From the field. X-ris. Arcing

From the field. Arcing with Pierre-Emmanuel Rigot at X-RIS

May 28, 2026

This is not primarily a story about arcing; it is a story about how dangerous the wrong corrective action can be. It’s about the risk of acting without enough diagnostic certainty, and about why, in some cases, the safest decision is to slow down rather than intervene.

At its core, this case shows how BLOX supports remote diagnostics - not by replacing expertise, but by making the right data visible and shareable so that informed decisions can be made. As Pierre-Emmanuel Rigot, After Sales Manager and Technical Field Engineer at X-RIS, explains, arcing cases leave no room for error.

“If you take the wrong decision here, you can destroy everything.”

When automation no longer runs by itself

The customer’s X-ray scanner is designed to work autonomously; it runs on defined cycles and should operate independently, without interruption. Instead, the automatic process was stopping repeatedly. “It was excessive shutdowns - irregular shutdowns, and the automatic process was stopping all the time.” These were not isolated events. The interruptions happened often enough to disrupt normal operation.

To understand what was going on, Pierre-Emmanuel connected to the system remotely, then extracted the log files and uploaded them to BLOX. He immediately saw, not a single fault, but a pattern - “There was a cloud of arcing alerts visible in the graphical arcing data.

When seeing arcing is not yet understanding it

The arcing pattern was clearly visible in BLOX, and each event appeared as a red point, with a timestamp and a voltage level. “That visualization makes the issue very clear,” but visibility alone was not enough. The critical question was not whether arcing was occurring, but where it was occurring. At that time, the diagnostics could not clearly discriminate between tube arcing and cable arcing, and that distinction is crucial. “Because if we think it’s tube arcing and it’s actually cable arcing, we can destroy everything if we are not careful and act without the right data.”

Fact box

System setup

Automated X-ray scanner
Remote diagnostics via BLOX
High-voltage system with tube and cable assemblies

Observed issue

Repeated automatic shutdowns
High frequency of arcing alerts
Production interruption due to instability

Diagnostic challenge

Arcing clearly visible - shown as “low arc robustness”
No initial discrimination between tube arcing and cable arcing
High risk of irreversible damage if misdiagnosed

Outcome

Tube instability identified
Extended warm-up cycles applied
System stabilized without mechanical intervention

Cable arcing is particularly dangerous - it requires unmounting all four high-voltage cables, checking for damage, re-greasing correctly, adjusting the pressure on the cable flange, and only then trying again. Increasing the voltage in such a case would be risky. “If it’s cable arcing, you should never launch more kV.” A tube arcing, by contrast, is handled very differently. In that case, extended warm-up cycles are often enough to stabilize the situation within the tube’s vacuum, and choosing the wrong response carries significant risk.

“No - in case of excessive arcing, you cannot guess”

What BLOX made possible

Despite the uncertainty, BLOX enabled a structured and collaborative diagnostic process. The data was already available remotely and could be shared directly with Comet’s support experts. “One of the strengths of BLOX is that it’s a remote platform, where I can analyze the data myself, via the BLOX interface, and if I have a doubt, the data is ready to share with Comet experts.” Instead of describing symptoms, he could simply ask Comet to look at a specific serial number.

“For me, analyzing the data myself or having Comet analyze it is exactly the same, it’s from the same dataset.” Based on this shared analysis, Comet’s support team concluded that the tube was likely unstable and recommended extended warm-up cycles. “That was the recommendation, and it worked,” Pierre-Emmanuel says.

Stabilization over time

The decision was taken carefully. “I’m not comfortable with arcing cases, because if you take the wrong decision, you can destroy everything.” The customer extended the warm-up routine and continued operating, and Pierre-Emmanuel scheduled a follow-up log review two weeks later. When the new logs were analyzed, the result was clear: “When we looked at the new logs, the arcing events were gone.

Reducing uncertainty before acting

This case also highlighted a limitation: At the time, the diagnostics could show that arcing was happening, but not precisely where. That is now being addressed at Comet. “We are waiting for the improvement Pascal Corbat, the BLOX Product Manager, is working on”.

The goal is to determine which tank the arc occurs in and at what voltage level. With that information, it will be much clearer to distinguish between tube arcing and cable arcing. Better diagnostics through BLOX will reduce the need for on-site interventions and lower the risk of taking the wrong action.

What this case shows

This case was never about reacting faster; it is about reacting correctly. When arcing appears, the technical response is not the real challenge; the real challenge is choosing the right intervention - or deciding not to intervene at all.

BLOX did not remove uncertainty. It reduced it to a level where disciplined decisions were possible. Making the same diagnostic data visible to everyone involved allowed expertise to be applied calmly, collaboratively, and with confidence. The outcome was not just a stabilized system. It avoided risk, avoided mechanical intervention, and avoided unnecessary cost. In high-risk environments, maturity is not measured by how quickly you act. It is measured by knowing when restraint protects more value than action.

“We are often in a hurry. That’s when mistakes happen.”

Facing a field challenge or seeing a pattern in operation?

Get in touch to share your case, ask a question, or help shape future “From the field” articles.

Latest three news

Focus topic. A conversation with Jan Bressendorff and Allen Gress about pipeline weld inspection

October 8, 2026

On a pipeline job, the X-ray system is chosen for the weld, not from a catalog. Pipe size and access determine how the crew can inspect it. The procedure sets what the image must show. Heat, weight and exposure time shape the working day. A poor choice can cost hours. A good one helps the crew get an image the inspector can assess without needless delay.

Focus topic. The HP/15 builds on two decades of proven HP/11 performance for digital detectors, in-line inspection and CT.

September 21, 2026

For two decades, the HP/11 has been the reference minifocus X-ray tube for high-resolution and high throughput radiography. The HP/15 keeps everything that made it trusted, and reengineers the rest for digital detectors, in-line inspection and computed tomography.

From the field. Cooler leakage with Pierre-Emmanuel Rigot at X-RIS

September 10, 2026

This is not primarily a story about a cooler leak - it is a story about what happens when insight arrives too late. About the cost of operating without remote access. About the difference between reacting to failures and preventing them. And about how weak signals only become meaningful over time when data is allowed to flow. At its core, this case shows why BLOX alone is not enough.

Excessive arcing - when the wrong decision is the real risk