31 / 40
March 2017
AFRICAN FUSION
29
Particle testing (PT) on the piping inlets of an oil pump.
NDT perspective
through to a full-face mask. When on
top of a four level scaffold within a large
vertical tank, one’s thoughts tend to go
in the ‘what if?’ direction. If you suddenly
lose all air supply, what do you do? Our
options were limited; hold your breath
and climb down the scaffolding or re-
move your mask and egress the vessel
without too much speed. The process
controllers told us the fumes within the
vessels would kill you in a very short
time should you inhale them.
During the last few days of my first
shutdown, we were asked to start pro-
viding NDT reports. This proved to be
quite interesting as we had not made
any notes or recorded what vessels
we had inspected beforehand. It then
became necessary to go back to each
vessel and try to recall what weld and
configuration/type thereof we had
inspected. This information had to be
transferred to a drawing of the vessel
that did not always showall of thewelds
in the vessel’s construction.
At the power station, the system
worked differently to that of petro-
chemical. We had to draw up a turbine
inspection quality control plan (QCP)
from an example that was provided.
The problemwas that the QCP example
that we were given was for a different
turbine manufacturer. Our component
descriptions did not match that of the
actual components, which we only
found out when the drawings circa.
1962were given to us. Our QCPwas also
drawn up where the NDT was required
on components unseen as they were
still in-situ in the turbine set that was
still assembled. Additionally, most of
us had zero experience in
inspecting such equipment.
Some components had
to be re-inspected as the
incorrect method was ini-
tially specified. We often
had to revise our inspection
reports, as the component
identificationwas usually in-
correct. This occurred when
the senior supervisor was
asked to ensure that the
componentswere labelledas
per the drawings. He would
usually delegate this task
to an apprentice or assistant. Many an
hour was wasted trying to decipher the
person’s handwriting on the tags as
well as swopping the tags around when
it was discovered that the components
had been incorrectly marked, and the
reports had to be revised too.
We had no access to any previous
inspection records, so our brief was to
‘record all indications’. This often led
to some technicians recording gouges,
scratches andother non-relevant indica-
tions. We were soon accused of record-
ing ‘fly crap’ by our ‘learned’ colleagues
from Europe who had been brought to
SA to help and advise.
We learnt a lot about quality and the
correct process selection – and think-
ing on your feet had to come into play.
There was little time for indecision and
procrastination. One had to be astute,
especially where the age-old standoff
between production and quality came
to a head. This proved to be interesting
when their cousin, Mr Safety, also had to
be taken into account.
Some lessons
Proper planning, organisation, leader-
ship and control must all be well estab-
lished. A full breakdown of activities
should be devised well before a shut-
down/outage begins where everyone is
fully informed and clear about the task
and its objectives.
The NDT activities should also in-
volve all paperwork including records,
data capturing and reporting. The
‘Management of Change’ process should
be an underlying principle that keeps
everyone ‘in the loop’.
A line of leadership or command
should also be established and made
known to everyone, as this helps espe-
cially at the early stages of a project.
Respect for other ‘trades’ should be
a top priority as everyone has a job to
do and no one should be made to feel
inferior.
I have no doubt that many of these
lessons are now been widely adopted
and are routinely implemented during
modern day inspections.