AMS 2750

Thermal Loop Solutions, Part 1: A Path to Improved Performance and Compliance in Heat Treatment

How often do you think about the intelligent designs controlling the thermal loop system behind your heat treat operations? With ever-advancing abilities to integrate and manage data for temperature measurement and power usage, the ability of heat treat operations to make practical, efficient, and energy-conscious change is stronger than ever. In part 1, understand several benefits of thermal loop systems and how they are leveraged to comply with industry regulations, like Nadcap.

This Technical Tuesday article by Peter Sherwin, global business development manager – Heat Treatment, and Thomas Ruecker, senior business development manager, at Watlow was originally published in Heat Treat Today’s January/February 2024 Air & Atmosphere Heat Treat print edition.


Introduction

Heat treatment processes are a crucial component of many manufacturing industries, and thermal loop solutions have become increasingly popular for achieving improved temperature control and consistent outcomes.

A thermal loop solution is a closed loop system with several essential components, including an electrical power supply, power controller, heating element, temperature sensor, and process controller. The electrical power supply provides the energy needed for heating, the power controller regulates the power output to the heating element, the heating element heats the material, and the temperature sensor measures the temperature. Finally, the process controller adjusts the power output to maintain the desired temperature for the specified duration, providing better temperature control and consistent outcomes.

Performance Benefits

Heat treatment thermal loop solutions offer several advantages over traditional heat treatment methods, including improved temperature control and increased efficiency. The thermal loop system provides precise temperature control, enabling faster heating and cooling and optimized soak times. In addition, the complete design of modern thermal loop solutions includes energy-efficient heating and overall ease of use.

Figure 1. Watlow Industry 4.0 solution (Source: Watlow)

Heat treatment thermal loop solutions are integrated with Industry 4.0 frameworks and data management systems to provide real-time information on performance. Combining artificial intelligence and machine learning algorithms can also provide additional performance benefits, such as the ability to analyze data and identify patterns for further optimization. Ongoing performance losses in a heat treatment system typically come from process drift s. Industry 4.0 solutions can explore these drift s and provide opportunities to minimize these deviations.

Heat treatment thermal loop solutions can be optimized using Failure Mode and Effects Analysis (FMEA). FMEA is a proactive approach to identifying potential failure modes and their effects, allowing organizations to minimize the risk of process disruptions and improve the overall efficiency of their heat treatment processes. Historically, this was a tabletop exercise conducted once per year with a diverse team from across the organization. Updates to this static document were infrequent and were primarily based on organization memory rather than being automatically populated in real time with actual data. There is a potential to produce “live” FMEAs utilizing today’s technology and leveraging insights for continuous improvement.

Th e effectiveness of heat treatment thermal loop solutions can be measured using metrics such as overall equipment effectiveness (OEE). OEE combines metrics for availability, performance, and quality to provide a comprehensive view of the efficiency of a manufacturing process. By tracking OEE and contextual data, organizations can evaluate the effectiveness of their heat treatment thermal loop solutions and make informed decisions about optimizing their operations.

Regulatory Compliance

Nadcap (National Aerospace and Defense Contractors Accreditation Program) is an industry-driven program that provides accreditation for special processes in the aerospace and defense industries. Heat treatment is considered a “special process” under Nadcap because it has specific characteristics crucial to aerospace and defense components’ quality, safety, and performance. Th ese characteristics include:

  • Process sensitivity: Heat treatment processes involve precise control of temperature, time, and atmosphere to achieve the desired material properties. Minor variations in these parameters can significantly change the mechanical and metallurgical properties of the treated components. This sensitivity makes heat treatment a critical process in the aerospace and defense industries.
  • Limited traceability: Heat treatment processes typically result in changes to the material’s microstructure, which are not easily detectable through visual inspection or non-destructive testing methods. Th is limited traceability makes it crucial to have strict process controls to ensure the desired outcome is achieved consistently.
  • Critical performance requirements: Aerospace and defense components often have strict performance requirements due to the extreme conditions in which they operate, such as high temperatures, high loads, or corrosive environments. The heat treatment process ensures that these components meet the specifications and can withstand these demanding conditions.
  • High risk: The failure of a critical component in the aerospace or defense sector can result in catastrophic consequences, including loss of life, significant financial loss, and reputational damage. Ensuring that heat treatment processes meet stringent quality and safety standards is essential to mitigate these risks.

Nadcap heat treatment accreditation ensures suppliers meet industry standards January/February and best practices for heat treatment processes. The accreditation process includes rigorous audits, thorough documentation, and ongoing process control monitoring to maintain high quality, safety, and performance levels.

The aerospace industry’s AMS2750G pyrometry specification and the automotive industry’s CQI-9 4th Edition regulations are crucial for ensuring consistent and high-quality heat treated components. Adherence to these regulations is essential for meeting the stringent quality requirements of the aerospace and automotive industries and other industries with demanding specifications.

Temperature uniformity is a crucial requirement of both AMS2750G and CQI-9 4th Edition, mandating specific temperature uniformity requirements for heat treating furnaces to ensure the desired mechanical properties are achieved throughout the treated components. AMS2750G class 1 furnaces with strict uniformity requirements +/-5°F (+/-3°C) provide both quality output and predictable energy use. However, maintaining this uniformity requires significant maintenance oversight due to all the components involved in the thermal loop.

Calibration and testing procedures are specified in the standards to help ensure the accuracy and reliability of the temperature control systems used in heat treat processes.

Detailed process documentation is required by AMS2750G and CQI-9 4th Edition, including temperature uniformity surveys, calibration records, and furnace classifications. This documentation ensures traceability, enabling manufacturers to verify that the heat treat process is consistently controlled and meets the required specifications.

Figure 2. Eurotherm data reviewer (Source: Watlow)

Modern data platforms enable the efficient collection of secure raw data (tamper-evident) and provide the replay and reporting necessary to meet the standards.

Th e newer platforms also off er the latest industry communication protocols – like MQTT and OPC UA (Open Platform Communications Unifi ed Architecture) – to ease data transfer across enterprise systems.

MQTT is a lightweight, publish-subscribe- based messaging protocol for resource-constrained devices and low-bandwidth, high-latency, or unreliable networks. IBM developed it in the late 1990s, and it has become a popular choice for IoT applications due to its simplicity and efficiency. MQTT uses a central broker to manage the communication between devices, which publish data to “topics,” and subscribe to topics that they want to receive updates on.

OPC UA is a platform-independent, service-oriented architecture (SOA) developed by the OPC Foundation. It provides a unified framework for industrial automation and facilitates secure, reliable, and efficient communication between devices, controllers, and software applications. OPC UA is designed to be interoperable across multiple platforms and operating systems, allowing for seamless integration of devices and systems from different vendors. The importance of personnel and training is emphasized by CQI-9 4th Edition, which requires manufacturers to establish training programs and maintain records of personnel qualifications to ensure that individuals responsible for heat treat processes are knowledgeable and competent. With touchscreen and mobile integration, a significant development in process controls has occurred over the
last decade.

Figure 3. Watlow F4T® touchscreen and Watlow PM PLUS™ EZ-LINK®
mobile application

By integrating these regulations into a precision control loop, heat treatment thermal loop solutions can provide the necessary level of control and ensure compliance with AMS2750G and CQI-9 4th Edition, leading to the production of high-quality heat treated components that meet performance requirements and safety standards.

Continuous improvement is also emphasized by both AMS2750G and CQI-9 4th Edition, requiring manufacturers to establish a system for monitoring, measuring, and analyzing the performance of their heat treatment systems. This development enables manufacturers to identify areas for improvement and implement corrective actions, ensuring that heat treat processes are continuously improving and meeting the necessary performance and safety standards.

To Be Continued in Part 2

In part 2 of this article, we’ll consider the improved sustainability outcomes, potential challenges and limitations, and the promising future this technology offers to the heat treat industry.

About the Authors

Peter Sherwin, Global Business Development Manager – Heat Treatment, Watlow
Thomas Ruecker, Senior Business Development Manager, Watlow

Peter Sherwin is a global business development manager of Heat Treatment for Watlow and is passionate about offering best-in-class solutions to the heat treatment industry. He is a chartered engineer and a recognized expert in heat treatment control and data solutions.

Thomas Ruecker is the business development manager of Heat Treatment at Eurotherm Germany, a Watlow company. His expertise includes concept development for the automation of heat treatment plants, with a focus on aerospace and automotive industry according to existing regulations (AMS2750, CQI-9).

For more information: Contact peter.sherwin@watlow.com or thomas.ruecker@watlow.com.

This article content is used with the permission of heat processing, which published this article in 2023.


Find Heat Treating Products And Services When You Search On Heat Treat Buyers Guide.Com

Thermal Loop Solutions, Part 1: A Path to Improved Performance and Compliance in Heat Treatment Read More »

Jason Schulze on Understanding AMS 2750E — Alternate SAT

Heat Treat Today Original ContentJason Schulze, Conrad Kacsik Instruments, Inc.


This is the third in a series of articles by AMS 2750 expert, Jason Schulze. Please submit your AMS 2750 questions for Jason to Doug@HeatTreatToday.com.


Introduction

Of all the changes made to AMS2750 through the years, the Alternate Systems Accuracy Test (ALT SAT) is arguably the one that has had the largest impact within the heat treat industry. The requirements for the ALT SAT, as presented in AMS2750E, make up just 0.008% of the specification as a whole; yet these requirements account for an inordinate amount of time spent on discussion and debate.

Below, we’ll discuss the requirements of the ALT SAT as they are presented in both AMS2750E, and in the Nadcap Pyrometry Guide.

ALT SAT Applicability

Prior to revision E of AMS2750, a load thermocouple that was single-use, or which was replaced more often than the applicable SAT frequency, did not require an SAT of any kind. During the time period when Revision D was in effect, the Alternate SAT did not exist. This meant that if you used a load thermocouple and had a documented single-use statement or replacement schedule, which ensured the usage did not exceed the applicable SAT frequency within your internal procedures, that particular load sensor was not subject to the SAT requirements of AMS2750D.

AMS2750D page 14, paragraph 3.4.1.2

3.4.1.2 An SAT is not required for sensors whose only function is over-temperature control, load sensors that are limited to a single use (one furnace load/cycle), sensors not used for acceptance as part of production heat treatment, or load sensors whose replacement frequency is shorter than the SAT frequency. See 3.1.8.4 and 3.1.8.5.

When AMS2750E replaced AMS2750D, the ALT SAT was introduced. In addition to the ALT SAT, paragraphs 3.4.4 through 3.4.4.3 were also inserted:

AMS2750E pg 19, para 3.4.4

3.4.4 The SAT can be accomplished using any one of 3 methods:

3.4.4.1 Perform an SAT following the requirments in 3.4.5

3.4.4.2 Alternate SAT process defined in 3.4.6

3.4.4.3 SAT Waiver process, as described in 3.4.7

By stating that the SAT “…can be accomplished using any one of 3 methods”, this section has often been misinterpreted to mean that a supplier may simply choose which type of SAT they wish to implement. This is not the case.

An ALT SAT must be performed on any thermocouple that is either

  1. single use, or
  2. replaced more often that the applicable SAT frequency.

Throughout the industry, these two items typically apply to load thermocouples. As an example, let’s assume that a non-expendable load thermocouple is used in a furnace that is designated as a Type A, Class 5 furnace. This would put the standard SAT frequency at quarterly (no SAT extension & parts-furnace). If the non-expendable load thermocouple that was used had a documented replacement frequency of monthly, the ALT SAT requirements would apply to this particular load thermocouple.

In the example above, a supplier could not accomplish the SAT “…using any one of the 3 methods” – the ALT SAT requirements would be required for that particular load thermocouple system and would need to be accounted for in the supplier’s internal pyrometry procedure.

ALT SAT Requirements

The ALT SAT requirements can be split up into a single main requirement and two sub-requirements which suppliers may choose to implement.  The main requirement is:

  • Calibration of instruments at the point at which the sensor is connected.

This means that, wherever the thermocouple is connected directly, instrument calibration must take place at this point. Let’s look at a vacuum furnace as an example.

Vacuum Furnace showing Location A and Location B for an Alternate SAT
Vacuum Furnace showing Location A and Location B for an Alternate SAT (photo courtesy: PVT Inc.)

Location A indicates where load thermocouples will be plugged in directly. Location B is where the extension wire from inside the furnace travels to the outside of the furnace and then on to the recording instruments. Location A is where the calibration of the recording instrument must take place per the ALT SAT requirements. This requirement in no way changes the standard requirements for instrument calibrations as they are presented in AMS2750E; it only specifies exactly where the instrument calibration must take place within the furnace sensor system. Your internal pyrometry procedure must state that this is a requirement.

The next paragraphs, 3.4.6.1.1 & 3.4.6.1.2, are where the supplier must read and understand both paragraphs in order to make a choice regarding which option best suits their furnace set-up and production. Let’s break both paragraphs down.

Option Number 1

3.4.6.1.1 - Establish appropriate calibration limits for sensors which when combined with the calibration of the instrument/lead wire and connector, will meet the SAT requirements of Table 6 or 7, as appropriate.

There are several ways to go about conforming to this paragraph. Keep in mind, that when choosing an option you are dealing with 2 variables; the error of the instrument which records the thermocouples in question and the error of the thermocouples themselves.

a) This option relieves you of one of the variables stated above. When calibrating your instruments which the thermocouples are plugged in to, ensure there is absolutely no error at all. Adjustments (offsets) may need to be made to accomplish this. This means that, if you do not permit offsets currently, you will either need to account for them in your procedures or choose option “b” below. Once you’ve established that your instrument has no error, you restrict the error of the thermocouples you purchase not to exceed the appropriate SAT difference stated in Table 6 or 7.

As an example, let’s assume you have a vacuum furnace that uses 2 load thermocouples which are single use only. The furnace is classified as a Type A, Class 2 furnace – this means the Maximum SAT difference is ±3°F or 0.3% of the reading.  You would ensure that the recording instrument for those 2 channels recording the load temperature have no error. Then, order load thermocouples which have an error of ±3°F or 0.3% of the reading, or less.

b) This option is most attractive to those who do not wish to allow offsets within their heat treat operation. To accomplish this, you compare the error of the specific channels of the instrument the thermocouples in question plug into, to the error of the thermocouples themselves. The resulting value cannot exceed the maximum error permitted for the appropriate furnace class. Internal pyrometry procedures specifically state how thermocouple wire will be received and the ALT SAT calculation accomplished prior to releasing the thermocouple wire to production. There are two variables that must be verified in this option. Anytime one of these two variables change, the calculation must be obtained. The Nadcap Pyrometry Reference Guide requires that this calculation be evaluated at the instrument (chart recorder) calibration points (min, max & middle 1/3rd.)

Overview of a Calculation – Single Temperature
Overview of a Calculation – Single Temperature

For Your Consideration

There has been some confusion in the industry that the ALT SAT process, specifically Option B above, must be accomplished at the furnace. This misunderstanding includes suppliers using a Field Test Instrument to simulate the min, max and middle 1/3rd of the instrument calibration temperatures in an effort to obtain the error of the instrument channels in question. This amounts to nothing more than an additional instrument calibration; one could simply obtain the error from the current instrument calibration instead of performing extra work at the furnace.

Option A and B above would be performed as a desk operation; none of the tasks would be performed at the actual furnace.

Conclusion

The ALT SAT process has been successfully implemented by many suppliers in the Aerospace Industry; both Nadcap approved and non-Nadcap. As with any AMS2750E process, detailed procedures and training are key to executing the ALT SAT process.

Submit Your Questions

Please feel free to submit your questions and I will answer appropriately in future articles. Submit your questions by sending an email to doug@heattreattoday.com.

Jason Schulze on Understanding AMS 2750E — Alternate SAT Read More »

Need the Latest AMS 2750 Pyrometry Standards for Heat Treating?

AMS Pyrometry Heat Treat Standards from SAE
AMS Pyrometry Heat Treat Standards from SAE

Finding Aerospace Materials Standards (AMS) can be a bit daunting if you haven’t done it frequently. AMS Standards are maintained by SAE International and some of the most common heat treat standards, those dealing with pyrometry (AMS 2750) can be found at this link.

http://standards.sae.org/ams2750e/

Need the Latest AMS 2750 Pyrometry Standards for Heat Treating? Read More »