QAR: Click Here
Conditions for approval required by: Jonathan Paget
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.
Can you please confirm were the QTR tests witnessed by the mandated body or just a partial sample at a later date?
Dimension report for features E & F do not make sense, these are basic dimensions with the hole position controlled by the geometric tolerance. To me the dimensions stated do not conform for these geometric tolerances and do not align with the positional tolerances quoted.
For this qualification there are two test reports :
1. The QTR of HOWMET which is the full qualification requested in the ISO5858 specification : reference 8964-4JSMR10209M-ISO5858 [REF1]
2. The counter-test report performed with the witness of the mandated body at a later date : doc DGQT 57063 [REF2]
Concerning the dimensional inspection, HOWMET performed a measurement on 20 samples as requested in the ISO 5858 (see [REF1] §5.1), without the witness of the mandated body.
And the dimensional inspection for counter-test was performed on a single sample (see [REF2] §4.5.1 & Appendix 4).
You are right dimension report for feature E & F do not make sense, those are framed dimensions so it is requested to refer to the positional tolerances.
The measurements E & F are given for information but there is clearly a problem for these 2 dimensions in the [REF1].
According to HOWMET / Saint-Cosme all the drilling concerned are performed at the same time and the positional tolerances were compliant so this point will be evaluated & corrected (update of the QTR of HOWMET).
Then the QTR of HOWMET was updated and the problem for E & F corrected (see QTR INDEX A enclosed).