use of binocular

Date 11-23-2010 09:56

Bert,
You will find that elevated piping can quite often look like new from the ground but the top of the pipe (which you cannot see) is severely corroded due to chemicals landing on the top of the pipe. This would not be a problem on an overland pipeline but any piping in and around refineries, petrochemical plants is susceptible to this problem,
Regards,
Shane

By Joey

Date 11-23-2010 14:42

Hi Shane,

This is my smart azz understanding :). By naked eye, the surface of the moon looks smooth. But using binocular the moon has a lot of black holes. To asses the condition and get more details, you need to reach the area; therefore, the binocular findings may assist on whether scaffolding must be erected or not. This will save cost of erecting unnecessary scaffolding.

Pacman won!!! :) my future president :) :)

Regards
Joey

By Lawrence (*****)

Date 11-23-2010 15:09

Pac-Man is the only Boxer worth watching! Other than him it's MMA now a days.

By Joey

Date 11-24-2010 07:21

Bloodsport MMA fighting? That is too violent Lawrence. I can’t stand to see those broken leg, arm. I would prefer to watch those legal cockfighting :)

By RANDER

Date 11-23-2010 15:35

I don't believe you will find anything written prohibiting or approving the use of binoculars during your inspections. As Shane pointed out many times piping can look good from below as well as viewed from an angle. However the 10 o clock to 2 o clock position can be susceptible to corrosion especially if there is coating failure as condensation tends to accumulate in these areas. Piping near cooling towers should be carefully inspected in these areas.
Ensure your client is aware of the level of inspection you are performing and note the limitations in your report as you will most likely not see any weld defects and even pitting may be difficult to detect if the surface/coating condition is poor.

By CWI555

Date 11-30-2010 11:26

If intrinsic safety is not an issue, RF frequencies are not restricted, and scaffolding is not practical:

ASME would clasify anything outside of 24" and 30 degrees to be a remote examination. For a remote examination, it must meet the mimimum of detail as compared to what a direct examination would be. Qualification of that system is required by ASME.

For that, A trip to your local spy shop or auto parts reverse camera and a trip to the RC store is called for.

The basic camera gear and transmitter is around 6 ounces, so the remote helo needs to be capable of lifting that.

I've done this twice, the client was more than pleased that they got their examinations performed, allowing pinpoint placement of scaffolding to effect repairs with no wasted $$$
The gear paid for itself the first trip, the second trip was $$$, and the one upcoming will be $$$.

An option you may want to look at.

By Superflux (****)

Date 11-30-2010 18:09

CWI555,
Do you charge extra for the "specialised remote viewing equipment"?
Very ingenious solution to the accessibility issue.

By CWI555

Date 11-30-2010 20:33 Edited 11-30-2010 20:35

Yes I do. Price varies depending the complexity of the task at hand. However, the price is significantly cheaper than that of a direct examination (that would require extensive scaffolding or significant risk of injury or life), while still providing acceptable results. I use magnetic crawlers, wire access crawlers, and others as well. Each system must be specifically designed for the task at hand as there are no canned solutions out there. (though I am working on that one)

More than anything its a safety issue. In this day and age of liability and risk of injury to a worker, the cost of remote inspection is cheap compared to the potential end results of some one falling.

I've got a lot of time in the nuclear examination world, and have used an extensive array of robotic/remote equipment to perform exams and inspections. If its to hot (radiation) for a human, a way has been devised to do it remotely. I've got 400 hours in remote PT examination of all things as an example. Not to many can claim that one or even know it exist.
The mechanics of it are relatively straight forward, the devil is in the details of qualification of the system and design of a system that if it fails (crash and burn) it will do no harm to plant equipment or risk any form of injury.

By RANDER

Date 11-23-2010 16:35 Edited 11-23-2010 17:10

Certainly. If the client is aware of the level of inspection then why not? In many cases of inservice piping inspection you will not see 100% of the pipe. It is not practical to build scaffold, use manlifts, use rope access techs, etc... to see 100% of the line. If there are areas of concern that justify a closer inspection then the decision can be made to provide access to those areas. Is the use of binoculars ideal? No. Is it ideal to build scaffold over 100% of a 600+ acre refinery so that you can see 100% of the pipe?...I dont think so.
Communication is key. If the client is under the assumption that you as the inspector are 18 inches from the pipe at all times when in reality you are walking the line from the ground 20 feet away you might run into some problems, However if you are on the same page they will realize that some things may escape detection by walking it from the ground and they can determine where to spend the money to get the best inspection. This is pretty standard for piping inspection in my experience in petroleum refineries and oilfields.

Let me add that if this is a D.O.T. Regulated pipeline you had better be very sure that Binocs. are acceptable.

By CHGuilford (****)

Date 11-23-2010 17:39

Sure - why not?

Just kidding...although that's exactly what I used for one inspection job years ago. I was sent out to inspect erected steel (about 100' x 200' and 2 stories). Found the place - no contractor, no crew, no staging, no ladders, everything very uniformly rusted. Tall weeds growing up through the gravel where trucks once drove - a ghost town.
I called in to the office to be sure I had the right place - yup I did. I was told to just look everything over and look at bolted connection to "check that bolts are properly instaled".

My report stated that anchor bolts had nuts on them, and looking through binoculars, the connection bolts appeared to have nuts on them (It was hard to tell because I had to stand where the sun was in my eyes to see some of the connections) I reported the conditions of inspection, what i could see, and that I could not accept or reject anything. And that was all I would say about it.

I don't know if anyone else got paid for the inspection but I did.

By 803056

Date 11-23-2010 20:01

Regardless of the type of inspection performed, it is important to report how the inspection was performed and what inspection aids were used.

An inspection of completed welds requires the inspector to get"close and personal" to measure the weld size, check the profile, length, look for small cracks and other surface breaking discontinuities. However, routine examination of paint finish may not require the same level of visual inspection if the concern is whether there is a general failure of the coating, whether there is visiable rust, etc. The owner should be consulted any time the inspector cannot get up close and personal when a visual examination is specified. The owner should be made aware of he limitations involved when the inspector has to operate in less than ideal conditions.

A number of standards require nondestructive examinations to be performed in accordance with a written procedure. The procedure should be reviewed and approved by the client before the inspection is initiated so all parties are aware of the type of examination to be performed and how the examination will be performed. No one like surprises once the job is completed and it is discovered the examination performed was not what the client expected.

Best regards - Al

By fschweighardt (***)

Date 11-23-2010 23:25

Inspection should be based on agreed upon criteria and methods. Both parties need to sign a contract specifying exactly how it will be done. Methods, criteria to some code, maybe some additional specifics, all should be in the agreement. This way there are no suprises for anybody

By Joey

Date 11-24-2010 07:36

d_paul71

If you will hesitate to sign those inspection done by high definition binoculars,
I guess you will hesitate to sign those inspection done by boroscope too :)

By d_paul71 (**)

Date 11-24-2010 11:06

lol When the camera is practically touching the defect I think I could make a good call on accepting or rejecting the examination. :)