REPORT No.

VQ/TI/2013/03 Rev 0

IRIS REPORT FOR HEAT

EXCHANGER
Tables of Contents
1.0 Introduction
2.0 Equipment Details
3.0 Exchanger Details
4.0 Scope of work
5.0 Inspected By
6.0 Limitations
7.0 Tube Identification
8.0 Discussion/Results
9.0 Cleaning Details
10.0

Recommendation & Conclusion

11.0Appendices
1. Inspection Summary Report
2. Heat Exchanger Status (Tube Sheet)
3. List of inspected tubes

TEST DATE: 12,to14/3/2012

Page. 1 of 4

REPORT No. VQ/TI/2013/03 Rev 0

IRIS REPORT FOR HEAT

EXCHANGER

TEST DATE: 12,to14/3/2012

Page. 2 of 4

1.0 INTRODUCTION
Internal Rotary Inspection was conducted on the QCHW PRIMARY COOLER QCC-02QWS-41-10 on 12/3/2012 to 14/3/2012
A computerized MS-5800 Multi-function non destructive testing system was used to carry
out the inspection. All results were recorded to disk with manual analysis on screen. The
equipment was calibrated as per velosi IRIS written procedure Doc. No. VQ/IRIS/01
Rev.1.

2.0

EQUIPMENT DETAILS
Equipment
Serial No
Probe
Turbine used

3.0

:
:
:
:

EXCHANGER DETAILS
Serial No
Tube Material
Configuration
:
Total number of tubes
Number of tubes Inspected
OD
:
Thickness
:

4.0

MS 5800 ECT RFT MFL 1ch US

879715
15MHz
12MM

:
QCC-02-QWS-41-10
:
SA 214
Straight Tube
:
6070
:
6070
19.05mm
2.11mm

Tube
Tube
Tube Wall

INSPECTED BY
H Kruger
Maneesh George

5.0

SCOPE OF WORK
To carryout IRIS inspection on 359 tubes, to their entire length of tubes, to find out and
analyze any wall loss or any other anomaly.

6.0

TUBE IDENTIFICATION
In order to be able to identify and locate each tube, and there by create full traceability
the grid coordinates row and column were used.
Viewing From Plant East
Rows were numbered from Top to Bottom
Columns were numbered from Left to Right

REPORT No. VQ/TI/2013/03 Rev 0

IRIS REPORT FOR HEAT

EXCHANGER
7.0

TEST DATE: 12,to14/3/2012

Page. 3 of 4

LIMITATIONS
Tubes have to be pristine clean for IRIS inspection. Any internal deposit / loose scale
may create the ultrasound waves to scatter and give the wrong wall thickness and in the
worst cases the defect may remain undetected.
Tubes were inspected till the starting of U bend.

8.0

DISCUSSION / RESULTS
Tubes were found to be in an average clean condition and with isolated scaling and
deposits.
The inspected tubes were found with less than 20% of external corrosion.
Tubes were classified as follows

Classifications

Total

TUBE PERCENTAGE

No defects detected

101

21.53%

>0% - 10% wall loss

0%

>10% - 20% wall loss

Nil
Nil

>20% - 30% wall loss

Nil

>30% - 40% wall loss

Nil

0%
0%

>40% - 50% wall loss

Nil

0%

>50% - 60% wall loss

Nil

0%

>60% - 100% wall loss

Nil

0%

Plugged

Nil

0%

Restricted

16

3.41%

0%

This distribution of damage is shown in Appendices, in the form of heat exchanger drawing

9.0

CLEANING DETAILS

Good

Bare metal internal Surface finish

Average

Minor scaling and/or deposits throughout tube

length.

Poor

Heavy scaling and/or deposits causing spurious

REPORT No. VQ/TI/2013/03 Rev 0

IRIS REPORT FOR HEAT

EXCHANGER

TEST DATE: 12,to14/3/2012

Page. 4 of 4

indications on tube inspection results.

Very Poor

10.0

Multiple restrictions caused by internal bore

reduction. Tube inspection results limited at
best.

RECOMMENDATION & CONCLUSION

Further monitoring is highly recommended in order to provide a comprehensive survey of
this unit. This provides information on wastage propagation rates, and gives advance
warning of potential tube failures. Also maximizing the data available for plant integrity
management .The interval between the inspections should be based upon the plant
operation and inspection history, design, material & operating conditions of the plant.