Non-Destructive Testing, Imaging & Surveys

.the dorsia tool-kit

When a claim or dispute needs clarity on cause, extent, and whether damage is active or historic, we use a practical set of non-invasive tools to capture defensible evidence

Quickly, safely, and with minimal disruption.

This page outlines what we use on site, and what it helps us confirm for Insurers, Loss Adjusters, Builders, and Property Owners.

  • We use FLIR moisture meters to identify presence, spread, and severity of moisture-affected materials, and to support opinions on likely mechanisms (where evidence allows).

    Best for:

    • Plumbing leaks / escape of liquid

    • Roof, window, and wall ingress

    • Bathroom / shower waterproofing concerns

    • Condensation and ventilation-related issues

    What it gives you:

    • Moisture mapping with clear locations

    • Photos and annotated evidence

    • Practical notes on what areas appear active vs. drying vs. historic

  • Thermal imaging helps visualise patterns consistent with moisture, airflow, or insulation irregularities, particularly in ceilings and wall zones where staining is unclear or intermittent. We use FLIR cameras.

    Best for:

    • Leak tracing (roof and ceiling areas)

    • Wall/window ingress patterns

    • Bathroom moisture migration indicators

    • Identifying cold spots consistent with condensation risk

    Note: Thermography is an indicative tool and is typically paired with moisture testing for confirmation.

  • Where access allows, we use Milwaukee, high-definition inspection cameras/borescopes to verify conditions behind linings with minimal disruption. This can help determine whether targeted opening-up is warranted.

    Best for:

    • Hollow steel columns

    • Subfloors without adequate access

    • Suspected concealed leakage pathways

    • Verifying cavity conditions adjacent wet areas

    • Localised staining where the source is uncertain

  • Before any drilling, cutting, or targeted access, we use the Bosch wall scanner D-tect 200 C Professional to help identify likely concealed services and embedded items.

    In addition, this tool can be used to indicatively locate reinforcement within concrete, including:

    • whether reinforcement is likely present,

    • the approximate depth of cover, and

    • the approximate bar spacing/pattern.

    This provides a quick, practical verification method to support early decision-making and reduces reliance on more disruptive, full concrete testing where a fast indicative check is suitable.

    Best for:

    • Reducing risk before any intrusive verification works

    • Locating likely services/embedded elements (e.g., wiring, pipework)

    • Indicatively identifying reinforcement presence, depth and spacing in concrete

    • Improving accuracy when documenting likely concealed conditions

  • We measure and document cracking to help determine whether movement appears progressive or stable, and whether patterns align with a sudden event or longer-term behaviour.

    Best for:

    • Impact and storm-related cracking

    • Movement concerns and dispute contexts

    • Baseline documentation for future comparison

    Options include:

    • Baseline crack measurements and photographic scaling

    • Crack gauge installation (where appropriate)

    • Follow-up re-inspection and comparative commentary (if instructed)

  • We use DJI drones to capture high-quality aerial imagery and video of roofs, drainage layouts, storm impact zones, and hard-to-access elevations, particularly where safe access is limited.

    Best for:

    • Roof condition observations

    • Storm event evidence capture

    • Pre and post-works documentation

  • We use NIVCOMP digital floor level survey equipment to measure and present floor level variation in a clear, professionally drafted drawing, useful for movement-related matters.

    Best for:

    • Escape of liquid events

    • Baseline movement documentation

    • Supporting assessment of floor level variation patterns

    • Comparing future surveys where monitoring is required

.what this toolkit helps answer

  • Is the issue active or historic?

  • Is the damage localised or widespread?

  • Does it appear consistent with the reported event?

  • Is there a safety risk or immediate make-safe requirement?

  • What’s the most sensible next step (monitoring, targeted access, repairs, or further investigation)?