A weld inspection report says “digital radiographic testing, ISO 17636-2:2022, computed radiography,” but its translation says “medical CT scan approved the weld.” The wording has replaced an industrial testing technique with a different imaging method and added a pass decision the report did not establish. Accurate translation of digital weld radiography records must preserve inspection method, detector type, weld and image identity, image-quality evidence, indications and any separate acceptance criterion. The result is only as useful as the connections between those facts.
This guide answers searches for ISO 17636-2:2022 translation, digital radiographic weld test report translation, CR versus DDA, computed radiography for welding, digital detector arrays, X-ray and gamma-ray inspection, image quality indicators, weld indications versus defects, testing Class A and Class B, SNR and spatial resolution, welding radiography certificates and multilingual NDT reporting. It takes one specialized technical search intent and explains how a reader can interpret the language without assuming a weld automatically passed inspection.
ISO lists ISO 17636-2:2022 as the current published second edition for digital radiographic testing of fusion-welded joints in metallic plates and pipes, using computed radiography or digital detector arrays. The catalogue notes a corrected version in February 2023 and a later revision work item under development, not yet a replacement published standard. The method addresses producing suitable images to reveal imperfections; it does not itself specify acceptance levels for the indications. This article discusses the publicly described scope and translation implications, not licensed testing instructions.
The inspection method and its scope
What non-destructive testing means
Non-destructive testing, NDT, uses methods to investigate material or component conditions without treating destruction of the tested article as the main method of assessment. A radiographic examination provides evidence of features affecting an image; it does not directly measure every form of structural integrity or future service life.
A plausible mistranslation is: A customer translates “NDT complete” as “component guaranteed free of every defect.” Before choosing a synonym, identify whether the phrase describes a test method, image property, observed indication, physical imperfection or acceptance decision. These are different levels in an inspection record. A translation can sound natural while jumping from one level to another and changing the engineering conclusion.
The appropriate repair is: Preserve the method, tested area, results and limits; a completed examination is not universal proof of defect-free material. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
The edition and corrected version
ISO 17636-2:2022 is the currently published second edition of this digital radiography method, and the ISO catalogue indicates a February 2023 correction. A developing revision is not an automatically applicable new edition. Historical certificates must retain the method citation originally used by the inspection provider.
A plausible mistranslation is: An older test is relabeled as having followed an unpublished future revision. Check which physical joint and image each number belongs to. Welding documentation is often copied across inspection plans, spool maps, image archives and acceptance registers. A swapped identifier can leave every sentence technically grammatical while attributing a finding to the wrong component.
The appropriate repair is: Keep the cited edition and issue date separate; refer revision questions to the issuing inspection organization. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
The scope covers welded metallic joints
The public description concerns fusion-welded joints in metal plates and pipes, with a broader technical meaning of cylindrical bodies such as tubes and pressure vessels. A translated report should identify the actual examined joint, not imply that an entire building, machine or pipe network was tested.
A plausible mistranslation is: A report for one pipe weld is rewritten as “full pipeline inspected and approved.” A familiar abbreviation is not enough to decide what a source means. CR, DDA, IQI and SNR all require context-specific interpretation. An international glossary should preserve the original symbol and explain its job, rather than substitute an English phrase that only happens to share initial letters.
The appropriate repair is: Preserve joint number, component and examined extent; do not expand the scope across unexamined material. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Industrial radiography is not clinical CT
An industrial radiographic image can display differences in transmitted X-ray or gamma-ray intensity through a weld. It is not automatically computed tomography or a medical imaging examination. These categories may share some vocabulary, but the actual acquisition and intended interpretation differ.
A plausible mistranslation is: The phrase “computed radiography” is expanded into “computed tomography scan.” Do not silently add an engineering conclusion. A radiographic test can be complete and its images technically acceptable without that fact constituting a full disposition of the weld. A separate code, contract requirement and qualified decision may be needed. Translation must preserve that institutional boundary.
The appropriate repair is: Keep computed radiography, CR, as the stated industrial detector workflow, without inventing a tomographic examination. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Film radiography and digital radiography differ
The public ISO scope differentiates digital radiography in Part 2 from film radiography addressed in ISO 17636-1. The two are related NDT approaches, but evidence, detector records and image handling may differ. A translated label should not erase which approach was used.
A plausible mistranslation is: “Digital radiograph” becomes “film negative” because the receiving institution uses an old template. Review the rendered record alongside the source. A figure legend can detach from a radiograph, a superscript can disappear, or an inspection sector can change after table reflow. Language QA alone will not find many of these errors; visual comparison is part of evidence preservation.
The appropriate repair is: Retain the specific method and digital record identity, while keeping any separate film reference correctly attributed. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Image acquisition and technique records
CR means computed radiography
Computed radiography uses an imaging-plate approach and digital readout rather than a direct film-only workflow. In a report the abbreviation CR usually belongs to the acquisition route. It is not shorthand for a medical clinical review, a corrosion rating or an acceptance class.
A plausible mistranslation is: A bilingual spreadsheet expands CR as “corrosion resistance.” If the original is unclear, leave a traceable query rather than guessing. The equipment, technique class, inspected length, acceptance standard and signatory fields are not decorative details. They can affect how the report is used during construction, quality review or maintenance.
The appropriate repair is: Preserve the instrument context and define CR as computed radiography where the source confirms that meaning. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
DDA means digital detector array
Digital detector arrays capture images electronically by an array-based detector system. The published ISO description includes manual and automated inspection with these detectors. A report referring to a DDA should not be translated as if it had used imaging plates in a CR process.
A plausible mistranslation is: A DDA scan is described as computed radiography merely because both are digital. Write for the reader who sees only an excerpt in a contract. The distinction between image quality and weld acceptance should remain visible even in a shortened sentence. Use precise subject nouns such as “radiograph,” “inspection,” “indication” and “weld,” and avoid an unqualified word like “approved.”
The appropriate repair is: Keep the detector category explicit and trace every image to its actual acquisition system. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
X-rays and gamma rays are distinct source types
Both X-ray and gamma-ray techniques can be used for industrial radiography, but they are not identical source descriptions. A test report may name one because it matters to traceability and technique documentation. Translators should not replace an unfamiliar radiation term with a more common one.
A plausible mistranslation is: “Gamma radiography” becomes “X-ray examination” without evidence. Treat chronology as part of truth. First an image is acquired, then evaluated, then the indications may be interpreted against applicable rules. A retake or repair can start another event. The translated sequence should not collapse them into a single apparent all-clear.
The appropriate repair is: Preserve the source type exactly and let qualified inspection personnel interpret its technical suitability. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Ionizing-radiation safety is not optional
Industrial radiography uses ionizing radiation and is carried out under specialized safety, access and authorization procedures. Translation is not a reason to suggest ad hoc exposure or screening practices. A public educational article should keep technical interpretation separate from operational radiation-safety instructions.
A plausible mistranslation is: A simplified translation encourages untrained staff to repeat an exposure to obtain a clearer image. Before choosing a synonym, identify whether the phrase describes a test method, image property, observed indication, physical imperfection or acceptance decision. These are different levels in an inspection record. A translation can sound natural while jumping from one level to another and changing the engineering conclusion.
The appropriate repair is: Limit the article to reading records and emphasize that acquisition and radiation control belong to licensed or appropriately qualified professionals. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Technique Class A and Class B labels
Some radiographic procedures distinguish technique classes such as A and B with differing image-quality requirements. These labels should be retained as exact classifications under the report’s cited method and procedure. They are not simple grades meaning a weld has passed with A or failed with B.
A plausible mistranslation is: A report lists technique Class B, and the translation says “weld quality grade B.” Check which physical joint and image each number belongs to. Welding documentation is often copied across inspection plans, spool maps, image archives and acceptance registers. A swapped identifier can leave every sentence technically grammatical while attributing a finding to the wrong component.
The appropriate repair is: Keep “technique class” attached to the letter; find the separate acceptance record before describing a weld-quality decision. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Image-quality concepts and the weld map
Image quality is not weld quality
A radiograph can be technically suitable for identifying relevant indications while the weld itself may contain imperfections; conversely, an inadequate image cannot establish that a weld is sound. Image quality and weld acceptance are separate judgments that may occur in sequence.
A plausible mistranslation is: “Image quality acceptable” becomes “weld accepted without defects.” A familiar abbreviation is not enough to decide what a source means. CR, DDA, IQI and SNR all require context-specific interpretation. An international glossary should preserve the original symbol and explain its job, rather than substitute an English phrase that only happens to share initial letters.
The appropriate repair is: Translate the image-quality conclusion literally and reserve weld disposition for the authority and criterion that actually states it. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Image quality indicator, IQI
An image quality indicator is an aid for evaluating whether a radiographic technique provides suitable sensitivity or visibility under specified requirements. Its identifiers, type and recorded values belong to the test evidence. It is not a sample of welding filler metal or an automatic defect count.
A plausible mistranslation is: An IQI reference is translated as “number of weld cracks.” Do not silently add an engineering conclusion. A radiographic test can be complete and its images technically acceptable without that fact constituting a full disposition of the weld. A separate code, contract requirement and qualified decision may be needed. Translation must preserve that institutional boundary.
The appropriate repair is: Preserve IQI notation and distinguish evidence about image technique from observations about the inspected joint. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Spatial resolution describes distinguishable detail
Spatial resolution concerns an imaging system’s ability to represent fine features separately. It is not identical to the size of an actual crack or pore. Technical expressions for basic spatial resolution and related criteria require their own symbols and units as stated in the report.
A plausible mistranslation is: An image-resolution value is moved into the defect-size column. Review the rendered record alongside the source. A figure legend can detach from a radiograph, a superscript can disappear, or an inspection sector can change after table reflow. Language QA alone will not find many of these errors; visual comparison is part of evidence preservation.
The appropriate repair is: Keep measurement categories and abbreviations with their original definitions, and request clarification for any unexplained symbol. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Signal-to-noise ratio is an image parameter
A signal-to-noise ratio describes contrast between informative signal and variation or noise under a definition. It is not the probability that a weld is safe and is not automatically a percent of acceptable material. Normalization and calculation details may matter in specific procedures.
A plausible mistranslation is: The abbreviation SNR is presented as “safety number rating.” If the original is unclear, leave a traceable query rather than guessing. The equipment, technique class, inspected length, acceptance standard and signatory fields are not decorative details. They can affect how the report is used during construction, quality review or maintenance.
The appropriate repair is: Use the report’s intended image-quality meaning and retain any subscript, normalization or test qualifier. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Contrast, sensitivity and visibility
Contrast describes an image difference; sensitivity and detectability relate to what features can be revealed under a defined technique. These ideas interact but are not synonyms. A radiograph may make one kind of imperfection more visible than another depending on geometry and other conditions.
A plausible mistranslation is: A translator rewrites “limited indication visibility” as “no imperfections present.” Write for the reader who sees only an excerpt in a contract. The distinction between image quality and weld acceptance should remain visible even in a shortened sentence. Use precise subject nouns such as “radiograph,” “inspection,” “indication” and “weld,” and avoid an unqualified word like “approved.”
The appropriate repair is: Preserve the limitation rather than replacing it with a reassuring universal statement. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
From indications to acceptance decisions
Geometry and weld orientation matter
A radiographic result relates to a particular joint geometry, examined sector, viewing arrangement and identification scheme. A pipe weld may be indexed by circumferential location or image position. Translating an orientation marker incorrectly can attach an indication to the wrong location.
A plausible mistranslation is: An image labeled sector 03 is reported as sector 30 after reformatting. Treat chronology as part of truth. First an image is acquired, then evaluated, then the indications may be interpreted against applicable rules. A retake or repair can start another event. The translated sequence should not collapse them into a single apparent all-clear.
The appropriate repair is: Keep the original image key, orientation and weld map, verifying that every translated reference points to the intended physical location. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Exposure details are traceability data
An inspection record may identify source, detector, set-up, calibration and acquisition conditions. These details help qualified personnel establish which image belongs to which procedure and event. The translator should preserve recorded values but not extrapolate new operational steps from incomplete data.
A plausible mistranslation is: A blank technique field is filled using a common setting copied from another weld. Before choosing a synonym, identify whether the phrase describes a test method, image property, observed indication, physical imperfection or acceptance decision. These are different levels in an inspection record. A translation can sound natural while jumping from one level to another and changing the engineering conclusion.
The appropriate repair is: Leave missing conditions missing and ask the issuing NDT provider for an authorized correction rather than inventing procedure data. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Imperfection and indication differ
An indication is evidence observed in a test display; an imperfection is a physical discontinuity or feature that may explain it. Not every indication necessarily represents the same physical cause, and an interpretation can be qualified. A translator should retain the report’s exact level of certainty.
A plausible mistranslation is: “Indication observed” is rendered as “verified crack” without the examiner’s conclusion. Check which physical joint and image each number belongs to. Welding documentation is often copied across inspection plans, spool maps, image archives and acceptance registers. A swapped identifier can leave every sentence technically grammatical while attributing a finding to the wrong component.
The appropriate repair is: Keep observation, interpretation and confirmed physical classification as distinct fields. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Imperfection is not automatically an unacceptable defect
A discontinuity may be identified, characterized and then assessed against a separate acceptance criterion. The word defect is sometimes reserved for a condition that fails an applicable requirement, whereas imperfection can describe a feature without a universal pass/fail judgment.
A plausible mistranslation is: “Porosity indication” is translated as “rejected weld” without a disposition. A familiar abbreviation is not enough to decide what a source means. CR, DDA, IQI and SNR all require context-specific interpretation. An international glossary should preserve the original symbol and explain its job, rather than substitute an English phrase that only happens to share initial letters.
The appropriate repair is: Preserve the examiner’s observation, and seek the actual acceptance or rejection statement before expressing a decision. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
The method does not establish acceptance levels
ISO’s public abstract explicitly says ISO 17636-2 does not specify acceptance levels for indications. Other applicable documents, including standards on acceptance levels or a contract, may govern disposition. That is a key limitation for anyone translating a certificate for a purchasing decision.
A plausible mistranslation is: A translator declares compliance with ISO 17636-2 equivalent to full acceptance under all welding codes. Do not silently add an engineering conclusion. A radiographic test can be complete and its images technically acceptable without that fact constituting a full disposition of the weld. A separate code, contract requirement and qualified decision may be needed. Translation must preserve that institutional boundary.
The appropriate repair is: Name the imaging method separately from the acceptance reference and the person authorized to assess conformity. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Image files, revisions and accountability
CR image versus DDA image identity
Digital image files may have equipment identifiers, timestamps, sequence numbers and associated metadata. Reassigning an image from one detector workflow to another can break auditability. File labels and image IDs are evidence keys, not prose that can be paraphrased freely.
A plausible mistranslation is: A CR image named W-014-CR01 is relabeled DDA-01 to standardize filenames. Review the rendered record alongside the source. A figure legend can detach from a radiograph, a superscript can disappear, or an inspection sector can change after table reflow. Language QA alone will not find many of these errors; visual comparison is part of evidence preservation.
The appropriate repair is: Retain original identifiers and create a separate localization index if the destination system needs translated labels. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Digital image processing is not raw evidence
Images may be displayed with adjustments that help an inspector see details. The source may distinguish acquisition data, processed views, annotations and final evaluated images. A translation that calls every displayed view “unmodified original” can make the archive misleading.
A plausible mistranslation is: An enhanced display screenshot is advertised as the raw detector file. If the original is unclear, leave a traceable query rather than guessing. The equipment, technique class, inspected length, acceptance standard and signatory fields are not decorative details. They can affect how the report is used during construction, quality review or maintenance.
The appropriate repair is: Translate image state, version and processing notes precisely, and preserve a route back to the archived source. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Retake and rejected image are not weld rejection
An image may be rejected for technical inadequacy and retaken, while the underlying weld remains unevaluated pending a suitable examination. The word reject can therefore have different objects. A translator must identify whether the decision concerns an image, a procedure or the weld itself.
A plausible mistranslation is: “Radiograph rejected; retest required” becomes “weld rejected.” Write for the reader who sees only an excerpt in a contract. The distinction between image quality and weld acceptance should remain visible even in a shortened sentence. Use precise subject nouns such as “radiograph,” “inspection,” “indication” and “weld,” and avoid an unqualified word like “approved.”
The appropriate repair is: Name the object of rejection explicitly and carry its status into the translated report. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Repair inspection and original inspection
A weld may undergo repair and subsequent testing. The records need to distinguish original indications, repair area, later examination and final disposition. Chronological compression can imply that a repaired weld was accepted before the corrective work occurred.
A plausible mistranslation is: Post-repair examination notes are merged into the original report date. Treat chronology as part of truth. First an image is acquired, then evaluated, then the indications may be interpreted against applicable rules. A retake or repair can start another event. The translated sequence should not collapse them into a single apparent all-clear.
The appropriate repair is: Maintain event order, dates, inspected areas and report revisions so the reader can trace the history accurately. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Personnel and signing authority
NDT reports may include personnel identities, certification information, review signatures and organizational roles. A translator should not convert an inspector’s qualification into an engineering approval or the equipment operator’s record into a signed disposition statement.
A plausible mistranslation is: “Examined by” is rewritten as “certified structurally safe by.” Before choosing a synonym, identify whether the phrase describes a test method, image property, observed indication, physical imperfection or acceptance decision. These are different levels in an inspection record. A translation can sound natural while jumping from one level to another and changing the engineering conclusion.
The appropriate repair is: Retain actor, role and signature meaning. Do not invent authorization that the source does not document. A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
The final multilingual inspection certificate
Final report should preserve scope and limit
A useful target-language summary identifies the examined weld, stated ISO 17636-2 edition, detector category, applicable image-quality result, recorded indications and separate acceptance status if supplied. It explains the limitation that imaging and acceptance are different stages.
A plausible mistranslation is: The closing paragraph says “digitally scanned and therefore free of all faults.” Check which physical joint and image each number belongs to. Welding documentation is often copied across inspection plans, spool maps, image archives and acceptance registers. A swapped identifier can leave every sentence technically grammatical while attributing a finding to the wrong component.
The appropriate repair is: Use a narrower faithful sentence: “The identified weld was examined with the reported digital radiographic method; findings and disposition are recorded separately.” A second reviewer should compare the original and translated report at the level of image ID, weld ID, method and decision status. If the destination sentence sounds more conclusive than the issuing inspection authority, it should be narrowed until a reader can see what was actually observed.
Worked translation cases: what must be repaired
Image acceptance versus weld acceptance
Source: “Radiographic image quality acceptable; indications referred for evaluation.” Faulty: “Weld accepted without defects.”
The original reports an image-quality decision and a pending or separate interpretation. The translation adds a final weld disposition. The correct summary retains the suitability of the radiograph and separately records any assessment of indications against an applicable acceptance criterion. A technical reviewer should be able to locate which document, if any, authorizes the final decision.
The final published translation should preserve these differences in the report body and any extracted summary. A note in the translator’s private worksheet cannot repair an external certificate already circulated without its qualifiers. Where the discrepancy originated in the signed source, request an authorized amended record. The translator may detect problems but cannot invent engineering findings.
Computed radiography versus computed tomography
Source: “CR, digital radiographic testing of weld W-014.” Faulty: “CT medical examination of joint W-014.”
CR in this context is computed radiography, not evidence of a tomographic reconstruction or medical procedure. The two phrases may share the word computed, but their technical meanings differ. Restore the detector workflow and the industrial NDT scope. Leave source, detector and image IDs unchanged to avoid breaking the chain to the archived file.
The final published translation should preserve these differences in the report body and any extracted summary. A note in the translator’s private worksheet cannot repair an external certificate already circulated without its qualifiers. Where the discrepancy originated in the signed source, request an authorized amended record. The translator may detect problems but cannot invent engineering findings.
Image rejection versus component rejection
Source: “Radiograph rejected; retake required because image quality inadequate.” Faulty: “Weld W-014 failed structural inspection.”
The image was rejected as an inadequate basis for evaluation; the weld had not necessarily been judged against acceptance criteria. The corrected translation should state the object of rejection and that repeat examination was required. Any later decision about weld disposition must refer to the separate valid examination and authorized acceptance record.
The final published translation should preserve these differences in the report body and any extracted summary. A note in the translator’s private worksheet cannot repair an external certificate already circulated without its qualifiers. Where the discrepancy originated in the signed source, request an authorized amended record. The translator may detect problems but cannot invent engineering findings.
Indication versus confirmed crack
Source: “Linear indication at weld position 4.” Faulty: “Verified crack requiring replacement.”
An observed image indication is not automatically a confirmed physical crack with a repair decision. That interpretation may require appropriate evaluation and code-based acceptance assessment. Preserve the examiner’s stated description, position and degree of certainty, then add the subsequent official findings only if the source documents them.
The final published translation should preserve these differences in the report body and any extracted summary. A note in the translator’s private worksheet cannot repair an external certificate already circulated without its qualifiers. Where the discrepancy originated in the signed source, request an authorized amended record. The translator may detect problems but cannot invent engineering findings.
Digital image source becomes a fictional device
Source: “DDA image 0025, test ID RT-81.” Faulty: “CR image 25, test ID RT-18.”
Detector type, image number and report identifier have all changed. A quality reviewer may now search for the wrong file and attribute a feature to another inspection. Restore identifiers character for character, including leading zeros. If a destination archive imposes a new filename, preserve the original identity in a cross-reference field rather than rewriting the signed report.
The final published translation should preserve these differences in the report body and any extracted summary. A note in the translator’s private worksheet cannot repair an external certificate already circulated without its qualifiers. Where the discrepancy originated in the signed source, request an authorized amended record. The translator may detect problems but cannot invent engineering findings.
Developing revision becomes published compliance
Source: “ISO 17636-2:2022.” Faulty: “ISO 17636-2:2026 revised standard, certified pass.”
As checked on 30 October 2026, ISO shows a revision work item under development, not a published replacement for the 2022 edition. The draft status does not update historical test evidence, and the method by itself supplies no universal acceptance level. Preserve the 2022 citation and keep any later revision information in a distinct explanatory note.
The final published translation should preserve these differences in the report body and any extracted summary. A note in the translator’s private worksheet cannot repair an external certificate already circulated without its qualifiers. Where the discrepancy originated in the signed source, request an authorized amended record. The translator may detect problems but cannot invent engineering findings.
Ten questions readers ask about digital weld radiography
Does ISO 17636-2 itself define weld acceptance levels?
No. Its public description says it does not specify acceptance levels for the indications found on radiographs.
Is computed radiography the same as computed tomography?
No. Computed radiography uses an imaging-plate digital workflow; computed tomography is a different imaging approach.
What does DDA stand for?
Digital detector array, a digital acquisition technology used in the testing scope.
Are X-ray and gamma-ray techniques interchangeable in a translation?
No. Preserve the source type specified by the actual inspection record.
Does Class B mean the weld received a grade B?
No. A technique class should not be turned into a weld acceptance or quality grade without evidence.
Does a good IQI result mean no cracks exist?
No. It concerns image technique and performance, not a guarantee of defect-free material.
Does “indication” always mean “crack”?
No. An indication requires interpretation and cannot be automatically assigned a particular physical cause.
Does “radiograph rejected” always mean “weld rejected”?
No. The image may have been unsuitable for evaluation and may require retaking.
Can I update a historical 2022 reference to a revision under development?
No. Preserve the laboratory’s stated method edition and identify unpublished revisions separately.
Why not combine this with the master translation hub?
This article owns one NDT report interpretation problem. The broader translation and English-learning hubs retain their separate canonical roles.
Primary reference and the existing language-learning routes
Public standard scope verified 30 October 2026: ISO 17636-2:2022 — Non-destructive testing of welds, radiographic testing, Part 2: X- and gamma-ray techniques with digital detectors. ISO identifies a February 2023 corrected version and a revision work item under development. This original guide explains the public scope and translation reasoning, not the licensed inspection procedure, radiation safety plan or engineering acceptance rule.
Broader education remains with Master Art of Translation, the Vocabulary Learning Hub and How English Works: Translation and Meaning Across Languages. This page answers the specialist digital-weld-radiography translation intent without establishing another general hub.
All inspection IDs, source excerpts, findings and faulty translations in this article are invented educational examples. They are not a real engineering approval, an inspection certificate, a substitute for qualified NDT interpretation or directions for performing hazardous radiation work.