General Discussions: Re: PCN vs. ASNT

Forum General Discussions

Re: PCN vs. ASNT
Posted by: Oliviero Oldani (PID_3903), E-mail: Address, on December 06, 2008 at 21:49 :
In Reply to: Re: PCN vs. ASNT posted by : S.V.Swamy , E-mail: Address, on December 06, 2008 at 15:07 :
Dear all,
I followed this discussion, which is a big subject for all the world market.
In Italy too is living the question: Which is the best certification scheme?
I think that the manufacturer shall have the responsibility to understand the operator skilling. Any certification scheme can release only the written witness of the base matter understanding.
Only the manufacturer can add the necessary practical experience and skilling for the base matter application on their own product.
The main point is the presence of the level III. Today the level III is mainly a consultant. But a consultant seen as a cost only.
The manufacturers are understanding that they need the level II to satisfy the codes and standard. It should be more clear that they need the level III principally.
----------- Start Original Message -----------
: Both Nigel and Chris have made valid points. If the manufacturer does not have permanent Level III to check the quality of the inspectors, using third party services is next best. That is where we, the qualified and experienced NDT professionals can help.
: There was a committee to assess the quality of NDT personnel (their ability to detect certain defects in specimens) in which one of my colleagues was involved. Several countries took part in that round robin study. The results of such studies should be well publicised to sensitise the manufacturers, customers and QS agencies to the need of personnel qualification specific to the job on hand.
: Best wishes.
: Swamy
: The NDT Guru
: : Hi Chris
: : SNT-TC-1A is a company (Owner) certification program. Similarly, CP-189 which I believe to be more rigorous. Employer-certification programs can work well where there is consistency - a regular workforce in a fixed location with long term planning. However ASNT must have realised the system's short-comings and failure to meet the requirements of certain sections of industry because both the NDT Level III and ACCP central certification programe were introduced.
: : The nearest I know of to a company imposing another system on top of central certification (in the case of ISO 9712/EN 473/ PCN certification) is when the already qualified practitioner has to demonstrate capability through testing of test pieces selected by the Owner. In terms of general construction and fabrication, I dont think that the Owner would be prepared to pay the extra costs involved - consider many major engineering companies will not have a permanent Level III presence in their workforce. Whilst Outside Agencies provide sterling service, how can the Owner be certain of the familiarity with the Owner's processes and products necessary for prompt and accurate solutions of inspection problems.
: : But certainly in any case it is necessary to raise the quality of inspections when major engineering projects design basis is the premise that all significant defects are detected and simultaneously understaff the inspection (both weld inspection and NDT) for the construction phase of the project.
: : Cheers
: : Nigel
: : : : I am strongly dis agree comments about PCN Standard, I am suggesting ASNT also to issue Level 1 & 2 certificate through general society, institution. So no need to blame either ASNT or PCN or etc.
: : : : Regards,
: : : : S.Senthilkumar
: : : : : Abdullah
: : : : : its not a great question as a good ASNT certified technician is just as good as a bad PCN certified technician.
: : : : : The other issue is you are not distinguishing as to which form of ASNT you want to make a comparision with. ASNT SNT-TC-1A is an employer based certification and in some peoples eyes is therefore inferior to a third party issued certification such as PCN or the ASNT ACCP.
: : : : : It also may vary dependent upon which discipline you wnat to employ MT & PT togeter with RT are relatively simple to compare. When you become more complex such as RT Film Interpretation or UT you may want to performance demonstration test all personnel and this takes out of the equation the certification. It then ensures the personnel you employ are truely capable.
: : : I would have to agree that there are some good and some bad in both situations. The best thing I've seen a truly concerned owner do is to develop a certification process of there own. A program in addition to the above mentioned programs.
------------ End Original Message ------------

Follow Ups:

Re: PCN vs. ASNT Andre Fouche 07:03 Dec-07-2008 (0)

Post a Followup:

Name:

E-Mail:

Subject:

Comments:
----------- Start Original Message ----------- : Dear all, : I followed this discussion, which is a big subject for all the world market. : In Italy too is living the question: Which is the best certification scheme? : I think that the manufacturer shall have the responsibility to understand the operator skilling. Any certification scheme can release only the written witness of the base matter understanding. : Only the manufacturer can add the necessary practical experience and skilling for the base matter application on their own product. : The main point is the presence of the level III. Today the level III is mainly a consultant. But a consultant seen as a cost only. : The manufacturers are understanding that they need the level II to satisfy the codes and standard. It should be more clear that they need the level III principally. : : Both Nigel and Chris have made valid points. If the manufacturer does not have permanent Level III to check the quality of the inspectors, using third party services is next best. That is where we, the qualified and experienced NDT professionals can help. : : There was a committee to assess the quality of NDT personnel (their ability to detect certain defects in specimens) in which one of my colleagues was involved. Several countries took part in that round robin study. The results of such studies should be well publicised to sensitise the manufacturers, customers and QS agencies to the need of personnel qualification specific to the job on hand. : : Best wishes. : : Swamy : : The NDT Guru : : : Hi Chris : : : SNT-TC-1A is a company (Owner) certification program. Similarly, CP-189 which I believe to be more rigorous. Employer-certification programs can work well where there is consistency - a regular workforce in a fixed location with long term planning. However ASNT must have realised the system's short-comings and failure to meet the requirements of certain sections of industry because both the NDT Level III and ACCP central certification programe were introduced. : : : The nearest I know of to a company imposing another system on top of central certification (in the case of ISO 9712/EN 473/ PCN certification) is when the already qualified practitioner has to demonstrate capability through testing of test pieces selected by the Owner. In terms of general construction and fabrication, I dont think that the Owner would be prepared to pay the extra costs involved - consider many major engineering companies will not have a permanent Level III presence in their workforce. Whilst Outside Agencies provide sterling service, how can the Owner be certain of the familiarity with the Owner's processes and products necessary for prompt and accurate solutions of inspection problems. : : : But certainly in any case it is necessary to raise the quality of inspections when major engineering projects design basis is the premise that all significant defects are detected and simultaneously understaff the inspection (both weld inspection and NDT) for the construction phase of the project. : : : Cheers : : : Nigel : : : : : I am strongly dis agree comments about PCN Standard, I am suggesting ASNT also to issue Level 1 & 2 certificate through general society, institution. So no need to blame either ASNT or PCN or etc. : : : : : Regards, : : : : : S.Senthilkumar : : : : : : Abdullah : : : : : : its not a great question as a good ASNT certified technician is just as good as a bad PCN certified technician. : : : : : : The other issue is you are not distinguishing as to which form of ASNT you want to make a comparision with. ASNT SNT-TC-1A is an employer based certification and in some peoples eyes is therefore inferior to a third party issued certification such as PCN or the ASNT ACCP. : : : : : : It also may vary dependent upon which discipline you wnat to employ MT & PT togeter with RT are relatively simple to compare. When you become more complex such as RT Film Interpretation or UT you may want to performance demonstration test all personnel and this takes out of the equation the certification. It then ensures the personnel you employ are truely capable. : : : : I would have to agree that there are some good and some bad in both situations. The best thing I've seen a truly concerned owner do is to develop a certification process of there own. A program in addition to the above mentioned programs. ------------ End Original Message ------------

Optional Link URL:
Example: "http://www....html". Alternative write "http://www.ndt.net/wshop/attach/filename.htm" if you transfered a filename.htm via FTP

Page Title: is important!

Optional Image URL:
http://www....gif

Attention! Please click the button only once. This may take a moment to process
Forum General Discussions Help