A Study and Review of Remote Inspection Practices and Examples

Abstract A key step in the process of manufacturing pressure equipment is the inspection. Third-party inspection of equipment is necessary to minimize the risks involved in using pressure vessels due to incorrect calculations, poor weld procedures, and incomplete or skipped non-destructive examination and hydrostatic testing. However, as the technology for manufacturing, Non-Destructive Examination (NDE), and design has advanced, inspection remains a very in-person step in the quality assurance of pressure equipment. With the limited number of inspectors across the different types of third parties, including Authorized Inspectors, Class Societies, and other external consultants, this does result in several consequences of inspection, chiefly the requirement for Travel. Travel contributes to the total carbon footprint of the manufacturing of pressure equipment and the overall risk to the inspector. Inspections also contribute to scheduling issues and costs and can be greatly impacted by factors outside the control of the inspector or the manufacturer, such as pandemics, conflicts, and extreme weather conditions. A primary way that inspectors and manufacturers have looked to address these consequences is in the form of remote inspections. Also called remote surveillance and remote surveys, this technique uses telecommunication technology such as video conferencing software and the ever-ubiquitous portable camera in cell phones and tablets to permit an inspector in one location to view steps in the manufacturing of pressure vessels in another location. In this manner, the inspector is able to perform their task without physically being in the location of the equipment, reducing travel, cost, carbon emissions, and risk. However, remote inspections are not themselves without risks. As with anything connected to the internet, cybersecurity is a concern that must be addressed. Furthermore, the ability of the manufacturer to manipulate data being sent via telecommunications is a risk that must be mitigated. The use of remote inspections therefore must consider the challenges that the absence of a physical presence entails. This paper reviews the various requirements that are in place for this process, from the National Board of Boiler and Pressure Vessel Inspectors, ASME, International Association of Class Societies, and others to compare the best practices applied across the industry. Benefits and risks of remote inspections are weighed and mitigation efforts that have been used are reviewed. Past experiences from inspectors and manufactures are used as examples. The paper will conclude with a summary of considerations for the selection and execution of remote technology as a means of inspection.