“Inspect the bridge welds” is not a sufficiently defined NDT scope. A useful plan identifies the structural detail, suspected condition and consequence of missing it. The bridge owner’s inspection programme and engineering assessment determine which details need attention.
Identify the member, connection and weld detail on a drawing or location schedule. Review known repairs, previous findings and relevant loading history with the responsible engineer. An inspection location described only as “near the bearing” may be impossible to reproduce on the next visit.
Plan access, traffic management and safe working arrangements with the owner. Limited access should become a recorded coverage limitation, not an unqualified satisfactory result.
Visual examination establishes surface condition and context. Appropriate surface methods can investigate accessible crack concerns; ultrasonic techniques may address internal conditions where material, geometry and access allow. FHWA provides technical resources for bridge NDE, including ultrasonic applications.
Coatings, weld shape, attachments and backing can affect interpretation. Demonstrate the proposed technique on representative geometry and agree the examination coverage before it is accepted as a substitute for another method.
Record orientation, length and location of reportable indications, with photographs and measurement references. Preserve the distinction between a finding, its interpretation and the owner’s structural decision. An NDT report does not independently establish bridge load capacity. Track follow-up examinations and repairs against the original detail identifier.
FHWA’s ultrasonic bridge inspection resource provides further background. Use the governing specification and approved procedure for the actual job.
Discuss the examination scope. Include the component, material, service history and decision the inspection needs to support.