_edited.png)
ACCREDITATIONS
Clients
.webp)
.webp)
RESULTS-ORITNTED Training Description
Course Duration
5 Days
Training Delivery Method
Classroom (Instructor-Led)
Instructors Languages
English / Arabic / Urdu / Hindi / Pashto
Certification Provider
Tamkene Saudi Training Center - Approved by TVTC (Technical and Vocational Training Corporation)
Certificate Validity
2 Years (Extendable with additional training hours)
Course Average Passing Rate
97%
Competency Assessment Criteria
Practical Assessment and Knowledge Assessment
Post Training Reporting
Post Training Report + Candidate(s) Training Evaluation Forms
Training Design Methodology
ADDIE Training Design Methodology
Certificate of Successful Completion
Certification is provided upon successful completion. The certificate can be verified through a QR-Code system.
Course Overview
Magnetic Particle Testing is the most sensitive and productive surface and near-surface examination method available for ferromagnetic materials. A fatigue crack in a weld toe, a seam in a forging, a grinding crack in a hardened steel component, or a lap in a rolled bar — all of these produce magnetic flux leakage fields that draw magnetic particles into visible accumulations before the discontinuity is long enough to be seen by the unaided eye. But that sensitivity exists only when the magnetization is in the correct direction relative to the expected discontinuity orientation, the applied field strength is within the productive range, the particles are applied correctly under appropriate lighting, and the examiner understands the difference between a relevant indication of a flaw and a non-relevant indication from a change in geometry or permeability.
This training course develops comprehensive Magnetic Particle Testing — MT — competency across magnetic physics, magnetization methods and current types, wet and dry particle systems, fluorescent and visible inspection techniques, all magnetization techniques including yoke, prod, coil, central conductor, and head shot methods, surface preparation, system performance verification, indication interpretation, false indication identification, demagnetization, and acceptance criteria application. The course is aligned with ISO 9712:2021: Non-Destructive Testing — Qualification and Certification of NDT Personnel — MT Level I and Level II — and ASNT SNT-TC-1A: Personnel Qualification and Certification in Non-Destructive Testing. Examination procedures follow ASME Section V Article 7: Magnetic Particle Examination, ASTM E709: Standard Guide for Magnetic Particle Testing, and ASTM E1444: Standard Practice for Magnetic Particle Testing. General principles follow ISO 9934-1:2015: Non-Destructive Testing — Magnetic Particle Testing — General Principles, with equipment requirements in ISO 9934-2 and detection media in ISO 9934-3. Weld MT requirements follow ISO 17638: Non-Destructive Testing of Welds — Magnetic Particle Testing. Acceptance criteria follow ISO 23278: Non-Destructive Testing of Welds — Magnetic Particle Testing — Acceptance Levels, AWS D1.1: Structural Welding Code, API 1104: Welding of Pipelines and Related Facilities, and ASME Section VIII: Rules for Construction of Pressure Vessels. The course integrates ISO 45001:2018: Occupational Health and Safety Management Systems and ISO 9001:2015: Quality Management Systems, applying Hazard Identification, Risk Assessment, and Risk Control — HIRARC and Root Cause Analysis — RCA throughout.
Key Learning Objectives
Apply ISO 9712:2021 and ASNT SNT-TC-1A MT Level I and Level II qualification requirements.
Explain magnetic physics — flux, permeability, hysteresis, leakage field, and magnetization direction.
Select magnetization technique and current type based on component geometry and discontinuity orientation.
Perform yoke, prod, coil, central conductor, and head shot magnetization techniques per ASME Section V Article 7.
Perform yoke lift test — minimum 4.5 kg AC and 18 kg DC — per ASTM E1444.
Apply wet fluorescent and wet visible particle systems under correct lighting conditions.
Verify MT system performance using field indicator and pie gauge before examination.
Interpret MT indications — distinguishing relevant, non-relevant, and false indications.
Apply acceptance criteria per ISO 23278, AWS D1.1, API 1104, and ASME Section VIII.
Apply demagnetization and verify residual field using a gaussmeter or field indicator.
Course Outline
Day 1 — Magnetic Physics, Magnetization Principles, and Material Applicability
1. Introduction to Magnetic Particle Testing
1.1 MT Overview and Standards
MT detects surface and near-surface discontinuities in ferromagnetic materials using magnetic flux leakage.
MT is limited to ferromagnetic materials — it cannot be used on austenitic stainless steel, aluminium, or non-ferrous metals.
MT advantages over PT — detects near-surface discontinuities below the surface and through thin coatings.
ISO 9712:2021 — Level I performs under supervision; Level II evaluates, interprets, and signs MT reports independently.
ASNT SNT-TC-1A — Level I requires minimum 4 training hours; Level II requires minimum 16 training hours.
ASME Section V Article 7 — the primary examination procedure standard for industrial MT applications.
ASTM E709 — the comprehensive MT guidance standard covering all techniques and applications.
ASTM E1444 — the specific MT practice standard for aerospace applications.
1.2 Magnetic Physics
Ferromagnetic materials — iron, nickel, cobalt, and their alloys — can be strongly magnetized.
Magnetic flux — the total magnetic field through a material — represented by lines of force.
Magnetic flux density — B — the flux per unit area — measured in Tesla or Gauss.
Magnetic field strength — H — the magnetizing force applied to a material — measured in Amperes per metre.
Permeability — the ease with which a material conducts magnetic flux — high permeability materials magnetize easily.
Hysteresis — the lagging of magnetization behind the magnetizing field — explains residual magnetism after removal of the field.
Residual magnetism — the magnetization remaining in a material after the magnetizing current is removed.
Coercive force — the reverse field required to remove residual magnetism from a magnetized material.
2. Flux Leakage and Flaw Detection Principle
Magnetic flux leakage — flux forced out of the material at a discontinuity due to reduced permeability at the flaw.
Leakage field — the external magnetic field above the surface at the location of the discontinuity.
Particle attraction — magnetic particles are drawn to the leakage field and form a visible accumulation — the indication.
Perpendicular magnetization rule — maximum flaw detectability when the magnetizing flux is perpendicular to the flaw axis.
Parallel magnetization — flux running parallel to the flaw produces minimal leakage and the flaw may not be detected.
45-degree rule — discontinuities within 45° of the flux direction produce sufficient leakage for detection.
Bi-directional magnetization — examining in two perpendicular directions ensures detection of all flaw orientations.
Surface versus near-surface detection — subsurface discontinuities produce weaker, diffuse indications compared to surface flaws.
3. Magnetization Current Types
3.1 Alternating and Direct Current
AC — Alternating Current — produces a skin effect — concentrating flux at the surface — best sensitivity for surface flaws.
AC advantage — the alternating field keeps wet particles in continuous motion — improving particle migration to leakage fields.
HWDC — Half-Wave Direct Current — rectified AC — produces a pulsating field with deep penetration capability.
HWDC advantage — better near-surface subsurface detection depth than AC while retaining particle mobility.
FWDC — Full-Wave Direct Current — fully rectified — deepest penetration — best for subsurface discontinuities.
DC disadvantage — particles do not move once the field is applied — wet particle application must precede magnetization.
Current type selection — AC for surface only; HWDC or FWDC when near-surface subsurface sensitivity is required.
3.2 Continuous versus Residual Technique
Continuous technique — particles applied while the magnetizing current is flowing — highest sensitivity.
Residual technique — particles applied after current is removed — relies on residual magnetism — for high-coercivity materials only.
Continuous technique is the required default for most industrial MT examinations per ASME Section V Article 7.
Residual technique is only used when the material has sufficient retentivity — confirmed by material specification.
Day 2 — Magnetization Techniques and Equipment
4. Yoke Technique
4.1 Yoke Operation and Lift Test
Electromagnetic yoke — a U-shaped electromagnet inducing a longitudinal field between the two poles.
Yoke magnetization direction — flux runs between the poles — detects transverse discontinuities perpendicular to the yoke axis.
Yoke application — widely used for weld surface examination in field environments due to portability.
Yoke lift test per ASTM E1444 — minimum 4.5 kg lifting force in AC mode — verified before each shift.
Yoke lift test per ASTM E1444 — minimum 18 kg lifting force in DC mode.
Lift test verification frequency — before each shift of use and every 8 hours of continuous use.
Failed lift test — the yoke is removed from service until the lift test is passed.
4.2 Yoke Examination Coverage
Pole spacing — minimum 75 mm and maximum 200 mm between poles per ASME Section V Article 7.
Effective examination area — the area between and slightly beyond the poles where adequate flux is present.
Yoke rotation — the yoke must be applied in two perpendicular directions to detect all flaw orientations.
Overlap — successive yoke positions must overlap to ensure continuous examination coverage.
Curved surface application — yoke legs must maintain contact with the curved surface — curved pole shoes used where required.
5. Prod Technique
Prod technique — electrical current passed directly through the part between two hand-held electrodes — prods.
Prod magnetization direction — circular field around each prod — detects discontinuities running between the prods.
Prod technique detects linear flaws perpendicular to the line joining the two prods.
Prod spacing — typically 75 mm to 200 mm — optimum current flow between the prods.
Current calculation — amperage per ASTM E709 — 100 to 125 amperes per 25 mm of prod spacing.
Prod burn marks — direct contact current can cause arc burns at the prod contact point — prohibited on pressure vessels per some codes.
Prod restriction per ASME Section V Article 7 — prods are prohibited on finished pressure vessel surfaces.
Prod examination coverage — the area between and beside the prod line is the effective examination zone.
6. Coil, Central Conductor, and Head Shot Techniques
6.1 Coil Technique
Coil technique — component placed inside an energized coil — induces a longitudinal magnetic field along the part axis.
Coil technique detects transverse discontinuities — cracks and seams perpendicular to the part's long axis.
Coil ampere-turns — the product of current × number of coil turns — determines field strength in the part.
Fill factor — the ratio of component cross-section to coil cross-section — determines effective field strength.
Effective examination length — limited to a defined distance from the coil centre — multiple coil positions needed for long components.
6.2 Central Conductor and Head Shot
Central conductor technique — current-carrying conductor threaded through a hollow component induces a circular field in the part wall.
Central conductor detects longitudinal discontinuities — seams, laps, and cracks running along the component length.
Head shot technique — current passed directly through the part end to end — induces a circular field throughout the cross-section.
Head shot detects longitudinal discontinuities parallel to the current flow direction.
Head shot restriction — prohibited on components where arc burns at contact areas would be unacceptable.
Combined technique — coil and central conductor used sequentially to achieve bi-directional magnetization coverage.
Day 3 — Particle Systems, Surface Preparation, and System Verification
7. Magnetic Particle Types and Application
7.1 Dry Particles
Dry powder particles — coated magnetic particles applied by dusting or blowing onto the magnetized surface.
Dry particle colors — red, black, grey, and yellow — selected for contrast against the component surface color.
Dry particle application — applied with a bulb, powder blower, or shaker while the magnetizing current flows.
Dry particles are preferred for hot surfaces and outdoor field examinations where wet bath handling is impractical.
Excess dry powder removal — light air current directed across the surface — too much air removes particle accumulations.
Dry particle sensitivity — generally lower than wet fluorescent particles for fine surface-breaking discontinuities.
7.2 Wet Particles — Visible and Fluorescent
Wet visible particles — black or red magnetic particles suspended in water or oil carrier — inspected under white light.
Wet fluorescent particles — fluorescent magnetic particles suspended in carrier — inspected under UV-A light in darkness.
Fluorescent MT sensitivity — significantly higher than visible MT — fluorescence provides maximum contrast against the dark background.
Wet bath concentration — verified by centrifuge tube — minimum and maximum particle concentration defined per procedure.
Bath contamination check — UV lamp check of bath for fluorescent contamination before use.
Particle application — applied by spray or flow while the magnetizing current flows for continuous technique.
Water bath rust inhibitor — added to prevent rust on carbon steel components during wet water-based MT.
Petroleum carrier — used when rust inhibition or water-sensitive surfaces require an oil-based suspension.
8. Surface Preparation and Pre-Examination Cleaning
Surface preparation is critical — contaminants reduce particle mobility and mask flux leakage fields at discontinuities.
Oil, grease, and paint — removed by solvent cleaning or abrasive methods before MT begins.
Weld spatter — removed before MT as it produces non-relevant indications that mask real weld discontinuities.
Loose scale and rust — removed because they inhibit particle mobility and reduce sensitivity.
Paint and coatings — thin coatings up to 50 µm are generally acceptable — thicker coatings reduce sensitivity.
Surface roughness — rough surfaces reduce sensitivity and increase background particle retention.
Background contrast paint — white contrast paint applied before visible dry powder MT on dark surfaces.
Post-examination cleaning — all MT materials removed from the component surface after examination is complete.
9. System Performance Verification
9.1 Magnetic Field Indicators
Pie gauge — a partitioned disc of alternating sectors used to verify magnetic field direction and adequacy.
Pie gauge verification — particles applied to the pie gauge surface confirm the field is perpendicular to expected flaws.
Artificial flaw shim — a thin shim with an artificial notch placed on the component surface to verify particle sensitivity.
Gaussmeter — measures the tangential field strength at the component surface to verify the applied field is within the productive range.
Field strength productive range — 2.4 to 7.2 kA/m tangential field strength per ISO 9934-1:2015.
9.2 Light Measurement and Bath Verification
UV-A intensity for fluorescent MT — minimum 1000 µW/cm² at the examination surface per ASME Section V Article 7.
White light for visible MT — minimum 100 foot-candles — approximately 1076 lux — per ASME Section V Article 7.
UV-A radiometer — used to verify UV-A intensity before each fluorescent MT session.
Lux meter — used to verify white light intensity before each visible MT session.
Dark adaptation — inspector must be dark-adapted for at least 5 minutes before fluorescent MT inspection.
Wet bath centrifuge check — performed daily before use to verify particle concentration within the specified range.
Bath system performance check — verification on a system performance indicator before examination commences.
Day 4 — Indication Interpretation, Acceptance Criteria, and Demagnetization
10. MT Indication Classification
10.1 Relevant, Non-Relevant, and False Indications
Relevant indication — caused by a surface or near-surface discontinuity — requires evaluation against acceptance criteria.
Non-relevant indication — caused by a geometry or permeability change, not a material flaw.
False indication — caused by contamination, poor technique, or magnetic writing — not related to material condition.
Linear indication — length at least three times the width — typically caused by cracks, seams, or lack of fusion.
Rounded indication — length less than three times the width — typically caused by porosity or inclusions.
Weak diffuse indication — may indicate a near-surface subsurface discontinuity or insufficient field strength.
10.2 Non-Relevant Indication Sources
Permeability change — particle accumulation at the boundary between two materials of different magnetic permeability.
Cold work boundary — particle accumulation at the heat-affected zone boundary due to permeability change.
Keyway and thread indication — geometry changes concentrate flux and produce particle accumulations without a flaw.
Geometric indication — sharp changes in cross-section produce leakage fields that attract particles at the geometry change.
Press fit indication — the interface between two assembled components produces a non-relevant particle accumulation.
Magnetic writing — localized magnetization from contact with another magnetized object — produces a spurious indication.
11. Discontinuity Types and MT Appearance
Cracks — sharp, well-defined linear indications — always rejectable — may be fatigue, stress corrosion, or hydrogen induced.
Seams — long linear indications aligned with rolling or forging direction — sharp and continuous.
Laps — elongated linear indications from folded material on forgings and rolled products.
Lack of fusion — sharp linear weld indication at the fusion line — a planar flaw requiring accurate sizing.
Incomplete penetration — linear indication at the weld root — detected from the root side when accessible.
Porosity — rounded or clustered indications from gas pores within the weld metal.
Inclusions — irregular indications from non-metallic slag or sand trapped in welds or castings.
Grinding cracks — sharp, fine linear or net-pattern cracks from thermal damage during grinding operations.
Hydrogen flakes — elongated subsurface indications in heavy forgings — detected with HWDC or FWDC current.
12. Acceptance Criteria Application
Acceptance criteria always applied from the standard specified in the written MT procedure.
ISO 23278: NDT of Welds — Magnetic Particle Testing — Acceptance Levels — Levels 1, 2, and 3.
ASME Section VIII acceptance criteria — no linear indications; rounded indications within defined size limits.
AWS D1.1 — linear indication length limits and rounded indication size limits for structural welds.
API 1104 — acceptance limits for pipeline girth weld MT indications by length and depth.
Cracks — universally rejectable under all MT codes regardless of length or orientation.
Linear indication measurement — the total length including any intervening spaces closer than the width of the widest indication.
MT after post-weld heat treatment — required when PWHT is specified and MT is a code requirement.
13. Demagnetization
13.1 Demagnetization Requirements
Demagnetization — reducing residual magnetism to an acceptable level after MT examination.
Demagnetization is required when residual magnetism would interfere with subsequent welding, machining, or service.
Maximum acceptable residual field — typically 3 Gauss or as specified in the applicable code or procedure.
Demagnetization obligation per ASME Section V Article 7 — required when residual field may affect subsequent operations.
13.2 Demagnetization Methods
AC demagnetization coil — component passed through an energized AC coil and withdrawn slowly — most effective method.
Yoke demagnetization — AC yoke applied and slowly withdrawn from the component.
Reversing DC method — DC current reversed and reduced in steps — used for large components.
Thermal demagnetization — heating above the Curie temperature — destroys ferromagnetism permanently — rarely used industrially.
Residual field verification — measured with a gaussmeter or field indicator after demagnetization to confirm acceptability.
Demagnetization documentation — residual field measurement recorded in the MT examination report.
Day 5 — Procedure Development, HSE Integration, Quality Management, and Case Studies
14. MT Procedure Development and Documentation
Written MT procedure — mandatory per ASME Section V Article 7 before any examination begins.
Procedure content — scope, material, technique, current type, particle type, field verification method, and acceptance criteria.
Procedure qualification — system performance verification on a performance indicator before first use.
MT report content — component identification, technique, current type, particle type, field verification, indications, and accept/reject decision.
Demagnetization record — residual field measurement included in the MT examination report.
Record retention per ISO 9001:2015 Clause 7.5 — MT reports retained per the applicable code and client requirement.
Applying RCA to missed MT indications — identifying field direction, field strength, particle type, or lighting as root cause.
15. HSE and Quality Management Integration
Applying HIRARC to MT operations — UV radiation, electrical shock from prod technique, confined space, and fire risk from petroleum carrier.
UV-A radiation — prolonged UV-A exposure causes eye and skin damage — UV-rated safety glasses are mandatory during fluorescent MT.
Prod technique electrical hazard — contact burn risk requires insulated prod handles and prohibition in wet or explosive atmospheres.
Petroleum-based wet bath — flammable carrier — requires fire prevention controls and no ignition sources during application.
Confined space MT — petroleum carrier vapours accumulate in enclosed spaces — forced ventilation required.
Permit-to-Work — required before MT on live pressurized systems or in confined spaces.
Quality management per ISO 9001:2015 — procedure control, light meter calibration records, and gaussmeter calibration.
MT nonconformance per ISO 9001:2015 Clause 10.2 — corrective action required for invalid examinations and missed indications.
16. Practical Technique Exercises
Yoke lift test exercise — performing and documenting the AC and DC yoke lift test per ASTM E1444 before technique application.
Pie gauge verification exercise — verifying magnetic field direction and adequacy using the pie gauge on representative specimens.
Bi-directional yoke examination — examining weld specimens in two perpendicular directions and identifying all indications.
Prod technique exercise — applying the prod technique to flat plate specimens under supervision with correct amperage calculation.
Coil and central conductor exercise — applying longitudinal and circular magnetization to tubular and bar specimens.
Wet bath concentration check — measuring particle concentration by centrifuge tube and assessing bath condition.
Fluorescent MT exercise — performing a complete fluorescent wet particle examination under UV-A light in a controlled darkened area.
17. Case Studies and Group Discussions
Case studies from MT failures in Middle East oil and gas, pressure vessel, structural, and pipeline environments including fatigue cracks missed in weld toes due to yoke applied parallel to the crack direction, grinding cracks on vessel nozzles not detected due to failed yoke not replaced, and near-surface hydrogen flakes in heavy forgings missed because AC current was used instead of HWDC — and the importance of correct technique selection and system verification in preventing in-service structural failures.
Group discussion on MT challenges in Middle East environments including managing fluorescent MT in high-ambient-light outdoor GCC inspection environments, controlling petroleum carrier fire risk during MT in hazardous area classified zones on offshore and onshore petrochemical facilities, and maintaining wet bath concentration and UV-A light intensity compliance during high-volume weld inspection on GCC pipeline and fabrication projects.
Indication interpretation workshop — participants evaluate a presented set of MT specimens and photographs, classify each indication as relevant, non-relevant, or false, apply the specified acceptance criteria, and complete the MT report with accept/reject decisions.
Day 1 — Magnetic Physics, Magnetization Principles, and Material Applicability
1. Introduction to Magnetic Particle Testing
1.1 MT Overview and Standards
MT detects surface and near-surface discontinuities in ferromagnetic materials using magnetic flux leakage.
MT is limited to ferromagnetic materials — it cannot be used on austenitic stainless steel, aluminium, or non-ferrous metals.
MT advantages over PT — detects near-surface discontinuities below the surface and through thin coatings.
ISO 9712:2021 — Level I performs under supervision; Level II evaluates, interprets, and signs MT reports independently.
ASNT SNT-TC-1A — Level I requires minimum 4 training hours; Level II requires minimum 16 training hours.
ASME Section V Article 7 — the primary examination procedure standard for industrial MT applications.
ASTM E709 — the comprehensive MT guidance standard covering all techniques and applications.
ASTM E1444 — the specific MT practice standard for aerospace applications.
1.2 Magnetic Physics
Ferromagnetic materials — iron, nickel, cobalt, and their alloys — can be strongly magnetized.
Magnetic flux — the total magnetic field through a material — represented by lines of force.
Magnetic flux density — B — the flux per unit area — measured in Tesla or Gauss.
Magnetic field strength — H — the magnetizing force applied to a material — measured in Amperes per metre.
Permeability — the ease with which a material conducts magnetic flux — high permeability materials magnetize easily.
Hysteresis — the lagging of magnetization behind the magnetizing field — explains residual magnetism after removal of the field.
Residual magnetism — the magnetization remaining in a material after the magnetizing current is removed.
Coercive force — the reverse field required to remove residual magnetism from a magnetized material.
2. Flux Leakage and Flaw Detection Principle
Magnetic flux leakage — flux forced out of the material at a discontinuity due to reduced permeability at the flaw.
Leakage field — the external magnetic field above the surface at the location of the discontinuity.
Particle attraction — magnetic particles are drawn to the leakage field and form a visible accumulation — the indication.
Perpendicular magnetization rule — maximum flaw detectability when the magnetizing flux is perpendicular to the flaw axis.
Parallel magnetization — flux running parallel to the flaw produces minimal leakage and the flaw may not be detected.
45-degree rule — discontinuities within 45° of the flux direction produce sufficient leakage for detection.
Bi-directional magnetization — examining in two perpendicular directions ensures detection of all flaw orientations.
Surface versus near-surface detection — subsurface discontinuities produce weaker, diffuse indications compared to surface flaws.
3. Magnetization Current Types
3.1 Alternating and Direct Current
AC — Alternating Current — produces a skin effect — concentrating flux at the surface — best sensitivity for surface flaws.
AC advantage — the alternating field keeps wet particles in continuous motion — improving particle migration to leakage fields.
HWDC — Half-Wave Direct Current — rectified AC — produces a pulsating field with deep penetration capability.
HWDC advantage — better near-surface subsurface detection depth than AC while retaining particle mobility.
FWDC — Full-Wave Direct Current — fully rectified — deepest penetration — best for subsurface discontinuities.
DC disadvantage — particles do not move once the field is applied — wet particle application must precede magnetization.
Current type selection — AC for surface only; HWDC or FWDC when near-surface subsurface sensitivity is required.
3.2 Continuous versus Residual Technique
Continuous technique — particles applied while the magnetizing current is flowing — highest sensitivity.
Residual technique — particles applied after current is removed — relies on residual magnetism — for high-coercivity materials only.
Continuous technique is the required default for most industrial MT examinations per ASME Section V Article 7.
Residual technique is only used when the material has sufficient retentivity — confirmed by material specification.
Day 2 — Magnetization Techniques and Equipment
4. Yoke Technique
4.1 Yoke Operation and Lift Test
Electromagnetic yoke — a U-shaped electromagnet inducing a longitudinal field between the two poles.
Yoke magnetization direction — flux runs between the poles — detects transverse discontinuities perpendicular to the yoke axis.
Yoke application — widely used for weld surface examination in field environments due to portability.
Yoke lift test per ASTM E1444 — minimum 4.5 kg lifting force in AC mode — verified before each shift.
Yoke lift test per ASTM E1444 — minimum 18 kg lifting force in DC mode.
Lift test verification frequency — before each shift of use and every 8 hours of continuous use.
Failed lift test — the yoke is removed from service until the lift test is passed.
4.2 Yoke Examination Coverage
Pole spacing — minimum 75 mm and maximum 200 mm between poles per ASME Section V Article 7.
Effective examination area — the area between and slightly beyond the poles where adequate flux is present.
Yoke rotation — the yoke must be applied in two perpendicular directions to detect all flaw orientations.
Overlap — successive yoke positions must overlap to ensure continuous examination coverage.
Curved surface application — yoke legs must maintain contact with the curved surface — curved pole shoes used where required.
5. Prod Technique
Prod technique — electrical current passed directly through the part between two hand-held electrodes — prods.
Prod magnetization direction — circular field around each prod — detects discontinuities running between the prods.
Prod technique detects linear flaws perpendicular to the line joining the two prods.
Prod spacing — typically 75 mm to 200 mm — optimum current flow between the prods.
Current calculation — amperage per ASTM E709 — 100 to 125 amperes per 25 mm of prod spacing.
Prod burn marks — direct contact current can cause arc burns at the prod contact point — prohibited on pressure vessels per some codes.
Prod restriction per ASME Section V Article 7 — prods are prohibited on finished pressure vessel surfaces.
Prod examination coverage — the area between and beside the prod line is the effective examination zone.
6. Coil, Central Conductor, and Head Shot Techniques
6.1 Coil Technique
Coil technique — component placed inside an energized coil — induces a longitudinal magnetic field along the part axis.
Coil technique detects transverse discontinuities — cracks and seams perpendicular to the part's long axis.
Coil ampere-turns — the product of current × number of coil turns — determines field strength in the part.
Fill factor — the ratio of component cross-section to coil cross-section — determines effective field strength.
Effective examination length — limited to a defined distance from the coil centre — multiple coil positions needed for long components.
6.2 Central Conductor and Head Shot
Central conductor technique — current-carrying conductor threaded through a hollow component induces a circular field in the part wall.
Central conductor detects longitudinal discontinuities — seams, laps, and cracks running along the component length.
Head shot technique — current passed directly through the part end to end — induces a circular field throughout the cross-section.
Head shot detects longitudinal discontinuities parallel to the current flow direction.
Head shot restriction — prohibited on components where arc burns at contact areas would be unacceptable.
Combined technique — coil and central conductor used sequentially to achieve bi-directional magnetization coverage.
Day 3 — Particle Systems, Surface Preparation, and System Verification
7. Magnetic Particle Types and Application
7.1 Dry Particles
Dry powder particles — coated magnetic particles applied by dusting or blowing onto the magnetized surface.
Dry particle colors — red, black, grey, and yellow — selected for contrast against the component surface color.
Dry particle application — applied with a bulb, powder blower, or shaker while the magnetizing current flows.
Dry particles are preferred for hot surfaces and outdoor field examinations where wet bath handling is impractical.
Excess dry powder removal — light air current directed across the surface — too much air removes particle accumulations.
Dry particle sensitivity — generally lower than wet fluorescent particles for fine surface-breaking discontinuities.
7.2 Wet Particles — Visible and Fluorescent
Wet visible particles — black or red magnetic particles suspended in water or oil carrier — inspected under white light.
Wet fluorescent particles — fluorescent magnetic particles suspended in carrier — inspected under UV-A light in darkness.
Fluorescent MT sensitivity — significantly higher than visible MT — fluorescence provides maximum contrast against the dark background.
Wet bath concentration — verified by centrifuge tube — minimum and maximum particle concentration defined per procedure.
Bath contamination check — UV lamp check of bath for fluorescent contamination before use.
Particle application — applied by spray or flow while the magnetizing current flows for continuous technique.
Water bath rust inhibitor — added to prevent rust on carbon steel components during wet water-based MT.
Petroleum carrier — used when rust inhibition or water-sensitive surfaces require an oil-based suspension.
8. Surface Preparation and Pre-Examination Cleaning
Surface preparation is critical — contaminants reduce particle mobility and mask flux leakage fields at discontinuities.
Oil, grease, and paint — removed by solvent cleaning or abrasive methods before MT begins.
Weld spatter — removed before MT as it produces non-relevant indications that mask real weld discontinuities.
Loose scale and rust — removed because they inhibit particle mobility and reduce sensitivity.
Paint and coatings — thin coatings up to 50 µm are generally acceptable — thicker coatings reduce sensitivity.
Surface roughness — rough surfaces reduce sensitivity and increase background particle retention.
Background contrast paint — white contrast paint applied before visible dry powder MT on dark surfaces.
Post-examination cleaning — all MT materials removed from the component surface after examination is complete.
9. System Performance Verification
9.1 Magnetic Field Indicators
Pie gauge — a partitioned disc of alternating sectors used to verify magnetic field direction and adequacy.
Pie gauge verification — particles applied to the pie gauge surface confirm the field is perpendicular to expected flaws.
Artificial flaw shim — a thin shim with an artificial notch placed on the component surface to verify particle sensitivity.
Gaussmeter — measures the tangential field strength at the component surface to verify the applied field is within the productive range.
Field strength productive range — 2.4 to 7.2 kA/m tangential field strength per ISO 9934-1:2015.
9.2 Light Measurement and Bath Verification
UV-A intensity for fluorescent MT — minimum 1000 µW/cm² at the examination surface per ASME Section V Article 7.
White light for visible MT — minimum 100 foot-candles — approximately 1076 lux — per ASME Section V Article 7.
UV-A radiometer — used to verify UV-A intensity before each fluorescent MT session.
Lux meter — used to verify white light intensity before each visible MT session.
Dark adaptation — inspector must be dark-adapted for at least 5 minutes before fluorescent MT inspection.
Wet bath centrifuge check — performed daily before use to verify particle concentration within the specified range.
Bath system performance check — verification on a system performance indicator before examination commences.
Day 4 — Indication Interpretation, Acceptance Criteria, and Demagnetization
10. MT Indication Classification
10.1 Relevant, Non-Relevant, and False Indications
Relevant indication — caused by a surface or near-surface discontinuity — requires evaluation against acceptance criteria.
Non-relevant indication — caused by a geometry or permeability change, not a material flaw.
False indication — caused by contamination, poor technique, or magnetic writing — not related to material condition.
Linear indication — length at least three times the width — typically caused by cracks, seams, or lack of fusion.
Rounded indication — length less than three times the width — typically caused by porosity or inclusions.
Weak diffuse indication — may indicate a near-surface subsurface discontinuity or insufficient field strength.
10.2 Non-Relevant Indication Sources
Permeability change — particle accumulation at the boundary between two materials of different magnetic permeability.
Cold work boundary — particle accumulation at the heat-affected zone boundary due to permeability change.
Keyway and thread indication — geometry changes concentrate flux and produce particle accumulations without a flaw.
Geometric indication — sharp changes in cross-section produce leakage fields that attract particles at the geometry change.
Press fit indication — the interface between two assembled components produces a non-relevant particle accumulation.
Magnetic writing — localized magnetization from contact with another magnetized object — produces a spurious indication.
11. Discontinuity Types and MT Appearance
Cracks — sharp, well-defined linear indications — always rejectable — may be fatigue, stress corrosion, or hydrogen induced.
Seams — long linear indications aligned with rolling or forging direction — sharp and continuous.
Laps — elongated linear indications from folded material on forgings and rolled products.
Lack of fusion — sharp linear weld indication at the fusion line — a planar flaw requiring accurate sizing.
Incomplete penetration — linear indication at the weld root — detected from the root side when accessible.
Porosity — rounded or clustered indications from gas pores within the weld metal.
Inclusions — irregular indications from non-metallic slag or sand trapped in welds or castings.
Grinding cracks — sharp, fine linear or net-pattern cracks from thermal damage during grinding operations.
Hydrogen flakes — elongated subsurface indications in heavy forgings — detected with HWDC or FWDC current.
12. Acceptance Criteria Application
Acceptance criteria always applied from the standard specified in the written MT procedure.
ISO 23278: NDT of Welds — Magnetic Particle Testing — Acceptance Levels — Levels 1, 2, and 3.
ASME Section VIII acceptance criteria — no linear indications; rounded indications within defined size limits.
AWS D1.1 — linear indication length limits and rounded indication size limits for structural welds.
API 1104 — acceptance limits for pipeline girth weld MT indications by length and depth.
Cracks — universally rejectable under all MT codes regardless of length or orientation.
Linear indication measurement — the total length including any intervening spaces closer than the width of the widest indication.
MT after post-weld heat treatment — required when PWHT is specified and MT is a code requirement.
13. Demagnetization
13.1 Demagnetization Requirements
Demagnetization — reducing residual magnetism to an acceptable level after MT examination.
Demagnetization is required when residual magnetism would interfere with subsequent welding, machining, or service.
Maximum acceptable residual field — typically 3 Gauss or as specified in the applicable code or procedure.
Demagnetization obligation per ASME Section V Article 7 — required when residual field may affect subsequent operations.
13.2 Demagnetization Methods
AC demagnetization coil — component passed through an energized AC coil and withdrawn slowly — most effective method.
Yoke demagnetization — AC yoke applied and slowly withdrawn from the component.
Reversing DC method — DC current reversed and reduced in steps — used for large components.
Thermal demagnetization — heating above the Curie temperature — destroys ferromagnetism permanently — rarely used industrially.
Residual field verification — measured with a gaussmeter or field indicator after demagnetization to confirm acceptability.
Demagnetization documentation — residual field measurement recorded in the MT examination report.
Day 5 — Procedure Development, HSE Integration, Quality Management, and Case Studies
14. MT Procedure Development and Documentation
Written MT procedure — mandatory per ASME Section V Article 7 before any examination begins.
Procedure content — scope, material, technique, current type, particle type, field verification method, and acceptance criteria.
Procedure qualification — system performance verification on a performance indicator before first use.
MT report content — component identification, technique, current type, particle type, field verification, indications, and accept/reject decision.
Demagnetization record — residual field measurement included in the MT examination report.
Record retention per ISO 9001:2015 Clause 7.5 — MT reports retained per the applicable code and client requirement.
Applying RCA to missed MT indications — identifying field direction, field strength, particle type, or lighting as root cause.
15. HSE and Quality Management Integration
Applying HIRARC to MT operations — UV radiation, electrical shock from prod technique, confined space, and fire risk from petroleum carrier.
UV-A radiation — prolonged UV-A exposure causes eye and skin damage — UV-rated safety glasses are mandatory during fluorescent MT.
Prod technique electrical hazard — contact burn risk requires insulated prod handles and prohibition in wet or explosive atmospheres.
Petroleum-based wet bath — flammable carrier — requires fire prevention controls and no ignition sources during application.
Confined space MT — petroleum carrier vapours accumulate in enclosed spaces — forced ventilation required.
Permit-to-Work — required before MT on live pressurized systems or in confined spaces.
Quality management per ISO 9001:2015 — procedure control, light meter calibration records, and gaussmeter calibration.
MT nonconformance per ISO 9001:2015 Clause 10.2 — corrective action required for invalid examinations and missed indications.
16. Practical Technique Exercises
Yoke lift test exercise — performing and documenting the AC and DC yoke lift test per ASTM E1444 before technique application.
Pie gauge verification exercise — verifying magnetic field direction and adequacy using the pie gauge on representative specimens.
Bi-directional yoke examination — examining weld specimens in two perpendicular directions and identifying all indications.
Prod technique exercise — applying the prod technique to flat plate specimens under supervision with correct amperage calculation.
Coil and central conductor exercise — applying longitudinal and circular magnetization to tubular and bar specimens.
Wet bath concentration check — measuring particle concentration by centrifuge tube and assessing bath condition.
Fluorescent MT exercise — performing a complete fluorescent wet particle examination under UV-A light in a controlled darkened area.
17. Case Studies and Group Discussions
Case studies from MT failures in Middle East oil and gas, pressure vessel, structural, and pipeline environments including fatigue cracks missed in weld toes due to yoke applied parallel to the crack direction, grinding cracks on vessel nozzles not detected due to failed yoke not replaced, and near-surface hydrogen flakes in heavy forgings missed because AC current was used instead of HWDC — and the importance of correct technique selection and system verification in preventing in-service structural failures.
Group discussion on MT challenges in Middle East environments including managing fluorescent MT in high-ambient-light outdoor GCC inspection environments, controlling petroleum carrier fire risk during MT in hazardous area classified zones on offshore and onshore petrochemical facilities, and maintaining wet bath concentration and UV-A light intensity compliance during high-volume weld inspection on GCC pipeline and fabrication projects.
Indication interpretation workshop — participants evaluate a presented set of MT specimens and photographs, classify each indication as relevant, non-relevant, or false, apply the specified acceptance criteria, and complete the MT report with accept/reject decisions.
Group Exercises
MT procedure development exercise — teams develop a written MT procedure for a presented weld inspection scenario per ASME Section V Article 7, defining technique, current type, particle type, field verification method, lighting requirements, demagnetization, and acceptance criteria — reviewed for completeness and standard compliance.
Comparative technique exercise — groups apply yoke and prod techniques to identical presented specimens, compare indication detection, apply RCA to any indication missed by one technique but detected by the other, and present findings with technique selection recommendations for the component type.
False and non-relevant indication investigation — teams receive specimens with a mix of relevant, non-relevant, and false indications, correctly classify each, re-examine ambiguous indications after re-preparation, and develop a report distinguishing confirmed relevant indications from non-relevant and false findings.
Gained Core Technical Skills
Proficiency in applying magnetic physics — flux leakage, permeability, hysteresis, and perpendicular magnetization rule — to technique selection and field direction planning.
Competency in selecting and applying all five MT techniques — yoke, prod, coil, central conductor, and head shot — with correct current type for each application.
Skill in performing system verification — yoke lift test, pie gauge, UV-A and white light measurement, gaussmeter, and wet bath centrifuge — before every examination session.
Ability to classify MT indications as relevant, non-relevant, or false — correctly identifying discontinuity types from their indication characteristics under fluorescent and visible conditions.
Proficiency in applying acceptance criteria per ISO 23278, AWS D1.1, API 1104, and ASME Section VIII and completing MT examination reports with accept/reject decisions.
Competency in applying demagnetization methods and verifying residual field with a gaussmeter against the maximum acceptable limit.
Ability to apply HIRARC to MT electrical, UV, and flammable carrier hazards, develop written MT procedures per ASME Section V Article 7, and apply RCA and ISO 9001:2015 to MT nonconformances and missed indication investigations.
Services Geographical Coverage
In Tamkene Training Center or at our client's facility (On-Site), Covering All Saudi Arabia Cities and Locations:
Targeted Audience
NDT technicians seeking formal MT Level I or Level II qualification under ISO 9712:2021 or ASNT SNT-TC-1A.
Weld inspectors and QC engineers responsible for surface and near-surface examination of welds, forgings, and castings in ferromagnetic materials.
Inspection engineers and integrity engineers applying MT for in-service crack detection on pressure vessels, pipelines, structural components, and rotating equipment.
Quality managers and QC supervisors responsible for managing MT programs, approving procedures, and reviewing MT report quality in fabrication and maintenance environments.
HSE engineers responsible for managing MT electrical, UV radiation, and flammable carrier safety programs in field and workshop environments.
Any professional whose role involves performing, supervising, reviewing, or managing Magnetic Particle Testing in oil and gas, petrochemical, power generation, structural fabrication, or manufacturing environments.
Practical Assessment
Yoke lift test and system verification — performing and documenting the AC and DC yoke lift test, pie gauge field verification, and UV-A intensity measurement before examination commences.
Complete MT examination — performing a full bi-directional yoke examination on a presented weld specimen using fluorescent wet particles under UV-A light, identifying all indications, and completing the examination record.
Indication interpretation and report — interpreting a presented set of MT specimens and photographs, classifying each indication as relevant, non-relevant, or false, applying acceptance criteria per the specified standard, and completing the MT report with accept/reject decisions.
Demagnetization and residual field verification — demagnetizing a presented component using the AC coil method and verifying residual field with a gaussmeter against the maximum acceptable limit.
Knowledge Assessment
Magnetic physics questions — flux leakage definition, perpendicular magnetization rule, AC skin effect description, and coercive force definition.
Technique and equipment questions — yoke AC minimum lift test value per ASTM E1444, prod spacing current calculation formula, pole spacing limits per ASME Section V Article 7, and continuous versus residual technique selection criteria.
Particle system and lighting questions — wet bath centrifuge check purpose, fluorescent MT minimum UV-A intensity per ASME Section V Article 7, visible MT minimum white light level, and dark adaptation required time before fluorescent MT.
Indication and acceptance questions — linear versus rounded indication definition, three non-relevant indication sources, crack universal rejection rule across all MT codes, and ISO 23278 acceptance level options for weld MT.
Demagnetization and HSE questions — maximum acceptable residual field, AC coil demagnetization procedure, HIRARC primary hazard for prod technique in a wet environment, and ISO 9001:2015 Clause 10.2 corrective action trigger for a failed yoke lift test used during examination.
Why Choose This Course
Aligned with ISO 9712:2021, ASNT SNT-TC-1A, ASME Section V Article 7, ASTM E709, ASTM E1444, ISO 9934-1, 9934-2, 9934-3, ISO 17638, ISO 23278, AWS D1.1, API 1104, ASME Section VIII, ISO 45001:2018, and ISO 9001:2015.
All five magnetization techniques — yoke, prod, coil, central conductor, and head shot — are taught and practiced, developing technique selection competency beyond single-method familiarity.
Yoke lift test, pie gauge verification, UV-A measurement, and wet bath centrifuge check are all practiced as mandatory pre-examination disciplines — developing the verification habit that prevents invalid examinations.
Bi-directional magnetization is assessed as a practical examination requirement — developing the discipline that ensures all flaw orientations are detected.
Incorporates Middle East MT challenges including fluorescent MT in high-ambient-light outdoor GCC environments, petroleum carrier fire controls in hazardous area classified zones on offshore and onshore facilities, and maintaining wet bath compliance during high-volume pipeline and fabrication weld inspection programs.
Note: This course outline, including specific topics, modules, and duration, can be customized based on the specific needs and requirements of the client.
.webp)
Recommended Courses
.webp)
Suggested Questions
.webp)
The training I received from Tamkene was truly exceptional.
Dalal AlSaeed
.webp)
Choosing Tamkene for our professional development was a game-changer.
Wafi AlZayer
.webp)
Tamkene delivered quality training with a strong focus on standards. The organization and delivery exceeded our expectations.
Saad AlMisehal
Testimonial