QAR: Click Here
Conditions for approval required by: Julien Gauther
Certification of Aerospace Products to international quality Standards
Certification of Aerospace Products to international quality Standards
Form restricted to registered, logged in users. Please return to the home page and use the Create Account option.
In PFC, surface treatment operations were carried out by HFS.
Is there an MCR scheduled for surface treatment subcontracting?
PFC: third page deals with cage (basket) manufacturing and fourth page deals with nut assembly.
It should be preferable to have these titles instead of “nut internal process” for all pages.
QTR, 1st page: could you please replace 1110 MPa by 1100 MPa?
In QTR, 1st page, EH Object is “EN2867”. Could you please replace by EN2865?
QTR, salt spray test: is it possible to have a picture of these ten nuts after exposure?
Other surfaces / Autres surfaces Ra ? 6,3 ?m sur EN2867
Could you please replace EN2867 by EN2865?
In QTP as well as in ISO5858, 8 parts are requested for tensile tests at 80% load and 8 nuts at 100% as well.
In QTR, we have only 4 parts tested for each.
Could you please clarify?
Moreover, loads applied at 80% are higher than those for 100%. Why?
This is a bit surprising because one test at 100% at break shows a load equal to 13290 N whereas load applied at 80% is 14175 N without break apparently.
Test bolts used for tensile test at 80% is MJ4 in diameter with 900 MPa strength class.
This bolt may break at 8500 N.
Torque out test: torque applied (4,8 N.m) is for anchor nuts with a cage made of aluminum alloy.
This nut is made of stainless steel, so, torque to be applied is 6 N.m.
Many thanks in advance.
Regards.
In PFC, surface treatment operations were carried out by HFS. YES it is. Surface treatment was performed before fire incident.
Is there an MCR scheduled for surface treatment subcontracting? AN ACP008 has already be sumited See File 1001.
PFC: third page deals with cage (basket) manufacturing and fourth page deals with nut assembly.
It should be preferable to have these titles instead of “nut internal process” for all pages. The flow chart was updated with pages for “nut internal process”, “cage internal process” and “assembly internal process” – see new flow chart enclosed
QTR, 1st page: could you please replace 1110 MPa by 1100 MPa?
In QTR, 1st page, EH Object is “EN2867”. Could you please replace by EN2865? QTR was updated . All the typo were corrected.
QTR, salt spray test: is it possible to have a picture of these ten nuts after exposure? Some pictures of the parts submitted to salt spray test were added in the QTR;
Other surfaces / Autres surfaces Ra ? 6,3 ?m sur EN2867
Could you please replace EN2867 by EN2865? Typo on the surface roughness was corrected in the new QTR.
In QTP as well as in ISO5858, 8 parts are requested for tensile tests at 80% load and 8 nuts at 100% as well.
In QTR, we have only 4 parts tested for each.
Could you please clarify?
As I explained on other dossier ISO 5858 was not very clear concerning the sampling of the UTS tests. We have performed 4 tests more at 80% load and 100% load – See QTR updated enclosed;
Moreover, loads applied at 80% are higher than those for 100%. Why?
This is a bit surprising because one test at 100% at break shows a load equal to 13290 N whereas load applied at 80% is 14175 N without break apparently : The load at 80 % was a mistake, in the updated QTR the values are correct. We have also updated the class of the test bolts because with test bolt at 900 MPa it was not possible to perform the test until 80%.
Test bolts used for tensile test at 80% is MJ4 in diameter with 900 MPa strength class.
This bolt may break at 8500 N. : We have also updated the class of the test bolts because with test bolt at 900 MPa strength class, it was not possible to perform the test until 80%.
Torque out test: torque applied (4,8 N.m) is for anchor nuts with a cage made of aluminum alloy.
This nut is made of stainless steel, so, torque to be applied is 6 N.m. : Torque out : It was also a bad interpretation of the iso 5858 standard . The test was re-performed at 6Nm and the results are conform.
Many thanks for these detailed answers and document updates!
Approved on my side.
Best regards.