X Ray Vision

(John Paul de Oliveira, GB-2 #86934 / AB #44580) #1

Not really, but close! Looks legit

See through walls with android smartphone attachment | NextBigFuture.com
See through walls with android smartphone attachment

brian wang | December 22, 2017 ](https://www.nextbigfuture.com/2017/12/see-through-walls-with-android-smartphone-attachment.html#so-post-comments-140614)

1
There is an $85 android smartphone add-on device that lets you clearly image through up to 4 inches of concrete wall.
Walabot is a 3D RF imaging sensor. The 3D imaging is created using radio frequency technology, the same technique we use for Wi-Fi, mobile networks, and radar systems. Antennas in the Walabot firing out signals and sensors to pick up the reflections.

(John H. Clements, CMI) #2

Very Interesting! I’m getting ready to purchase my first IF Camera for over $1500.00 and something like this add-on device comes along at $85.00. Technology can be so sweet. Thanks for the heads-up John.

(John Paul de Oliveira, GB-2 #86934 / AB #44580) #3

John,
I do not think it would be anywhere as useful for an inspection as a good IR camera. If it works it has a place in different types of remodeling construction. The Seek Thermal Pro is $700.

(David A. Andersen, TN HI# 40) #4

I didn’t realize it was April Fools Day already…

Your kidding, right??

(John Paul de Oliveira, GB-2 #86934 / AB #44580) #5

Dave,
Your question is about? … That I am falsifying information? The model/make? Please be more clear. There are better cameras… but at what price point? Anyways, this thread is about x ray vision

(John Paul de Oliveira, GB-2 #86934 / AB #44580) #6
  • 320 x 240 Thermal Sensor
  • 32° Field of View
  • > 15 Hz Frame Rate
  • 1,800 ft. Detection Distance
  • Gorilla® Color Display
  • -40F° to 626°F Detection
  • 300 Lumen LED Flashlight
  • Rechargeable Battery
  • Up to 4 Hour Runtime
  • 4GB Internal Storage
  • Capture Photos
  • Spot Temperature
  • 9 Color Palettes
  • Auto & Span/Level Control
  • Adjustable Emissivity
(William B. Ogletree, TREC License #22530) #7

Looks to me like it would open up a world of liability. Identify even one deficiency using a device like this and you risk creating the expectation that you will find all the defects behind the walls, even if this device could not reveal them.

(David A. Andersen, TN HI# 40) #8

I don’t know where this BS came from.
I don’t do two inspections the same way, ever.
I base my inspection on the clients expectations. Just because one client is different than the other makes no never mind.

I believe that where this came from is when you perform an inspection under one “inspection standard” and don’t maintain that standard in all of your inspections.

Just because you add something special that a client wants to know does not change the standard. The standard states that you can add or delete things from the inspection based upon the client’s consent and requests.

That is the “standard”!

Just because you do something does not create a standard. The only thing that changes the “standard” is your “contract” and a contract supersedes a standard. In order to have a contract you must have consent of both parties. If you claim to do something in a contract and failed to do it, you’re liable (Like many of you do with thermal imaging).

(John Paul de Oliveira, GB-2 #86934 / AB #44580) #9

Will not be using this device on an inspection, just posted this to show the advancement of technology. It seems to fit in the realm of building science. It’s application would be, like David answered, limited to specific contractual obligations.

It is kind of amazing to be able to spot rebar in concrete. I clearly remember a not too bright co worker, punching through a structural block wall with a rotary hammer drill. He had encountered an obstacle, and kept at it, eventually getting the 30 lb. drill stuck, hanging at 90 degrees. He had heated up the tip of the drill bit, and the metal main gas line pipe wall enough to kind of weld them together.

This device might have been useful.

(David A. Andersen, TN HI# 40) #10

I don’t see a need in HI, but those of us that do Building Science stuff may find it useful if sensitive enough.

Claims to see through a 4" concrete wall. When was the last time you saw a 4" concrete wall in building construction?

(John Paul de Oliveira, GB-2 #86934 / AB #44580) #11

Lots of 3.5" slab, it should work in block wall. There will possibly be a better, and cheaper version. I have owned about 4 different types of stud finders, mostly junk. Definitely a remodel market for it.

(William B. Ogletree, TREC License #22530) #12

I’m going to assume that this was directed at my comments since it came immediately after my post. If that’s not the case, please let me know.

I agree that one can provide differing approaches to differing client needs and expectations while adhering to standards, but nowhere in my post did I mention “standards”. I was talking about how expectations could become unrealistic, and how including “x-ray” visualization in your report could lead to problems resulting from such unrealistic expectations.

For instance, let’s say that using this “X-ray” device reveals a specific deficiency in a specific place, and you include this in your report. A few years later, the owner discovers a similar deficiency in an area you did not examine. He might contend that you were derelict in your duties for not finding it. In short, when you say you can see things behind walls, the client might expect that means “all things” behind “all walls”. This would be absurd, of course, but from what I have read about litigation against inspectors, people are not averse to taking absurd positions if they think they can get someone else to pay to fix their problem.

You are correct in asserting that the contract defines the terms (or at least does in theory), but lawyers have ways of convincing judges and juries to set those terms aside.

This device can obviously be a useful tool in the right hands and in the right circumstances. I won’t be running out to get on any time soon, though.

(William B. Ogletree, TREC License #22530) #13

I’m going to assume that this was directed at my comments since it came immediately after my post. If that’s not the case, please let me know.

I agree that one can provide differing approaches to differing client needs and expectations while adhering to standards, but nowhere in my post did I mention “standards”. I was talking about how expectations could become unrealistic, and how including “x-ray” visualization in your report could lead to problems resulting from such unrealistic expectations.

For instance, let’s say that using this “X-ray” device reveals a specific deficiency in a specific place, and you include this in your report. A few years later, the owner discovers a similar deficiency in an area you did not examine. He might contend that you were derelict in your duties for not finding it. In short, when you say you can see things behind walls, the client might expect that means “all things” behind “all walls”. This would be absurd, of course, but from what I have read about litigation against inspectors, people are not averse to taking absurd positions if they think they can get someone else to pay to fix their problem.

You are correct in asserting that the contract defines the terms (or at least does in theory), but lawyers have ways of convincing judges and juries to set those terms aside.

This device can obviously be a useful tool in the right hands and in the right circumstances. I won’t be running out to get on any time soon, though.

(Robert Young) #14

Thanks John.
Looks like a great device for a home inspector to detect density changes in a wall assembly or solid wall.

(Robert Young) #15

I have a large allotment of equipment and tools to detect objects and temperature in solid and hollow walls assemblies.
I would like to see an illustration and it appears that device does it. That is why I purchased my Ti100 infrared camera actually. To identify the wall assembly and start my progression into home sciences through thermal imaging.

David, I know you as a very astute individual. Maybe you were not thinking clearly, which is totally out of character. But this can happen to all of us.

IMO, it would be extremely beneficial to ‘physically locate’ and visually observe the outline of reinforcing steel bars in footings and foundations. Now I inspect concrete slabs relying on audio beeps and a line of red led lights on a grid and center spots with molded arrows indicating a starting reference for density differences or magnetic in steel, metal cables or conduit. One scenario, an attached home settled or shifted, thus dividing the footing in two planes or hemispheres. A lateral or diagonal crack directly correlates the division while referencing interesting point/s between the attached homes. I would greatly like to locate reinforcing steel in footings and the foundation walls, visually with an actual illustration.

I am going to read more about the device.
Have a great day David.

(Brett Lee) #16

It’s not effective read the reviews.

(Jon Walter) #17

Looked up the Walabot](http://jonsguide.org/best-walabot-review/), watched the video, looks kinda neat. Looks like it works good. Doesn’t look like it would hold up to heavy use unless you took really good care of it, so probably only you would use it. I didn’t see any info on how quick it drains your phone battery, just that your phone powers it.

IIRC, there’s a self contained unit out there that does what this does and doesn’t cost too much more. I can’t recall the company that made it though. I thought I saw it on the DIY channel on that show Cool Tools, but can’t find anything yet.

(Mitchel Brooks) #18

That’s a very interesting new way to go at a wall. Although, I definitely think you would have to explain the limitations of the x ray.