EN 10228 Compliant Forgings — The Governing Methodology & Acceptance Framework Behind Every NDT Technique We Perform
Shivam Forge manufactures and inspects steel forgings to EN 10228 (Non-destructive testing of steel forgings) — the multi-part European standard that defines test methodology, quality classes, and acceptance criteria for magnetic particle, penetrant, and ultrasonic testing of forgings — for European engineering, chemical plant, and machinery customers requiring documented NDT compliance rather than testing performed to an undefined internal standard. Rajkot, India. Call +91-9265772827.
Performing ultrasonic testing or magnetic particle inspection on a forging answers only half the question a customer actually needs answered — the other half is what result counts as a pass, and that second half is exactly what EN 10228 defines. The standard is published in coordinated parts: EN 10228-1 covers magnetic particle inspection methodology and acceptance classes, EN 10228-2 covers penetrant testing, EN 10228-3 covers ultrasonic testing specifically for ferritic and martensitic steel forgings, and EN 10228-4 covers ultrasonic testing for austenitic and austenitic-ferritic (duplex) stainless steel forgings — a separate part because the coarser grain structure of austenitic materials scatters ultrasonic energy differently and requires different technique and acceptance criteria than ferritic material does. Each part defines quality classes — typically several numbered severity levels — against which indication size, density, and location are evaluated, meaning 'ultrasonic tested to EN 10228-3 Class 3' is a specific, auditable acceptance statement in a way that 'ultrasonically tested' alone is not. This is the structural difference between EN 10228 and a description of the individual test technique itself: a customer's individual NDT service pages describe how a technique like ultrasonic testing or magnetic particle inspection is physically performed, while EN 10228 is the governing document that defines the technique parameters, coverage requirements, and — critically — the numerical acceptance class the results must meet for the forging to pass. European engineering customers who specify EN 10228 compliance on a purchase order are asking for both halves of that equation, documented, not just confirmation that a test was run.
Magnetic particle inspection performed and reported against EN 10228-1's methodology and quality class framework, detecting surface and near-surface discontinuities in ferromagnetic forgings with results evaluated against the specified acceptance class.
Liquid penetrant testing performed to EN 10228-2 for surface-breaking discontinuity detection, applicable across ferromagnetic and non-ferromagnetic forgings alike including austenitic stainless components where magnetic particle inspection isn't applicable.
Ultrasonic testing performed to EN 10228-3's technique and acceptance class requirements for carbon and alloy steel forgings, detecting internal discontinuities such as inclusions, laminations, or forging defects below the surface.
Ultrasonic testing performed to EN 10228-4's separately defined technique parameters for austenitic and austenitic-ferritic stainless forgings, accounting for the different acoustic behavior coarser-grained stainless microstructures present compared to ferritic material.
Acceptance quality class confirmed against the customer's specification or drawing before testing begins, since EN 10228's quality classes represent different severity thresholds and the correct class must be agreed rather than assumed.
NDT performed with calibrated equipment and by personnel qualified to the level EN 10228 compliance requires, maintaining the procedural discipline the standard's methodology sections specify.
NDT reports explicitly reference the specific EN 10228 part (1, 2, 3, or 4) and quality class applied, rather than a generic 'tested per EN 10228' statement that leaves the actual acceptance criteria undocumented.
EN 10228 test results incorporated into EN 10204 3.1 or 3.2 material test certificates, giving European customers a single coordinated documentation package covering both material properties and NDT compliance.
European engineering, chemical plant, and machinery specifications frequently call out EN 10228 compliance for forged component NDT, and understanding what that reference actually requires matters more than treating it as a box-ticking exercise. EN 10228 is not a single test method — it's a coordinated family of standards, with EN 10228-1 covering magnetic particle inspection, EN 10228-2 covering penetrant testing, EN 10228-3 covering ultrasonic testing for ferritic and martensitic steel forgings, and EN 10228-4 covering ultrasonic testing specifically adapted for austenitic and austenitic-ferritic stainless forgings. Each part defines both the technique parameters that must be followed and, critically, a set of numbered quality classes that establish what result actually constitutes a pass.
This second element — the quality class — is where EN 10228 compliance delivers genuine value over an undefined internal testing standard. A magnetic particle or ultrasonic test performed without a referenced acceptance standard tells a customer that a test was run, but not what threshold the forging was actually held to; two different suppliers could both claim 'ultrasonic tested' while applying meaningfully different, unstated acceptance thresholds. EN 10228's numbered quality classes remove that ambiguity: a forging tested and accepted to EN 10228-3 Class 2, for example, has been held to a specific, published, auditable severity threshold that any customer, auditor, or third-party inspector can independently verify against the published standard.
The separate treatment of ferritic/martensitic material (EN 10228-3) and austenitic/duplex stainless material (EN 10228-4) for ultrasonic testing reflects a genuine metallurgical difference rather than an arbitrary standards-committee split. Austenitic stainless steels have a coarser, less uniform grain structure than ferritic steels, and this coarser structure scatters ultrasonic energy more, producing more background noise and making small internal discontinuities harder to distinguish from normal grain-structure signal. EN 10228-4's technique parameters — probe selection, frequency, and evaluation criteria — are adapted specifically to manage this, which is why applying EN 10228-3's ferritic-oriented parameters to a stainless forging would produce an inspection that's neither correctly calibrated nor properly documented against the applicable standard.
For European engineering customers, chemical plant contractors, and machinery OEMs requiring forgings with NDT performed and documented to EN 10228, Shivam Forge tests and certifies against the correct part and quality class for your material grade and application. Contact our engineering team at +91-9265772827 or sales@shivamforge.com with your drawing and specification for a manufacturability review and quotation.
Our individual NDT service pages describe how a technique like ultrasonic testing or magnetic particle inspection is physically performed. EN 10228 is the governing European standard that defines the specific technique parameters, coverage requirements, and numbered quality classes that determine whether a given result is a pass or fail for forgings. A test report saying 'ultrasonic tested to EN 10228-3 Class 2' documents both the method and the acceptance criteria; 'ultrasonically tested' alone documents neither.
Austenitic and austenitic-ferritic (duplex) stainless steels have a coarser grain structure than ferritic and martensitic steels, which scatters ultrasonic energy differently and produces more background noise during testing. EN 10228-4 defines technique parameters and acceptance criteria adapted to this different acoustic behavior, separate from EN 10228-3's ferritic/martensitic framework, so the correct part must be applied based on the forging's material class.
Each EN 10228 part defines several numbered quality classes representing different severity thresholds for indication size, density, and location — lower numbers are generally more stringent. The applicable class is specified by the customer's drawing or purchase order, or agreed between customer and manufacturer before testing based on the forging's service criticality. We always confirm the class before testing rather than assuming a default.
Yes. EN 10228 NDT results are incorporated into the EN 10204 3.1 or 3.2 material test certificate package, giving you a single coordinated document covering chemical composition, mechanical properties, and NDT compliance referencing the specific EN 10228 part and class applied.
The testing itself uses the same equipment and broadly similar technique as any competent NDT process, but EN 10228 compliance requires documenting the specific part and quality class applied and maintaining procedural discipline against that standard's requirements, which is a documentation and quality system commitment rather than fundamentally different testing hardware. For European customers requiring auditable NDT documentation, it's the correct standard to specify regardless of any modest additional documentation effort.
Why Choose Shivam Forge
Shivam Forge delivers precision hot-forged components from our integrated Shapar, Rajkot facility — covering forging, CNC machining, heat treatment, and quality inspection under one roof.
