This has long been evident in many industries, even though Codes invoked by contracts contain very explicit requirements that all inspections and tests be conducted in accordance with a documented procedure. Audits of inspection and testing operations continue to expose a general lack of understanding that any test – visual or other – must be conducted in a very predictable and regulated manner in order to assure both accuracy of the inspection/test, and the thoroughness.

Most sentiments regarding visual inspection procedures regard them as “unnecessary” to a fully trained and certified inspection professional who has likely conducted, “…untold hundreds of similar inspections…”. Those organizations who profess to “do it right”, generally regard the inspection and test report form as the “procedure”. While better than nothing, this practice brings into light the lack of understanding of many between the process of inspection and the collection of data resulting from that process.

In the rare event that a visual inspection procedure is part of a company or individual’s quality management system, the use of this tool is relegated to the book shelf rather than made a part of every-day practice. Similar to Welding Procedure Specifications (WPS), welding inspection procedures simply do not find their way into the hands of those individuals most effected and most reliant on them, and necessary to their day-to-day work activities.

The most effective visual weld inspection procedures are “living documents” that are revised for each assignment, and include detailed information relating to; the items to be inspected, contact information, contract/job references, materials used in fabrication, inspection tools needed, the inspection environment, scope of inspections, reference materials to be used (Code or specification with acceptance criteria), safety hazards anticipated, etc.

AUDIENCE
Employers and inspection personnel regularly engaged in visual weld inspection.

TRAINING IMPLICATIONS
Using procedure formats developed over 40+ years of industry and inspection experience, the author will show the value of including visual inspection procedures for all inspection activities, and improve the training offered by employers to their inspectors in the development and application of project-specific inspection procedures.
As employers embrace the use of documented procedures for all inspections, there will need to be training established for employees to instruct them in the development and use of said procedures.

APPLICABILITY
Documented inspection procedures are applicable wherever visual inspection is conducted, and, if properly developed and implemented, can be used as a selling tool for small contractors and individual inspectors to improve and expand their business base.

POSSIBLE IMPACT TO THE INSPECTION INDUSTRY
The author anticipates a generally positive impact to the inspection industry as employers and individual inspection consultants adopt the process of producing detailed inspection procedures. This action would improve the quality of inspections, demonstrate a high level of commitment to conducting highest quality inspections, and ensuring that inspections are adequately researched prior to being conducted.

Another anticipated improvement in inspection quality would result from inclusion of the “scope of work” within project-specific procedures. This practice would help eliminate follow-up inspections necessitated by poor communication between the inspector and employer resulting in incomplete inspections, additional costs, and schedule impacts.

Another factor affecting the overall cost of a product has to do with the applicable acceptance criteria specified by the design authority. Specification of acceptance criteria more critical than the design warrants only adds cost. Then, if an inspector applies these criteria in an overzealous manner, the cost escalates even further. The bain of the inspector is the “borderline indication”. Since the acceptance criteria is already considered conservative, rejection of the borderline indication adds even more cost.

AWS D14.4, Specification for the Design of Welded Joints in Machinery and Equipment, is one of the best standards produced by AWS. It integrates the design, fabrication, and inspection of components according to the design criteria for a weld joint, or structural component. The design authority specifies a Class of weld joint, which then dictates fabrication requirements, inspection method(s) and frequency, and the applicable acceptance criteria. This presentation will describe this unique approach and some of the inherent benefits. As part of this approach, the visual examination acceptance criteria is greatly simplified, providing an opportunity to improve the consistency and effectiveness of the inspection, thereby reducing the overall cost.

Bernardo Cuervo is a Senior Pipeline Integrity Consultant for G2 Integrated Solutions with 30 years of experience in pipeline design, construction, and in-line inspection (ILI). Cuervo graduated as a Civil Engineer in 1989 and is a Master Trainer of the National Center for Construction, Education, and Research (NCCER). He is co-chair of the Corrosion Control Course of the University of Oklahoma and a PHMSA associate instructor for the ‘Safety Evaluation of In-line Inspection Programs’. Cuervo has co-presented the workshop ‘Practical Pigging Operations’ for Clarion Technical Conference and has trained and certified analysts and pipeline operators in various ILI technologies in the USA and Canada.

(8:45 – 10:00am) Inspection of Crack Repairs in Large Castings and Forgings
Presenter: George Fairbanks, Fairbanks Inspection & Testing

AWS D1.1 allows for using modern fracture mechanics as a basis for justifying alternative flaw acceptance criteria in structural steel welds, but it does not provide any recommendations for executing this practice. The intent of this presentation is to provide recommended best practices for planning and implementing
alternative flaw acceptance criteria programs. The emphasis is placed on the interaction of different technical specialists, workflow, material procurement requirements, and schedule. Consensus fracture mechanics procedures, fracture toughness testing standards, non‐standard fracture mechanics tests,
other necessary material testing, and inspection capabilities are reviewed. Similar to any other engineering method, there are multiple options for level of effort and technical sophistication.

The multiple options, each with its respective pros and cons, are provided. Current and anticipated future research and development trends for fracture mechanics in alternative flaw criteria are briefly discussed.

[1]With the plethora of leaks and explosions that have been occurring recently, and the increased emphasis on pipeline regulations with the new laws and standards coming out, you are likely all too aware of the stakes. The question is: How can you get ahead of them? The answer lies in digital data. With the recent surge in digitalization, critical and accurate information about pipeline health is more readily accessible than ever. Tools now exist that deliver real data in real time at all stages of the pipeline’s lifecycle –from construction through to operations. In fact, even inspection work can be reported immediately from the field via mobile tablet. Allot this can translate into substantial productivity gains, risk mitigation, and reduced likelihood of failure –but the real game changer is the access to readily accurate data from your asset at any time. Let’s examine how.

This paper provides an overview of the existing federal and state legislation regulating the themed park industry and the means, methods, and technologies existing and being developed to effectively inspect amusement rides. Actual ride components with examples of existing inspection methods are described.