By the end of this section, students will be able to:
If you want to learn more, please visit our website AJR.
Most of the parts and materials used in the world are made using robust, repeatable processes with minimal post-fabrication inspections. In industries where the consequences of failure can be high (aerospace, turbomachinery, nuclear, medical, oil and gas, high-value costly to replace automotive), parts are often subjected to nondestructive testing, which is process of inspecting components or assemblies for discontinuities, or differences in characteristics without destroying the serviceability of the parts, to see if they contain any defects that would cause failure while in service. Thus, the use of NDT to ensure freedom from defects that could cause in-service failure is integral to the certification of many systems.
While more detailed definitions exist, for the purposes of this book, a defect is a discontinuity that may compromise the ability of a part to meet design intent. While it can be expected that the above industries will continue to use NDT for AM parts, the lack of long-term service history may cause other industries, such as automotive, to consider the use of NDT until manufacturing and service history provides the data needed to eliminate it. One unique aspect of AM is that since the parts are built in layers, the opportunity presents itself to inspect the part as it is built, known as In-Situ AM. Related to this is the ability to gather and analyze significant amounts of data while a part is being built, which provides unprecedented ability to perform Process Monitoring or Process Control while the part is being built.
Post-build NDT, often referred to as conventional NDT, is divided into volumetric and surface methods. Volumetric methods look for discontinuities in the interior of a part or material, while surface methods look for discontinuities on the surface of a part. Each of these methods have their own attributes, with surface methods generally considered more critical. Surface discontinuities tend to have a greater impact on performance than subsurface ones due to higher stress concentrations and the potential for crevice corrosion. It can be imagined one day, that in-situ NDT of AM may address both volumetric and surface inspections. In the following paragraphs, each of the inspection technologies will be briefly described with relation to AM, followed by an example.
This original method of NDT is almost exclusively used for volumetric inspections and dates back to the days of Roentgen. It can be used for the full range of AM materials, and works by passing X-rays (although some systems use Gamma rays or neutrons) through a part and onto a detector. Cracks and pores are found because they have less matter to absorb the X-rays so more hit the detector. Inclusions (undesirable foreign material) are found because they either absorb more X-rays (higher density) or fewer X-rays (lower density). General practice is that when more X-rays hit the detector, the image is darker, and when fewer hit the detector, the image is brighter. It can be inferred that for a discontinuity to be detected, it must be oriented so that it has some thickness in the direction of the X-ray beam. This means that planar discontinuities, such as cracks, may be difficult to detect, unless one knows their preferred orientation.
While photographic film was the preferred detector until the s, more and more industries are now using digital detectors to capture the image. These offer significant benefits in terms of time, sensitivity, and ability to analyze the image. The most sophisticated, and expensive, radiographic method is known as computed tomography (CT). In this method, the part is rotated while being continually exposed to the X-rays and the detector continually collects the data. The data is then processed to generate a 3D reconstruction of the part. In addition to being used to detect and characterize discontinuities, CT can also generate a solid model for comparison with the actual design. This extra capability can be quite useful in AM to determine if a complex part with internal passages meets dimensional requirements where conventional metrology would not be able to inspect.
For the purposes of this discussion, we will say the discontinuities of interest are pores, inclusions, and cracks. Additionally, it is necessary to know whether internal passages are the correct distance from the surface of the part. A series of radiographic shots, as shown below, could be used to look for pores and cracks, with a typical sensitivity being 2% of material thickness (thus if the part is 50mm thick, pores above 1mm across could be detected), and to provide some information on the cooling channels. The use of CT, however, would provide the ability to determine the actual geometry of the cooling channels and allow a digital comparison with the original model the part was built to. One aspect of AM where complexity can be a hindrance is in performing radiographic inspections. Parts with a large number for small features can have lots of noise around the edges of the features, making it difficult to interpret the radiographic results.
One version of ultrasonic inspection, called surface wave inspection, is used as a surface or near-surface inspection. This entails introducing a surface wave (called a Raleigh wave) into a part and then listening for it to reflect back off of a discontinuity. Because surface wave inspection is relatively rare in industry, and would be so for AM, we will focus on the use of ultrasonic as a volumetric inspection method. Ultrasonic inspection is effective in materials that transmit sound, such as metals and composites. It is less effective in porous ceramics, neat polymers, or elastomers. Volumetric ultrasonic inspection works much like sonar on a ship. A pulse, generally between 1MHz and 20MHz, is sent out from a transducer.
While the first is used in metals and composites, and the second mainly in metals (especially welds), through-transmission is most commonly used for the inspection of composites. Inspection of flat shapes will use general service probes, while more complicated shapes may use customized probes other devices (called shoes) to introduce the sound into the part. The most complicated shapes often require building custom phased array ultrasonic probes, which contain an array of transducers specifically designed for the inspected geometry. All of these methods are best for finding discontinuities that are oriented perpendicular to the direction of sound. Thus, radiography (good at finding discontinuities parallel to the beam direction) and ultrasonic inspection can be very complimentary, which is why they are often used together in the inspection of welds.
The primary challenges in performing ultrasonic inspection of AM parts are due to geometric complexity and surface roughness. Because the sound needs to be introduced into and received out of the part, the geometry needs to be relatively simple to allow both access for the transducer and the ability to have some area of contact. Additionally, a predictable back surface is needed. Finally, the wave needs room to propagate, so thin or narrow features are difficult to inspect. In conventional manufacturing, most ultrasonic inspections are performed on simple shapes, such as rectangular plates or round bars. The rough or irregular surfaces of many AM parts also make inspection difficult, as a smooth, consistent surface is needed to introduce the sound into the part.
Eddy-current inspection is primarily a surface inspection method, although discontinuities within 1mm of the surface can be detected with the correct set-up. Eddy-current uses an electromagnetic coil (generally between 10Hz and 4Mhz, depending on material and application) to induce eddy-currents in the part. Thus, only conductive materials can be inspected. The presence of a physical discontinuity will disturb the eddy-currents, which is picked up the test equipment. Eddy-current testing requires a reasonably smooth surface, so the rough surfaces of AM parts can be a significant hinderance. It can also be very labor-intensive. As a result, it is often relegated to inspecting small areas, where a production discontinuity or fatigue crack is suspected.
Like Eddy-current, magnetic particle inspection can detect surface and near-surface (also up to ~1mm deep) discontinuities. A prerequisite for this inspection method is that the material in question be reasonably ferromagnetic (alloy steels or PH stainless steels). Magnetic particle inspection works by inducing a magnetic field in the part and applying magnetic particulate matter to highlight areas where the magnetic field is disturbed. These are areas of potential cracks, laps, etc. Needless to say, the rough surfaces and undercuts in many AM parts would generate many false positive indications, so magnetic particle inspection would be limited to smooth surfaces.
Due to the ability to use a common inspection procedure, applicability to all nonporous materials, and quick examination time, penetrant inspection is the most common surface inspection method in industry. A discontinuity must be open to the surface in order for penetrant inspection to work, as the method entails using capillary action to draw the penetrant into the discontinuity, which then bleeds back out after the excess penetrant is removed and a developer is applied. Like magnetic particle and eddy-current inspection, linear discontinuities around 1.5mm and above are typically detected with high-sensitivity fluorescent penetrant materials. Also, like magnetic particle and eddy-current inspection, the ability to inspect is significantly compromised by rough surfaces. Additionally, surfaces must be free of grease and oils. Finally, for the high-sensitivity penetrants, machines parts with yield strengths under MPa require a pre-penetrant etch to remove any smeared metal. The combination of these often means penetrant inspection requires cleaning and acid or alkaline etch tanks, which is why the inspection is often performed by specialist chemical processing contractors.
This method treats each part like a tuning fork, although in many cases the sound is outside of the audible range. The part is loosely held and tapped in a controlled method. The sound coming off the part will have a characteristic resonance frequency that is detected with a specialized microphone and analyzed. Changes in the resonance frequency may be the result of either discontinuities or discrepant geometry. Because it is quick to perform, resonance inspection can be used as the primary inspection to screen parts as acceptable or questionable, with the questionable part inspected using another method for final disposition.
Thermographic inspection involves imaging an area with an infrared camera to look for differences in temperature. The inspection can be either passive (using background thermal energy to look for hot or cold spots) or active (applying heat via flash lamps or the like and looking for hot or cold spots). Outside of AM, thermographic inspection is often used to inspect areas where a coating may be bonded onto a surface to check for unbonded areas. This also takes advantage of one of its advantages, which is being noncontact and able to inspect large areas quickly. Within AM, it is being developed and implemented for process monitoring and in-situ NDT.
Because of the difficulty of inspecting AM parts post-build, and the opportunity to inspect parts while they are being built, process monitoring, process control, and In-Situ NDT are being implemented and developed. We will start with defining the three terms:
Because AM is an inherently digital process, and because the machines produce large amounts of data, Process Monitoring is the most widely applied of the three. Ideally, Process Monitoring is performed while the process is active, although it can be applied post-built as part of an accept/evaluate/reject decision tree. A wide range of process parameters can be monitored. These include input parameters (laser input power, recoater voltage, arc current, gas flow rate, etc.) or output parameters (melt puddle size, bed surface temperature, laser energy, etc.). The key is reliably determining how the parameters correlate with either an acceptable part, a rejectable part, or a suspect part that requires further evaluation, which is made more challenging in that the definition may be geometry dependent. Making this determination is being helped by the use of a range of data analytics and machine learning tools that are now available.
Process Control will often use the same sensors and data as Process Monitoring. The difference is that the AM machine uses the results of the sensing and analysis to determine if a process is going out of the desired limits and makes changes to the input parameters to keep it within its desired limits. Needless to say, this must be done while the process is active so the changes can be made as part of a closed loop. While not as widely used as Process Monitoring, Process Control is beginning to appear on newer-generation AM machines with increasingly sophisticated sensors and analysis methods.
Making parts without discontinuities is always the goal. Depending on the industry and the part requirements such as, the criticality of the part and the level of confidence in the process, NDT may still be required. In AM, the best time to perform this may be while the part is being built, either to achieve desired level of sensitivity and reliability, minimize NDT cost, or to avoid continuing to add value to a part that is not acceptable. In-Situ NDT may look very much like Process Monitoring and use the same sensors and analysis methods. The difference, however, is that the output of the analysis is a determination that a region of a part contains or does not contain an unacceptable discontinuity and its approximate size.
The decision to use Process Monitoring, Process Control, In-Situ NDT, or Post-Build NDT or some combination of the four, and the methods to be used requires the input of a combination of disciplines and needs to be integrated into the overall design and build of the system as part of the overall certification of that system.
Key to the effective use of NDT is knowing the size of discontinuities that can be detected. Ideally, the NDT methods used to inspect a part can detect discontinuities that are smaller than those that will cause a part to not meet design intent; that is, smaller than the applicable defect size. One measure of this is knowing the smallest possible discontinuity a method can detect on a part, often referred to as the minimum detectable defect size, Because of the complexities of part geometry, discontinuity geometry, operator skill, etc., however, having an absolute size for what can be detected in a part is rarely possible. Thus, the term Probability of Detection (PoD) is used to refer to the size of discontinuity that can be detected with a good chance of success. A typical definition of success is being able to find 90% of the discontinuities above a certain size with 95% confidence. Depending on the material, part geometry, type of discontinuity and NDT method, parts with either actual or simulated discontinuities in the locations of interest and of a range of sizes will undergo NDT multiple times to statistically determine that value.
The final stage in integrating NDT with design and analysis is determining the effects of defects (EoD). That is, how do different discontinuities of different sizes impact the performance of a material. This type of testing is often done when a new material or process is introduced, or it is used for the first time in a new application, especially one that is loaded in fatigue or where damage tolerance is needed.
EoD testing often requires the following:
When this is completed successfully, the results are analyzed and the size of discontinuity that needs to be detected is determined. Ideally, this size is larger than the size that can be detected with confidence. If not, changes to the design and/or materials and processes need to be made. In the case of AM, many industries are just beginning studies to determine both the detectable sizes and the effects of defects.
Whether you’re in the automotive or petroleum industry, you’ve probably heard about non-destructive testing. It’s either part of your product development to enhance new parts’ quality or a regulatory requirement.
This guide explains when non-destructive tests are used, which assets to inspect regularly, and the best testing methods for different materials.
Non-destructive testing (NDT) refers to quality assurance and material examination techniques that preserve the integrity of inspected materials, components, and assets.
Industrial assets such as oil storage tanks, lightning prevention systems on wind turbines, piping, and supporting pylons require regular examination for maintenance and regulatory purposes. NDT inspections identify defects, flaws, irregularities, or wear and tear in structures to ensure safety and robustness
Non-destructive testing is the only way to get high-fidelity material characteristics of an asset without damaging it.
The most common types of non-destructive testing methods assume the usage of sound waves, acoustic impulses, or gamma rays to perform in-depth material assessments. By combining different methods, NDT technicians can test objects for the smallest cracks, voids, or weld discontinuities, invisible to the naked eye.
Types of materials you can test with NDT:
NDT serves two primary purposes: quality control and asset maintenance.
Aerospace and automotive companies have little margin for error when developing new product components. Aircraft engine turbine blades must operate under extreme temperatures and pressure while maintaining optimal speeds. Quality assurance engineers use NDT techniques like ultrasonic testing (UT) or radiographic testing (RT) to inspect the blades for material inconsistencies or cracks after crash tests to ensure durability. NDT allows inspection without interfering with a product’s final use, balancing quality control and cost-effectiveness.
Regular NDT assessments are a compliance requirement in many industries. Operators of oil rigs, power plants, and chemical facilities must comply with safety standards and ensure assets don’t leak, deform, or degrade to the point where they become hazardous.
Magnetic particle testing is used to detect surface-level cold cuts or shrinkage cracks in castings, forgings, and metal components. Eddy current testing is a good method for detecting early signs of corrosion or material loss in pipelines, boilers, and storage tanks.
Early issue detection prevents costly leaks, deformations, and sudden equipment failures. Fortune Global 500 manufacturing and industrial firms lose over $1.5 trillion yearly to unplanned downtime. Regular NDT testing helps avoid operational failures, save on repairs, and extend assets’ lifespan.
Industries relying on NDT for asset evaluations and inspections:
Destructive and non-destructive testing gauge material endurance using different principles. Non-destructive tests aim to preserve material integrity, while destructive testing (DT) applies different pressures (e.g., high temperature, extreme load) until asset deformation or destruction.
Destructive tests help determine the point of failure for the material or component, while NDT tests provide data on asset condition, quality, and reliability.
NDT inspection frequency varies depending on the assets in use, established by regulatory bodies and certification organizations like SAFed, IoP, or ASNT.
In the UK, lifting equipment (e.g., aerial loading platforms) and associated accessories used to lift people must be inspected every six months, and other lifting equipment (e.g., hoists) must be inspected every twelve months. The American Petroleum Institute Standard (API 653) states that internal and external storage tank inspections must be done at least every 5 years.
Even when NDT isn’t directly required, running regular tests is more cost-effective than replacing equipment. Although most wind turbines have a lightning strike prevention (LPS) system, lightning damages cost operators over $100 million annually and account for 60% of blade losses. This leads to extra downtime, maintenance expenses, and higher insurance costs. These losses can be minimized with regular LPS tests with drones — a cost-effective method, requiring only 20 minutes versus 6 hours with rope access.
Asset owners develop non-destructive inspection schedules based on their assets’ risk levels and industry standards to prevent unscheduled downtime.
NDT uses various analysis techniques to evaluate materials, parts, components, and large structures.
The main non-destructive testing methods are:
Visual testing (VT) involves observing the test object’s surface for discontinuities or damages. Remote visual inspections effectively identify corrosion, physical damage, part misalignment, and cracks, especially in hard-to-reach areas.
NDT technicians use visual testing as a standalone method for evaluating visible damage like poor welds in oil piping or cracks in a storage tank. With the Voliro drone, technicians can inspect 8-10 storage tanks (inside or outside) in one day for signs of wear and tear, using payloads UT and EMAT payloads.
Visual testing is the first step in ultrasonic and radiographic inspection. It locates areas of interest and ensures the surface is free of contamination, coatings, or obstructions that may interfere with the tests.
The visual test is the second step in liquid penetrant and magnetic particle inspection. It confirms the correct application of penetrant or magnetic particles and captures defect indications.
Best NDT method for preliminary asset inspection and test site preparation.
Magnetic particle testing (MT) detects flaws or defects on metal surfaces or just beneath. Technicians create a magnetic field using a permanent magnet, electric coils, or handheld electrode prods.
When a magnetic field is applied to the metal, defects disrupt the field, causing magnetic force lines to leak out. These lines attract tiny metal particles, creating a visible mark that shows the defect’s location. Colored magnetic particles stick to the metal and are visible to the naked eye or under ultraviolet light.
Magnetic particle testing is the go-to method for testing welding on metal structures and cracks in power generation equipment, such as wind turbines, generators, boilers, and structural steel components.
Best for NDT testing method for easily accessible ferromagnetic assets.
Are you interested in learning more about Ndt Products? Contact us today to secure an expert consultation!
Magnetic flux leakage testing also leverages changes in magnetic fields to detect signs of corrosion or other damage in metal components. It’s like using a magnet to find hidden metal objects in your pocket. If there’s a problem in a metal pipe, like a hole or thinning, the magnetic field leaks out, and sensors can detect it.
Unlike magnetic particle testing, MFL doesn’t use colored particles to detect surface damage. Instead, it uses data from various sensors (Hall effect, fluxgate, and coil sensors) to detect the smallest changes in magnetic fields indicative of a defect.
Most data is collected by sensors on specialized equipment, so MFL is used to test larger structures like storage tanks, tubes, and pipes. Inspection drones streamline the examination process by allowing close access to test pieces.
Best NDT testing method for large ferromagnetic assets and structures.
Liquid penetrant testing (PT) is another method for finding surface-level defects in metal construction. Inspectors apply a highly fluid liquid penetrant to the structure. The substance seeps into cracks. Technicians apply a developer agent to the surface to color the trapped penetrant, exposing defects.
Non-ferromagnetic materials like stainless steel, aluminum, or non-ferrous alloys can be tested with penetrant testing. This testing method also works better for structural components with irregular shapes (e.g., piping with multiple curves or bends).
Best NDT testing method for non-ferromagnetic assets with complex geometries.
Ultrasonic testing (UT) leverages high-frequency sound waves for asset inspection. An irregularity in a wave causes some of the sound to bounce back, alerting the inspector about a possible defect. It’s like using a sonar fish finder to locate fish, but you’re fishing for flaw.
Different sound waves are used in UT. Some vibrate in the same direction as the sound (compression waves), while others vibrate perpendicular to the sound (shear waves).
Compression waves help detect:
Shear waves help detect:
Ultrasonic testing can detect weld issues in structures, pipelines, pressure vessels, and tanks, as well as problems with piping systems (e.g., corrosion, erosion, wall thickness variations). It’s a common non-destructive examination method for pressure vessels and storage tanks to detect early signs of wall thinning, pitting, or stress corrosion cracking.
Technicians traditionally use various ultrasonic transducers and probes to inspect assets. These can be hand-held or attached to a drone to reach narrow cavities or high areas. UT inspection drones are a safer alternative to sending personnel up elevated structures, reducing risks.
Voliro has developed two ultrasonic transducer payloads for live scans at temperatures up to 260°C (500 °F), saving substantial time and effort on data collection. Boasting high dexterity, Voliro drones can perform thorough inspections in complex environments like chimneys, storage tanks, or stacks. UT inspections can be done in a day without shutdowns. Learn more about Voliro inspection drones.
Guided wave testing is another non-destructive evaluation technique that uses ultrasonic waves to identify defects. Since ground wave testing doesn’t require direct contact, it’s often used to detect surface anomalies along large objects like pipes.
Inspectors place a transducer ring or exciter coil outside the pipe and direct ultrasonic waves along its sides. The waves bounce off any irregularities (like corrosion) on the surfaces inside and outside.
The advantage of guided wave testing is that you don’t need to remove any coatings or insulation to examine the piping. The downside is that GW testing results have lower resolution, making it harder to detect smaller defects or identify their precise size, shape, or location.
Best NDT testing method for large pipelines and tubing.
Radiographic testing (RT) uses radiation rays (aka X-rays) to examine dense materials. Gamma radiation passes through the test object, exposing a film or digital detector on the other side. Darker areas indicate where more radiation passes through, signifying gaps or cracks.
Industrial radiography uses two types of radioactive isotopes:
Because we’re talking gamma radiation, inspectors must follow special safety protocols and always use appropriate personal protective equipment (PPE) to minimize exposure. Soindustrial radiography is rather laborious and expensive.
Eddy current testing is an electromagnetic method for inspecting conductive materials, like certain metals, alloys, and conductive paints or platings on metal surfaces. Unlike MPT and LT, direct contact between the surface and the testing equipment isn’t required with eddy testing.
During testing, inspectors apply an alternating current to materials to create a magnetic field, inducing eddy currents within them. Flaws or defects in the material alter the current’s pattern. Detecting and analyzing this change helps inspectors identify flaws with high precision.
Eddy current testing is a cost-effective and reliable technique used for quality assurance and safety inspections of power cables, heat exchanger coils, condenser tubes, non-pyrogenic alloys, and carbon fiber composites.
Best NDT testing method for no-contact inspection of conductive materials.
Ground penetrating radar (GPR) works by sending electromagnetic pulses into the ground and listening for their echoes as they bounce back. This signal can create a picture of what’s underground, similar to how ultrasound creates images of what’s inside the body.
When the signal hits something underground, like a pipe or rock, it bounces back differently, and GPR can detect these differences. With GPR, asset owners can detect buried pipes, cables, and changes in the ground, like whether the soil is wet or dry. GPR can’t scan through metal (i.e., peak inside a metal pipe) — it can only indicate its location.
GPR is useful for finding buried utilities or hidden structures in concrete. Hence, this testing method is often used in civil engineering and construction.
Best NDT method for detecting underground objects or obstructions.
Acoustic emission testing (AE) captures mechanical vibrations of stressed materials or structures. Technicians attach sensors (e.g., piezoelectric sensors) or transducers (e.g., strain gauges) to the test object’s surface to convert stress waves into electrical signals. Then, they apply a sudden force, change in temperature, or pressure to the structure and analyze the generated vibration.
AE tests detect surface changes caused by stress waves (cracks, deformation, etc.), indicating hidden problems or weaknesses. It’s great for quality assurance of critical assets like supporting structures, towers, bridges, and individual system components (pumps, compressors, bearings).
Best NDT testing method for structural bearing components, pressure vessels, and storage tanks.
Thermal testing (also known as infrared thermography) measures the apparent surface temperature of tested objects to examine their thermal conductivity. Overheating metal parts in a motor can deform, causing performance issues. Poorly isolated wiring in electrical panels can cause short circuits. Thermal tests help detect those problems.
Infrared thermography is primarily used to identify energy loss in buildings. Although manufacturing companies also use thermal scanning to locate cracks or delaminations in polymers, plastics, ceramics, and semiconductors. Infrared testing helps localize areas under high thermal stress, fatigue, or degradation, which can change material integrity.
Best NDT testing method for detecting energy loss and thermal-induced deformations.
Microwave testing (MW) uses electromagnetic waves in the microwave frequency range to scan for irregularities. By analyzing reflected wave signals, teams can identify abnormalities such as cracks, voids, or inconsistencies.
Microwave (MW) inspection is gaining popularity for examining plastic and composite materials due to its effectiveness, especially with complex composite materials like glass fiber-reinforced polymers (GFRP).
The non-contact nature of this NDT technique allows for accurate, reliable, and repeatable MNDT readings on composites in high or low temperatures and complex electrostatic environments (e.g., DC biasing fields, ionizing radiation, etc.). On the downside, microwave testing doesn’t work great for metallic or other conductive materials. Delivering accurate results requires extensive setup, leading to higher testing costs.
Best NDT method for examining plastic and composite materials.
Laser testing uses helium-neon, diode, Nd: YAG, and excimer lasers to detect surface-level issues. Inspectors first apply stress to the material (e.g., bend it). Then use laser light to create images of surface changes.
The two main testing techniques are holography and shearography. Here’s how they work:
Both approaches are non-contact fast, and they can detect a variety of defects without closely following a material’s shape. However, the test setup process is rather laborious.
Best NDT testing method for aerospace components, semiconductor chips, and electronic assemblies.
Leak testing uses non-destructive testing methods to locate breaches in the integrity of sealed or pressurized systems like gas tanks, refrigeration systems, or chemical basins. These tests ensure asset integrity, safety, and regulatory compliance.
The four most common leak testing methods are:
In some cases, inspectors may suggest using alternative techniques like dye penetrant or acoustic emission testing for more precise results.
Best NDT method for container assets.
Non-destructive inspections must be conducted at regular intervals, according to specific standards from regulatory bodies.
The main regulatory standards for NDT testing include:
The above standards provide guidelines for the qualification, certification, and performance of NDT personnel, as well as the proper use of different NDT techniques and interpretation of the results.
Additionally, each industry must meet compliance requirements for regular asset management prescribed by respective regulatory bodies. Here’s a quick overview of the main regulatory bodies and standards related to asset maintenance.
Purpose-built for close-to-structure work, Voliro drones help collect richer inspection data in less time. Inspect assets in use to avoid unnecessary downtime and production delays.
Our drones have 360-degree mobility, enabling your teams to perform work at heights and in hard-to-reach areas safely. With AI-assisted autonomy and 3-day pilot training included in every subscription, using a Voliro is like switching from a paper map to GPS navigation.
If you are looking for more details, kindly visit Non Destructive Testing Products.