I've just learned that our customer has submitted an ECR to change the drawing material callout to ASTM A228 and remove the UNS G-10800 designation. All of a sudden it's a non-issue, nor our fault.
Hmmm...
Of course, we still have process issues to remediate, but those are already pretty much...
Yes, I do have a copy of the original QQ-W-470 spec. The ASSIST website is an invaluable resource for MIL specs and FED specs, and it's all FREE! :-)
Interestingly, the chemistry is very slightly different between the old QQ-W-470 spec and the current ASTM A228 spec, most noticeably for...
Yep! We're doing that too. This job was the latest from an annual multi-ship PO that was reviewed and quoted last year. Since then we have tightened up our review process due to other in-house audit findings, and are much better at finding, questioning and documenting this sort of thing. We...
Hi salmon2, good points. If we went back through each material lot and reviewed the certs for chemistry, we may find one or two heats that met both. As you point out, the Mn has a narrow range and it usually is at or near nominal when we order music wire to ASTM A228, which is well below the...
Hi 1gibson,
Customer is a huge conglomerate going through a corporate-level restructuring and improvement effort. Our specific customer is a former small subsidiary that is now under a larger umbrella and being absorbed into this new corporate culture, so they are scrutinizing everything...
IRstuff,
Yeah, this is an old drawing. Its initial release pre-dates the cancellation of QQ-W-470, so the QQ-W-470 spec was valid at the time the drawing was initially released.
So now I wonder, am I dealing with an issue where the material callout was valid at the time the drawing was...
Hi USAeng,
No, they are specifying the raw material to the Fed spec and the UNS grade simultaneously (all in one breath, so to speak).
It's not the mechanical properties that are in question, it's the chemical composition.
Very frustrating...
IRstuff and EdStainless,
You are both correct, we did miss the discrepancy during contract review and we should have caught it then (due diligence). But we didn't. Now here's the kicker...we have been making this same part for the same customer for over 14 years. Neither of us have 'caught'...
Hi TVP,
My dilemma is that the UNS G-10800 grade of material consists of a range of chemicals that fall outside the ASTM A228 standard, not within.
To look at it another way, the drawing material callout consists of 2 requirements (ASTM A228 and UNS G-10800), each of which contradicts the...
Hi micalbrch,
Yes, QQ-W-470 is cancelled, in 1985. The cancellation notice refers future procurement to ASTM A228. That much is clear.
And yes, we do have the material cert. While it's possible to produce material that conforms to chemical composition requirements of both ASTM A228 and UNS...
Thanks swall,
So far they are simply asking why we didn't make the springs out of UNS G-10800 material. At this point I need to open a dialogue with them to discover the scope of their complaint and discuss design requirements. I'm trying to gain insight and knowledge beforehand to be able...
We are a spring manufacturer. We made springs to a customer’s drawing but they are rejecting them. Their complaint is that we used the wrong material. Their drawing calls out “Music wire per QQ-W-470, spring temper, UNS G-10800, .0220 ± .0004 dia.”
We ordered - and used - music wire per...
