ML20094M625
| ML20094M625 | |
| Person / Time | |
|---|---|
| Site: | Beaver Valley, Columbia, Diablo Canyon  |
| Issue date: | 11/21/1995 |
| From: | CARDINAL INDUSTRIAL PRODUCTS CORP. |
| To: | NRC OFFICE OF INFORMATION RESOURCES MANAGEMENT (IRM) |
| Shared Package | |
| ML20094M601 | List: |
| References | |
| REF-PT21-95 NUDOCS 9511270151 | |
| Download: ML20094M625 (42) | |
Text
- - _ _
i
'l i
. '\
7 i
l l
Investigation and Analysis !
of- l Suspect Fasteners :
Event 29257 )
1 w
I 4
l t
- Final Report g
Prepared by J CardinalIndustrial Products Division of B&G Manufacturing Co., Inc.
5 November,1995 i
=
9511270151 951121 ,
8 INTRODUCTION On July 10,1995 B&G Manufacturing Co., Inc. ("B&G") purchased the name and certain I other assets from Cardinal Industrial Products, L.P. ("CIP-LP") a limited partnership formed i and operated in Nevada servicing the nuclear power industry. B&G acquired these assets to begin its own nuclear fastener business as a new division of B&G ("B&G-Cardinal"). <
Various owners have operated a nuclear fastener business under the " Cardinal" name at West Oquendo Road in Las Vegas prinr to B&G's acquisition of assets from CIP-LP on July 10, 1995. In this report the term " Cardinal facility" is used to describe the general operations which have continued at that site independently of ownership. The reader is advised to be aware of the nature and sequence of the ownership as this report is reviewed.
Shortly after July 10,1995, Duquesne Light notified B&G-Cardinal about nonconforming :
Grade B7 hex capscrews, which had been processed and sold to tnem by CIP-LP. Several l of the suspect fasteners were tested by B&G-Cardinal and an independent testing laboratory and found to deviate from SA 193, Grade B7 mechanical requirements. j Although these fasteners had been processed, sold, and shipped by CIP-LP, B&G sent :
notifications of the nonconformance to the NRC and to other purchasers of product from the same lot. As a result of the notifications, two other utility companies reported to B&G-
} Cardinal nonconforming fasteners from the same lot and one additional lot.
B&G initiated a comprehensive investigation to ascertain the scope and cause of the problem, to determine corrective actions, to keep its new customers fully informed and, as a courtesy, to be able to instruct them to evaluate the condition in light of 10CFR Part 21 paragraph 21.21(a)(1)(ii) and (b)(1).
L:allograph: naiysis of the nonconforming fas;eners indicated improper heat treatment, which prompted B&G-Cardinal to begin testing similar lots of material from inventory that l were manufactured using the same heat treatment process. This testing revealed additional nonconforming product and thereby indicated the problem was not isolated to only one lot but was related to the process.
investigation and testing traced the problem to the heat treating furnace at the Cardinal facility, and substandard fasteners most likely can be isolated to eight lots of material processed since 1989. (The investigation could not address product processed prior to 1989 because records were unavailable.)
~
Final Report 11/95 Page 1 w . s. _
This report describes the problem, the investigation strategy, testing and analysis, and other e actions taken by B&G-Cardinal that revealed the source of the defects to be processing deficiencies in heat treating certain rnaterial at the Cardinal facility.
THE PROBLEM Certain lots of hex capscews that were processed and shipped per ASME SA-193, Grade B7 out of the Cardinal facility by CIP-LP were found to coniain defective fasteners.
The problem was initially discovered by Duquesne Light's Beaver Valley facility, which had sent several W diameter capscrews to an outside laboratory for random verification testing.
The results of these tests indicated some fasteners from the lot were not in compliance with the mechanical requirements of the specification. Duquesne Light reported this failure to B&G-Cardinal. Independent test reports from the Beaver Valley facility (and later from PG&E Diablo Canyon and Washington Pulsiic Power Supply System) suggested the fasteners in question had not been properly heat treated.
The suspect lot of ASME SA-193 Grade 87 capscrews was manufactured at the Cardinal l facility from AISI 4140 medium carbon alloy steel. The manufacturing process utilized by CIP-LP was to cold form capscrews from spheroidized annealed cold heading wire. The fasteners were then heat treated by a process of either normalizing, quenching, and tempering, or simply by quenching and tempering. Depending on the lot sizes, the heat treatment was either performed at the Cardinal facility or by an approved outside vendor.
l IMMEDIATE ACTION l To verify the testing results obtained by Beaver Valley, B&G-Cardinal performed tensile and hardness tests on capscrews from the same lot. These tests were performed at the Cardinal facility's laboratory under the direction of B&G-Cardinal's Quality Assurance Department. The mechanical properties of several of the capscrews tested were found to deviate from the minimum requirements of Grade B7. This lot of material was immediately removed from stock, marked as nonconformir.g. and isolated in the nonconformance room.
Samples of both conforming and nonconforming fasteners were sent to an outside laboratory for metallographic examination. The examination of the conforming fasteners indicated the fasteners had the tempered martensite structure expected from proper heat treatment. The nonconforming fasteners, however, had a spheroidized structure that indicated the heat-treated fasteners had not reached the temperature required for the i martensite struciure to form.
Final Report 11/95 Page 2
Because the nonconforming lot was heat treated at the Carcinal facility, B&G-Cardinal decided to concentrate its investigation on the heat treating equipment and process there.
l THE INVESTIGATION Early indications suggested that the nonconforming fasteners had never been heat treated.
The lot in question weighed over 250 pounds and would have been placed in several containers for ease of transport through the Cardinal facility, so it was plausible that a lone )
container of fasteners had bypassed heat treatment and was later intermingled with the rest j oflot, which had been heat treated. B&G-Cardinal then sampled a large number of the fasteners stillin inventory from the suspect lot and found, however, substandard fasteners J
~ with visible surface scale, which indicated that allthe fasteners, iricluding suspect ones, had ;
been heat treated.
1 Because the. fasteners definitely had been heated in the furnace, the focuc of the ;
investigation tumed to the heat treatment process and equipment at the Cardinal facility. l Recognizing that a problem with the heat treating facility may have affected other lots of ;
material, the Quality Assurance Department began sampling other lots from inventory that had been heat treated through the fumace at the Cardinal facility.
1 During the investigation, B&G-Cardinal sent courtesy notifications to the NRC and to l companies wisich had purchased capscrews from the questionable lot. Within a few days ;
of these notifications, PG&E Diablo Canyon informed B&G-Cardinal of a substandard, %"
diameter capscrew that had come from a second lot. In addition, the inventory sampling process by B&G-Cardinal revealed a third and fourth lot that contained substandard ,
- fasteners of %" and %" diameters, respectively. Courtesy notifications were also sent l regarding these lots.
- i
- It became apparent that the four lots found to have substandard fasteners all entered the ]
- - fumace in "large" charges held at a temperature for "short" periods (relative to other !
F charges performed at the Cardinal facility). The period in question was the duration parts were held in the fumace (" soaked") at the specified temperature for austenitizing just prior to lowering the basket of parts into a quench tank. The soaking time for A/SA 193, Grade ;
B7 product must be long enough to allow all parts to achieve an austenitic microstructure prior to quenching them rapidly in a liquid medium at a controlled temperature of 125'F.
The quenching provides a rapid temperature drop that results in the formation of a primarily :
martensitic structure. After quenching, parts should register hardness values of .
approximately 50 on the Rockwell C scale and tensile strengths between 225,000 and '
-300,000 psi. The parts then undergo a tempering cycle that entails heating them to a f
, s ;
Final Report 11/95 Page 3 ;
1 in f f
.. .-- - - . _ - - ... - - .-- . - -.- . - -~
l !
l- ;
!- :1,100*F minimum fol lowed by a slow cooling process. Tempering reduces the tensile '
strength and develops ductility as required (for A/SA 193, Grade B7, a minimum tensile '
' strength of 125,000 psiwith ductility exhibiting 16% minimum elongation and 50% minimum ,
reduction of area).
Two primary problems can occur with the heat treating cycle. First, the charge may not be ;
allowed to " soak" in the fumace long enough for all the fasteners to reach the temperature i
required to achieve an austenistic microstructure. Second, the parts may not cool rapidly enough if the liquid que n.hing medium is not circulating sufficiently enough to provide adequate heat transfer in the required amount of time. The .ots in question were processed ;
in heat charges of relatively heavy weight, which could be a potential factor in either '
problem. If the charge size was too large, some or all the parts may not have reached the -
required temperature in the given time period; or the temperature of the quenching liquid i i
may have become too high to accomplish the required rapid cooling by the time the liquid reached the parts at the center of the charge upon being lowered into the quenching tank. s Heat treatment logs for charges performed at the Cardinal facility dating back to 1989 were included in the records obtained by B&G-Cardinal from CIP-LP. B&G-Cardinal examined these logs, which showed since -1989 a total of 333 charges were heat treated involving AISI 4140 medium carbon alloy steel. The data for each of these charges was entered into a spreadsheet and then sorted in descending order by weight and time (pounds per hour) with the expectation that the worst case charges (heavier charges or shorter soak times) would appear first (See Addendum 1). The charge with the previously identified %" lot with known substandard fasteners was at the top of the list, and the other three %" lots were all within the first 13% of charges listed. The pattem of sorted data was as anticipated and indicated that sound metallurgical principles were taking investigation in the proper direction.
Most of the product indentified in the heat treatment log had been sold and shipped prior to B&G's purchasing assets from CIP-LP, therefore lots generally were not available from inventory for testing. Thus, the strategy ofinvestigation was to recreate the heat treating conditions that would produce known defects. Test charges were planned using times, temperatures, and weights identical to the heat charges known to have produced defective product. Other test. charges were devised with the purpose of determining what combinations of weight and soak times would result in defective product. From the heat treatment log, charges with extreme weights relative to soaking times were identified for ,
each diameter of Grade B7 capscrews, and product was either manufactured or taken from
' inventory to be used for the test charges.
Final Report 11/95 Page 4 .
l
-=. - - .. - .- . -.- . -- - .- . - . - . - .-
I. .. ,
l: .
~
Over a two week penod, 22 test charges we's heat treated. After each charge, test s coupons were removed from specific locations within the heat treatment basket and were j tested for hardness (See Addendum 2). From the results of the early test charges, the
- following hypotheses were formed:
- 1. Some of the fasteners in the basket were not reaching the required
> temperature in'the allotted time. This' conclusion was based upon the location of the substandard fasteners found in _ failed test charges. This 1 hypothesis is supported by two separate metallographic examinattuns of substandard fasteners.
- 2. The time required for all fasteners in the charge to reach temperature is' dependent upon charge density as well as overall weight. Charge density is q a function of the fastener's dimensions where %" diameter fasteners will pack more densely than %" diameter fasteners.
r in addition to performing tests to verify the integrity of past charges, other charges were specifically performed to verify the above hypotheses.
Because the problem appeared to relate in general to heat transfer and not necessarily to any specific material, the Investigation was broadened to include all heat treated materials.
The heat treatment logs were again reviewed, but without regard for material or heat :
treatment type but rather simply for what appearea to be the critical indicators of weight, time at temperature, and charge density. No other charges were found to have critical :
factors in the range which coincided with test charge failures.
During the investigation, the possibility of a problem with the quenching phase of the heat ;
treating cycle was dismissed based upon metallographic analysis. The metallography ;
comparisons of acceptable and substandard fasteners taken from the same lot showed two clearly different but identifiable microstructures. The photomicrograph of the acceptable <
fastener showed the proper tempered martensite microstructure with some retained austenite. The microstructure of the substandard fastener was spheroidized carbides in a ferrite matrix, which results only when alloy steel does not reach the austenitizing f
temperature. Either microstructure was dependent upon proper quenching. In other words, inadequate quenching in either case would have produce yet another identifiable microstructure.
Final Report 11/95 Page 5
INVESTIGATION FINDINGS m
in the process of performing of 22 different quench-cycle test charges, B&G-Cardinal was ;
able to recreate heat treatment conditions and substandard fasteners corresponding to the four inventory lots known to have contained substandard fasteners. Because these test charges produced the expected results and thereby substantiated the hypotheses, B&G-Cardinal ceased investigating other causes. In addition to the test cbrges that recreated known failures, other test charges produced substandard fasteners that paralleled four additional lots of material from the heat treatment log. While there is no conclusive evidence that corresponding actual production charges contained substandard fasteners, it was likely they did; therefore, B&G decided to send courtesy notifications to the NRC and known customers for these lots, too. The other 14 test charges done under the remaining ,
worst-case conditions produced acceptable results and therefore strongly suggests that substandard fasteners can be isolated to the eight lots of inventory for which simulated heat-treatment charges produced fa: lures.
The test charges containing substandard fasteners were evaluated by hardness testing of forty coupons taken from specific locations from throughout the charge. The hardness readings were documented on forms which detail the location of each coupon (See Addendum 2). Based upon the map of the hardness readings, it is apparent that the bottom layer of fasteners near the center of the basket was the last to reach temperature in larger lots. The primary heat transfer mode for the fumace is radiation. The secondary heat transfer mode is conduction. In large charges of densely packed fasteners, conduction becomes much more important. Because of the configuration of the furnace atthe Cardinal facility, the bottom center portion of the basket did not receive significant heat through radiation. Fasteners at the bottom layer received their heat through conduction from the upper layers of fasteners. In the charges containing substandard fasteners, the time required for the heat to reach the bottom layer of fasteners was longer than the fasteners remained in the fumace.
This problem was not discovered earlier because the test coupons that had been used by
, the Cardinal facility for tensile and hardness testing were typically placed at the top, center spot of the chaige. Had the test coupons been placed within the area of the charge which failed to reach temperature because oflagging heat transfer, the defects could have been detected during the normal testing performed on heat charges.
The furnace at the Cardinal facility takes approximately two hours to reach the a,ppropriate austenitizing temperature for A/SA 193, Grade B7. After this temperature is reached, the fasteners are allowed to " soak" at temperature for at least one hour. The soak time is intended to provide even distribution of the heat. The fumace's thermocouple used to
~
Final Report 11/95 Page 6
register its temperature is positioned in the upper region of the fumace (See Addendum 3).
- The results of the test charges demonstrated that not all the contents of a charge reach the indicated temperature at the same time. The time required for the bottom layer of fasteners to reach temperature was affected by the weight of the charge and the charge density.
One of the test charges that failed (#21) was 331 pounds of %" x 1"long capscrews. This charge contained nearly 8,000 pieces and was only 2% inches deep in the basket (the basket is 37 inches long and 25 inches wide). Another charge of the equivalent weight (#5) passed but contained %" x 2%" and %" x 3"long capscrews. This charge contained just over 1,100 fasteners and was 4% inches deep. How densely fasteners were packed in the charge affected the amount of heat received through radiation as compared Io conduction.
In general, the smaller the diameter of the fasteners, the more the charge acts as a solid mass. In both of the above listed examples the charge was held at temperature for one hour, but the charge that failed had %" diameter fasteners that packed more densely than the chargo that passed with the larger, %" diameter fasteners.
In another example, the diameter of the test charge was held constant a'nd packing density was changed. 300 pounds of %"x 1"long capscrews were held at temperature for one hour and contained no bad fasteners (test charge #19). Another charge (#22) contained 270 pounds of %" x 4" capscrews and was also held at temperature for one hour. The four-inch long capscrews of this lot were carefully lined in rows when packed into the basket (which is a common practice to present shank warpage). The tightly packed charge of four-inch
~
long screws contained failed fasteners.
INVESTIGATION CONCLUSIONS The conclusion of this investigation is that the substandard fasteners resulied from procedural error involving the time that heat treatment charges were held at temperature for the given conditions, specifically the charge's weight and density as determined by the diameter of the products and method of packing. According to the records lett behind by CIP-LP, the standard practice of CIP-LP for heat treating operations referred to Military Standard MIL-H-6875. However, the CIP-LP's standard practice made no reference to factoring the overall weight or packing method when determining the correct soaking t!cne for a particular charge in the furnace at the Cardinal facility.
The heat treatment equipment located at Cardinal facility does have limitations. In general, the furnace has heating elements on four sides and on the ceiling (See Addendum 3). This would not be a problem except that the single thermocouple is located in the ceiling of the fumace. The temperature indicated on the display panel and recorded on the strip chart
~
Final Report 11/95 Page 7
l l
i i
may not reflect the temperature throughout the fumace and the charge. This limitation,
, however, could have been compensated for procedurally by allowing charges to remain at
- temperatur*: for longer periods of time.
B&G-Cardinal has been asked what the percentage of fasteners is substandard in the suspect, and what is the strength of the substandard fasteners it should be assumed that the heat treatment of any of the suspect lots was insufficient to achieve the mechanical properties of A/SE 193, Grade B7, and that the mechanical properties of the fasteners from 3 those lots are equivalent to annealed AISI 4140 material. This means the tensile strength is between 60,000 and 70.000 psi. Estimating the percentage of fasteners that are :
substandard in a given lot is much more difficult. Basing estimates upon heavy charges having five or six layers of capscrews with as rnany as fifty percent of the bottom layer being substandard suggests that the lot would contain 10 percent defective fasteners.
However, one cannot assume that substandard fasteners are distributed evenlythroughout a total lot; defective fasteners, for instance, could have been concentrated into one container when packed for warehousing or shipping. Therefore, B&G-Cardinal cannot i i
conclusively say what percentage of fasteners purchased by any particular customer was substandard.
There are two other factors in connection with the heat treating equipment at the Cardinal l facility which would tend to isolate suspect charges to the types of product and material l investigated with the 22 test charges.
~.
The first is the quenching medium, which is a polymer solution. The particular design of the quench tank located at the Cardinal facility precludes the use of oil Liecause it would be a fire hazard. The polymer solution is a suitable alternate for oil for many materials such as ,
A/SA 193 Grade 87. But a polymer solution cannot be used in the heat treatment of very l high strength materials such as A490 structural bolts. A574 socket screws, F912 set screws, or A354 Grade BD (SAE J995 Grade 8) because thes. mecificatione renoire an oil quench. A polymer solution is a!so not suitable for quenching products made from !
medium carbon steels, such as A325 structural bolts. A449 Type 1 (SAE J995 Grade 5) i bolts, A194 Grade 2H nuts, A563 Grade C, D, or DH nuts, and F436 flat washers, Consequently, there seems no reason to believe that any of these types of products would have undergone heat treatmen' at the Cardinal facility.
l Secondly, rods and studs were generally not heat treated at the Cardinal facility because they were produced from bars which already met applicable specifications and did not require additional heat treatment. In addition, the heat treatment basket could not physically accommodate any studs or rods longer than 36 inches.
I Final Report 11/95 Page 8 1
{
B&G-Cardinal believes that the problem of substandard fasteners discovered initially by
, Duquesne Light does not extend beyond the eight lots of Grade 87 capscrews already identified through testing charges based upon critical factors ofweight, density, and soaking times; but B&G-Cardinal cannot guarantee this conclusion. Customers should evaluate replacing any fasteners installed from these eight lots, and should consider testing other lots if deemed necessary for further assurance.
SUMMARY
Shortly after receiving notification from Duquesne Light that capscrews sold to them by CIP-LP did not meet the specification requirements, B&G-Cardinal began an investigation into the cause and scope of the problem. During this investigation, a detailed review of records was performed as well as a duplication of past heat treatment charges. During the investigation, B&G-Cardinal recreated the heat treating conditions of suspect lots and !
through test charges successfully duplicated the failures in four Ic's of material known to l contain substandard fasteners; additional test charges produced four more lots with i substandard fasteners, which may indicate that corresponding lots in the field may also i have substandard fasteners.
( The cause of the problem was determined to be procedural error. As a courtesy, B&G-1
~
Cardinal has notified the NRC and the companies that purchased capscrews from lots containing suspect material.
B&G-Cardinal has discontinued using the heat treatment equipment at the Cardinal facility 1 until such time that satisfactory modifications are made to both the hardware and procedures goveming the heat treating operation, w ective act' ~ 'c preclude recurronce include. but are not limited to:
- 1. Revising or adding procedures to address minimum' soak times, basket loading procedures, and placement of test specimens; upgrading training
^
programs for operators of the fumace.
- 2. Adding a second thermocouple to the furnace located at the bottom-center of the furnace near the parts basket (where heat transfer can lag behind other sections of the furnace, depending on weight and density).
4 Adding a view port to the furnace so that the operator can observe the charge j 3.
during the heat treatment. l 5
Final Report 11/95 Page 9
-i
- 4. Considering overhauling or replacing the furnace if other corrective actions l
.. - are insufficient. .
)
ADDENDUMS -
4
- 1. Sorted Heat Treatment Data Showing Heavy Charges -
I 2. Test Charge Results l
. 3. Heat Treatment Equipment at the Cardinal Facility 5
1 i
?
?
1 i l
i l
l 1
i i
i d l i
'~
Final Report 11/95 Page 10
l-Heat Treatment Log Charge Data Sorted by Founds per Hour Data Charge Oty Description Ibs Total Hrs. Ibsthr Notes
]')
Il22/94 2905 935 5l811 X 3 HHS 317.90 543 1 543 Failed Lot " Tut" 750 51811 X 2112 HHS 225.00 Test charge 03 failed 8/18id2 2547 2263 3/8 0 X 6 HCS 452.60 453 1 453 Test charge 22 faHed 3/27/93 2696 1259 5/8 0 X 3 HCS 390.29 390 1 390 Test charge 06 failed 11l13/92 2615 318 10 X 4 HHS 381.60 382 1 382 Good per test charge 15 4I15194 2952 1100 SI811 X 3 HXB 352.00 555 1.5 370 Test charge 04 failed 633 5/811 X 3 HXB 202.56 9/16194 3075 1212 5/811 X 21/2 HHB 363.60 364 1 364 Good per test charge 07 717/94 3010 860 5IB 11 X 4 HHS 361.20 361 1 361 Good per test charge 07 6I16/94 2996 860 5/811 X 4 HHS 361.20 361 1 361 Good per test charge 07 12/14/92 2633 300 3/4 0 X 2 HHS 117.00 361 1 361 Good per test charge 10 202 3/4 0 X 4 HHS 127.26 134 3/4 0 X 6 HHS - 116.58 211 519 5 3163 2115 II213 X 21/2 HCS 359.55 360 1 360 Good per test charge 12 911 6194 3073 1200 51811 X 21/2 HHB 360.00 360 1 360 Good per test charge 07 5/28193 2735 1710 II2 0 X 3 HHS 359.10 359 1 359 Good per test charge 12 1016/93 2825 54 13/4 0 X 12 HHS 523.80 524 1.5 349 Good per test charge 17 10/16/92 2595 129 1 II2 6 X 6 516.00 516 1.5 344 Good per test charge 17 11/6/92 2609 249 18 X 8 HHB 512.94 513 1.5 342 Good per test charge 20 11l4I92 2606 249 18 X 8 HHB 512.94 513 1.5 342 Good per test charge 20 4l14195 3216 1460 11213 X 3 II2 HCS 335.80 335 1 335 Good per test charge 12 11111/92 2612 307 10 X 6 HHS 500.41 501 1.5 334 Good per test charge 20 8/25/94 3053 975 5/8 0 X 3 HHS 331.50 332 1 332 Good per test charge 07 9/21I92 2572 1500 5I16 0 X 3 HCS 105.00 331 1.5 331 Good based upon data from 1610 5116-0 X 6 HCS 225.40 charge 12, 22"'
10/7/93 2826 1000 1/2-13 X 1112 HHS 120.00 330 1 330 Good per test charge 12 1400 11213 X 2 HHS 210.00 10I23/92 2598 785 5/811 X 4 HHB 329.70 330 1 330 Good per test charge 07 Addendum 1 Page1
O Date Charge Oty Description Ibs Total Hrs. Ibs/hr Notes 4/5/91 2242 544 3/4 0 X 41/2 HHB 375.36 485 1.5 323 Good per test charge 11 54 11/8 0 X 6 HX8 109.62 7/26194 3024 112 21/4-8 HHN 469.28 470 1.5 313 Good per test charge 20 8/30/94 3058 813 5/8 0 X 3 II2 HHS 308.94 309 1 309 Good per test charge 07 8/6/90 2098 345 7/8-0 X 21/2 HHS 220.80 462 1.5 308 Good per test charge 13 335 7/8 0 X 3 HHS 241.20 5/14/91 2261 1269 518 0 X 1 1/4 HCS 215.73 606 2 303 Good per test charge 08 1694 5/8 0 X 2 HCS 389.62 8/89 1877 284 1518 0 HHN 460.00 460 3 303 Good per test charge 08 12/21/93 2882 71 1314 8 HHN 144.84 455 1.5 303 Good per test charge 13 63 13/4 8 HHN 128.52 65 13/4 8 HHN 132.60 24 13/4 8 HHN 48.96 j 211 919 3 2675 5350 3/816 X 1112 HCS 299.60 300 1 300 Failed tot "TS1" Test charge 19 passed Test charge 21 failed 10/5/92 2585 703 3/410 X 4 HHB 442.89 443 1.5 295 Good per test charge 12,13 10/25190 2146 110 11/2-0 X 6 HHB 440.00 440 1.5 293 Good per test charge 17 4/25192 2465 242 10 X 4 HCS 273.46 578 2 289 Good per test charge 16 114 1 114 0 X 6 HHS 304.38 11/13/92 2613 108 11I2 0 X 6 HCS 432.00 432 1.5 288 Good per test charge 17 6/18193 2751 2050 11213 X 2 HCS 287.00 287 1 287 Good per test charge 12 5l17194 2969 2100 318 0 X 4 HCS 273.00 273 1 273 Friled Lot "TS9" Test charge 22 failed 31094 2934 9 11/8 0 X 3112 HHS 12.69 273 1 273 Good per test charge 15 23 1118 0 X 31l2 HHS 32.43 23 11/8 0 X 3 II2 HHS 32.43 23 1118 0 X 3 II2 HHS 32.43 23 1118 0 X 31/2 HHS 32.43 9 1118 0 X 3 3/4 HHS 13.32 22 11/8 0 X 3 3/4 HHS 32.56 22 11/8 0 X 3 3/4 HHS 32.56 22 1118 0 X 3 3/4 HHS 32.56 22 11I8 0 X 3 3/4 HHS 32.56 Addendum 1 Fage 2
Date Charge Qty Description Ibn Total Mrs. Ibs/hr Notes 10/24/92 2599 649 5/811 X 4 HHB 272.58 273 1 273 Good per test charge 07 10/7/92 2587 647 31410 X 4 HHB 407.61 408 1.5 272 Good per test charge 11,13 6/15194 2995 216 1 II8 7 X 3 Il4 HCS 272.16 272 1 272 Good per test charge 15 5l18194 2970 1320 3/8 0 X 6 HCS 264.00 264 1 264 Failed Lot "TS6" Test charge 22 failed 3/30/95 3202 248 7/8 9 X 5.2 HHB 262.88 263 1 263 Good per test charge 10,15 11113/92 2614 127 10 X 8 HHS 261.62 262 1 262 Good per test charge 15 11/16/92 2617 98 1 II2 0 X 6 HCS 392.00 392 1.5 261 Good per test charge 17 6/21/94 2999 620 5/811 X 4 HHS 260.40 261 1 261 Good per test charge 07 9/2I92 2561 161 1114 0 X 5114 HHB 389.62 390 1.5 260 Good per test charge 17 3/11/93 2680 1250 518 0 X 3 HCS 387.50 388 1.5 259 Good per 'est charge 09 11/6/92 2610 574 5/8 0 X 4 HHS 241.08 258 1 258 Good per test charge 07,12 110 1l213 X 2 HHS. 16.50 1l14193 2649 303 718 0 X 6 HHS 369.66 370 1.5 247 Good per test charge 13 1l18190 1934 178 1114 0 X 41/2 HCS 367.00 367 1.5 245 Good per test charge 17 9/15I94 3071 275 7/8 9 X 4 HHB 244.75 245 1 245 Good per test charge 10,15 612 619 0 2068 322 7/8 0 X 3 HHB 231.84 484 2 242 Good per test charge 8,16 327 7/8-0 X 3 Il4 HHB 251.79 7/21/93 2769 106 3/410 X 21/2 HHS 47.70 361 1.5 240 Good per test charge 09,13 121 3/410 X 3 HHS 61.71 120 3/410 X 31/2 HHS 68.40 120 3/410 X 4 HHS 75.60 123 3/410 X 6 HHS 107.01 12/23!92 2638 1050 518 0 X 3 HHS 357.00 357 1.5 238 Good per test charge 09 11/25192 2622 110 II213 HHN 71.50 357 1.5 238 Good per test charge 09 1140 518 0 X 2 HHS 285.00 11I20/90 2168 91 1112 0 X 6 HCS 354.90 355 1.5 237 Good per test charge 17 Sl5I90 2019 112 3/4 0 X 2 HB 39.20 235 1 235 Good per test charge 07,10 650 5/8 0 X 21/2 HHB 195.00 4I619 2 2458 500 112 0 X 4 HCS 125.00 349 1.5 233 Good per test charge 12 :
606 112 0 X 6 HCS 224.22 I l
~
Addendum 1 ;
Page 3 I
Date Charge Qty Description Ibs Total Hrs. IbsIhr Notes SI30/92 2492 274 5/8 0 X 4 HCS 109.60 579 2.5 232 Good per test charDe 08 267 5/8-0 X 8 HCS 200.25 472 5/8 0 X 6 HCS 269.04 5/13/92 2479 192 7/8 0 X 4 HCS 163.20 574 2.5 230 Good per test charge 14 270 7/8 0 X 8 HCS 410.40 5/15/91 2262 121 10 X 21/2 HCS 96.80 460 2 230 Good per test charge 16 124 10 X 3 HCS 112.84 125 10 X 8 HCS 251.25 12/21/92 2636 490 3/4-0 X 3 HCS 230.30 230 1 230 Good per test charge 10 6/1/91 2274 61 21/2 8 HHN 344.04 344 1.5 229 Good per test charge 17 9/9/94 3064 900 5/811 X 31/2 HHB 342.00 342 1.5 228 Good per test charge 09 2/25193 2677 5550 3/816 X 1 HCS 227.55 228 1 228 Good per test charge 19 12/10/92 2630 305 3/4 0 X 3 HHS 155.55 228 1 228 Good per test charge 10 184 3/4 0 X 2 HHS 71.76 8/21/90 2110 1175 1/2 0 X 4 II2 HHD 340.75 341 1.5 227 Good per test charge 12 8126/94 3055 665 5/8 0 X 3 HHS 226.10 226 1 226 Good per test charge 07 8121194 3048 22 31/2 8 HHN 335.72 336 1.5 224 Good per test charge 17 5/28/94 2980 563 5/8-0 X 6 HHS 332.17 332 1.5 221 Good per test charge 09 1I8/93 2646 226 18 X 51/2 HCS 329.96 330 1.5 220 Good per test ct.arge 15 3/30/95 3201 157 3/410 X 5 HHB 117.75 218 1 218 Good per test charge 10,15 112 7/8 9 X 4 HHB 99.68 6/22/93 2752 1450 11213 X 2 HHS 217.50 218 1 218 Good per test charge 12 4/6/94 2949 215 3/4 0 X 2 HHS 83.85 215 1 215 Good per test charge 10 151 3/4-0 X 6 HHS 131.37 7/23/93 2771 244 7/8 9 X 4 HHB 214.72 215 1 215 Good per test charge 10,15 9I2/94 3060 760 5!8 0 X 4 HHS 319.20 319 1.5 213 Good per test charge 09 417/93 2701 1010 112 0 X 3 HHB 202.00 314 1.5 209 Good per test charge 12 302 1/2 0 X 6 HHB 111.74 2/5!91 2198 550 314 0 X 31/2 HHB 313.50 314 1.5 209 Good per test charge 09,13 l
2/10/90 1947 443 5/8-0 X 13/8 HHS 94.00 209 1 209 Good per test chaige 07 l 449 5/8 0 X 2 HHS 115.00 Addendum 1 Page 4
i Date Charge Oty Description Ibs Total Nrs. Ibslhr Illotes
~
8/22/92 2552 1600 3/8 0 X 4 HCS 208.00 208 1 208 Good per test charge 19 416/91 2243 548 3/4-0 X 5 HHS 411.00 411 2 206 Good per test charge 11 10/23/91 2363 1700 1/213 X 3 3/4 HCS 408.00 408 2 204 Good per test ch:rge 08,12 2/13/90 1949 43 3/4-0 X 3 3/4 HHB 26.00 408 2 204 Good per test charge 11 25 314 0 X 4 HHB 16.00 394 3/4 0 X 61/2 HHB 366.00 6f27/92 2511 25 21/2-0 HHN 141.00 203 1 203 Good per test charpe 15 11 21!2 0 HHN 62.04 11/2/92 2604 185 18 X 6 HHB 301.55 302 1.5 201 Good per test charge 15 10/30/92 2602 185 18 X 6 HHB 301.55 302 1.5 201 Good per test charge 15 Al13/95 3215 67 M42 X 4.5 CAP NUT 201.00 201 1 201 Good per test charge 15 8/3/90 209R' III 1 II4 0 X 6 HCS 286.38 400 2 200 Good per test charge 16 2847 3/8 0 X 1 HXB 113.88 5/30/91 2270 126 10 X 31/2 HHS 138.60 495 2.5 198 Good per test charge 16 126 10 X 4 HHS 151.20 126 10 X 6 HHS 205.38 7130/90 2092 343 1/4 0 HXN 24.01 392 2 196 Good per test charge 17
,~
105 11/2 0 X 5 HHB 367.50 8/17194 3045 52 21/2 0 HHN 293.28 293 1.5 196 Good per test charge 17 8/15194 3042 52 21/2 HHN 293.28 293 1.5 196 Good per test charge 17 7126I55 3282 318 3/4 0 X 2 HHS 124.02 196 l 196 Good per test charge 10 160 3/4 0 X 21/2 HHS 72.00
. 6/17/93 2749 250 1/213 X 21/2 HCS 42.50 196 1 196 Good per test charge 12 900 1/213 X 21/2 HCS 153.00 5/23194 2974 76 3/410 X 31/2 HHB 43.32 289 1.5 193 Good per test charge 09,15 136 18 X 4 II2 HHB 178.16 144 51811 X 4 Il2 HHB 67.68 ,
4l23/92 2464 238 10 X 8 HCS 478.38 479 2.5 192 Good per test charge 16
~
Addendum 1 Pege 5
Date Charge Qty Description lbs Total Hrs. Ibsthr Notes 3/29/90 1981 50 7/8 0 X 2 3/4 HHB 34.00 285 1.5 190 Gocd per test charge 13 50 7/8-0 X 4 HHB 44.50 25 7/8~0 X 5 HHB 26.50 25 7/8-0 X 51/2 HHB 28.50 25 7/8 0 X 6 HHB 30.50 50 7/8 0 X 3 HHB 36.00 50 7/8 0 X 31/2 HH8 40.50 50 7/8 0 X 4 HHB 44.50 8/2/91 2324 387 3/4 5 X 3 HXB 185.76 284 1.5 190 Good per test charge 9,13 146 114 20 X 4 HCS 8.76 300 3/410 X 11/2 HXB 90.00 2114/92 2422 696 3/816 X 13/4 HCS 41.76 282 1.5 188 Good per test charge 12,19 999, 1/213 X 3 3/4 HCS 239.76 6!?7/95 3264 119 1114 0 X 5 HHS 278.46 279 1.5 186 Good per test charge 17 12/30/92 2642 180 7/8 0 X 8 HHS 279.00 279 1.5 186 Good per test charge 13 3/12/91 2330 585 1114 0 HHN -
462.15 462 2.5 185 Good per test charge 16 811/9 5 3285 315 3/4 0 X 6 HHS 274.05 274 1.5 183 Good per test charge 10 j 10/28190 2149 3160 1/2 0 X 2 HXB 455.04 455 2.5 182 Good per test charge 08 5/22/91 2266 1070 3I4 0 X 21/2 HCS 438.70 439 2.5 176 Good per test charge 11 l 11/20l90 2167 90 11I2 0 X 6 HCS 351.00 351 2 176 Good per test charge 17 II26/91 2195 68 1 II4 0 X 31/2 HHB 124.44 349 2 175 Good per test charge 17 145 1118 0 X 4 HHB 224.75 SI26/93 2728 60 2 8 HHN 174.00 174 1 174 Good per test charge 15 4/7/91 2244 78 3/4 0 X 4 HCS 46.80 519 3 173 Good per test charge 14,16 393 10 X 4 HHB 471.60 12/9/92 2629 1435 1/2 0 X 3 HCS 172.20 172 1 172 Good per test charge 12 i 3l6/91 2223 543 314 0 X 4 HHB 342.09 342 2 171 Good per test charge 11 3I24/90 1975 125 1114 0 X 4 HHB 250.00 250 1.5 167 Good per test charge 17 5/20/94 2973 1676 3/8 0 X 3 HCS 166.70 167 1 167 Good per test charge 19 6/24/93 2754 770 1/213 X 2 II2 HCS 130.90 247 1.5 165 Good per test charge 12 680 1/213 X 2112 HCS 115.60 Addendum 1 Page 6
1 1
Date Charge Sty Descripties ~ hs Te'.al ~ Hrs. lhelbr Notes !
C 12/12/91 2393 288 3/410 X 1 II2 HXB 226 51811 X 2 Il2.HX8
'86.40 245 61.02 1.5 164 Good'per test chary 10,19 f 1389 3I816 X 13/4 HCS 97.23 3I26,90 1977 353 3/40 X 2 HHS 137.67 160 '1 160 Good per test chwp 10,19 l 554 114 0 X 2 II2 HCS 22.16 1 5I29/91 2269 104 1 1/2 0 X 4 HHS 312.00 312 2 156 Good per test chap 16 6,'23/93 2753 2125 11213 X 11/2 HCS 233.75 234 1.5 156 Cood per test charge 12 61619 1 2279 1280 II2 0 X 2 Il4 HXB 204.80 309 2 155 Good per test chwp 12 !
805 II2 0 X 13/4 HXB 104.65 :
4/519 5 3208 3100 3/816 X 11/4 HCS 155.00 155 1 155 Good per test charp 19 8I22/0'J 2111 145 3/40 X 4 HH8 91.35 229 1.5 153 Good per test chap 10,12 1 1 475 1/2 0 X 4112 HHB 137.75 l
6I14/91 2285 982 1/2 0 X 31/2 HXB 225.86 226 1.5 151 Good per test charp 12 l 7/26I94 3025 580 5/811 X 2 HHS 150.80 151 1 151 Good per test chary 07 l l
Sill 92 2473 113 11/40 X 8 HHS 376.29 376 2.5 150 Good per test charp 17 3/11/91 2228 144 10 X 5 HHB 204.48 376 2.5 150 Good per test chw,s 16 143 10 X 4 HHB 171.60 5I22191 2267 1072 3/4 0 X 2 HCS 375.20 375 2.5 150 Good per test chap 11 Note (1) Charge 2572 was deternuned to be good based primarily upon data from charge 12.
In addition to test charge 12, test charge 22 was also considered as a reference. Although test charge 22 was considered to contain non conforming parts, it very nearly passed. Test charge
!' 22 was referenced because the diameter and length of the parts were similar to charge 2572.
l The addition-' 'O minutes charge 2572 was held at temperature, compared to test charge 22, i provides adequate assurance that this was a good charge.
' a l
- i i
1
- Addendum 1 ,
l Page7 L
! i
. I
l .
i l
1 Test Charge Results j m
Test Weight Time Number iptin (peunds)
Results (minutes) 01 3/8 x 1" her cap screws 50 60 Passed l 02 3/8 x 1" her cap screws 300 60 Passed 03 SI8 x 21/2",3" her cap screws 550 60 Failed 04 Sl8 x 21/2",3" her cap screws 550 90 Failed 05 5/8 x 21/2",3" her cap screws 330 60 Passed 06 5/8 x 21/2",3" hex cap screws 400 60 Failed 07 5/8 x 21/2",3" hex cap screws 365 60 Passed 08 5/8 x 21/2",3" her cap screws 610 130 Passed 09 5/8 x 21/2",3" hex cap screws 400 90 Passed 10 3/4" x various length hex cap screws 360 60 Passed 11 3/4" x various length hex cap screws 485 105 Passed 12 1/2 x 3" hex cap screws 360 60 Passed 13 7/8" x various length hex cap screws 465 90 Passed
~
14 7/8" x various length hex cap screws 575 150 Passed 15 1" x various length hex cap screws 385 60 Passed 16 1" x various length hex cap screws 578 120 Passed 17 11/2 x 6" her cap screws 516 90 Passed 18 318 x 1" hex cap screws 300 30 Failed 19 3/8 x 1" hex cap screws 300 60 Passed 20 1 x various length hex cap srmws 516 90 Passed 21 3I8 x 1" hex cap screws 331 60 Failed 22 3/8 x 4" hex cap screws 273 60 Failed The remaining addendum contains analyses for the above 22 test charges except for charges numbered 1,2, and 5, which were either superceded or re performed.
NOTE: To maintain consistency throughout testing, the Rockwell C scale was used to record all hardness values since readings are valid for the entire scale. In normal practice, hardness values would be expressed using a different scale if Rockwell C readings were below 20.
'~
Addendum 2 Page1
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Anaiysis l '
j Test Product Weight (pounds) .
! ZBG TEST 03 5f8 0 X 2%,3 550 l AISl 4140
- Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 91819 5 1 HOUR @1575 POLY j Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC)
TOP view 25 1 52 53 49 2 41 40 4.4 49 h 22~ 3 52 54 50 4 35 52 50 3.9 5 51 55 50 NORTH SIDE OF OVEN ~ (/
- 35 %
7 53 52 48
/\
8 45 44 36 23 g 9 l2- 9 54 51 50 10 48 8.2 25 5.0 11 51 17 4 3 12 50 45 25 11 Depth of Products (T): 6" 13 Comments:
THE ENTIRE CHARGE CONSISTED OF NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS. THE BOLTS USE0 FOR TEST COUPONS WERE REMOVED FROM THE LOCATIONS SHOWN AB0VE. THE COUPONS FOR ODO NUMBERED LOCATIONS (0) WERE TAKEN FROM THE TOP TWO INCH LAYER. THE COUPONS FOR EVEN NUMBERED LOCATIONS (E)
WERE TAKEN FROM THE BOTTOM FOUR INCH LAYER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN UNACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
~
Addendum 2 Page 2
~.
1 I
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis i Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 04 518 0 X 2%, 3 550 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 9/10/95 1112 HOUR @1575 POLY Test Coupon i.ocations and Hardness Readings (HRC)
TOP VIEW E5 1 55 51 2 52 47 46 22~ 3 57 48 4 54 55 40 5 52 56 NORTH 510E OF CVEN j[
35' 6 H 46 48
- s.
7 52 52 l
2\ A3 l 8 55 31 9 ca 52 R' t 12 10 18 17 57 11 12 l Depth of Products (T): 6" 13 Comments: l NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS (21/2" LONG) WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE. THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. ,
THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER. l THE COUPONS FOR ODD NUMBERED LOCATIONS (0) WERE TAKEN FROM THE TOP TWO INCH LAYER.
THE COUPONS FOR EVEN NUMBFRED LOCATIONS (E) WERE TAKEN FROM THE BOTTOM FOUR INCH j LAYER. ;
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN 1 UNACCEPTA#lE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, AND TIME. I Addendum 2 !
Page 3 i
- As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
^
Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 06 518 0 X 2%, 3 400 AISI 4140
! Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench
! 9/11/95 1 HOUR @l575 POLY I l Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC)
TCP view /f\
4 1 26 ,
2 2 26 !
1
@ l
@ 22' 3 51.7 4 41.4
! 5 42.5 NORTH SIDE OF OVEN
- y g 35 y i 7
^ 8 l I 12' 9 I
i 10 m v v l 11 i
12 Depth of Products (T): 5" 13
- Comments
APPROXIMATELY FIFTY POUNDS OF NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS (21/2" LONG)
WERE PLACED IN THE BOTTOM SECTION OF THE BASKET AND ARRANGED IN A
, CIRCLE OF SUFFICIENT AREA TO INCLUDE THE ABOVE COUPON LOCATIONS. THE i REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF PREVIOUSLY HEAT TREATED BOLTS 0F THE SAME DIAMETER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN j
- &#ACCEPTA#lE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
~~
Addendum 2 Page 4
f i
4 As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis !
4 Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 07 3/4 0 X 2 %,3% 365 l AISI 4140 1 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 9/12195 1 HOUR @1575 POLY l ;
1 Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) !
TOP vaEW 25 49 52 , 51 l 1
. 2 51 53 h 22- 3 51 52 h , 4 48 47 5
j NORTH SIDE OF OVEN - \/
6 l -
~
35- s l .
?\ n l 12~ 9
- m afDm !, io 11 12 Depth of Products (T)
- 5" 13 Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS (21l2" LONG) WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE. THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF BOTH HEAT TREATED AND NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, AND TIME.
. Addendum 2 Page 5
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
~
Test Product ' Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 08 518 0 X 2%, 3 610 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 9/12/95 2 HRS 10 MIN @1575 POLY
- Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC)
@ 1 51 52 49 h 2 55 54 h 22 3 53 I
h 4 52 l
~o re s m , o. . @y 5 52 g 35 y 7
' /s '
@ @ @ @ @ 9 4
9 12~
l o o 00h a crvf +T o y 10 11 12 Depth of Products (T): 7" 13 Comments:
NON. HEAT TREATED BOLTS (2 Il2" LONG) WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS I
SHOWN ABOVE. THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF BOTH HEAT TREATED AND NON. HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER.
l BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
~
Addendum 2 Page 6
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis !
2 Test Product Weight (pounds) !
i Z8G TEST 09 3I4 0 X 2 %, 3%, 6 400 AISI 4140 i Date Time @ Temperature.( F) Quench
! 9/13195 1 HR 30 MIN 91575 POLY !
Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) !
A 'B C D l
h@@@@n 2 1 54 50 51 52 55 54 53 52
@@@ 22' 3 55 65 51 54 4 49 53 54 54 l
@ NORTH $10E OF OVEN - @y 5 6
53 53 53 54 50 52 53 52 i g 35- y 7 53 51 53 54 i
I =-
^ 8 55 53 53 53 A
- l. B 9 54 53 55 53 12-4 c .
- D T 10 53 v v j 11 54 l 12 52 Depth of Products (T): 4" I? 54 l
Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS (2 Il2" LONG) WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS i SHOWN ABOVE. THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF BOTH HEAT TREATED AND NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER.
I BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN
- ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
~
Addendum 2 i
Page 7 i
t As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis ,
^' ' '
, Test Product Weight (pounds)
, ZBG TEST 10 314 0 X 2 %, 3%, 6 360
- AISI 4140 <
I Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 911 319 5 1 HOUR @ 1575 POLY Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) _
7 A B C D h@@@@ 2 1 54 55 54 54 56 54 56 55 ;
j 22' 3 55 56 53 54 4 55 55 54 56
@ @ 55 52 52 52 5
NORTH SIDE OF OVEN - \ /
6 56 55 53 55
- 35" s.
a 7 55 53 55 59
^ 8- 53 54 52 54 A i 4
B 9 55 54 55 51 C d-
,s D T 10 53 v v i 11 56 12 52 Depth of Products (T): 4" 13 56 Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS (2112" LONG) WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE. THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF BOTH HEAT TREATED AND NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, AND TIME. j Addendum 2 Page 8
1 As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 11 3/4 0 X 2 %, 3%, 6 485 AISI 4140 1 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench )
911 419 5 1 HR 45 MIN Lill1575 POLY I Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) n A B C D l h@@@h 2 1 54 54 54 54 52 57 58 57
@@@ 22~ 3 54 54 54 57 4 52 57 52 53
@ NORTH $1DE OF OVEN '
@ \ /
5 55 56 53 54 g 35 y
, 7 50 56 53 53
^ 8 56 52 54 49
[
@B 12- 9 56 56 54 52 10 54 11 53 12 53 Depth of Products (T): 5" 13 56
) Comments:
NON HF.AT TREATED BOLTS (2112" LONG) WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHO'!dN ABOVE. THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WlRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF BOTH HEAT TREATED AND NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
Addendum 2 Page 9
1 As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Anairsis <
Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 12 1/2 0 X 2 % 360 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 911 419 5 1 HOUR Lill1575 POLY q
Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC)
A B C D h@@@@7 2 1 52 53 53 52 51 53 52 52 l @@@ 22' l
3 50 52 54 53 4 50 53 53 52 l
@ NORTH SIDE OF OVEN
@ j/
5 52 55 48 50
- 35 m 7 52 54 51 51
^ 8 51 52 50 50 A
B 9 52 53 51 53 12-A D T 10 51 v v 11 51 12 51 Depth of Products (T): 4" 13 50 l
Comments:
THE ENTIRE CHARGE CONSISTED OF NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS. THE BOLTS
, USED FOR TEST COUPONS WERE REMOVED FROM THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONS!DERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, AND TIME.
~
Addendum 2 Page 10
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
^
. Test Product Weight (pounds)
- ZBG TEST 13 718 0 X 3, 4 485 AISI 4140
]
Date Time @ Temperature ("F) Quench
- 9115l95 11l2 HOURS 91575 POLY 4
Test Coupon locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) j n A B C D l
h@@@h 2 1 53 54 54 55 51 54 53 52 ;
@@@ 22~ 3 54 54 52 53 4 54 54 53 55
@ NORTH $10E OF OVEN *
@ }[
5 51 54 51 53
- 35 s
' I 7 55 54 52 54
^ 8 52 54 54 54 i 4
12" 9 55 54 54 51 D i 1D 52 V \"/
11 52 12 52 Depth of Products (T): 5Il2" 13 52 Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE.
THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, AND TIME.
~
Addendum 2 Page 11 1
As Guanched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
' Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 14 7/8 0 X 3, 4 575 AISl 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 9/15195 2 Il2 HOURS 91575 POLY Test Coupen Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) g A B- C 0
@@@@ 54 1 53 53 53 2 55 52 54 53
@@@ 22~ 3 53 53 58 55 52 i
4 55 54 55
@ NORTH SIDE OF OVEN *
@ j[
5 49 54 55 55 l
- 35 s 7 54 52 54 53
^ 8 54 53 52 55 A n B 9 55 54 54 55 12-
'D i
\y 10 54
){
11 54 12 55 Depth of Products (T): 61/2" 13 54 Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE. 1 THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE l WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
I
~
Addendum 2 Page 12
)
As Guenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
~
Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 15 10 X VARIOUS 385 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 911 619 5 1 HOUR @l575 POLY Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) 7 A B C D h@@@h 2 1 54 55 56 55 53 56 54 54 l
@@@ 22~ 3 53 54 54 56 I a 4 54 53 54 55 35~
@s s 6 56 54 55 54 7 55 55 54 54
^ B 51 54 54 55 I A
12- 9 56 54 54 55 ,
C ,
D T 10 53 v 'd 11 56 12 55 Depth of Products (T): 5" 13 54 Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE.
, THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED ARQUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, AND TIME.
Addendum 2 Page 13
. - As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis j O Test Product I
Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 16 10 X VARIOUS 578 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench i 911 619 5 2 HOURS @1575 POLY l
- Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) l l
n A B C D h@@@h 2 1 58 55 56 54 54 54 54 55 4
hhh 22" 3 55 53 55 54 53 53 57 l
4 55
@ NORTH $fDE OF OVEN ' @y 5 55 55 56 54
- 35 %
7 51 52 51 52 l l
^ 8 55 58 54 57 A
- B 9 52 56 53 52
' C 12- l i 10 56 v v -
. 11 61 12 57 Depth of Products (T): 7" 13 l 53 i Comments:
N0'd-HEAT TREATED BOLTS AND 1" DIAMETER X 4" COUPONS WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE. THE TEST COUPONS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME DIAMETER. ,
I BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN I ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, AND TIME.
l
- I
~
Addendum 2 Page 14
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
[' '
Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 17 1 1/2 0 x 5 516 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 911 819 5 1 Il2 HOURS @1575 POLY Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) 3- A B C D se vna 2 50 51
@@@ 22' 3 54 52 4 54 51
@ @ " "2 '2 6 52 53
.- 35" s 7 51 54
^ 8 54 52 12- 9 54 54
! T 10 53 V
W g
i 12 53
! Depth of Products (T): 4" 13 33 Comments:
) THE ENTIRE CHARGE CONSISTED OF NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS. THE BOLTS USED FOR TEST COUPONS WERE REMOVED FROM THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE.
4 i BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
~
Addendum 2 Page 15
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis O Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 18 318 0 x 1 300 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 9/18195 112 HOUR 91575 POLY Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readinas (HRC) _
A B C D h@@@@g 2 1 57 55 54 55 54 44 51 54
@@@ 22~ 3 55 56 55 51 54 4 54 53 54
@ NORTH SIDE OF OVEN h y 5 55 42 1 5
- 35 s 7 48 49 14 1
^ 8 47 47 11 3 A
2- 9 53 53 41 1 D i 10 1
< v v y
i 12 1 l Depth of Products (T): 2Il2" 13 7 j
. Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE.
I THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME SIZE.
J
- BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN
&#ACCEPTA#lE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
l i
~
Addendum 2 Page 16
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
~
Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 19 318 0 x 1 300 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 911 819 5 1 HOUR @l575 POLY Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) n A B C D h@@@@ 2 1 55 56 56 56 56 56 55 55
@@@ 22~ 3 55 56 56 55 4 56 55 53 56
@ NORTH S IDE OF OVE'i h (/
5 55 54 54 52
- 35 s 7 55 55 52 54
^ 8 55 54 54 50 A
12- 9 56 56 55 53 C
10 52 11 51 12 55 l
Depth of Products (T): 2112" 13 52 Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN AB0VE.
THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STFEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME SIZE. THIS LOT PURPOSEFULLY TAKEN OUT OF THE OVEN SLOWLY. OPEN OVEN TO QUENCH TIME WAS ~45 SECONDS.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
~
Addendum 2 Page 17 l
t
. As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Anaisis Test Product Weight (pounds) ;
ZBG TEST 20 10 X VARIOUS 516 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench !
9/19195 1 Il2 HOURS 91575 POLY ;
- Test Coupon Locations and Hardness Readings (HRC) ;
! jq A B C D h@@@h 2 1 57 54 55 56 55 57 55 51 l
1 h h 'h 2 3 54 55 55 50 4 55 54 55 54 i'
@ NORTH SIDE OF OVEN '
h (/
5 56 54 56 55 54 55 53 55 6
35 s 7 54 55 55 53
- \
A 8 52 54 55 55 ,
B 9 55 55 55 54 !
12-C ir. i D T 10 55 v v 11 55 i I
12 55 '
Depth of Products (T): 7" 13 56 Comments:
1" DIAMETER X 4" COUPONS WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE.
THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE j SAME DIAMETER.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN ACCEPTABLE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WElGHT, AND TIME.
i Addendum 2 Page 18
_ _ _ _ _ _ _l
i As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
^
Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 21 3180x1 331 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature (*F) Quench 9/20l95 1 HOUR @1575 POLY Test Coupon Lecations and Hardness Readings (HRC) 7 A B C D h@@@h 2 1 55 53 54 56 55 54 54 53
@@@ 22~ 3 49 54 54 53 4 58 56 56 56
@ NORTH $tDE OF OVEN ' @y 5 50 53 23 1.3 I 35 %
7 55 54 53 24 !
4 -- ^ 8 56 54 45 16 A
l2- 9 55 54 48 29 D i 10 40 w y -.
11 38 12 26
- Depth of Products (T)
- 2112" 13 46 Comments:
NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS WERE PLACED IN THE LOCATIONS SHOWN ABOVE.
THE TEST COUPON BOLTS WERE IDENTIFIED BY STAINLESS STEEL WIRE WRAPPED AROUND THE SHANK. THE REMAINDER OF THE CHARGE CONSISTED OF BOTH HEAT TREATED AND NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS OF THE SAME SIZE.
BASED UPON THE HARDNESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN
- NACCEPTA#lE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, AND TIME.
Addendum 2 Page 19 1
As Quenched Heat Treat Charge Analysis
^
Test Product Weight (pounds)
ZBG TEST 22 318 0 x 4 273 AISI 4140 Date Time @ Temperature ( F) Quench 9/20l95 1 HOUR 91575 POLY Test Coupon Lacations and Hardness Readings (HRC) n A B C D h@@@h 1 2-51 52 51 51 52 52 47 49
@@@ 22' 3 53 51 51 51 4 52 53 49 50
@ NORTH SIDE OF OVEN '
h g(
5 52 50 34 17 35 m 7 52 49 45 42
- ^ 8 51 52 50 48 A
B 9 48 45 46 44 l2-
? 8e
- 11 46 12 46
~
f Depth of Products (T): 2" 13 43 Comments:
I THE ENTIRE CHARGE CONSISTED OF NON HEAT TREATED BOLTS. BOLTS WERE l NEATLY ARRANGED IN FIVE R0WS TO SIMULATE A COMMON PRACTICE WHICH PREVENTS WARPING OF THE SHANKS.
BASED UPON THE HARONESS VALUES, THIS CHARGE IS CONSIDERED AN
- ACCEPTA#lE COMBINATION OF DIAMETER, WEIGHT, TIME. AND BASKET LOADING.
Addendum 2 Page 20 i
f i
Heat Treatment Equipment ;
3 .
General: The heat treatment equipment at the Cardinal facility consists of a basic electric ;
furnace, a separate quench tank containing a polymer solution, as well as severalinstrumentation and control systems. ;
i Furnace: The furnace has two main components, the base and the door. The base is supported by a steel structure at a height of 41/2 feet above the foundation (just lower than the top of the adjacent quench tank). The door is supported by the same structure, and moves vertically to allow for insertion and removal of the parts basket. The door operates hydraulically with a total travel of approximately 30 inches. A rack supported by bricks rests in the center of the base. The basket containing the parts being heat treated is placed on the rack. Both the rack and the basket are made from inconel. The furnace door houses the heating elements and tne thermocouple. There are eleven rows of heating elements; two on each side and three across the ceiling. Side views of the furnace door and base are shown ;elow as Figures 1 and 2. !
F.gure 1 is the view from the quench tank. Figure 2 is the view from the side perpendicular to the quench tank. ;
72.5*
54 5' :
15'-> c 51 5 ' : + 9 -* ,
- - 2F j THERM 0 COUPLE a
'"*^" " "
- N .,1lll11llll.11 1111111llllllll11111111 3 5~
" 42 t
i HEATING f
4 --- -
L c.
30 5~
ELEMENTS
, 27 DOOR l
l l
d 3 V V V i
I FM :j6' Hijil5EE EAT
- i
- LIFTING LUG
^
-j l I3
, BASKET
~'
y )
RACK o j BRICES %
e^SE In n i 3 5- 1 l je es- i 4 70' :J -
= 76*
l Figure 1 Furnace Side View Facing Quench ank l
~
Addendum 3 p Page 1 i
e e
- 60.5' ";
42.5 :j er-* er-> +9 +
.=e-rd>.
325 + - - * <-- 3.25' THERMOCCUPLE- e l5' L5'-* <-
N. ..
m .
INSULATION % '. .
h
': -A /\ /\ ./ 4 3 s-HEATING d
[ - :
[,i 7.5-ELEMENTS N ../-
- A
&. x, , 27' s t l~ ,
,( t l 85'3' {u y +
DOOR l f-- !:. '
- - 25 b i
- t. l F T I NG L UG - ---- ^ n i i'i i ii V ii i' i BASKET RACK , , 25' BRICKS % _ _
BASE l r - il l u 53' 2' l= t: 58' =l 1
- 64' :
Figure 2 Furnace Side View Figure 3 is a side view of the furnace with the oven door in the closed position. With the oven door closed, there is appioximately 21/2 inches of clearance between the top of the basket and the upper heating elements. The thermocouple protrudes eight inches from the ceiling and extenh into the basket approximately two inches.
l lNSULATION i
,gy HEATING 25-4 11lll1lllllll lll111111llll11llll1111 <7'"'" i i "
m T,~G- :Fil!B6ullll m wan % -
tug -
- <mE MM!=A ' B",C"5 y '"
Lu
-Mil ll BASKET ' '
lllliL_ ll
- D* "
JW UCW M' . - . .
l l h --
U ;-
1 I l- BASE Figure 3 Furnace Door Closed Addendum 3 Page?
O Figure 4 is a top view (and side view) of the base with the bottom of the figure facing the
. quench tank. The bricks used to support the rack are arranged in a symmetrical pattern as shown. =
76: =
70
= es- :
- 43* =
a
, a
_ . . ; . . 3 3-RACK
_Q.
- 4 r# ;-- 7 3 ,
sr 34 saicns s r-, - re m- r-m.-
w- , w .
wo r s3-3r rg a -
- 2, . . .
INSULAil0N 1..h
- f. . l g 3.; w. .- . , . .- s +
l l u BASE y . __ __ _
'I n nl Figure 4 Top View of Bass Figure 5 is a top view with the same perspective as Figure 4.1his view shows the parts basket placed on the rack and a cutaway view of the door showing the clearance between the basket and the side heating elements.
2 75' -~ = A6* = .s- 2 7s'
- 37'
.! ;_' i iiiiin u iin iiiiiii ni s iii n iiii !
INSULATION 7 s' y y j y
-'q HEATING g ELEMENTS %
E L e -l
]
i
{
h h
LIFTING tVG g,_ g jy 2s-ps,ET _ 2 .
u -
_r spicxs T p
n ics - - U ' .' L M C j 7 js-x,, _ T to ,i n o ,,i u m i n o i m i m o mme ,
- 1i a a tE -_l ! ,
Figure 5 Top View of Base with Basket
~
Addendum 3 Page 3
O Figure 6 is a top view of the door as viewed from the base looking up. The right side of the
, drawing faced the quench tank. This view shows the upper three rows of heating elements and the location of the thermocouple.
= 605 :
- 425' t 9'-*
--> 4 ' e n
11111111ll1116111l1415ll1Ill ;
5 3: ,
i f ._ q.
]:
THERMOCOUPLE %
~ _
{
e INSULATION % ,
- : 34 3-
= : .
h5 5-HEATING / }
U IIItiIIIIIIi m i11t_ttiIIiiilI h h-DOOR - 4~ } u i
Figure 6 Top View of Door )
Quench Tank: The quench tank is located adjacent to the furnace. The tank contains 2,390 I gallons of a polymer based quenchant. The polymer is suspended in water and precipitates out ;
onto the hot parts when they are lowered into the tank. This provides an insulative layer which controls the rate of temperature drop. The polymer returns into solution as the parts cool. The polymer is a suitable replacement for oil as a quenchant, except for specifications which specificC/ state par mst be quenched in oil. The qtenchant is circulated by an agitator assembly located at the bottom of the tank. The agitator ensures a continuous flow of quenchant through the parts basket during the quench. The polymer quenchant in maintained at approximately 125 F for quenching A/SA 193 Grade B7 products.
instrumentation and Controls: The signal from the thermocouple is sent to a control panel !
which automatically maintains the furnace temperature by controlling the power to the heating j elements. The temperature is maintained within a tolerance of 215 F. The temperature signal j also feeds a strip chart recorder which plots temperature against time. l Other: The oven door, basket crane, and agitators are all operated by individual hydraulic j systems.
Addendum 3 Page 4 s -