SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
The Value of Nondestructive Testing for New Transmission & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
The Value of Nondestructive Testing for New Transmission & - - PowerPoint PPT Presentation
The Value of Nondestructive Testing for New Transmission & Substation Foundations Presented by Rakesh Anthony Khan, P.E., CWI, FDH Infrastructure Services SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018 Definition of NDT Webster defines nondestructive testing or
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Definition of NDT
Webster defines nondestructive testing or non-destructive testing (NDT) as a wide group of analysis techniques used in science and technology industry to evaluate the properties of a material, component or system without causing damage.[1] The terms nondestructive examination (NDE), nondestructive inspection (NDI), and nondestructive evaluation (NDE) are also commonly used to describe this technology.[2] Because NDT does not permanently alter the article being inspected, it is a highly valuable technique that can save both money and time in product evaluation, troubleshooting, and research. The six most frequently used NDT methods are eddy-current, magnetic-particle, liquid penetrant, radiographic, ultrasonic, and visual testing.[3] NDT is commonly used in forensic engineering, mechanical engineering, petroleum engineering, electrical engineering, civil engineering, systems engineering, aeronautical engineering, medicine, and art.[1] Innovations in the field
- f nondestructive testing have had a profound impact on medical imaging, including
- n echocardiography, medical ultrasonography, and digital radiography. With the
advent of machine learning, computer vision and data-driven techniques, nondestructive testing has been improved in different fields. [4] applied data-driven and machine learning techniques to predict damage state based solely on visual
- bservations in infrastructures.
2 of 50
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Background
3 of 22
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Testing
4 of 22
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Nondestructive Testing
5 of 22
Measure material properties. Structures are assets too.
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Nondestructive Testing - Metals
6 of 22
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
7 of 22
Nondestructive Testing - Concrete
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Nondestructive Testing of Foundations
Variable medium. Very little access. Visual inspection can be misleading. Types of Testing
- Crosshole Sonic Logging (CSL)
- Gamma Gamma Logging (GGL)
- Thermal Integrity Profiling (TIP)
- Sonic Echo/Impulse Response (SE/IR)
Technician experience is required to collect meaningful data. Engineer experience is required to interpret test results.
8 of 22
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
9 of 22
Crosshole Sonic Logging
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
10 of 22
Gamma Gamma Logging
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
11 of 22
Thermal Integrity Profiling
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Impact Time (in μs) Amplitude t Length
Sonic Echo
12 of 22
Dispersive Wave
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
13 of 22
Substation Construction Example
Project in construction phase. Several foundations poured. Some structures already set. Potential Integrity Issues
- Known geotechnical challenges
- Additional concrete poured in many
locations
- CSL testing had unclear results
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
14 of 22
- Formed by the dissolution of rocks, such as limestone or
dolomite
- Sink holes, disappearing streams, springs
- Highly variable subsurface conditions, soft soils, variable
water conditions, voids
Geotechnical Challenge - Karst Geology
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
15 of 22
Karst Prevalence
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
16 of 22
FDH Testing at this Site
- Dispersive Wave (DW) testing was
carried out on the foundations
- Piers were segmented into 6 or 8
sections (depending on the foundation size)
– 2 testing setups were performed in each section
- Setup 1 – Direct
- Setup 2 – Across Pier
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
17 of 22
Dispersive Wave Testing Results
Site GEO, construction notes, and CSL testing results were also reviewed as part
- f the investigation
Likelihood of integrity issues presented
- n a color scale based on DW analysis as
well as other information available
Possible Issues
- Soil intrusions propagating past the
rebar cage
- Bearing depth concerns
- Voids or inclusions of soil
Coring location selected to determine magnitude of issue
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
18 of 22
Concrete Core Process
- Results reviewed with plan to
determine the magnitude of the indicated issues by coring at select locations
- Coring locations just inside the
rebar cage to quantify the extent of the integrity issue and evaluate if it would affect the foundation’s capacity
- Cores performed along the inside
- f rebar cage
- Core Results:
- Major soil intrusion inside rebar cage
- Bearing depth discrepancies
- ‘Golf ball to baseball’ sized inclusions
- Small zones where concrete was not
fully mixed
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
19 of 22
Corrosion Assessment
Prior to Construction
- 13 samples tested by three different consulting companies
- Slightly to moderately aggressive
- 12 of 13 tests are slightly aggressive
- 1 of 13 tests is moderately aggressive
- Resistivity 1100 (ohm.cm) to 15000 (ohm.cm)
- pH > 7.9
- Chloride < 146 ppm
- Sulfate < 169 ppm
Corrosion Evaluation
- 3 processes to classify the corrosion risk were utilized
1) FHWA
- Undisturbed soil: No corrosion
- Disturbed soil: 3 samples qualified for
0.08 (mm/yr) for 50 years 2) CALTRANS:
- Non corrosive Environment
3) Mughabghab (1989):
- Corrosion rate of 0.03 (mm/yr) for 50 years
Conclusion
- Average of 1.5 mm of corrosion after 50 years: 4% of the
rebar size
- Include this in Capacity Calculations and any Remediation
Methods
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
20 of 22
Capacity Determination
- Capacity evaluations performed based on the soil
intrusion size and corrosion risk
- The voids were conservatively sized
- Evaluation for compression and section loss in rebar
within the tension zone
- Identified the overall capacities of the foundations
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
21 of 22
Transmission standards group within the Utility was involved in assumption processes for analysis and performed verification calculations. Worst case foundations would live past their intended service life. No further action necessary. Exploratory cores pressure grouted. No removal of structures already placed. No major project delay.
Result
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Key Learnings
- Karst soil conditions present
construction difficulties.
- Conservative design valuable in karst
soils.
- Knowledge of NDT options is important.
- Experience in applying NDT for
actionable results is critical.
- NDT techniques can confirm installation
quality, resolve issues, and save costs.
22 of 22
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
Questions?
SEPTEMBER 5 - 7, 2018
- Founded in 1994 by Civil Engineering PhDs
- Infrastructure engineering & NDT services
- company. 180+ employees
- Headquartered in Raleigh, NC
- Licensed across the US
- Patented and proprietary NDT methods
- Services for Telecom, Heavy Civil, Power,
Industrial, Commercial, and Government
Structural Engineering Civil Engineering Geotechnical Engineering Nondestructive Testing
- Structure Design
- Foundation Design
- Structural Evaluation
- Modification Design
- Rigging Plans
- Mount Analysis
- Permitting Support
- New Site Development
- Site Remediation
- Bridge Scour Analysis
- Environmental Compliance
- Temporary Access Matting
- Lab Analysis
- Resistivity Testing
- Drilling Portfolio
- Geotechnical Reports
- Dispersive Wave
- Ground Penetrating Radar (GPR)
- Infrared (IR) Thermography
- Concrete Strength
- Ultrasonic Testing
- Corrosion
- Post-Tensioned Rod Solutions
Field Investigations Construction Services Research & Development Value Added
- Inspection
- Foundation Mapping
- Structure Mapping
- Mount Mapping
- Line & Antenna Mapping
- Construction
- Construction Management
- Painting & Lead Abatement
- Emergency Restoration
- PhD-led group
- Structures Laboratory
- Refine existing NDT
- Develop new NDT
- Training & Investigation
- Research & Development
- Failure/Forensic Investigations
- Expert Witness Testimony