With all due respect, David, I disagree.
It is an introduction course to thermal imaging. It is not one of the three level courses.
As well, it is offered as a Industry Specific Course by the oldest recognised thermal imaging institute, Infraspection Institute, to aid in the detection of thermal anomalies through the use of infrared imaging.
You said it was cheap, I am agreeing based upon the amount of money that you can expect to spend learning the thermography process. It is an introductory course and industry-specific, not a level I - III. My first course was industry-specific, John taught for many years only taking this one course. For the amount of money, it’s the first place to go (regardless of its cost). My first course cost $1,700.00.
The idea behind the courses is to get building inspector involved. They can then decide to further their education with level courses but at least they have the ‘basic understanding’ of how to collect data from that specific course material. It is not cheap. It is much value/d.
I concur with getting involved with other thermographers.
But progress can be made through the smallest of steps, David.
The idea, plant a seed and nurture development.
Negativity and talking to, instead of positive reinforcement, turns individuals of learning.
I am not speaking negatively to anyone on this thread. I specifically stated that.
I am simply providing the hard cold facts of what to expect from thermography in the home inspections. If you do not understand the ramifications of what you’re doing, is not in your best interest to do it on your own. Consideration of the information provided may prevent the new thermographer from falling into the quagmire of liability from improper analysis and reporting.
If replies to this string would have focused, focus being the operative word, and remained focused on the posts simple question, Radiant heating, I am quite sure many more non level building inspectors, InterNACHI members, would have joined the thread igniting there interest in thermography.
At this point in the thread, pretty much everything was covered concerning thermography for hydronic heating systems set in concrete. Threads will always drift and people will make comments which need correction. I.e. we cannot go around claiming a 2.5° delta-t is of no concern when no-load measurements were taken (as addressed by two of us here). My explanation specifically addresses just how drastic an error this can be. A learning experience. Sorry I’m clumping it all together at once.
Remember, there are few Level certified inspectors here. The explanations can appear overwhelming to many.
That would be the point.
They need to understand what they don’t know, matters!
May I recommend, preach to the congregation, not the choir.
Simple short explanations.
Make it interesting as well as easy to digest.
Again, quit thinking this is about you. My posts were for the congregation not you guys in the choir.
You know, simple lessons and tutorials go along way in lifting up a colleagues confidence.
Relative to what you need to know, my explanations are short as possible. Another perception that this stuff is just point and shoot photography.
If you need some confidence in what you’re doing, call me. You’re not alone. I get phone calls all the time from inspectors and I am retired and on dialysis four days a week, and have nothing better to do then pass on what information I can. I even work cases with inspectors with thermal cameras when it is too much for them at the time.
Thank you for your replies. Always welcomed. You guys are the best.
