where expertise comes together - since 1996 -

The Largest Open Access Portal of Nondestructive Testing (NDT)

Conference Proceedings, Articles, News, Exhibition, Forum, Network and more

where expertise comes together
- since 1996 -
8888 views
Career Discussions
S.Senthilkumar
Engineering, QA/QC/NDT
NOV (National Oilwell Varco), Angola, Joined Mar 2006, 41

S.Senthilkumar

Engineering, QA/QC/NDT
NOV (National Oilwell Varco),
Angola,
Joined Mar 2006
41
14:25 Mar-02-2009
NDT Reports Reporting

Dear All,

One of our Client asking us to give NDT Reports saying that NO INDICATION. They are not accepting the following:
NO RELEVENT OR NO SIGNIFICANT INDICATION FOUND.

What is the correct way to report? or Above all are correct only.

Thank you
Regards,
S.Senthilkumar

    
 
 Reply 
 
John O'Brien
Consultant, -
Chevron ETC , USA, Joined Jan 2000, 278

John O'Brien

Consultant, -
Chevron ETC ,
USA,
Joined Jan 2000
278
14:56 Mar-02-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to S.Senthilkumar at 14:25 Mar-02-2009 (Opening).

I would agree with your client - the statement no relevent or no significant indication is a linguistic nightmare.

There are either indications presnet or there are not. If they are presnet they have a dimension that is either acceptable to the accept/reject criteria or unacceptable.

The client wants the facts not shades of grey.

    
 
 Reply 
 
tj
tj
15:31 Mar-02-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to John O'Brien at 14:56 Mar-02-2009 .

Many specs have maximum dimensions for nonrelevant indications. Saying that there are no indications when there are is not covering yourself.

Thanks, TJ

    
 
 Reply 
 
Juan Amado
Engineering, Inspection
Arco Industrial, S.A., Panama, Joined Nov 2001, 44

Juan Amado

Engineering, Inspection
Arco Industrial, S.A.,
Panama,
Joined Nov 2001
44
15:39 Mar-02-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to S.Senthilkumar at 14:25 Mar-02-2009 (Opening).

Some codes (ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code for example) specify criteria for both relevant indications and rejectable indications. If on a RT inspection you detect indications which are large enough to meet the relevant criteria, but small enough to be within the limits of aceptability, then it would not be right to write NO INDICATION on the report. The relevant indication shall be measured and reported as such.
This also serves a purpose later on, during the service life of the part, if other inspections are carried out, having results to compare with and not to be speculatng if the indications present developed in service.

As always I hope this helps.

Regards,
Juan Amado

    
 
 Reply 
 
Michel Couture
NDT Inspector,
consultant, Canada, Joined Sep 2006, 847

Michel Couture

NDT Inspector,
consultant,
Canada,
Joined Sep 2006
847
16:58 Mar-02-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to Juan Amado at 15:39 Mar-02-2009 .

I totally agree with you all and to add to what Juan talked about, I was in the same situation i.e. inspection of pressure vessel and we used to indicate on our report even the UT signals that was caused by geometry. I also know from experience the practice is also similar in the nuclear industry. And again like Juan said, it will help in doing the assesment and also establish a trend during futur inspection.

In the end, we as NDT technician have to remember, that we are working for our customer. Having said that, I don't mean to agree to falsify a report when you know that it doesn't meet code, but when a customer wants to see a specific wording or want you to reject a part although the indication is within codes, HEY!!! who are we to say no?

What do you guys think?

    
 
 Reply 
 
tj
tj
17:46 Mar-02-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to Michel Couture at 16:58 Mar-02-2009 .

I do agree with you Michel. The only exception in my opinion would be that if an indication is relevant but acceptable per acceptance standard then NO INDICATION would not be acceptable wording on report. I think it would be wrong for someone to request such a thing.

TJ

    
 
 Reply 
 
Gary Robertson
Gary Robertson
17:48 Mar-02-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to S.Senthilkumar at 14:25 Mar-02-2009 (Opening).

Dear all,

I disagree with the client asking for the term no indication found.
But If the component under examination is acceptable to spec then that’s what should be on the report.

Acceptable to specification at time of inspection.

Regards

Gary Robertson

    
 
 Reply 
 
Michel Couture
NDT Inspector,
consultant, Canada, Joined Sep 2006, 847

Michel Couture

NDT Inspector,
consultant,
Canada,
Joined Sep 2006
847
18:26 Mar-02-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to Gary Robertson at 17:48 Mar-02-2009 .

Sorry Gentlemen,

I guess I brought about some confusion. By all mean, if there is an indication, it should be mentionned. I wouldn't have any other way. What I meant was when an indication is acceptable by code and the customer still wants it rejected. Then I do what they ask. If they want to be more stricked than code, that is their prerogative. Let remember that after all, codes are the minimum. Now is it reasonable? Well that is another story.

Cheerio's to all

    
 
 Reply 
 
S.Senthilkumar
Engineering, QA/QC/NDT
NOV (National Oilwell Varco), Angola, Joined Mar 2006, 41

S.Senthilkumar

Engineering, QA/QC/NDT
NOV (National Oilwell Varco),
Angola,
Joined Mar 2006
41
21:09 Mar-02-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to S.Senthilkumar at 14:25 Mar-02-2009 (Opening).

Dear All,
Thank you for your contribution. One more clarification. For example ASME SEC VIII RT, UT, MT & PT says
NON Relevant Indicattion Sizes>
RT less than 0.75mm (Appdx for Rounded Indication)
MT less than 1.5mm (Art ...)
PT less than 1.5mm (Art..)
UT Only says 20% Reference level above evaluation.

All the above are says non relevant indication, So I need to record in report less this size as well?

Thanks
Regards,
S.Senthilkumar

    
 
 Reply 
 
Juan Amado
Engineering, Inspection
Arco Industrial, S.A., Panama, Joined Nov 2001, 44

Juan Amado

Engineering, Inspection
Arco Industrial, S.A.,
Panama,
Joined Nov 2001
44
04:15 Mar-03-2009
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to S.Senthilkumar at 21:09 Mar-02-2009 .

I'll add the following regarding how I understand it:

1. If there are no indications (which is very rare, but does happen), then you can say: NO INDICATIONS WERE OBSERVED
2. If there are indications, but are smaller than the relevant indication size, then you can say: NO RELEVANT INDICATIONS WERE DETECTED
3. If there are indications that are, larger than the relevant indication size, but smaller than the rejectable indication size, then you can say (for example): "A rounded indication was observed measuring xx in its largest dimention", and the weld or joint or part, as appropriate, should be marked accepted per the applied criteria.
4. If there are indications that are larger than the acceptable indication size, then it shall be reported, and marked as rejected.

Hope this helps.

Best regards,
Juan Amado

    
 
 Reply 
 
chris tumane
chris tumane
11:03 Nov-19-2012
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to Michel Couture at 18:26 Mar-02-2009 .

is non relevant indication acceptable?

    
 
 Reply 
 
chris tumane
chris tumane
11:15 Nov-19-2012
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to chris tumane at 11:03 Nov-19-2012 .

specification says 2mm or more long indication and an indication 3.6mm but it is non relevant indication.

    
 
 Reply 
 
Jianjun Wu
Engineering,
China, Joined Nov 2012, 20

Jianjun Wu

Engineering,
China,
Joined Nov 2012
20
08:23 Nov-26-2012
Re: NDT Reports Reporting
In Reply to chris tumane at 11:15 Nov-19-2012 .

Dear all.
Normally, all recordable indications are to be specified in NDE report. This is depending on the requirements of the standard or code you applied.

For example, in UT testing, you found some spot indications in testing(maybe small porosity, slag), but their amplitude is lower than DAC-10 dB. The standard you applied has already specified that all indications with an amplitude lower than DAC-10 is regardless except they could be evaluated to hazadous discontinuities such as crack, LOF etc. you can say, "No recordable indications are found." Otherwise, you should report every recordable indications in the sheet.

    
 
 Reply 
 

Product Spotlight

NDT.net launches mobile-friendly design

NDT.net has revamped its website providing a mobile-friendly design.The front page received a comp
...
letely new design and all other sections are now reacting responsively on mobile devices. This has been a major step to make our website more user- friendly.
>

Varex Imaging Large Field of View (FOV) Digital Detector Arrays (DDAs)

A larger FOV DDA can reduce the space and volume of the X-ray inspection system on the factory floor
...
, enable faster scanning times, better throughput and better resolution images at a lower dose. Customers can also save time and money. With these benefits in mind, Varex Imaging has designed a family of large FOV detectors (4343HE, XRD 1611, 4343DX-I, 4343CT) for our industrial imaging customers.
>

Ultrasonic tomograph for imaging of concrete structures А1040 MIRA

Applicable for concrete inspection allowing imaging of the internal structure of objects from conc
...
rete, reinforced concrete, different stones. The operation applies pulse-echo technique at one-side access to the object. The instrument is feasible for concrete inspection for searching conduct ducts, conduits, detection of foreign inclusions, holes, honeycombing, cracks and other concrete defects.
>

Sci Aps Z-Series Portable Handheld Analysers

The world’s only handheld analyzer that measures carbon content in stainless (yes even L-grades),s
...
teels, and cast irons. Also accepted for low Si analysis for sulfidic corrosion analysis, and is widely used in the power industry for Cr analysis, for flow accelerated corrosion applications.
>

Share...
We use technical and analytics cookies to ensure that we will give you the best experience of our website - More Info
Accept
top
this is debug window