1. |
Data Collected |
|
| 1.1 |
Crack detail in steel bridge members. |
|
|
2. |
Onsite Equipment and Personnel Requirements |
|
| 2.1 |
Equipment: |
|
| 2.1.1 |
PRE-PL-LO-004, Personal Health and Safety Plan. |
|
| 2.1.2 |
Liquid penetrant examination set. |
|
| 2.1.3 |
Tape measure. |
|
| 2.1.4 |
Temporary marker. |
|
| 2.1.5 |
Digital camera. |
|
| 2.1.6 |
Pencil, sketch, and clipboard. |
|
| 2.2 |
Personnel: PRE-PL-LO-005, Personnel Qualifications. |
|
|
3. |
Methodology |
|
| 3.1 |
Establishing a local origin: |
|
| 3.1.1 |
Use the segmentation and numbering system (FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System) so defects can be located and noted by a unique element identifier. |
|
| 3.1.1.1 |
Use FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on each individual element. Establish the two relevant coordinate axes for each face of each element being evaluated. |
|
| 3.2 |
Testing: |
|
| 3.2.1 |
Perform the dye penetrant in accordance with ASTM E165-02. |
|
| 3.2.1.1 |
Clean the surface with appropriate cleaner. |
|
| 3.2.1.2 |
Apply the penetrant, and let it dwell. |
|
| 3.2.1.3 |
Remove the excess penetrant from the surface. |
|
| 3.2.1.4 |
Apply developer. |
|
| 3.2.2 |
Observe and measure crack extent. |
|
| 3.3 |
Documenting cracks: |
|
| 3.3.1 |
Location: |
|
| 3.3.1.1 |
Document the unique element identifier of the superstructure element on which the crack is located. |
|
| 3.3.1.2 |
Follow FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements, to establish a local origin on each element; identify the relevant coordinate axis (such as x, z for a girder web), and document the beginning and ending points of the crack using the y, z coordinates. |
|
| 3.3.1.3 |
Describe the location of the crack, e.g., adjacent to the connection of diaphragm 1DiAB to girder 1A. |
|
| 3.3.2 |
Size and orientation: |
|
| 3.3.2.1 |
Record the length of the crack (from one end to the other in a straight line) in decimal inches using the tape measure, measuring wheel, and/or laser measuring device. |
|
| 3.3.2.2 |
Measure the maximum crack width (opening) with the crack comparison card (crack gage). |
|
| 3.3.2.3 |
Record the orientation of the crack (degrees) using a plump bob, or compass (or other angle- measuring device). |
|
| 3.3.3 |
Take photographs (FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes) and/or draw sketches illustrating the location and size of the crack. |
|
| 3.4 |
Storing data, documents, and images: |
|
| 3.4.1 |
FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local, for local storage. |
|
| 3.4.2 |
FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote, for remote storage. |
|
| 3.5 |
Reporting: Transfer all metadata, data, documents, and images to Federal Highway Administration (FHWA), and/or upload all metadata, data, documents, and images into the Long-Term Bridge Performance (LTBP) Bridge Portal. |
|
|
4. |
Data Collection Table |
|
| 4.1 |
Table: |
|
| # |
Field Name |
Data Type |
Accuracy |
Unit |
Field Description |
Row Color |
| 1 |
State |
Text |
|
|
State Code; e.g., Virginia = VA |
Green |
| 2 |
NBI structure number |
Text |
|
|
Item 8, structure number; from NBI Coding Guide |
Green |
| 3 |
Structure name |
Text |
|
|
Descriptive name for the bridge; e.g., Route 15 SB over I–66 |
Green |
| 4 |
Protocol name |
Text |
|
|
Title of the protocol |
Green |
| 5 |
Protocol version |
Text |
Month and year |
|
Month and year the protocol version was published; e.g., May 2015 |
Green |
| 6 |
Personnel performing data collection activities |
Text |
|
|
First name(s) Last name(s) |
Green |
| 7 |
Date data were collected |
Text |
Exact date |
|
mm/dd/yyyy |
Green |
| 8 |
Ambient air temperature |
Number |
1 |
ºF |
Range: -50 to 150 |
Green |
| 9 |
Deck surface temperature |
Number |
1 |
ºF |
Range: -50 to 150 |
Green |
| 10 |
Location of crack: element type and unique identifier |
Text |
|
|
Example: Girder 1A; evaluate and record data for each crack identified in the individual element |
Blue |
| 11 |
Test site |
Text |
|
|
Descriptive location of the crack on the bridge (e.g., adjacent to the connection of diaphragm 1Di1AB to girder A) |
Yellow |
| 12 |
Pair of axis used to locate crack on deck or element |
Text |
|
|
(x, y), (x, z), or (y, z) |
Yellow |
| 13 |
Coordinates of the beginning of the crack |
Number |
0.125 |
In. |
Example on web (x, z) |
Yellow |
| 14 |
Coordinates of the end of the crack |
Number |
0.005 |
In. |
Example on web (x, z) |
Yellow |
| 15 |
Crack length |
Number |
0.1 |
In. |
|
Yellow |
| 16 |
Crack width |
Number |
0.01 |
In. |
|
Yellow |
| 17 |
Presence of rust at crack |
List |
|
|
Yes or No |
Yellow |
| 18 |
Crack photo |
BLOB |
|
|
Take one or more photos of each crack identified |
Yellow |
| 19 |
Comments |
Text |
|
|
|
Orange |
|
| 4.2 |
Table Key: |
|
| Column Descriptions |
# |
Sequential number of data item |
Field Name |
Data field name |
Data Type |
Type of data, such as text, number, predefined list, binary large object (BLOB), or PDF file |
Accuracy |
Accuracy to which the data are recorded |
Unit |
Unit in which a measurement is taken and recorded |
Field Description |
Commentary on the data or list of items in a predefined list |
| Row Color Key |
Green |
Data items only entered once for each protocol for each day the protocol is applied |
Pink |
Logical breakdown of data by elements or defect types (not always used) |
Blue |
Data identifying the element being evaluated or the type of defect being identified |
Yellow |
LTBP data reported individually for each element or defect identified |
Orange |
Comments on the data collection or data entered |
|
|
5. |
Criteria for Data Validation |
|
| 5.1 |
Comparison should be made with crack data and photos from previous inspections as well as with crack data and photos from FLD-DC-NDE-008, Ultrasonic Testing—Steel Fatigue Cracking, if available. |
|
|
6. |
Commentary/Background |
|
| 6.1 |
The purpose of this protocol is to provide a standard procedure for using dye penetrant examination of materials for detecting discontinuities that are open to the surface, such as cracks, seams, laps, cold shuts, laminations, through leaks, or lack of fusion. |
|
| 6.2 |
Dye penetrant testing is applicable to in-process, final, and maintenance examination. It can be effectively used in the examination of nonporous, metallic materials, both ferrous and nonferrous. |
|
| 6.3 |
Solvent-removable, visible dye liquid penetrant examination is generally the preferred method for field use where surface examinations are required. It has the advantage of easy portability and simplicity, and it does not require electricity, black lights and dark rooms, or a water source. |
|
| 6.4 |
The minimum requirements for conducting liquid penetrant examination are specified in ASTME1417-05e1. The nature of the cleaner, the penetrant, and the developer are specified in ASTME165-02. |
|
|
7. |
References |
|
| 7.1 |
LTBP Protocols: |
|
| 7.1.1 |
FLD-OP-SC-002, Structure Segmentation and Element Identification System. |
|
| 7.1.2 |
FLD-OP-SC-003, Determination of Local Origins for Elements. |
|
| 7.1.3 |
FLD-DC-NDE-008, Ultrasonic Testing—Steel Fatigue Cracking. |
|
| 7.1.4 |
FLD-DC-PH-002, Photographing for Documentation Purposes. |
|
| 7.1.5 |
FLD-DS-LS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Local. |
|
| 7.1.6 |
FLD-DS-RS-001, Data, Document, and Image Storage—Remote. |
|
| 7.2 |
External: |
|
| 7.2.1 |
ASTME1417-05e1, Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Testing, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2005. |
|
| 7.2.2 |
ASTME165-02, Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Examination, ASTM International, West Conshohocken, PA, 2002. |
|
