2. Current State of the Union
Over 4500 Nadcap audits now carried
out worldwide.
Around 50% audits are in the US alone.
Top20 QML Locations - Qualified Manufacturers List
120
100 California leads the nation
80 with the most
60 Nadcap Qualified
40
Manufacturers (100).
20
0
3. Main Audit Issues 2012
• SAT‟s not performed in each control zone
• Job Audit does not comply with all requirements
• eg. Soak time not as specified
• Insufficient information on Calibration stickers
• No Internal Pyrometry procedure (AMS2750)
4. Main Audit Issues 2012(cont‟d)
• QA Review not documented on Furnace record
• TUS Record does not include all Furnace T/C‟s
• Prior Nadcap corrective actions not
implemented
• Test instruments not digital and don‟t meet
AMS2750 requirements
5. AMS2750E versus AMS2750D
List of 12 Key Changes (1-6)
1. Wireless solutions
2. Life of non-expendable load thermocouples
3. Instruments purchased before September 2006. (AMS2750C)
4. Calibration „as-found‟ data
5. Calibration of TUS instruments
6. Electronic records
6. AMS2750E versus AMS2750D
List of 12 Key Changes (7-12)
7. Recording Control Sensor
8. Quench System Recording
9. Multi-zone Vacuum Furnaces – zone explanation
10. Initial TUS following Furnace modifications
11. TUS Report Requirements
12. Instrument Calibration
7. 3.1.1.5.1 Wireless Transmitters may be
used as an alternative to extension wire
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• No mention of wireless
• AMS2750E
• Now specifically mentions wireless
allowed
• also notes in 3.2.5.6 Wireless
equipment allowed but required as part
of calibration check
8. 3.1.5.3 Life of non-expendable base metal
load thermocouples
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• 2200°F to 2299°F days not specified, 10 uses.
• 1801°F to 2199°F 30 days and 90 uses
• AMS2750E
• 2200°F to 2299°F 3months or 10 uses
• 1801°F to 2199°F 3 months and 90 uses
9. 3.2.1.1 Purchased Control, Monitor,
Recording Instruments prior to Sept 2006
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• no deadline
• AMS2750E
• may meet AMS2750C until July 2015
10. 3.2.5.1 ‘as found’ condition in calibration
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• not worded strongly enough to ensure
„as found‟ results were included.
• AMS2750E
• greater emphasis on „as found‟
calibration details
11. 3.2.5.4 Calibration of Secondary Standards
and Field Test Instruments (TUS)
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• min 3 points (min, mid, max)
• AMS2750E
• now 6 simulated inputs (min, max and
4 points spread equally across the
working temperature range)
12. 3.2.7.1 Systems purchased after Sep2006
or any electronic record after 2015
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• no specified end date, used „write-
once‟ term
• AMS2750E
• “create electronic records that cannot
be altered without detection”
• added “capable of providing evidence
that the record was reviewed”
13. 3.3.2 Updated Chart matrix – Furnace
Instrumentation
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• Control Sensor recorded by recording
instrument
• AMS2750E
• added “or, 2nd Sensor in same sheath as
control sensor no more than 0.38” apart”
14. 3.3.3.2 Quench Systems installed before
Sep2005
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• existing installations don‟t require
recording instruments
• AMS2750E
• installed system before Sep2005 do
not require recording until July 2015
•
• If installed after Sep2005 they need
recording
15. 3.3.6 Multi-zone vacuum furnaces
(Instrumentation A & C)
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• each control zone (separate control t/c)
needed Hi, Lo and load sensors
• AMS2750E
• zones 225ft3 or less can be treated as a
single working zone to determine hi, lo
and load sensors.
• Above 225ft3 then divide by 225ft3 to
ascertain number of zones.
16. 3.5.3 Furnace Modifications (initial TUS!)
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• included Proportional versus high-low/off-on
and adjustment of tuning constants
• AMS2750E
• (k) added
• Change of Controller model or type
• PLC Logic program change to the
furnace heat control
• added to tuning constants – parameters
and rheostats
17. 3.5.21 TUS Report
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• Time and Temperature profile data
showing TUS sensors and control or
monitoring sensors for all zones tested
• AMS2750E
• Reworded “d. Time and Temperature
data from all recorded sensors required
for furnace instrumentation type for all
zones tested”
• added “e. Correction factors for TUS
sensors at each survey temperature”
• and “f. as found and as left TUS offsets
(if used in production)
18. Table 3 – Instruments and Instrument
Calibration
Comparison
• AMS2750D
• Controlling, Monitoring, or Recording Instrument,
Digital Instrument +/-2°F
• AMS2750E
• Controlling, Monitoring, or Recording Instrument,
Digital Instrument +/-2°F or 0.2% whichever is
greater
Presentation prepared by Peter Sherwin. AMS2750E released at the end of July-12.Presentation taken from Channel partner webinar (due 20thAugust).
US still the dominant force for Aerospace Heat Treatment and requirements of Nadcap accreditation.
Audit Issues from Jan-12 to Jun-12 (selection from 387 audits) and compared with 2011(23%)Issues with SAT tests remain at the top of the list when comparing 2012 and 2011. AMS2750E has been altered to try to address this – there are now 5 examples instead of 2 examples on how to calculate SAT – also for vacuum furnace control zones, the requirements have been reduced in the E version.(32% - this was split into two Job 1 and Job 2) Job Audits remain close to the top of the list with auditor reviewed jobs (in progress) having issues with meeting specified time or temperature. Our Control and Recording products help with adhering to this specification (use of programs for time @ temperature)(14%) Calibration stickers and information are getting better but still a problem capturing all information required (down to calibration companies)(13%) A continuing issue is having an internal procedure for addressing Pyrometry requirements (shrinking QA depts causing this to be an issue)
Audit Issues from Jan-12 to Jun-12 (selection from 387 audits) and compared with 2011 cont’d(12%)QA Review (signing off the cycle is ok) not documented on the chart record - this is a significant increase from the previous year (could be down to lower levels of supervision)(11%) Slightly less issues with all Furnaces T/C’s included in the TUS Record (just need to attach the process chart, even easier if both are eurotherm charts!)(11%) Prior agreed corrective actions from the previous audit are creeping back on this list - so if you have had a non conformance from the previous audit, even though you have to demonstrate a corrective action within a specified timeframe, these are not being followed through to the next audit (issue with shrinking QA depts)(11%) Increasing issue with Test instruments not meeting all the requirements (digital display, readability, calibration frequency and accuracy) – suggest that older instruments are starting to get to the end of their life and difficult to keep on meeting accuracy requirements – opportunities for our TUS recorder!
Summary list of 12 Key changes – this slide 1-6The following slides go into each individual change
Summary list of key changes – this slide 7-12The following slides go into each individual change
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:Now possible to use wireless solutions in Heat Treat applications that require conformance to AMS2750E.
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:Ensure thermocouple schedules meet these requirements – Aerodaq version E?
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:While many European companies decided to upgrade equipment for AMS2750D (only a few were involved with AMS2750C), many US companies with a history of the standard opted to keep the instruments that met AMS2750C if purchased before Sept 2006. Some companies have upgraded their systems but there is now a deadline for meeting the new standard (July 2015).
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:One key differentiating factor in both controllers and recorders is the low drift characteristics.We look after 50 nadcap sites in the UK and have built up reference data in the field and the lab that demonstrates our conformance to the AMS2750 specification and illustrates our capability for minimal drift.Cheaper products will cause customer real problems with this change in emphasis, and calibration companies cannot disregard this requirement to test prior to any change.
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:Using the new TUS recorder with the CJC block and doing an input adjust on site (for site conditions) will give the most accurate result.There should be no problem in then checking at 6 simulated inputs rather than the previous 3 specified.
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:We have a very secure, tamperproof file format. Need to also be able to review the process run and have QA sign-off. We can do this with Notes on the screen and/or with the Audit function on the 6000 series have the ability for QA to securely sign into the system.Another way is to use the annotations in Review – this is then useful to have Review FULL and run the program in the background (as a service) keeping updated records in front of the QA personnel.A final method is a custom report setup in Dream Report
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:Not necessary to retransmit digitally if the customer has a duplex thermocouple – can take one sensor output to controller and the other to recorder.Please note that the digital retransmission of the control sensor is a more accurate method
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:This is a perfect opportunity to sell more data acquisition devices (nanodac, 6000 series etc.) due to the requirement for recording the quench process. After 2015 will be mandatory for all installations to have recorders on the quench.
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:This reduces the requirement of sensors within a vacuum chamber (say a single chamber with 3 zones of control now requires less thermocouples) this gives an opportunity for instruments with less input capability.
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:Basically if someone buys a new controller (different make and model) they need to do an initial TUS.Any change of PID values (tuning constants/parameters) and then an initial TUS needs to be performed. This could mean that fuzzy logic controllers could be deemed inappropriate. Also a controller with multiple PID sets can be setup once and left, without needing to go back and continuing to re-tweak at different temperatures and having to redo the TUS.
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:Need the furnace chart / data from the furnace to attach to the TUS report (we can produce a single report if the process chart and TUS chart are Eurotherm type).Need to make sure that the Correction factors are entered at each test temperature for the TUS report. Use the note boxes to record as found and as left TUS offsets.
What this means to Eurotherm and partners:This has loosened the specification as we suspect our competitors were struggling to achieve this on a regular basis (particularly from calibration to calibration). 1000°F @ 0.2% = 2°F (Conforms to both D and E)1500°F @ 0.2% = 3°F (in D would be a fail, in E ok)2000°F @ 0.2% = 4°F (in D would be a fail, in E ok)With the requirement to complete the ‘as-found’ before alteration – we still suspect that older and cheaper instruments will struggle with this requirement
