel establishing corrosion inspection programs.
Insulated systems must utilize profile radiography comparison techniques,
which can be problematic unless the company is prepared for the cost of
stripping and reinsulating locations after ultrasonic follow-up inspections.
Profile radiography comparison techniques can evaluate size changes in
corrosion networks, but determining the depth of pits or corrosion networks
with density changes can be difficult at best. Insulation and product or
sediment in the system can reduce density comparison results. Therefore, the
most accurate way of determining size and depth while monitoring corrosion

JUNE 2017 • MATERIALS EVALUATION 665

ME BACK TO BASICS w
x inspection for piping
rates is using ultrasonic straight beam inspections.
Ultrasonic straight beam inspections can provide
accurate readings to determine corrosion rates, so this
paper shall focus its attention on ultrasonic inspec-
tion.
The most important aspect of any ultrasonic
corrosion inspection program is standardization.
Consistency and repeatability can only be maintained
through standardization of the ultrasonic program.
From well-defined locations for repeat inspections to
every aspect of the ultrasonic system, everything
matters. Proper cataloging of radiography and ultra-
sonic results is of the utmost importance for tracking
corrosion rates. Frequency of inspection on corrosion
areas should be adjusted depending on severity and
corrosion rate of areas.
From well-defined locations for repeat
inspections to every aspect of the
ultrasonic system, everything matters.
This paper shall explore some of the do’s and
don’ts associated with a quality corrosion inspection
program established over years of corrosion inspection
and procedure writing, with its focus on ultrasonic
procedures.
Program Set-Up
Use of a quality database should be the first objective.
A database capable of cataloging multiple inspection
results on individual corrosion areas allows for easy
analysis and complete history of a corrosion network.
Redundant array of independent disks (RAID) storage
devices have backup systems to prevent any loss of
data that may be associated with computer problems.
As the program grows, memory can be an issue, and
obtaining a system that can add memory easily and
without the need for data transfers can also prevent
loss of data.
Utilize the experience of API 570 inspectors to
determine what areas are most susceptible to
corrosion. They have the training and experience to
provide a good starting point for possible corrosion
areas in a piping system. Keep individual locations to
small sections of pipe, 0.3 m (1 ft) sections if
possible; this allows for quick analysis of selected
666 MATERIALS EVALUATION • JUNE 2017
locations. If multiple systems are to be analyzed,
unique identifiers for individual piping systems and
inspection locations in the database will avoid
confusion. Well-defined individual inspection locations
on the actual system will ensure repeatability, and
locations marked on system drawings provide inspec-
tion personnel the ability to find inspection locations
within the system easily.
Baseline Inspection
Selected locations start with baseline inspections to
evaluate a piping system. Perform baseline radiog-
raphy on selected areas of insulated piping. Utilize
ultrasonic straight beam baseline inspections on unin-
sulated areas to determine the Actual Material
Thickness (ActMatT) and Minimum Thickness (MinT)
of selected locations. Never rely on the Nominal Pipe
Thickness of associated piping during manufacturing
due to the tolerances allowed, normally 12.5%
(API 5L, 2012). Once the ActMatT has been estab-
lished, never alter it; this way, corrosion rates remain
consistent. Locations of concern are evaluated and a
frequency of repeat inspections is established based
on severity to determine corrosion rates.
Radiography
Computed radiography offers advantages over indus-
trial film applications. Computed radiography plates
are reusable and, if handled correctly, have a long
shelf life. There are no environmentally unfriendly
chemicals to dispose of, shot time is reduced
(therefore, exposure to radiation is reduced), and
image processing can offer wider latitude for viewing
through contrast and brightness adjustments.
Conducting profile radiography of selected locations
can evaluate the condition of the system. Sizing of
corrosion areas is accurate in computed radiography
though the use of measurement tools in the software
when a comparator is added to the exposure.
Comparisons made with previous radiographs of the
location can determine if the existing corrosion is
 TABLE 1
Frequency and thickness range for dual crystal transducers.
Probe size 15 MHz 10 MHz 7.5 MHz 5 MHz 2.25 MHz
6.35 mm (0.25 in.) 0.64 mm (0.025 in.) 2.03 mm (.080 in.) 2.29 mm (0.09 in.)
to 3.81 mm (0.15 in.) to 6.35 mm (0.25 in.) to 9.53 mm (0.375 in.)
9.53 mm (0.375 in.) 2.03 mm (.08 in.) 2.29 mm (0.090 in.) 3.81 mm (0.15 in.)
to 6.35 mm (0.25 in.) to 12.7 mm (0.500 in.) to 16.51 mm (0.65 in.)
12.7 mm (0.50 in.) 3.05 mm (0.12 in.) 3.81 mm (0.150 in.) 6.35 mm (0.25 in.) 3.05 mm (0.75 in.)
to 6.35 mm (0.250 in.) to 19.05 mm (0.750 in.) to 38.1 mm (1.50 in.) to 38.1 mm (1.50 in.)

worsening. Depth is the real issue with radiography,
however, and a ranking system based on size and
density of the corrosion area needs to be established
and documented in the database for each location to
determine the severity of existing and further moni-
toring of corrosion. Density type ranking systems for
corrosion can be problematic due to insulation and
product or sediment that may exist in the system.
Procedures for profile radiography can be estab-
lished much like any radiography procedure. The key
is that set-up geometry, such as object to film and
source to object distance, should be spelled out
procedurally for each size and type of component, and
not altered to maintain accuracy in sizing due to
geometric enlargement possibilities when a
comparator is not used.
Ultrasonic Inspections
A quality ultrasonic program can provide excellent
results for any corrosion inspection program. A lack-
luster ultrasonic program can give fits of frustration
and cost money from follow-up inspections to obtain
accurate data. Typical weld inspection or thickness
readings are governed by existing codes. These codes
cover the complete ultrasonic system and deliver
repeatable results in the hands of qualified techni-
cians. Although a lot of existing weld and thickness
code requirements may apply, ultrasonic inspection on
corrosion is a bird of a different feather. Traditional
gain transfer, flaw sizing, sensitivity settings, and
multiple calibration options have proven ineffective.
Standardization of the ultrasonic program, training,
and record keeping is the key to repeatability and
success when performing ultrasonic inspections for
corrosion monitoring.
Ultrasonic Instruments
A flaw detection instrument with an A-scan display is
the best instrument suited to detect and monitor
corrosion areas. Once selected, stick with the same
type of instrument throughout the program. Thickness
instruments may be used to monitor corrosion areas,
but the repetition rate of these types of instruments is
insufficient to be utilized as a scanning device, and
the probability of detection goes way down.
Transducers
It is widely known that dual crystal transducers
provide the best possible resolving power due to the
nature of corrosion and because of their focused
beam. Provide technicians with a wide variety of
frequencies and sizes. Obtain transducers of a given
size and frequency from the same manufacturer and
utilize them throughout the program—remember stan-
dardization is the key. Ultrasonic procedures
containing a chart much like the one in Table 1 will
help keep the selection of a transducer inside the
focal range for a given thickness. This table is general
in nature; pipe condition and grain structure may
affect transducer performance and should be given
due consideration when selecting transducer size and
frequency.
Transducer orientation is important during
corrosion inspection, and while scanning should be
performed with the center barrier perpendicular to the
pipe, rotation of the transducer may be necessary to
obtain a suitable signal for final reading purposes.
Calibration Blocks
Utilize step wedge type calibration blocks (ASTM E797,
2015) so the expected material thickness can be
bracketed with a 2-point calibration. When the specific
material type is known, always utilize a calibration
block that matches the material. The problem is
corrosion programs are not usually started until a
problem has been identified, and specific material
types get lost in the shuffle after years of service or
were never documented to begin with. Therefore, stan-
dardizing the calibration block material will provide
consistency and repeatability throughout the moni-
toring process. Take carbon steel for instance;
selecting 1018 carbon steel step wedges, and only
1018 wedges, provides repeatability. The point here is
not to have one technician utilizing a 1018 block and

JUNE 2017 • MATERIALS EVALUATION 667

ME BACK TO BASICS w
x inspection for piping
the next utilizing a 4340 block for the same inspection
location.
Temperature
Normalizing the calibration block and transducer to
the component temperature within 3.89 °C (25 °F) will
provide better accuracy than a standard temperature
correction of 1% per 37.78 °C (100 °F) and should be
put into practice wherever possible (ASME Section 5,
2017). Whatever means of normalization is utilized
should be documented to ensure subsequent inspec-
tions follow the same practice for repeatability.
Gates
Utilize gates with a specific screen height established
(15 or 20%). Due to signal characteristics, experience
has shown corrosion is best detected utilizing full
wave rectification and the gate detection mode set to
read the flank or leading edge of the signal. Other
rectification modes may provide better accuracy in
determining actual measurements based on individual
signals, but recalibration is always required. Once
again, documentation of the method used is of the
utmost importance to maintain consistency during
future inspections.
Calibration
Calibration using basic 80% full screen height (FSH)
signals for each calibration block step and a minimum
of two steps that encompass the expected thickness
range should be used. If corrosion areas fall outside
the linear range of the calibrated steps, recalibration
will be required to include the actual thickness found.
Scanning Sensitivity
While codes or standards specify reflector types for
reference levels and gain adjustments for scanning
during weld or plate inspection, there are no such
specific criteria for locating and monitoring corrosion.
Reference levels and scanning sensitivity for
corrosion inspection are the most troublesome items
to control for a program. Since corrosion programs are
established on in-service piping, some of which have
been in service for years (and the internal condition of
the piping is not what it was when manufactured),
typical flat bottom holes of 1.59 mm (0.06 in.) or
3.18 mm (0.13 in.) in each step of the calibration
block for setting a reference level and adding 6 to
12 dB for scanning sensitivity can be utilized, but
experience has shown on older piping systems this
type of reference setting is inadequate due to surface
or internal conditions that cause fluctuations in back-
wall signal amplitude during inspection. Standard gain
transfer techniques used to correct for such conditions
668 MATERIALS EVALUATION • JUNE 2017
have proven inadequate when it comes to corrosion
on older piping systems since gain transfer readings
can not only change from item to item but from inch to
inch in some piping systems. This type of reference
setting can lead to false identification of corrosion
cells due to excessive gain or to corrosion cells being
missed entirely because of too little gain.
Experience has shown that a preliminary scan of
the actual location to be examined and adjusting the
back wall to 80% FSH during the preliminary scan will
set the proper reference level. Adding 6 to 12 dB to
that level for scanning will provide an adequate
response from corrosion areas without putting
excessive noise in the ultrasonic system. This means
that sensitivity settings may change from item to item
even in the same section of pipe.
The key is to establish one system and provide
proper training to technicians to ensure every techni-
cian follows the procedure. Old habits are hard to
break, so stressing that every technician follow a stan-
dardized system is the only way to provide consistent
and repeatable results.
Recording Readings
Extreme accuracy, to the 0.024 mm (0.001 in.), from
technician to technician is unlikely due to the nature
of reflective surfaces caused by corrosion. It’s recom-
mended to round readings, either by software applica-
tions built in the ultrasonic instrument or manually
recording to the nearest 0.25 mm (0.010 in.). This
allows for some variances from technician to techni-
cian and provides for a smoother transition when
tracking corrosion rates.
As stated before, corrosion programs are estab-
lished to locate and monitor corrosion rates to
determine the life expectancy of systems, flow rates,
operating pressure, and in some cases, help
determine inhibitor amounts to be injected into lines
to stop the spread of corrosion. For that purpose and
repeatability, determine the ActMatT and MinT with
the back wall for undamaged areas or the indication
for damaged areas at 80% FSH. Verify all severe
changes in ultrasonic readings from one inspection to
the next by another technician.
Sizing Corrosion
First and foremost, refer to customer requirements or
the underlying code for interaction rules regarding the
sizing of corrosion. Typical 6 dB drop methods work
well for sizing laminar type discontinuities or disconti-
nuities associated with welding by maximizing the
discontinuity signal and working towards good metal.
For corrosion, it’s the opposite. First, you must identify
the corrosion network to include any interaction rules,
then utilize the good metal outside the network,
setting the back wall to 80% FSH and scanning toward
the corrosion area until a 6 dB drop is noticed in the
back wall signal, and mark the center of the trans-
ducer.
Conclusion
The use of API 570 inspectors and a proper database
to record multiple inspection results for the same
location is a must for determining corrosion rates and
when to adjust corrosion inhibitor injection or make
repairs. Standardization is the key to repeatability in
corrosion monitoring for both radiography and ultra-
sonic inspection. Procedures and technique sheets
must be developed for each type of inspection and
component, such as elbow, straight run, or tee’s.
Consistency developed though technician training will
provide stability to the inspection program. wx
REFERENCES
API, API 5L: Specification for Line Pipe, The American Petro-
leum Institute, Washington, D.C., 2012.
ASME, ASME Section V: Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code,
The American Society of Mechanical Engineers, New York,
New York, 2017.
ASTM, ASTM E797/E797M-15: Standard Practice for Meas-
uring Thickness by Manual Ultrasonic Pulse-Echo Contact
Method, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, Pennsyl-
vania, 2015.
AUTHOR
Jack K. Staten, ASNT Level III UT, RT, MT, and PT; 7658
Nottinghill Sky Dr., Apollo Beach, Florida 33572; (715) 969-
7401; jstaten9378@msn.com
JUNE 2017 • MATERIALS EVALUATION 669