Conditions for approval required by: Martin Russell
_________________________
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.
Web Para 2. QTR.
It is not easy to extract the data to confirm that the renewal acceptance tests have all been addressed for each fastener under review. The declarations state tests have been done but not all of the test info is addressed in the QTR section. See observations below.
QTR P1/10 & P2/10 is applicable to a Safran part (EN not listed here). Need to confirm EN part is identical & route frozen for EN version.
QTR for EN2925-050:
P7/10. Grain size ‘conformance’ not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.5.3.
P7/10. Hardness not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.4.3.
P8/10. Penetrant Inspection EN2576 requires ISO3452 but QTR states ISO2859. The link should be explained. EN2576 para 5.5.7.
Head to shank fillet rad not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.3.4. Evidence table indicates the test was done but cannot see test info unless this is captured in 5.2?
Surface Hardening not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.5.5.
QTR for EN2926-050 & -060 similar:
P3/10. Grain size ‘conformance’ not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.5.3.
P3/10. Hardness not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.4.3.
P4/10. Penetrant Inspection EN2576 requires ISO3452 but QTR states ISO2859. The link should be explained. EN2576 para 5.5.7.
Head to shank fillet rad not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.3.4. Evidence table indicates the test was done but cannot see test info unless this is captured in 5.2?
Surface Hardening not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.5.5.
QTR for EN3614-050:
As above for QTR P5/10 & P6/10.
QTR for EN2926-070:
Cannot see data for this part in the QTR?
Bearing-in-mind the LISI relocation plans; Confirm the m’fg routes are not changed i.e. these parts are not affected by the LISI relocation. This statement indicates that process for these parts remains at the original site initially qualified & the m’fg route does not include the new site. Please clarify if these parts are processed under the MCR for LISI relocation.
Para 7.
M’fg Certificate of Conformity data is incomplete (pages1 to 25 of 31 pages are loaded blank).
Manufacturing routes are claimed to be unchanged at issue 1 but the reaffirmed versions dated 01/2019 include changes to heat treat & tempering references. Are these changes minor, editorial or require consideration from ASD-CERT?
I have responded to qual renewal 701 for LISI on various parts with the following conditions (loaded onto the web-site)
Web Para 2. QTR.
It is not easy to extract the data to confirm that the renewal acceptance tests have all been addressed for each fastener under review. The declarations state tests have been done but not all of the test info is addressed in the QTR section. See observations below.
QTR P1/10 & P2/10 is applicable to a Safran part (EN not listed here). Need to confirm EN part is identical & route frozen for EN version. EN correspondence with SAFRAN part is listed in PQ222-Drawing issue. I confirm that EN part is identical and manufacturing route frozen for EN version (see Web Para 7)
QTR for EN2925-050:
P7/10. Grain size ‘conformance’ not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.5.3. All results on the certificate of conformity are in compliance. The word “conform” is not specified because the result can be measured. Here in P7 / 10, the measured grain size is 7 – 8 ASTM which complies with the requirement of paragraph 5.5.3 of EN2576
P7/10. Hardness not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.4.3. Same reason as for grain size, the measured hardness of 28.9 to 31.4 HRC is in accordance with the requirements of paragraph 5.4.3 of EN2576
P8/10. Penetrant Inspection EN2576 requires ISO3452 but QTR states ISO2859. The link should be explained. EN2576 para 5.5.7. We carry out the test in accordance with ISO3452 but it is a general specification that explains how the test is performed, it’s a spec for method and not for requirement that’s why it does not appear in the certificate of conformity. The ISO2859 gives the sampling and the level in accordance with EN2576 table 4. It is an internal document (available on site) that allows us to make the link. Here is the extract that concerns us:
Head to shank fillet rad not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.3.4. Evidence table indicates the test was done but cannot see test info unless this is captured in 5.2? The head to shank fillet radius is checked at dimensional inspection. You can see lines “CONTROLE VISUEL Visual inspection IC714” and “ CONT. DIMENSION Dimensions inspection IC714” on the certificate of conformity.
Surface Hardening not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.5.5. This test is required only in case of a dispute with 5.5.2
QTR for EN2926-050 & -060 similar:
P3/10. Grain size ‘conformance’ not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.5.3. Same explanation as for EN2925-050
P3/10. Hardness not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.4.3. Same explanation as for EN2925-050
P4/10. Penetrant Inspection EN2576 requires ISO3452 but QTR states ISO2859. The link should be explained. EN2576 para 5.5.7. Same explanation as for EN2925-050
Head to shank fillet rad not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.3.4. Evidence table indicates the test was done but cannot see test info unless this is captured in 5.2? Same explanation as for EN2925-050
Surface Hardening not confirmed. EN2576 para 5.5.5. Same explanation as for EN2925-050
QTR for EN3614-050:
As above for QTR P5/10 & P6/10. Same explanation as for EN2925-050
QTR for EN2926-070:
Cannot see data for this part in the QTR? The reference EN2926-070 is presented under the reference 9836207024 which is equivalent (lot number 927458)
Bearing-in-mind the LISI relocation plans; Confirm the m’fg routes are not changed i.e. these parts are not affected by the LISI relocation. This statement indicates that process for these parts remains at the original site initially qualified & the m’fg route does not include the new site. Please clarify if these parts are processed under the MCR for LISI relocation. Yes we confirm that the manufacturing process does not change. The renewal is done for the VDR1 site but must be valid for the second site. Relocation for all EN references is covered in the following document: ASD-CERT Report number: 482
Para 7.
M’fg Certificate of Conformity data is incomplete (pages1 to 25 of 31 pages are loaded blank).
Manufacturing routes are claimed to be unchanged at issue 1 but the reaffirmed versions dated 01/2019 include changes to heat treat & tempering references. Are these changes minor, editorial or require consideration from ASD-CERT? This is a minor modification. The information present in the DT582 and DT570 have been integrated in the DT424 and DT556 but the data is still the same. No parameters have been modified.