French (Fr)English (United Kingdom)

DPC NEWS: a website dedicated to Penetrant Testing and Magnetic Testing



visits on site since April 2008

Log in


Receive HTML?

DPCNews 002 - COFREND Conference 2008

Written by Administrator
Sunday, 01 June 2008 20:54

June 2008

COFREND (French NDT Society) - Conference held in Toulouse - May 20 to 23. 2008.

This 3-day conference, along a very successful exhibition, displayed three conferences. One was about Penetrant Testing and Magnetic Testing. Another one was about the consequences of the European Directive on magnetic fields for Magnetic Testing, and another one was titled: “NADCAP AUDITS: A NIGHTMARE?”

The last one by date, given *by Alain MORETTI, from BABBCO, explained that the colour temperature and the spectrum of visible light is of the utmost importance for colour-contrast Penetrant Testing--otherwise known as "visible penetrant inspection". This parameter is far more important for a reliable detection of indications than the requirement for testing every batch of penetrant at +50 °C, as required by some auditors. This parameter should be introduced in any specification as well as in any new or revised Standard.

We suggest you directly contact Alain MORETTI for more information at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

Another very interesting conference was given by Stéphane GRAVELEAU, from SREM TECHNOLOGIES, a division of SOFRANEL Group. The author gave very thorough indications of the constant improvement of Magnetic Testing equipment since more than 30 years. Magnetic Testing, as Penetrant Testing, are sometimes completely ignored in engineers training about NDT as "obsolete methods", using chemicals harmful for the environment. This latter point is highly disputable, and these two "old methods" are reliable, used on a far larger scale in the world than at any previous time.

We suggest you directly contact Stéphane GRAVELEAU for more information at: This e-mail address is being protected from spambots. You need JavaScript enabled to view it

The last conference about audits led to "harsh" discussions between the author, Patrick DUBOSC, and some auditors: nevertheless, examples given in the paper are all real, true: the purpose of this conference was to make auditees confident that they must ask the auditor for any misunderstanding of the requirements ("please, Mr or Ms auditor, show me the exact paragraph in the questionnaire"), that they are who deliver the good parts absolutely needed by the primes--no subcontractors, no parts delivered--It was also said that there is no "NADCAP REQUIREMENT" per se, but the "Nadcap requirement" is very often a specific requirement displayed in a "supplement" for a specific prime--sometimes the only one to ask specifically for this point. It was explained that a "preaudit", either by an internal auditor, an outside one or a Nadcap "preauditor", is probably the best way to fix any "No" answer to questions PREVIOUS to the real audit. Some clues were given to auditees to ease audits, to make them smoother.

This conference is available in French and in English, and may be given should any need arises.

We, Pierre CHEMIN and Patrick DUBOSC, welcome any comment, any idea. If you have some examples you would like to see discussed here, please give us all the useful indications. If you require confidentially, we would modify locations, names and some parameters to prevent any traceability.

Nevertheless, we are convinced that our site may be a kind of surge-valve: the topic is NOT to target this company, or that auditor; but it is always to make users think, to make them ask themselves, or others, the right questions.

We may also give advice, once again on a confidential basis if needed: please, feel free to ask questions, to document our data basis: about

Material Safety Data Sheets (MSDS), about environment, a chemical name you don't understand, a Penetrant process you have heard about, etc.

We have plenty of examples, some being out of all the specs/standards, which led to the discontinuities detection, when the "current, normal, processes" prevented discontinuity finding.

Last Updated ( Monday, 23 May 2011 16:54 )