Please which you recommend to purchase in term of reliabilty,strength,price and accuracy
1. the AGR TD Focus-Scan Phased Array multi channels equipment or Olympos Omniscan Phased Array multi channels equipment?
2. The NDT equipment(except RT equipment) of GE or Olympos or AGR? particularly UT equipment.
Thanks and best regard
Ebrahim Al-Wabary/Saudia Arabia
Mob: +669 504920561
14:08 Sep-17-2009 Roger Duwe NDT Inspector, API-510, 570, 653 MISTRAS, USA, Joined Jan 2009 148
Re: NDT EQUIPMENTIn Reply to Ebrahim Al-Wabary/Saudia Arabia at 16:04 Sep-12-2009 (Opening).
For Phased Array, Omniscan is currently the best of the 'field' instruments.
For manual UT, any of Olympus [Panametrics] or GE [Krautkramer] premier instruments the best available. The software for these two manufacturers is quite a bit different, so it is not easy to go from one brand to another. If you need more than one or two instruments, consider buying all of one brand.
To improve the resolution of manual UT, use only the GE [Krautkramer] composite transducers. Nothing else on the market is even close for resolution and sensitivity.
Basically, as far as I know there are three prominet players namely Ominscan from Olympus, TD Scan from AGR and Phasor from GE. I know it is difficult to lean to one over other, and it is like which car is good GM, Chrysler or Ford.
I am too wondering what are other actual user's thoughts on who has used all three systems in terms its slient technical features, its software, ruggeeness and user friendlyness etc., without any bias on one manufacturer or specifically against one manufactuer.
I am just familiar with the Omniscan. However, after seeing demonstrations from multiple NDE companies, using a range of PA equipment, both BP (British Petroleum) and Suncor now specify Omniscan as "prequalified". Any other PA system has to be tested and pass a Performance Demonstration, to their satisfaction. I have to respect those opinions, and have drawn some conclusions from the lack of prequalified alternate systems.
Hopefully the conclusions you have drawn relate to the resources that Olympus have allocated to promoting the equipment and supporting evaluations, as well as the excellent job done by some of their technical people (Michael Moles in particular has criss-crossed the world showing people how to solve problems with the Omniscan)
I would not criticise the Olympus equipment itself, but neither would I draw any adverse conclusions about the quality of their competitors equipment.
As always, evaluate the equipment for your situation. Availability of training and support from your local rep are at least as important as the reputation of the system