Fig. 2 — Typical ultrasonic examination equipment for applications to the requirements of AWS D1.1, Structural Welding Code — Steel. Don’t rely solely on your memory, check the code requirements. inspectors may even attempt to make the requirements fit the inspection technique they have become so accustomed to in lieu of making the inspection technique fit the requirements. This is often done when the pressures of schedule and cost influence the work. When that happens, it is time to step back and really consider what you are trying to accomplish. At some point the inspector may incorrectly assume that reference to the codes, standards, and procedures is not required or becomes less critical because “I have performed this inspection a thousand times” or “I already know what the code says.” I have even heard phrases such as “this is a better method than what the code requires.” Now, don’t get me wrong, I firmly believe there is no substitute for field experience when it comes to inspection. I also know that many individuals are capable of keeping the code requirements committed to memory. However, over the years I have found the best policy is to challenge my memory by actually taking the time to study the code book and associated documents and validate whether my memory is correct. Sometimes my memory serves me well; sometimes I discover my memory is not quite right. Yes, I admit that I have fallen into the trap of thinking “I know what the code says.” It usually takes a strong self check to bring me back to the mentality I had as a new inspector; that is, to prepare by studying, asking questions, and observing the process. I was fortunate to have been mentored and to work beside someone whom I consider to be one of the most respected and competent inspectors in the nuclear industry. This individual has many years of both welding and inspection experience, and holds multiple Level III certifications as well as a welding engineering degree. He is patient and takes his time to make sure the job is performed correctly, efficiently, and safely. He has a tremendous capability for putting things in their proper perspective when it comes to cost, schedule, and safety, something we all know is difficult to do when we are up against the wall. The Need for Preparation It is hoped each inspector is thoroughly prepared regarding the component he or she is called upon to inspect. The time it takes for proper and thorough preparation typically saves both time and money in the long run — Fig. 1. I have always believed my preparation practices were above average for performing inspections. However, I recently had an experience with a trainee that opened my eyes and taught me a valuable career lesson with regard to this topic. I was called upon to perform multiple ultrasonic inspections that I felt were going to be just another set of “routine” inspections that would fall within my comfort zone toolbox of inspections. I had performed what I thought were similar ultrasonic inspections in the not-so-distant past. Within minutes, I had in my mind the path forward for completion of these inspections. I immediately envisioned the required flaw detector, transducers, calibration standards, acceptance criteria, qualified procedure(s), etc. I believed we were ready to move forward with very little effort. As with many ultrasonic inspection jobs, it is great to have a second set of hands to help out. These inspections were going to be performed in a radiation/contaminated area as well as a confined space. I felt this would be a great job in which to utilize the assistance of one of our trainees, and which would also allow him to receive some valuable ultrasonic experience hours. Whenever I work with trainees, I try to emulate the methods my mentor uses. While it would take extra time, I felt it would be valuable for me to go through the specification and associated requirements in detail with the trainee even though I felt I already knew the scope and requirements of the work. However, within minutes of reading through the specification, I realized my first assumptions about the inspections were off base and I would need to adjust my path forward. As we moved into the code requirements, I again realized that what I thought I knew was not totally correct. To my surprise, multiple items including personnel qualification, and calibration and equipment requirements were different from what I remembered — Fig. 2. While the code requirements were not a great deal different than my recollection, had I moved forward without 22 Inspection Trends / April 2013
Inspection Trends | April 2013
To see the actual publication please follow the link above