DOC.

ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 1 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

NDT Technical Services, Inc. Non-Destructive Inspection Corporation

Approval
ASNT LEVEL III – 2820 President
Name David L. Culbertson John Rosebud

Signature

Date March 31, 2010 March 31, 2010

Revision History

Revision No.: 0
Issue Date: March 31, 2010
 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 2 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

TABLE OF CONTENTS
PAGE

1.0 Purpose 3

2.0 Scope 3

3.0 Responsibility 3

4.0 General 3

5.0 Reference 4

6.0 Equipment 4

7.0 Floor Condition Considerations 4

8.0 Magnetic Flux Leakage Limitations 5

9.0 Function Test 5

10.0 Electronic Gain Settings 6

11.0 Inspection Method 6

12.0 Ultrasonic Prove Up 8

13.0 Reporting 9

14.0 Safety Considerations 10

 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 3 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

1.0 PURPOSE

The purpose of this procedure is to describe the use of magnetic flux

leakage examination method for the inspection of tank floors by Non-
Destructive Inspection Corporation (NDIC) to ensure the maximum
achievable coverage and best possible sensitivity for the detection of
under floor corrosion.

2.0 SCOPE

2.1 This examination procedure shall be used when utilizing any of the
MFE 2412/1212 series of scanning systems for the inspection of
tank floors looking for under floor corrosion.

3.0 RESPONSIBILITY

NDIC and/or the client’s Quality Assurance/Quality Control (QA/QC)

representative shall assure that the requirements of this procedure are
being met through a system of periodic audits.

4.0 GENERAL
4.1 All personnel shall be qualified and certified to an appropriate
level in accordance with NDIC’s Written Practice which shall
meet the requirements of the American Society for
Nondestructive Testing, Recommended Practice No. SNT-TC-
1A, 2001 edition.

4.2 Personnel operating Magnetic Flux Leakage equipment shall

have demonstrated to the employer a full understanding of this
application of Magnetic Flux Leakage and an ability to use and
maintain the equipment in line with this procedure and the
relevant Operation and Maintenance manuals.

4.3 Personnel performing the ultrasonic prove up of indications

detected by the Magnetic Flux Leakage equipment shall be
trained, qualified and certified in accordance with section 4.1.
They shall be capable of demonstrating a full understanding of
corrosion analysis using ultrasonic as an accurate quantification
tool for remaining wall thickness.
 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 4 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

5.0 REFERENCE

5.1 MFE 2412/1212 Operations and Maintenance Manual

5.2 “The Truth about Magnetic Flux Leakage as Applied to Tank Floor
Inspections” - paper presented by D. M. Amos, MFE Enterprises
Incorporated at the International Chemical and Petroleum Industry
Inspection Technology IV, ASNT Topical Conference, Houston,
Texas, June 22, 1995.

6.0 EQUIPMENT
6.1 The equipment utilized for the Magnetic Flux Leakage inspection
of tank floors using this procedure shall be any of the MFE
2412/1212 scanning systems currently available.

6.2 This equipment uses very powerful rare earth magnets in order
to near saturate the plate in the area of the scanning head. Coil
sensors placed between the poles of the magnetic bridge detect
the flux leakage fields and provide a low voltage output signal to
the electronic module for processing and real time display.

6.3 The electronic processing and display module is common to both

scanning systems.

6.4 The effective scan width of the MFE 2412 scanner is 12 inches
and the MFE 1212 scanner is 6 inches. The real time LED
display has twelve channels, one for each inch of scan width in
the case of the MFE 2412 and for each half inch in the case of
the MFE 1212.

6.5 Precise location of indications is readily achievable using this

equipment.

6.6 Proper use of this equipment does not require the setting of
calibration thresholds as the amplitude of the signal is an
unreliable indicator of remaining wall thickness.

7.0 FLOOR CONDITION CONSIDERATIONS

7.1 The achievable sensitivity of and Magnetic Flux Leakage

inspection on any given floor is directly dependent on the overall
top surface condition.

7.2 In ideal conditions it is possible to find very small corrosion

areas on the underside of the plate.
 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 5 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

7.3 As the top surface deteriorates in regard to cleanliness, topside

corrosion, and/or floor plate curvature the achievable inspection
will become relatively less sensitive and the results more and
more unreliable.

7.4 Every effort must be made to ensure that the top surface is as
clean as possible and free from any product residue, rust or
loose scale.

7.5 The effect of any undulations or bucking of the floor plates must
be taken into account in the assessment of indications and in
the scanning method..

8.0 MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE LIMINATIONS

8.1 Magnetic Flux Leakage is a qualitative not quantitative inspection

tool. It is very good at detecting magnetic anomalies and covering
the very large floor areas of tanks very quickly. It is not, however
capable of the accurate quantification of the signals as regards the
remaining wall thickness. The amplitude of the signals is a function
of the volume loss of material rather than a measure of the
thickness loss. This is the main reason that MFE Enterprises
Incorporated does not support either the single level threshold or
quantified mapping approach to this particular application. Accept/
reject criteria based on the above two methods can lead to
significant defects going undetected when only the amplitude of the
signal is taken into consideration.

8.2 There are reasons for the generation of Magnetic Flux Leakage
signals other than from plate corrosion. Localized changes in
material properties, weld scars and arc strikes can also cause
significant indications. This must be born in mind during the
inspection process and the cause of signals properly evaluated.

9.0 FUNCTION TEST

As previously stated the achievable sensitivity is very much dependent on

the material under test and the top surface condition. Prior to starting an
inspection it is necessary to check that the equipment is functioning as
intended and is set up to obtain the best possible sensitivity. The physical
set up of the equipment as regards magnet and sensor heights dictates
the level of sensitivity. For any given thickness of plate and for any
 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 6 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

thickness of coating it is recommended that a system function test plate as

described in the Operation and Maintenance Manual be constructed to
prove the capability of the system.

10. ELECTRONIC GAIN SETTING

As previously stated the mechanical arrangement of magnet and sensors

dictates the achievable sensitivity. If there are no leakage signals due to a
poor mechanical set up then it will not matter how much electronic gain is
incorporated there will be nothing to see. Fine tuning of the electronic gain
and mechanical set up are necessary in order to achieve the best possible
signal to noise ratio and defect detection. These parameters should
always be arrived at using the function test plate prior to inspections.

11. INSPECTION METHOD

11.1 Each plate within the tank must be scanned in a logical manner to
ensure the maximum coverage possible. The use of the smaller
scanning head may be required adjacent to welds, obstructions and
the floor to shell areas which are difficult to get to using the large
scanning head.

11.2 Scanning across the weld areas is not possible owing to scanner
clearance limitations. The entire floor is scanned on a plate by plate
basis, the scanning head being moved clear of the weld area whilst
transitioning from plate to plate.

11.3 Full coverage of the floor area using these systems is virtually
impossible due to the many and varied access limitations. If full
coverage is required it is possible to manually scan the omitted
areas using ultrasonics.

11.4 The systems are optimized for a medium walking pace. Once
properly set up variations in speed will affect the amplitude of the
signal but not the detection capability of the machine. Faster
speeds will result in much higher amplitude signals. This is also
true of the background noise levels. An optimum speed giving the
best signal to noise ratio is preferred. In a very high noise
environment it is sometimes necessary and acceptable to reduce
scanning speeds and increase the electronic gain to optimize the
 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 7 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

signal to noise ratio. This optimum set up may vary from floor to
floor and even from plate to plate.

11.5 The object of the exercise is to:

11.5.1 Identify any indication that clearly exceeds the background

noise levels.

11.5.2 Determine the type of indication i.e. isolated pitting or lake

type.

11.5.3 Confirm the indication by scanning from different

directions.

11.5.4 Locate and mark the exact position of pitting corrosion and
outline any area of lake type corrosion for further
investigation to determine the worst case occurrences
within the area marked.

11.6 Accurate location of individual leakage signals is achieved by

rocking the system backwards and forwards over the defect until
the operator is satisfied that he is stopped over the top of the
indication. By noting the highest affected channel number and
marking both the center of the array and the corresponding rule
mark on the front of the scanning head good location can be
achieved.

11.7 In the evaluation of indications it is necessary to determine the

reason for the response. In the absence of an obvious topside
source or geometric anomaly it must be assumed that the indication
is from an underside source.

11.8 Magnetic Flux Leakage cannot differentiate between top side and
under side corrosion. With these systems the response to topside
indications is often less than those obtained from an equivalent
bottom side indication. This must be born in mind when topside
corrosion is present. When high amplitude signals are obtained
from the same area it will be necessary to investigate further and to
determine whether bottom side indications also exist at that
location.
 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 8 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

11.9 All indications determined to be significant shall be indelibly marked

for subsequent ultrasonic prove up.

12.0 ULTRASONIC PROVE UP

The MFE 2412 and 1212 scanning systems are ideally set up for the
detection of isolated pitting corrosion. Isolated pitting with a small base
area and large through wall dimension are often difficult to find and
measure ultrasonically. The reason for this is that sufficient sound energy
must be returned from the area of the greatest through wall penetration
point to give a readable response. If the right equipment and technique is
not applied in the ultrasonic prove up of flux leakage signals significant
errors can occur.

12.1 Digital read out thickness meters are not recommended.

12.2 Digital displays with very slow screen rewrite frequency are difficult
to use as they preclude any real time scanning capability.

12.3 In order to carry out a good assessment of corrosion it is necessary

to use a real time “A” scan display. Analog displays are far superior
for this application than digital. Analog sets, however, are becoming
extremely hard to get hold of as manufacturers turn to the cheaper
and more reliable digital technology. Data processing and display
speeds are the important consideration when using digital
ultrasonic equipment.

12.4 A good quality twin crystal compression wave contact transducer in

the order of 0.375" in diameter, with a frequency of approximately 5
MHz. will generally suffice for the ultrasonic prove up. Some
focusing of the sound beam is an advantage for this application.

12.5 It may be necessary to change to a different transducer when

examining through some coatings or on particularly rough surfaces.

12.6 Ultrasonic coupling can be maintained using any of the proprietary

brands of couplant. Water works surprisingly well for this
application.

12.7 The instrument must be properly calibrated and the ultrasonic prove
up carried out in accordance with a specific procedure.
 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 9 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

12.8 The location and minimum remaining wall thickness must be

indelibly marked on the floor plate.

13. REPORTING

The final report shall include sufficient information, organized in such a

manner so that the client can quickly relocate and identify indications found
during the inspection for repair or replacement consideration. Marking the
floor, alone, is not sufficient. It will be necessary to produce a log of all
recordable indications along with a sketch showing the floor plate layout.

13.1 The following information must be included as a minimum for every

recordable indication:

13.1.1. Plate number

13.1.2. Indication number
13.1.3. Indication type
13.1.4. Datum Point
13.1.5. X and Y direction and distance from datum.
13.1.6. Minimum Ultrasonic reading of indication.
13.1.7. Adjacent nominal thickness
13.1.8. Percentage wall loss

13.2 Approximate location of indications can be indicated on a floor plate

layout sketch depending on the number of indications identified. If
necessary individual plate sketches can be added for reporting
clarity purposes.

13.3 Should the client require an assessment of the topside condition a

similar log will be necessary except with the severity determined
with the aid of a pit gauge.
 DOC. ID: MFL-A-10
REV. NO.: 0
NDIC DATE: 3/31/2010

TITLE: MAGNETIC FLUX LEAKAGE EXAMINATION PAGE NO.: 10 OF 10

FOR INSPECTION OF TANK FLOORS

14. SAFETY CONSIDERATIONS

14.1 The MFE range of equipment employs extremely powerful rare

earth magnets. When handling or lifting the equipment it is vital that
precautions are taken to prevent either injury to persons or damage
to the equipment.

14.2 When transporting the systems over long distances it is

recommended that the custom transportation box provided is used.
This includes a keep plate to reduce the effect of the powerful
magnetic field produced by the magnetic bridge.

14.3 Close proximity of the magnetic bridge to magnetic storage media,

heart pacemakers, credit cards can have a detrimental effect and
must be avoided at all times.

14.4 It is recommended that all maintenance, cleaning and adjustments

are carried out on a wooden bench or platform to minimize the risk
of personnel or equipment damage. All tools should be kept well
away from the magnetic bridge until needed.