Bill Amend will present, “What Do The Test Results (From the Manufacturer Test Reports or Your Lab) Mean for Your Pipeline?” on  May 5, 2021.

Manufacturer’s Test Reports (MTRs) are important records that document conformance to the specification. However, of equal importance is the fact that they also show actual measured values for the properties, which can greatly exceed minimum specified values, and show which optional or supplemental measurements have been made.

Course Description

This three-hour webinar is intended to benefit staff responsible for validating conformance to material specification, whether they be technical staff, receiving department staff, or procurement staff.  In addition, this webinar will benefit anyone who needs a better understanding of how “standard” tests of steel can result in unexpected or inconsistent results, or who need to have a better understanding of how to select a third party test lab.

You Will Learn:

What key information is included in, and how to interpret manufacturer test reports (MTRs);

How results of common pipeline steel tests (tensile tests, toughness tests, hardness, and chemical analysis) performed by third-party or in-house labs should be interpreted;

How test results can be influenced by testing procedures or details of sampling practices’

How results can be misapplied

What you should ask for or specify when ordering tests from a lab

What simple QA checks you can do to make sure the date you receive from a lab are reliable

Examples Include:

1. How the size of Charpy test specimens influence the reported energy and estimated transition temperature and what those Charpy results mean for your pipeline integrity management;

2. How and to what extent tensile test results can be influenced by variations in the test procedure and specimen type, while still meeting API specifications;

3. The challenges in comparing results of third-party labs to results reported by manufacturers when confirming conformance to specifications

Participants will receive a Certificate of Completion awarding 2.5 PDHs.

Feedback:
This webinar has been rated 4.7 stars out of 5!
“I really enjoyed the presentation.”
“Great presentation.”
“Very articulate and clear spoken. Explains topics well ad provides pertinent lead in”
“Provided great explanations of complex subjects.”
“Very solid, great teacher; knowledgeable and conveyed experience very well.”
“Great online course. I look forward to more of these.”
100 % of respondents would recommend this training to a colleague within or outside of their company.

Self Assessment Quiz

1. In modern high strength, low carbon content pipe, what is the downside to having a very low Pcm?
2. What is the downside to using a portable XRF unit to compare the composition of pipe vs. what is on the MTR or to check the CE?
3. What is the downside to using LIBS for determination of chemical composition?
4. What is one source of difference in chem analysis test results for tests performed on the surface vs. tests performed on the cross sectional or cut edge of a pipe wall?
5. What chemical composition should be referenced in the specification when comparing a measured composition of a steel pipe sample to the spec? (pick one or more) Ladle analysis   heat analysis    product analysis     check analysis
6. List three test options (test specimen type and/or test method) for measuring pipe YS using destructive tests in the lab (i.e., not hardness or instrumented indentation methods used in the ditch)
7. What are the two main methods for measuring YS from stress-strain curve data and which one does API 5L specify to be used?
8. How does the lab’s flattening procedure affect the apparent YS when transverse flattened straps are used for tensile tests of seamed pipe?
9. List two reasons why YS measured on flattened transverse straps may be different from YS measured using transverse machined round bar
10. Describe one easy QA check that can be done on stress-strain data for steel?
11. Hardness and chemical composition will be measured on the OD surface of a pipe or fitting. What important characteristic of hot rolled or forged steel should be considered when doing the surface preparation prior to measurement?
12. What four pieces of information should be included in every Charpy test report?
13. A Charpy test report states that a half size specimen was tested. What was the test specimen thickness (mm)?
14. A half size Charpy specimen is tested to evaluate the fracture characteristics of a pipe having a wall thickness of 0.75 inch. How will the measured shear area (%) on the Charpy specimen compare to the expected shear area of the pipe wall if the pipe fractures at the same temperature?
15. What destructive test evaluates the fracture performance of a specimen that includes the full wall thickness of the pipe?
16. What is the main difference in what loading condition the Charpy test evaluates vs. what either the CTOD or the SENT test evaluates?
17. What is the main difference in the type of “flaw” or fracture initiation site used in Charpy vs. most SENT or CTOD testing?
18. A pipeline has a design temperature of 32 deg F. According to the ASME B31G.standard, the pipe will have acceptable resistance to brittle fracture if 85% shear (or more) is measured in a Charpy test conducted at what test temperature?
19. What inexpensive destructive test can be used to evaluate seam quality?
20. What is one thing to be aware of when looking at the reported CE values for fittings made to some specification?

Instructor:

Bill Amend, P.E
Principal Engineer, DNV GL
Pipeline Integrity, Metallurgical Engineering, Materials Selection, Welding Engineer

Bill Amend has 41 years of experience performing pipeline integrity management, failure analysis, metallurgical engineering, and welding engineering services. His background includes 26 years working for pipeline operators (Unocal and Southern California Gas Co.)  before working for engineering services providers. He is currently Senior Engineer at DNV GL. He is a co-author of the ASME report CRTD Vol. 91 regarding field measurement of hardness to determine the lower bound yield strength of pipe and has managed and conducted various research projects for ASME, DNV GL, NYSEARCH and PRCI addressing the continued development and validation of methods for nondestructive determination of pipe properties, chemical analysis of steel, tensile testing, and characteristics of early vintage pipeline girth welds.  He is a registered professional Metallurgical Engineer in California and graduated from California Polytechnic State University in San Luis Obispo (Cal Poly SLO).

Please follow and like us: