Daily Inspection Report

Project Name Awzan Pipeline

Client KRG
Report Number 001
23-02-2025
Date

Equipment Description.

Inspection Type ☐ Internal ☒ External ☐ Both

☐ Heat ☐ Boiler /
Equipment Type ☐ Tank ☐ Vessel ☐ Tower ☒ Pipe
Exchanger Furnace

Equipment Name Pipeline Equipment No. N/A

Acceptance Criteria API 1104, ASME 31.4, ASME sec V

Performing UT flow detector weld scan and visual inspection for the welded joints
Scope of Inspection
 Daily Inspection Report
Project Name Awzan Pipeline
Client KRG
Report Number 001
23-02-2025
Date

1. During the visual inspection, couple observations found on the welds, including deep
sharp undercut more than 1 mm, surface porosity, and underfill, welding inspector should
follow the construction code acceptance criteria during both visual and NDT inspections, in
accordance with API 1104, ASME B31.4, and ASME Section V.

2. 2. Welding inspection personnel shall be familiar with the WPS used during
welding and shall conduct Toolbox Talks for the welders, explaining the WPS to
ensure all welders follow it and all welders should be informed and aware of the
essential and non-essential requirements in the WPS then Inspections shall be
performed before, during, and after welding.
3
3. During my UT flaw detection weld scan, some back-wall echoes were noted while using
70degree probe, these echoes were most likely returning from the weld root, sometimes
due to excessive weld in the root, which was in the acceptable limit, also we identified as
geometric issue other than actual defect, then while reviewing some UT reports, I found
that previous UT inspector had recorded defects below 9 mm, marking them as linear
indications, I believe further investigation is required in that areas, considering the welding
wire and the repair location because it could simply be noise from the wall or back-wall
echo, and also UT inspectors should be more specific when naming defects.

4. While reviewing the WPS, found that welders are required to use E7018 for the cap. I
believe this basic electrode can be used successfully and will generally pass during PQR
qualification, but there are some important considerations, E7018 is time-consuming since it
is used in uphill position, requiring more time, then being basic electrode, it must go
Daily Inspection Report through a baking process, where welders need to use an oven at 300–350°C and then
portable oven on-site to prevent slag inclusion and hydrogen cracking, in contrast, E7010
does not require these precautions, making it more advantageous in terms of efficiency.

5. During the WPS review, noticed that the specified heat input range is very low, which is
great if welders can achieve that. but I have doubts about whether welders can consistently
maintain such low heat input during welding will recommend that the welding inspector
monitor the heat input for couple welders and compare it with the WPS to ensure
compliance, if welders are consistently using higher heat input, the WPS should be reviewed
and possibly revised, and in any deviations should be documented in the main dossier for
future reference, especially in case of any weld weakening issues, these points should be
carefully considered.

6. have heard from site supervisors that double repairs were performed on the weld
without special consideration, normally these points need to be highlighted and addressed
during the PQR process, with additional testing on the test specimens, such as hardness
testing after repair and location checks as per NACE standards. I recommend that areas
undergoing double repair be subjected to hardness testing, covering at minimum the base
metal, heat-affected zone, and weld areas to ensure compliance and integrity in case of
higher than 250 HBW repair require on the affected area.

7. During the inspection, I found that the coating team was using regular sand for blasting
welded joints before applying the coating, it is recommend performing salt test to ensure
the surface is free from contaminants such as silicate, CaCO₃, and salts, this will help prevent
 Daily Inspection Report
Project Name Awzan Pipeline
Client KRG
Report Number 001
23-02-2025
Date

adhesion issues and potential coating failures, then peel of test to be performed at least
once per shift to ensure the quality of the coating and peel of test should be matching with
same of the manufacturing datasheet of the sleeve material.
 UT WELD SCANNING REPORT

Report No. : 001 Acceptance Std: API 1104-ASME 31.4, ASME sec V
Equipment : Awzan Pipeline Specification No. : N/A
Inspection Date 22-02-2025 DWG. No. : N/A
LOCATION Erbil N/A
Instrument Examination Data
Equipment: Serial No. Calibrated Device validation
Scan Condition: Parallel Free Runing Axial
Sonatest D50 I015206 21-Nov-25 Wave Length 0.8 mm
Crystal Size 10 mm Frequency: 4 - 7.5 MHz Dimention Velocity 3250 m Angle (s) - (degree) 45 60 70 0 degree Dual 00degree
degree
8*9 mm sec
Calibration BlockType: IIW V1 DAC ISO ASME BLOCK FOR PIPE REFERENCE STANDARD : ASME Sec IIIV ASME B 31.3 API 1104 EN 1714 BS 3923

UT Wedge: Yes No Wedge Type: Planar Curve Welding Process: SMAW GTAW GMAW SAW

Surface Condition: AS WELD BRUSHED GROUND MACHINED

Probe Cable Length : 2 m
Joint Type : Single V Double V DB SB Couplant : Water Cellulose GUM Other
Defect (mm)
Row DWI NO WELD TYPE WELDER NO. JOINT NO. DIA(INCH) THK (MM) Result Remarks
TYPE START L D H Repair Retest

1 KP-13 Butt Weld 7,8,11,12 W-44 32" 10 NSD - - - - - - ACC

2 KP-13 Butt Weld 7,8,11,12 W-74 32" 10 NSD - - - - - - ACC

1,2,5,8,7,1
2 KP-3 Butt Weld J-35 32" 10 NSD - - - - - - ACC
0

Remarks: UT Scanning Carried out on accessable area only.

Total Examination : MM Remark :
SD +
1 SMAW : Shield Metal Arc Welding GMAW:Gas Metal Arc Welding SAW:Submerge Arc Welding GTAW:Gas Tungsten Arc Welding -

LC: Longitudinal Crack LOF: Lack of Fusion CP: Cluster Porosity BT: Burn Through L: Length IND: Indication'(s)
D
Legend

2 TC: Transverse Crack LOP: Lack of Penetration AP: Aligned Porosity WH: Worm Hole D: Depth H: Height
H
SC: Star Crack SL: Slag Inclusion RC: Root Concavity EP: Excess Penetration W: Width SD: Center Distance
3 NSD :Non Signification Defect ACC: Accept REJ :Reject REP. :Repair CU : Cut Out W

4 WC : Circumferential Weld WA : Circumferential Weld LW : Longitudinal Weld WB : Longitudinal Weld

Performed By

Title NDT Inpector

Name Bestoon Ahmed

Signature

Date: 23.Feb.2025
Weld Scanning Flow detector for KP13__W-44 Weld Scanning Flow detector KP13__W-44

Weld Scanning Flow detector KP-3__J-35 Weld Scanning Flow detector KP-3__J-35
Observing deep undercut during visual inspection Observing surface porosity during visual inspection

Weld Scanning Flow detector KP-3__J-35 Weld Scanning Flow detector KP-3__J-35