Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
Dr Gary Mar<n, Paul Grosser
and Malcolm Oakey
Aircra& Inspec-on and Maintenance- Higher Standards, Be9er Compliance
24-25 October, 2017. Coogee, NSW
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• NDT Procedures are a set of detailed instructions that enable an
NDT technician to complete inspection of critical aircraft
components. Often these Procedures are produced by Original
Equipment Manufacturers’ (OEM’s), maintenance organisations and
sometimes the Civil Aviation Safety Authority (CASA).
• What is an NDT Procedure?
• Is it just a list of operations to followed during an inspection?
• NO!!!
• It’s a document that, if followed ensure not
only the safety of the aircraK and NDT
technician but permits traceability of results.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Recently CASA published Airworthiness Bulletin AWB 02-060
Issue 1 – 18 September 2017, NDT data - The use of during
the course of maintenance.
• This AWB applies to all aircraft and aeronautical products
maintained in accordance with the 1988 Civil Aviation
Regulations (CAR). The purpose of the AWB is to clarify:
Øapproval of Non Destructive Testing (NDT) data,
Øthe different ways NDT data can be presented,
Ø the precedence of different NDT data approvals, and
Ø how to control NDT data to ensure its proper use.
• Importantly CASA requires all non OEM NDT Procedures
to have Civil Aviation Regulation (CAR), specifically CAR
2A, approval before they can become Approved Data.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Under the more recent 1998 Civil Aviation Safety Regulations
(CASR) a Part 42 organisation, i.e. a Continuing Airworthiness
Management Organisation (CAMO) is responsible for the
airworthiness of the aircraft and it has the responsibility to ensure
the Part 145 maintenance organisation, i.e. the Approved
Maintenance Organisation (AMO) has the correct maintenance
instructions.
• The Part 145 AMO must ensure it has the correct maintenance
instructions, in this case NDT Procedures. Either organisation can
produce maintenance data as long as it is produced and approved
as described in the respective Manual of Standards (MOS). This is
a legal requirement under the regulations (CASR).
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Where OEM Procedures are provided they must be used for the
inspection.
• OEM’s often include the following in their Inspection Manuals:
3. References
Magnetic Particle Inspection shall be carried out in accordance with
Standard Practice for Magnetic Particle Examination ASTM E1444.
ASTM-E-1417 is referenced when LPI is required.
• There are also examples where inspection procedures are not
available or may be inappropriate for some components.
• Under the CAR 1988 CASA has approved a number of General
Inspection Procedures for Liquid Penetrant Inspection and Magnetic
Particle Inspection - attached to draft Civil Aviation Advisory
Publication (CAAP) 33-02.
• These procedures may be considered approved maintenance data
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Use of this maintenance data is subject to the following conditions :
Ø the maintenance data mentioned in paragraph 2A(2)(a), (b), (c)
or (d) of CAR is inadequate for the purpose
Ø the person carrying out the maintenance on the aircraft, aircraft
component or aircraft material first determines that the
instructions are:
o appropriate to the aircraft, aircraft component or aircraft material
to be maintained
o directly applicable to the maintenance that is to be carried out
o not contrary to, or inconsistent with the manufacturer’s data; or
any other applicable approved maintenance data mentioned in
regulation 2A of CAR.
• Some of the procedures in the CAAP may be used in place of:
Ø Australian Standard (AS) 2062
Ø American Society for Testing and Materials (ASTM)-E-1417 or a
European equivalent
Ø a generic European Standard for penetrant testing
Ø a Department of Defence standard for penetrant testing
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• These procedures could also provide the basis for maintenance
data developed under the 1988 CASR.
• Material contained in the Draft CAAP 30-02 only covers the
inspection portion of the inspection procedure.
• More material will be required to create a complete Inspection
Procedure and this will be outlined later.
• Procedures developed for any components need to refer back to the
requirements of the ASTM Standards upon which it must be based,
either ASTM E 1417 or ASTM E 1417.
• Procedures may be drafted by an NDT Level 3 or by an NDT Level 2
Technician approved in the relevant method. Procedures should
follow a consistent format and after drafting need to be reviewed by
a Level 3 NDT Technician who may make amendments before
approving the procedure.
• Under the 1988 CAR once the Level 3 has approved the Procedure
it must be forwarded to CASA for CAR 2A (4) approval or to an
authorised delegate for approval prior to use.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
Procedure Format
• standard formats should be followed to ensure no steps are
overlooked nor important material omitted.
• a typical standard format for surface method NDT procedures is:
1. Procedure designation - A unique identifier for a stand-alone
document. Including aircraft type, Inspection Method, inspection
by name or number, issue number and date. eg: ATTAR/B200/
LPI/wing spars 1 issue 1 dated 13 October 2017. Provision for
revision must be made.
2. Procedure title - A clear concise statement, including aircraft
type, inspection method and approximate location of the
inspection. The title should be in bold type larger than normal text.
3.Approval authority – A table including Author, Position of the
Author and signature, Date of Issue, Regulatory Authority
Approval, Number, Name and Signature.
4. Introduction – a paragraph briefly outlining reason for inspection
linking it to an Airworthiness Directive (AD) or similar. Use
photographs or diagrams showing inspection location within the
aircraft or component
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
5. Scope – a paragraph indicating what the procedure is applicable
to, what type of defects, and minimum detectable defects sought.
Detection reliability should be included here.
6. Personnel qualification and level - Refers to the NAS 410 level;
Trainee, Level 1 Limited, Level 1, 2 or 3 classification of the NDI
Technician eligible to carry out the Procedure.
7. References – Include all relevant references, e.g. ASTM E 1444,
here.
8. Safety - All safety requirements covering equipment,
consumables and site must be included.
9. Equipment - A list of equipment required to carry out the
inspection, covers both plant and consumables, including lighting
requirements and sensitivity levels where applicable. General
equipment such as rags and marking pens etc need not be listed.
10. Pre-inspection requirements - A list of what has to be done to
the aircraft or component prior to the commencement of the
Inspection. Any process that may cause deformation of the
surface must be avoided.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
11. Inspection - This is a set of detailed instructions on how to
perform the inspection. The use of photographs and diagrams is
encouraged where possible.
12. Acceptance/Rejection Criteria - A clear statement of what
discontinuities are acceptable and or unacceptable.
13. Post Inspection Requirements - This is generally a short
statement to ensure all equipment used to carry out the
inspection is removed from the aircraft. Post cleaning
requirements are included here.
14. Reporting – Requirements for recording and reporting of the
inspection results are detailed here.
15. Annexes - Annexes are used to include supporting information
from another source or defect logging diagrams etc. if
appropriate.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• ASTM Standard Practice and Draft CAAP 30-02
• The ASTM Standard Practices contain information that may not be
relevant to every inspection which is why a Level 3 is required to
review and approve Procedures before they are sent for regulatory
authority approval.
• The following is a interpreta<on guide of some of the specific statements
in the ASTM which we hope will enable the produc<on of workable
procedures from those statements, giving due considera<on to the part to
be inspected and the defects sought.
• It is not exhaustive and further assistance may be required.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• ASTM E1444 - 16 Standard Practice for Magnetic Particle
Examination.
• This covers all magnetic particle inspections and is therefore going
to contain much more information than required in any one
inspection procedure.
Head shot on bench Camshaft cracking Coil shot on bench
• In the aircraft industry most magnetic particle
inspection is done on a bench with a head,
central conductor or coil. Though the draft
CAAP 30.02 does permit the use of
electromagnetic yokes.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Magne<c par<cle carrier may be water but it does require the addi<on of
both surfactants and corrosion inhibitors - Safer
• Hydrocarbon based carrier is easier to work with and does not have
foaming or corrosion issues.
• Magnetic particle concentration is critical care needed to ensure it is
always within the specified range - regular concentration checks.
• When working with electromagne<c yokes the consumables normally
come in Cer<ficated aerosol cans - par<cle concentra<on checks are not
required.
• Any procedure using them must include a reminder to adequately shake
the cans to ensure appropriate par<cle distribu<on.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Clause 6.2.5
• To ensure the detection of discontinuities in any direction, each part
must be magnetized in a minimum of two directions at approximately
right angles to each other.
• Depending on part geometry, this may be circular magnetization in
two or more directions, multiple circular and longitudinal
magnetization, or longitudinal magnetization in two or more
directions.
• If the discontinuity sought is known then magnetisation only needs
to be at right angles to the known orientation.
• If a part is being checked for any discontinuities then the need to
magnetise in 2 directions at right angles remains.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• The same clause indicates that the pie gauge or flexible laminated
strips shall not be used to determine field strength.
• i.e. Castrol, Burmah or Ely strips may not be used to indicate field
strength, only orientation.
• Exceptions necessitated by part geometry, size, or other factors
require specific approval of the Cognizant Engineering Organization.
• Clause 6.2.7 tells us that prods may not be used on aircraft
components.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Clause 6.3.1.1 indicates the field strength in unidirec<onal, or
mul<direc<onal magne<zing applica<ons, is best assessed for adequacy
by examining parts having known or ar<ficial discon<nui<es of the type,
size, and loca<on specified in the acceptance requirements
• or by using the notched shims as detailed may also be used.
• In unidirec<onal magne<sa<on a Hall Effect probe gaussmeter may be
used to measure the peak values of the tangen<al field provided its
strength is minimum of 30 Gauss (30 × 10-4 Tesla [T]).
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• All inspections should be done using the wet continuous method.
• Magnetizing current shall be applied for a duration of at least 0.5
second for each application, with a minimum of two shots being
used.
• The second shot shall follow the first while the particles are still
mobile on the surface of the part.
• When evaluating indications using fluorescent materials, personnel
shall not wear eye glasses that are photochromic or that have
permanently darkened lenses.
• This is not intended to prohibit the use of eyeglasses with lenses
treated to absorb ultraviolet light as the light from the indication is
not UV.
• Black lights have changed significantly over the last couple of
decades with LED units now becoming very popular. When used all
UV lights still need to produce a minimum of 1000µWatt/cm2 at the
surface of the part.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Draft CAAP 33-02, requires the following minimum ancillary
equipment for magnetic particle testing using a fixed bench :
Ø black and white light meter
Ø 100 mL pear-shaped centrifuge
Ø tool steel ring (Ketos ring) or known cracked specimen
Ø flexible Type II laminated strips
Ø field indicator (Gauss meter)
Ø shunt meter for ammeter verification
Ø black light (capable of 1,000µW/cm² minimum at 38cm)
Ø fluorescent particle mixture conforming to AMS 3046
Ø inspection lights, mirrors and magnifiers.
Ø Marking media which won’t damage the part
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• For testing with electromagnetic yokes it requires:
Ø black and white light meter
Ø black light (capable of 1,000µW/cm² minimum at 38cm)
Ø light restricting cloak of an appropriate size
Ø marking media which will not damage the part, mirror and rule
Ø hand-held AC/HWAC magnetic yoke
Ø type II laminated strips (or equivalent)
Ø AMS 3046 fluorescent particle mixture
Ø field indicator (Gauss meter).
• More information may be found in ASTM E 709 – 15 Standard
Guide for Magnetic Particle Testing which is intended as a
reference to aid in the preparation of specifications/standards,
procedures and techniques.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• ASTM-E-1417- 16 Standard Practice for Liquid Penetrant Testing.
• In Australia penetrant inspection on aircraft and components is
supposed to be restricted to the use of Fluorescent penetrants
because of the fluorescence quenching effects of residual colour
contrast penetrants on subsequent fluorescent penetrants and
because fluorescent penetrants have higher sensitivity levels. Not
sure everyone is aware of this!
• The Standard practice covers all penetrant types, all penetrant
remover types and all developer types.
• Most commonly used inspection systems in Australia are: Solvent
removable, Water washable and Hydrophilic remover.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
Draft CAAP 33-02 requires the following basic equipment for Penetrant
testing :
Ø dip tanks or spray equipment
Ø black light (capable of 1,000 µW/cm² minimum at 38 cm)
Ø light restricting cloak of an appropriate size
Ø marking media which won’t damage the part, mirror and rule
Ø UV and white light meter
Ø process performance test pieces (testing and monitoring panels or
similar) for systems other than pressure pack materials.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• For specific procedures ASTM has specific Standard Practice
documents as follows:
• E1209 – 10 Standard Practice for Fluorescent Liquid Penetrant
Testing Using the Water Washable Process
• E1210 – 16 Standard Practice for Fluorescent Liquid Penetrant
Testing Using the Hydrophilic Post-Emulsification Process
• E1219 – 16 Standard Practice for Fluorescent Liquid Penetrant
Testing Using the Solvent Removable Process
• The inspection process for all of these methods is similar with the
variation being the removal of excess penetrant.
Ø Prepare the surface avoiding mechanical damage
Ø Mask any internal cavities avoids excessive bleed out
Ø Apply Penetrant by spray, immersion or brush
Ø Drain for dwell time. Penetrant collected may be re-used. Do
not exceed as penetrant in the discontinuities may dry out.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
Excess penetrant is to be removed from the surface by one of the three
following methods:
• E1219 – 16, solvent removal - removed by wiping with clean, lint-
free material - done under UV light.
Ø Finish using lint-free material lightly moistened with the solvent
remover.
Ø Spraying or dipping the surface with solvent to remove the
excess penetrant is prohibited.
• E1209 – 10, water wash - avoid overwashing.
Ø water temperature and pressure requirements as well as wash
technique must be adhered to - also under UV light.
Ø When examining single components it is better to wipe clean in
the same manner as for solvent removable penetrant.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• E1210 – 16, hydrophilic remover - used when processing larger
numbers of components.
Ø requires intial pre-rinse of the developer, unless spraying the
emulsifier, followed by immersion in an air agitated bath for a
specified time.
Ø Effective post-rinsing can be accomplished using either
manual, semiautomatic, or automatic water spray or immersion
equipment or combinations thereof.
• After washing, parts must be dried prior to developer application.
Best in an air recirculating oven that does not exceed 70oC. Parts
should be removed from the oven once dry as excessive dwell time
will dry penetrant in discontinuities. Other techniques such as air
blast may be used.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
• Developer may be applied by spraying, immersion dusting,
immersing, flooding, or spraying. T
• size, configuration, surface condition, number of parts to be
processed, etc., controls choice of developer and application
technique.
• Single components are best coated with a solvent based developer.
• Developer time commences when the developer is completely dry
on the part.
• Multiple components are best done with dry powder in cloud
chamber or
• The longer developer is left on the part the more diffuse the
indication so if indications are to be measured for evaluation it must
be done within the stipulated time frame.
• After inspection parts should be cleaned so that any penetrant or
developer is removed by washing with warm water. Blow out
passages and cavities with dry air to prevent contamination or
corrosion of the part.
Developing Inspection Procedures
from ASTM LPI and MPI Standard Practices
Conclusion:
• Inspec<on procedures cover more than the inspec<on
itself and an outline of the requirements of such a
document has been provided.
• It will be necessary to consult a number of documents
in order to develop the procedure for par<cular
inspec<ons.
• The DraK CAAP 30-02 provides a good star<ng point
for the basic inspec<on procedure but more
informa<ve detail may be found in the ASTM Standard
Prac<ce documents.
