RE

w
x ME BACK TO BASICS
From Materials Evaluation, Vol. 75, No. 4, pp: 456-460.
Copyright © 2017 The American Society for Nondestructive Testing, Inc.

PORTS
Nondestructive Testing
Report Writing
by Jerry Fulin

T
he importance of writing a nondestructive testing (NDT) report
correctly is often underestimated, or the case may be that report
writing was not provided during training. An NDT report is a reflec-
tion of the inspection process that a technician has completed.
Often, necessary information is not recorded on a report, or it is misleading to
the client or person reviewing the report. These days, the report is most likely
part of the recording criteria that are kept for the life of the product inspected.
Should the product come under scrutiny at some time in the future, it is
assured that the report will be reviewed and the technician may be required
to explain what was recorded on the report (ASME 2015).

A Correctly Written Report

All inspections must be completed in accordance with a specification,
using a qualified procedure, by qualified personnel. This is something the
author emphasizes in the classes he instructs because it is the technician
signing the report who is responsible for its contents. So, what is needed for a
correctly written report? To begin with, the technician must understand the
code and specification requirements of the client. Why? Because the
procedure must have the required codes and specifications listed in the refer-
ences section (ASME 2015). In addition, a review of the work order from the
client may have additional specifications or restrictions to be added to the
inspection requirements and/or procedure. The client, owner, or operator of
the finished product has the right, and at times an obligation, to add needed
inspection requirements. Someone in the office of the technician should be
reviewing the work order to have an understanding of all the inspection
requirements prior to sending a technician to the job site. Further, the office
should ensure the technician has the training and experience to fulfill all the

APRIL 2017 • MATERIALS EVALUATION 457

ME BACK TO BASICS w
x ndt report writing
inspection requirements. The technician should be
reviewing the work order or work assignment for any
additional or special specifications added to the
procedure prior to starting the work. Both the techni-
cian and the supporting office staff must understand
that, if the technician proceeds without completely
understanding what is needed, it is very probable that
the inspection results may not meet the client’s
requirements. If the client is not provided with a
good inspection and report, the results may require
another inspection to get the desired results. If the
technician is sure he/she does not meet the require-
ments, he/she should have a discussion with the
supporting office staff and/or request the needed
instruction or training prior to starting the work
task. As many of the author’s NDT mentors have
emphasized, the technician has an obligation to
do things right.
If the client is not provided with a good
inspection and report, the results may require
another inspection to get the desired results.
Should the technician’s performance not meet the
client’s expectations, both the technician and the
supporting office staff will be tagged as providing inac-
curate or incomplete results, which could affect their
selection for additional inspections in the future. It is
important to always remember that the integrity of the
inspection service provider is under review in each
and every report the technician writes and once a
technician loses his/her integrity, it will be almost
impossible to regain it. As an example, the author was
asked to review a company’s work on the thickness
measurements of a platform in the Gulf of Mexico. The
first thing that appeared in the review was the depth
of a corrosion pit on piping attached to a vessel. The
report stated that the original thickness of the pipe
wall was 9.525 mm (0.375 in.) and the recorded pit
depth was 22.86 mm (0.900 in.). This is clearly a
mistake, as the product—natural gas—was not blowing
into the face of the technician. To add to this recording
mistake, the technician’s report was returned to his
employer’s office and the recorded readings were
placed in a final report. The recorded readings were
then reviewed and signed by the company’s certified
authorized inspector before being sent to the client for
458 MATERIALS EVALUATION • APRIL 2017
use in risk-based assessment analysis. The client did
not feel the report provided the desired results and all
of the recorded inspections (one week of work on the
offshore platform) had to be repeated by someone else
from a different company because the client no longer
had faith in the original technician or his company.
Codes and Specifications
There are many possible codes and specifications
that can be applied to inspection techniques, including
those by organizations like ASTM International,
American Society of Mechanical Engineers, American
Petroleum Institute, American Water Works Association,
Association of American Railroads, International
Organization for Standardization, as well as industry
specific codes for bridge and aircraft, to name a few.
Additionally, each of these may have several specifica-
tions that could be applicable to an inspection task. It
is important that someone have copies of the code
and/or specifications being applied for review to the
client’s requirements and to ensure that the written
procedure meets the client’s needs. Often, a review of
the written procedure by a qualified person will find
that a revision is needed to meet the client’s inspec-
tion requirements.
It is important to keep in mind that the written
report is a reflection of the technician’s inspection.
The rule that can be applied here is that the recorded
information should be such that another technician
using the report can complete the same inspection
and obtain the same results. That requires detailed
information on the inspection technique used; the
client’s information, codes and specifications used for
the evaluation; the equipment used; and detailed
results of any imperfections recorded at a minimum.
Information about the client should include what the
client requires and the address provided by the client
as the office or the inspection location or both. List
information on all orders as there can be several for
each project. This information should be provided
by the client prior to the inspection. However, at
times the technician is sent to a worksite without this
information and it is then up to the technician to
obtain this information for the report. If the informa-
tion has not been provided for the report, the techni-
cian should state that on the report and make sure the
client understands it will be recorded that way.
Usually, when the client understands that the informa-
tion will be noted as lacking in the report, the
requested information is provided.
Recording Equipment and Materials
The recording of the equipment and material used
is dependent on the inspection technique. Recording
of the equipment on a report must include the manu-
facturer, model, and serial number information in such
a matter that each individual piece of equipment can
be traced from the report. Additional information that
must be included and traceable is the applicable cali-
bration information such as the date of calibration or
the due date of calibration. In another audit by the
author, a report from a company recorded using light
meters to confirm the correct amount of visible light
and ultraviolet light that was present at the inspection
area was in error, as only the model information of the
light meter was provided. In looking for the equipment
certification dates, the company had several light
meters of the same model. The calibration date and
calibration due date could not be determined from
only the model number, in this case resulting in not
knowing if the light meter used was in the calibration.
In the case of more advanced equipment such as
ultrasonic testing (UT) equipment, not only is the infor-
mation about the UT instrument required, but also the
associated equipment that was used, such as the
transducer model and serial number, cable used
(length), calibration standard(s) used, and, if appli-
cable, the manual or automatic scanner attached to
the UT equipment. The associated equipment from
different manufacturers, such as the transducer used,
can provide widely variable results even when used on
the same UT equipment, although the same frequency
and size are used.
There can be many variables in the associated
equipment that can vary the inspection results of
one’s work, which can only be determined from the
information recorded on the inspection report. Also,
the use of abbreviations must be limited, as not all
personnel reading a report understand the lingo that
the NDT technicians use. An example the author has
seen is the expression of a UT transducer reading of
the thickness of a large casting as longitudinal, longi-
tudinal wave, compression, compression wave, LW,
CW, L, C, single, single wave, SW, and S. This demon-
strates how the lingo can easily be misunderstood by
someone who does not fully understand UT processes.
In radiographic reports, not only the detailed informa-
tion of the isotope used but also the film and film
processing information must be recorded. Should a
second radiographic exposure be required at a later
date, all the information about obtaining the film
results on the first exposure must be recorded on the
report so the same film density and sensitivity can be
obtained on the second exposure.
Legibility
Another problem area that is very common in
report writing is the legibility of the information. If the
report is handwritten, the writing must be clear and
neat. It is best to take time and clearly print the infor-
mation. More than once the author has requested a
complete rewrite of a handwritten report because the
original was illegible. Today, clear, readable computer-
generated reports are mostly used. However, the input
data still depend on someone to key in the informa-
tion. The verbiage needs to be written in such a
manner that it makes sense to another person who
will read the report at a later date. Many technicians
write in abbreviated sentences that can be confusing
to another reader. A recommendation is to read aloud
what one has written, and if it does not flow easily,
check the grammar. Another challenge with computer
reports is that it is easy to copy a previous report to
save the time spent inputting common information.
Copying a report does save time, but the problem is
that often many of the entries that must be changed
are missed, such as locations, dates, serial numbers,
and calibration information of the different instru-
ments used for the current inspection. On many
reports that the author has reviewed, it was found that
calibration due dates were weeks prior to the dates on
the report. Upon review of the information and calibra-
tion records at the main office, it was found that the
calibration of the instruments in question was current,
but not correctly changed on the copied report.
Therefore, if one copies a previously saved computer
report in the interest of time, it is necessary to
carefully review each and every entry to ensure that all
changes are made to reflect current information.
Computer reports can be made in such a manner that
all commonly entered data can be pulled from
dropdown lists, which not only provide correct nomen-
clature of the equipment, but ease and speed the data
input process of the report.
The last item about recording information on a
report is the technician’s signature. In the author’s
experience, in 95% of the reports he has reviewed,
the technician’s signature (ASME 2015) is illegible,
and he could not determine who signed the report.
If the technician does not clearly print his/her name,
APRIL 2017 • MATERIALS EVALUATION 459
ME BACK TO BASICS w
x ndt report writing
no one can determine who has completed the report.
This is a major problem, especially when the report
needs a correction or a review is made and one must
know if the technician’s qualifications are acceptable
for the inspection completed. If the client requests a
corrected report but the person who completed the
report is not known, the inspection must be repeated.
Doing the inspection twice to get a good report is a
large waste of time and resources, and the client does
not want to pay for a second inspection. The techni-
cian should keep in mind that this report is his/her
work, and should proudly provide a clear signature.
The person reading the report—the client—can then
ask for the same technician to return for the next
inspection.
Conclusion
It is a fair statement that the NDT report is a reflec-
tion of the technician’s workmanship and that of
his/her employer. A report that needs a correction
means the technician is not competent in reporting
460 MATERIALS EVALUATION • APRIL 2017
his/her workmanship, and may place the actual work-
manship provided in question. This also reflects on
the technician’s employer, who provided a technician
whose workmanship is not up to the standards of the
task at hand. No matter how great and complete the
workmanship provided by the technician who
completed the inspection process, it is not any better
than what is recorded on the report. If a technician
thinks that his/her writing skills are not what they
should be, taking a writing class or a computer-based
class at a local community college to improve NDT
reports is strongly suggested. w x
AUTHOR
Jerry Fulin: ASNT NDT Level III.
REFERENCES
ASME Boiler and Pressure Vessel Code: Section V:
Nondestructive Examination. New York, New York.
American Society of Mechanical Engineers. 2015.