NDT Data Management Solutions

Centralized platform for storing, managing, and analyzing inspection records. Secure cloud and on-premise options. Enterprise-grade data management for inspection programs.

Centralized, secure, and searchable inspection records for complete asset visibility.

What this page covers

Key Data Management Functions
Master Your Inspection Data

What NDT data management has to solve

Inspection data has an unusual shape: it is generated in the field on instruments that each write their own format, it must be interpreted by someone qualified for that method, it is reported to several parties in different formats, and it has to stay interpretable for decades because the next inspection interval depends on comparing it with readings taken years earlier. Most data problems in inspection businesses come from treating it as documents rather than as a dataset with identity.

The four properties that make inspection data usable later

Location identity. A thickness reading is only comparable with an earlier one if both are bound to the same corrosion monitoring location under a permanent, never-reused identifier. Without that, a corrosion rate is arithmetic on unrelated numbers.
Provenance. Every record should carry the procedure revision in force, the technician's certification state and the instrument's calibration status as at the moment of examination — frozen, not looked up afterwards.
Format independence. Instrument-native files retained alongside an open export. A dataset readable only by one vendor's software has a shelf life set by that vendor's commercial decisions, not by your asset's life.
Separation of data and presentation. One dataset rendering into several client report formats. Storing the report as the primary object guarantees duplicate entry the moment a second client is involved.

Where it goes wrong in practice

The common failure is not loss but ambiguity: readings exist, but nobody can prove they were taken at the same place, by someone qualified, with an instrument in calibration, under the procedure revision that applied. That ambiguity surfaces at the worst possible moment — during an audit, or when an interval extension has to be defended. It is also why apparently well-run programmes fail an evidence trace on the first report an auditor picks.

What good looks like

Selecting an asset and a date range returns the inspection history, the qualification and calibration state applicable at each examination, the procedure revisions in force, and the thickness trend per location with computed corrosion rates. If that is a query, the programme is in good shape. If it is a folder structure and someone's memory, it is not.