DICONDE in Digital Radiography: A Better Data Handover

A radiography job is not fully handed over when the customer receives a PDF with a few selected images. The report may explain the inspection decision, yet leave the next reviewer unable to locate the original image, recover the technique information or open the record outside the contractor’s software. Digital imaging improves the delivery process only when the information remains usable after the project ends.

DICONDE provides a framework for exchanging nondestructive evaluation image information, but a purchasing team still has to define and test its actual handover. This guide focuses on that practical gap: what to request, what to demonstrate and what to retain. It is written for asset owners, fabrication quality teams and inspection providers managing digital radiography records across US and Canadian projects.

What DICONDE is intended to solve

ASTM E2339 describes a common approach to organizing and exchanging NDE image data, building on DICOM with industrial information definitions. Its scope addresses interoperability and the long-term readability of records produced by different acquisition systems. It also explains that the general practice must be used with the relevant method-specific practice and DICOM requirements. 1

That makes DICONDE a useful starting point for a data specification. It does not make “DICONDE supported” a complete acceptance test. Ask which information objects and transfer functions are supported, which versions are involved and what the receiving system can actually import. Keep the supplier’s conformance statement with the procurement record rather than accepting a checkbox without supporting documentation.

Treat the exchange as a workflow involving both ends. An acquisition system can export a record that the intended viewer handles incompletely. A viewer may display the image but omit information your quality team needs. The project should verify the proposed combination using representative data before production records accumulate.

Distinguish detector arrays from computed radiography

ASTM E2699-23 addresses DICONDE for digital X-ray equipment using digital detector arrays. Its public scope points computed radiography users to a separate practice, E2738. The distinction matters when a tender uses “digital radiography” as a broad label without identifying the acquisition system. 2

ASTM E2738-23 covers the exchange and archival organization of computed radiography information in conjunction with E2339. Ask the provider to identify whether the proposed records come from CR, a digital detector array or another source, and which applicable exchange specification it will use. 3

Do not infer inspection acceptance requirements from a file-format standard. Your technical authority still needs to establish the applicable examination procedure, image-quality requirements, personnel responsibilities and acceptance basis. The archive specification should preserve the evidence used in that process; it should not quietly substitute for it.

Separate the report from the examination record

Think of the handover as three connected layers. The first identifies the asset, component or weld. The second contains the examination record and its associated technique information. The third communicates the review, interpretation and disposition. Each layer should have a stable relationship to the others, even if they are stored in different systems.

A signed report is valuable because it expresses an accountable conclusion. A source image is valuable because it preserves evidence for review. A component register is valuable because it explains what the evidence belongs to. None should be expected to carry the entire burden alone. Define the identifier that joins them before deciding the folder structure or dashboard design.

Specify how revised reports are handled. A corrected weld identifier should not create two apparently current conclusions with no explanation. Preserve the earlier version where the project’s record policy requires it, label the superseding version and retain the reason for the change. Apply the same discipline when an image is reacquired or an examination is repeated after repair.

Write the deliverable schedule before acquisition

Ask the responsible technical and records teams to agree a minimum deliverable schedule. The following is a proposed contract checklist, not a claim that every field is mandated by one ASTM document. Adapt it to the actual procedure and customer requirements.

Include units and naming conventions in that schedule. If a project exchanges inch-based drawings and millimeter-based measurements, preserve explicit units at every handover. Avoid a workflow where the receiving organization must infer the unit from a supplier’s usual practice or from a filename abbreviation.

Set the delivery timing as well as the contents. A daily provisional transfer may help a quality team identify missing coverage while the crew is still mobilized. Final acceptance can follow the required review process. Distinguishing provisional from released records prevents early access from being mistaken for final approval.

Test interoperability with actual project examples

Choose a small but varied sample for the export trial. Include a routine accepted record, a record with a reportable indication, a repeat examination and a corrected identifier. If the production scope includes multiple acquisition systems, include each relevant type. The purpose is to expose ordinary workflow differences before they become an archive problem.

Transfer the sample through the intended delivery mechanism and open it in the intended receiving environment. Check the component association, image orientation, units, technique information and access to the original record. Verify that the receiving team can distinguish reviewed, provisional and superseded information. Record discrepancies rather than fixing them through undocumented verbal instructions.

ASTM E2339 explicitly does not provide a complete conformance-validation procedure or define all functions of a group of integrated devices. This is why a project acceptance exercise remains necessary even when both vendors claim conformance. 1 Your exercise should state what was tested and what remains outside its scope.

Preserve the relationship between source and presentation

Ask how image processing, annotations and review settings are recorded. A presentation image can make an indication easier to explain, but the recipient should understand its relationship to the retained source record. Require a demonstrable path from a report image back to the associated examination, rather than relying on a screenshot pasted into a document.

During the trial, ask a reviewer to reopen a nominated examination from its component identifier alone. Then ask the reviewer to find the relevant report, the examination version and any linked repeat work. Time the task if retrieval effort matters to the project, but do not turn one successful retrieval into a claim about the system’s performance at every scale.

Keep the meaning of annotations explicit. A mark may identify a location for discussion, a measured feature or a final disposition. Those are different statements. Agree which role can create or change each record and how a recipient can determine its status after export.

Make archive completeness measurable

Use a delivery manifest that lists the expected records, identifiers and filenames. Reconcile the manifest against the agreed examination scope and the released report register. This catches a different class of problem from checking whether one image opens correctly: a perfectly readable archive can still be incomplete.

For an illustrative project with 240 expected examination records, suppose 236 arrive and four remain outstanding. The transfer is 98.3% complete by record count. That percentage says nothing about the acceptability of the examined welds or the importance of the missing records. List the four exceptions individually and identify who will resolve them.

Checksums can help detect whether a transferred file has changed, but they do not establish that the original examination was correct. Use them for file-integrity reconciliation while keeping technical review and scope reconciliation separate. A useful final acceptance record confirms all three: the agreed records are present, they can be used, and the required review is complete.

Plan for software changes and contract endings

Ask what happens when a subscription expires, a contractor changes software or the asset changes owner. Establish who owns the records, who may access them and what export rights are included. Require the terms to cover the actual files needed for the intended future use, not only a report download.

Test a restore as well as a transfer. Copy an agreed sample into the owner’s archive, retrieve it through the ordinary user account and reopen it after the project folder has been closed. Document the software and version used. This is a practical check on the archive process, not a prediction that a particular viewer will remain supported indefinitely.

Agree retention and access controls through the owner’s applicable record policy and contract. Do not assume that a universal retention period applies to every radiography job across North America. The project’s industry, jurisdiction and contractual obligations can change what must be retained and for how long.

Connect the records to the rest of the portal

A digital asset model can make a record easier to find, but the model should link to a stable examination identifier. If a model or drawing is revised, that link needs to remain understandable. Our digital twin reporting guide covers asset locations, repeat campaigns and reviewable handovers.

For method fundamentals, use the radiographic testing guide. For planning calculations, the NDT tools library provides supporting calculators whose assumptions must be checked for the task. A software tool does not approve an exposure or an examination procedure. Include the data deliverable schedule when submitting an inspection request, so providers can price both field acquisition and the required handover.

The best time to discover a missing export field is during a controlled sample transfer. By specifying the receiving workflow before acquisition starts, an owner can make the final report, the image archive and the asset record work as one traceable package.

Sources and reporting notes

Sources checked October 11, 2026. References below are ASTM’s public scope and significance summaries. This article does not reproduce the standards or claim a clause-by-clause compliance review. The contract checklist and completeness example are original editorial guidance.

1. ASTM E2339-21: DICONDE general practice.
2. ASTM E2699-23: DICONDE for digital X-ray test methods.
3. ASTM E2738-23: DICONDE for computed radiography.