Roger Jones, FASM–CEO Emeritus, Solar Atmospheres (source: Solar Atmospheres)
Heat Treat Today’s Medical and Heat Treating December 2019 issue featured an article on medical alloys.Heat Treat Today asked Roger Jones, CEO Emeritus of Solar Atmospheres, Inc., to comment on how specialty medical metals are heat treated. These include titanium, niobium, tantalum, nitinol, and copper, to name a few, which in turn are used to create such standard medical devices and equipment as diagnostic guide wires, miniscule screws for implants, complex surgical tools that are operated robotically, and more. Read to see how Roger describes the hot zone and conditions under which medical device alloys are heat treated.
Vacuum furnace chambers processing titanium, niobium, chrome cobalt, and other medical device alloys are typically constructed from stainless steel. The hot zones are comprised entirely of metal (moly); graphite materials are never used in the construction of the hot zone or in fixturing parts. These furnaces process medical device alloys exclusively to avoid cross-contamination of the hot zone or the medical parts being treated.
Ultimate vacuum levels should be 1 X 10-6 Torr or better, with leak rates no greater than 2 microns Hg per hour. Gas system isolation valves aid in achieving tight vacuum, as they eliminate constant pumping on the quench system. Vacuum furnace leak up procedures are performed weekly, as well as a bake out at 2400 °F for one hour.
Horizontal, front-loading vacuum furnace with all-metal hot zone in a cleanroom setting typically used for heat treatment of medical alloys and devices (source: Solar Atmosphere)
Because of the alloys processed, cooling gases are mainly high purity argon from a liquid source. Very seldom is nitrogen used for cooling. Either type K or type N Inconel clad work thermocouples are imbedded in the loads for precise temperature readouts at +/- 10 °F or better. Processes include vacuum annealing, aging, stress relieving, solution treating, hardening, tempering, and other special processing. All furnaces are approved to the MedAccred quality standard, are surveyed to AMS 2750E, and comply with AS9100D in their processing parameters. Because the alloys are thermally treated, the vacuum furnaces operate in an air conditioned clean room with controlled temperatures and humidity levels.
This is the seventh in a series of articles by AMS2750 expert, Jason Schulze (Conrad Kacsik). Click here to see a listing of all of Jason’s articles on Heat TreatToday. In this article, Jason advances the discussion of initial and periodic TUS requirements. Please submit your AMS2750 questions for Jason to editor@heattreattoday.com.
Introduction
Any technician who has performed a Temperature Uniformity Survey (TUS) understands that the assembly, use, and placement of thermocouples is imperative to the success of the TUS.
As we move through the requirements of Temperature Uniformity Surveys, we will examine the requirements that apply to TUS thermocouples.
Initial Temperature Uniformity Surveys
Before we get started, let’s take a look at how AMS2750E describes :
An initial TUS shall be performed to measure the temperature uniformity and establish the acceptable work zone and qualified operating temperature range(s). Periodic TUS shall be performed thereafter in accordance with the interval shown in Table 8 or 9. ~ AMS2750E page 23, paragraph 3.5.1
Most companies, whether purchasing a new furnace or used one, know what they would like the acceptable work zone size and qualified operating range to be. I emphasize “would like” because what we would like our furnaces to be capable of is not always what they are able to do. We would like to use every square meter of our furnace control zone in an effort to maximize capacity and, of course, maximize profit on each cycle we process. We would like our furnaces to operate at the very limits of what the furnace manufacturer states it can do. Unfortunately, these items don’t always exist once the furnace is subjected to an initial Temperature Uniformity Survey per AMS270E.
An initial TUS is used to tell us what our furnaces can do based on pre-determined parameters. Normally, these parameters should be flowed down to our furnace manufacturers, and prior to shipping, these parameters are compared to what the furnace can actually attain making the furnace conformative and ready for shipment. I strongly recommend this whenever purchasing a new or used furnace.
Initial temperature uniformity testing requirements are as follows;
Initial survey temperatures shall be the minimum and maximum temperatures of the qualified operating temperature range(s).
Additional temperatures shall be added as required to ensure that no two adjacent survey temperatures are greater than 600 °F (335 °C) apart.
These requirements are simple and straight forward. One could argue that I may be oversimplifying the requirements of an initial TUS, but let’s not forget, these are merely the requirements, not the conditions, under which an initial TUS must be performed. Let’s look at an example that would conform to the stated requirements.
Example
A furnace (in this case, it is irrelevant what type of furnace or what it is used for) processes production hardware from 900°F to 2200°F. Based on the requirements of AMS2750E, the initial TUS would start by testing at 900°F and the last temperature tested would be 2200°F. The supplier would need to select temperatures between 900°F and 2200°F to ensure that there is no more than a 600°F gap between each adjacent temperature. Figure 1 is an example of temperatures that could be selected.
Figure 1
We’ve covered the requirements of an initial TUS; we will now address the conditions when an initial TUS is required. Initial TUSs are required when a) the furnace is installed (new or used) and b) when any modifications are made that can alter the temperature uniformity characteristics. You could dispute this by stating if a TUS fails (and the furnace is then repaired to be put back in service), if the qualified work zone is expanded, if a thicker control thermocouple is installed, etc. a new initial TUS is required. I would agree, but these would all fall under “B”.
Periodic Temperature Uniformity Surveys
Periodic TUSs are performed for single operating ranges greater than 600°F. In this case, the temperatures are selected must be 300°F from the minimum- and 300°F from the maximum-qualified operating range. If there is a gap of greater than 600°F, additional temperatures must be selected so there is no gap greater than 600°F. Using the example above, we could select temperatures as stated in Figure 2 below.
Figure 2
It is required that at least once each calendar year the minimum and maximum temperatures of the qualified operating range (in our example, it would be 900°F and 2200°F) are tested. Some suppliers may choose to perform an initial TUS once per year to ensure they capture the minimum and maximum.
Initial and Periodic Test Frequency
Tables 8 and 9 within AMS2750E describe the TUS frequency which is based both on furnace Class and Instrumentation Type. As an example, if our furnace referenced previously was identified as a Class 3 (±15°F), Type A instrumentation, the initial survey frequency would be quarterly. After two successful consecutive surveys, the frequency of testing could then be extended to being done annually.
It is important to recognize the difference between initial and periodic TUS temperatures and initial and periodic TUS frequency. Let’s use our example to expand on this. The supplier would perform a TUS using initial temperatures shown in Figure 1. If the TUS passes, the supplier would then, three months later, perform a TUS using the temperatures shown in Figure 2. This would then count as two successful consecutive TUSs. The next TUS could then be performed annually using the temperatures stated in Figure 2.
Conclusion
Understanding initial and periodic TUS requirements is imperative to ensure conformance to AMS2750E and Nadcap. In the next installment, we will discuss TUS data collection, relocation of hot and cold thermocouples, as well as quality requirements.
Submit Your Questions
Please feel free to submit your questions, and I will answer appropriately in future articles. Send your questions to editor@heattreattoday.com.
READER QUESTION (from a heat treat supplier across multiple industries): My vacuum furnace uses a type S thermocouple, and there is no access to perform the SAT. Is there an alternative? (We supply to aerospace and must be in accordance with 2750E.)
If you do not have access to the hot-junction (measuring tip) of the control thermocouple, an option would be to purchase a dual-element thermocouple.
If you are not familiar with dual-element thermocouples, they have two thermocouples in one small Inconel sheath. You can purchase a Type N and a Type S in a single sheath. The type N can be used as a resident SAT thermocouple. This will give you access to the connection-end of both the control thermocouple and a resident SAT sensor that is in the same sheath.
The only set-back in this situation would be the re-calibration or replacement of the dual element thermocouple every 3 months (per AMS2750E – Resident SAT sensors).
READER QUESTION: [I] just have two questions, one in regards to SAT and one in regards to TUS.
[Question 1] When SAT testing a lead sensor, let’s just say for the purpose of this example this lead sensor is a type “k” base metal thermocouple, is it acceptable to test this sensor against an SAT sensor which is also type “k”? I see that for resident SAT, the sensor should be of a different type, but for non-resident SAT, is this acceptable?
[Question 2] My other question is in regards to TUS, specifically para 3.5.18 of AMS2750E. I see that in this paragraph two options are addressed. I have a decent understanding of the first requirement, the second option is where I’m getting a bit confused which states ” . . . or if the difference between the measured temperature at the current recording locations and the actual respective hottest and coldest measured areas is less than the SAT tolerance for the applicable furnace class.” How does one calculate this difference?
Jason Schulze for HTT:
[To question 1] As long as the SAT thermocouple is not a resident SAT thermocouple, you are permitted to use the same type (i.e., K, J, T, etc.) as the thermocouple being tested.
[To question 2] I’ll use an example to work the next question. We will assume the furnace is a Class 2 (±3°F SAT difference). Let’s say a previous TUS had a hot location at #5 and it was +6°F. On a new TUS, the location changed to #9 and is now +2°F. The difference between the previous location and the current one is 4°F. This 4°F difference is more than the applicable SAT tolerance of ±3°F, therefore, the location would need to be moved from #5 to #6.
READER REPLY: In regards to the TUS requirement, I’m assuming the actual M.P. Reading(s) from the current hottest and coldest locations don’t get compared to the respective hottest and coldest locations on the TUS report? For example, I have a furnace that’s classified as class 1 (±5) surveyed at 385°F. The TUS report is stating that the lowest T/C location was 382°F T/C 8. I have now exceeded half the maximum temperature uniformity tolerance (2.5°F), therefore I must relocate unless the difference between the “current recording location” and the actual respective coldest location per the TUS is less the SAT tolerance. I was under the impression that as long as the cold location per the report T/C 8 382°F, when compared to the furnace low multipoint reading during the survey – being less than 2°F, it would not require relocation as my “current recording location” when compared to the actual respective cold location is less than the SAT tolerance. My understanding now is that the process control sensors are not used for this difference calculation but rather the TUS sensor representing the low location? I believe that the “current recording location” statement is where I’m getting thrown off a bit.
Jason Schulze:
You are correct in stating that the comparison is made between the previous and current hot or cold (respectively) locations and not the control thermocouple. AMS2750E is not that easy to follow in some instances so any confusion is understandable.
READER QUESTION (from a metals castings provider for aerospace and defense): For 1020°F SAT, if test instrument/thermocouple reads 1015°F and temperature controller reads 1020°F, it is acceptable to program -5°F bias/offset in controller so temp controller reads 1015°F, matching test instrument/thermocouple, correct?
Jason Schulze for HTT:
You are able to utilize offsets to the limits of AMS2750E table 6 or 7 to correct both TUSs and SATs. Instrument calibration is a bit different. AMS2750E does not invoke limitations regarding an offset due to instrument calibration.
Your comment regarding the application of a -5°F offset to correct the SAT would, in fact, be permitted according to AMS2750E. One thing that would be required is, if the SAT failed and that is why the offset is needed, there would need to be an internal corrective action and product impact investigation.
We welcome your inquiries to and feedback on Heat Treat Today articles. Submit your questions/comments to editor@heattreattoday.com.
This is the fifth in a series of articles by AMS2750 expert, Jason Schulze (Conrad Kacsik). Click here to see a listing of all of Jason’s articles on Heat Treat Today. In this article, Jason advances the discussion of TUSs with a lesson on the definitions of key AMS2750E terms. Please submit your AMS2750 questions for Jason to editor@heattreattoday.com.
Introduction
When executing a technical process, understanding the meaning and intent of certain definitions can clarify the interpretation of certain requirements, thereby, altering a specific course based on that interpretation.
In this article, we will focus on the primary definitions associated with temperature uniformity surveys as they apply to AMS2750E.
Control Zone vs Qualified Work Zone
Control Zone
AMS2750E, page 44, para 2.2.9: “A portion of the work zone in thermal processing equipment having a separate sensor/instrument/heat input or output mechanism to control its temperature. This portion of a furnace is independently controlled.”
Qualified Work Zone
AMS2750E, page 6, para 2.2.42: “The defined portion of a furnace volume where temperature variation conforms to the required uniformity tolerance.”
It’s important to understand the difference between the two definitions. Below is a figure which outlines the most basic idea behind each.
Figure 1
Failure of a Survey Thermocouple
AMS2750E, page 4, para 2.2.19: “Obviously incorrect or erratic activity of a survey thermocouple indicated by extreme high readings, extreme low readings, and/or erratic changes in readings not reflected by other sensors.”
This situation can be observed by pyrometry technicians in real time as the survey is running. Possible reasons for this may be:
a loss in chrome due to vapor pressure (vacuum furnaces only),
movement of the thermocouple during the test from the documented position,
Polarity reversal during test thermocouple assembly.
Note that AMS2750E allows only a specific number of thermocouples to fail during a TUS (see AMS2750E, page 30, para 3.5.16).
Heat Sink
AMS2750E, page 5, para 2.2.24: “A mass of material equivalent to the heat transfer characteristics of the thinnest section of the part being heat-treated. Heat sinks may be used during TUS (3.5.10.1) and during production (3.3.5).”
The use of heat sinks during a TUS is optional. Operators are permitted to utilize heat sinks on both TUS test thermocouples and the load thermocouple being used. The key is to document the initial TUS load condition, including the use of heat sinks, and utilize this configuration on subsequent tests.
If heat sinks are utilized on either the TUS test thermocouples, or the load thermocouples, the heat sink must comply with AMS2750E, page 26, para 3.5.10. Additional requirements and clarification regarding heat sink requirements can be found in the Nadcap Pyrometry Guide on page 47, question #43 and Heat Treat Auditor Advisory 17-007.
Figure 2
Qualified Operating Temperature Range
AMS2750E, page 6, para 2.2.41: “The temperature range of thermal processing equipment where temperature uniformity has been tested and found to be within required tolerances as specified in 3.3”
This temperature range affects multiple aspects of pyrometry, including the instrument calibration setpoints of both furnace instruments (AMS2750E page 14, para 3.2.5.5.1) as well as field test instruments (AMS2750E, page 14, para 3.2.5.4) used on that particular equipment. It also affects what product can be heat treated in the particular furnace.
Field Test Instrument
AMS2750E, page 4, para 2.2.20: “An instrument that is portable, that meets the requirements of Table 3, has calibration traceable to secondary equipment or better and is used to conduct on-site tests of thermal processing equipment.”
One of the key points in this definition is the term “portable”. This implies that furnace instruments cannot be used as field test instruments. For those new to pyrometry, this may cause confusion as a single instrument make and model could be designated as a field test instrument or a furnace instrument. As an example, consider a Yokogawa DX model electronic recorder. A supplier could buy two of the same model and use one as a furnace recorder and the other as a TUS recorder (making it a field test instrument). The only differences are its designated use, calibration points, and the fact that is independent from the furnace (portable).
Field test instruments must be calibrated using a standard instrument or better at 6 points per AMS2750E, page 14, para 3.2.5 and have an accuracy of ±1°F or 0.1%, whichever is greater.
Temperature Uniformity
AMS2750E, page 7, para 2.2.66: “The temperature variation (usually expressed as ± degrees) within the qualified furnace work zone with respect to set point temperature. For retort furnaces where a sensor in the retort is used to control temperature, the temperature variation is with respect to the sensor in the retort and not to the furnace set temperature.”
This relates directly to the furnace class designation per Figure 2 of AMS2750E. It’s important to keep in mind question #21 of the Hwhen designating furnace class.
Temperature Uniformity Survey
AMS2750E, page 7, para 2.2.68: “A test or series of tests where calibrated field test instrumentation and sensors are used to measure temperature variation within the qualified furnace work zone prior to and after thermal stabilization.”
As any pyrometry technician knows, one of the main issues to watch for is thermal inertia, or overshoot. Any overshoot will be cause for immediate failure and initiation of an internal RCCA per AMS2750E, page 34, para 4.2.
Conclusion
Understanding AMS2750E definitions will be advantageous to readers of the remaining articles in this TUS series.
We will next discuss the differences between periodic surveys, initials surveys and more.
Submit Your Questions
Please feel free to submit your questions and I will answer appropriately in future articles. Send your questions to editor@heattreattoday.com.
This is the fourth in a series of articles by AMS 2750 expert, Jason Schulze (Conrad Kacsik). The first three dealt with SATs — System Accuracy Tests — both the Standard SAT and the Alternate SAT. Click here to see a listing of all of Jason’s articles on Heat Treat Today. In this article, Jason sets some of the groundwork for a discussion of TUSs — Temperature Uniformity Surveys — by addressing the importance of a uniform furnace. Please submit your AMS 2750 questions for Jason to editor@heattreattoday.com.
Introduction
Temperature Uniformity Surveys (TUS) are an important part of testing any furnace to ensure consistent and uniform product results. In the next few posts, we’ll discuss not just the importance of temperature uniformity surveys, but also the requirements set forth by AMS2750E as well.
The Importance of a Uniform Furnace
Although a uniform furnace is important for all heat treating processes, I will utilize my experience in brazing to explain the importance of temperature uniformity within a furnace. Even if you may be unfamiliar with brazing, the logic should be straightforward.
Brazing depends on the eutectic reaction in a braze filler metal to bond two materials together. Temperature, atmosphere, and (when applied) vacuum greatly influence the reaction; with respect to this article, we will only deal with temperature uniformity as it applies to AMS2750E and Nadcap.
Brazing is inherently sensitive in the majority of aerospace applications. As a consequence, tight temperature tolerances are typically applied to brazing processes: anywhere from ±15°F to a super-tight ±5°F.
Here’s a practical example. We are developing a diffusion braze process in which two widgets are brazed together using Ni braze filler material. We load a single layer of widgets on a flat ceramic plate: one in each corner and one in the middle. This gives us five samples in total. Once our development cycle is complete, we take the samples to the laboratory for examination of the required diffusion depth. In the lab, we notice that the samples located in the rear of the furnace (farthest from the door) have considerably less diffusion than the samples in the front (nearest the door) and the middle.
In a case like this, we would immediately look at the most recent TUS. If we notice that the uniformity requirement is ±25°F with actual TUS results being +20°F/-18°F (which does conform to a ±25°F), Temperature Uniformity Surveys should not be considered arbitrary. If tight temperature tolerances are required by your customer, it is safe to assume there is a good reason for it, and we should take seriously the need to keep our furnaces in top shape and capable of passing customer and/or AMS2750-required temperature uniformity surveys.
This first TUS article discussed the importance of temperature uniformity requirements as they are passed down to us from a purchase order (PO) holder to a supplier. In following articles, we will begin discussing definitions from AMS2750E and Nadcap to ensure we have a proper understanding of the terms as we implement requirements.
Submit Your Questions
Please feel free to submit your questions and I will answer appropriately in future articles. Send your questions to editor@heattreattoday.com.
A reader whose company offers sintering and heat treating of medical devices recently submitted an inquiry regarding AMS2750 specifications and sintering.
READER QUESTION: “Does insipient melting of metal particles fall under these guidelines? Our temperatures go as high as 2650°F and finding cost-effective ways to utilize thermalcouples to verify TUS temperatures seems a difficult task in itself.” Heat Treat Today‘s resident AMS2750 expert Jason Schulze (Conrad Kacsik) provided the following response. Submit your AMS2750 questions to Jason at editor@heattreattoday.com.
Understanding whether AMS2750E should be implemented within your process can be confusing. In this post, we will focus on understanding when AMS2750E is applicable to a supplier and when this should be verified.
What is “Flow-Down”?
Within most industries, there exists some type of flow down with regards to specific requirements. When we purchase a car, there are loan terms which flow down to a purchaser via a loan contract, such as interest rates, the number of months included in the loan, the ratio at which payments are distributed to interest and principal, as well as the requirement to carry full coverage car insurance for the life of a vehicle loan. These details are requirements which flow down to the purchaser via a contract.
The same can be said of a manufacturer or processor in the aerospace, commercial, or automotive industry. Certain requirements flow down from a purchaser (PO holder) to the supplier (entity receiving the purchase order).
Order of Precedence
In the aerospace and automotive industry, the flow down of requirements typically will encompass three documents in a specific order of precedence: 1) purchase order, 2) part print, and 3) process specifications. This is considered the order of precedence with regards to specific requirements.
Let’s look at an example:
ABC Aerospace issues a purchase order for turbine blades to be manufactured at Ajax Machine. Ajax Machine has several multi-axis grinding machines as well as captive heat treating. ABC Aerospace issues a purchase order to Ajax Machine that states the following:
“Part Number 30925-96 – 1,050 pc. Due January 1st, 2050 per Rev B 30925-96 Print”
Ajax Machine obtains the PO as stated above, along with the part print stated on the purchase order. The part print states multiple dimensional requirements for the turbine blades, but it also states a heat treat requirement to an industry heat treat specification. This heat treat specification would identify multiple variables such as time, temperature, and atmosphere for heat treatment; it may also specify that all furnaces used for heat treatment shall conform to AMS2750E, if the PO holder (customer) does, in fact, require this.
For a supplier attempting to understand if AMS2750E applies to their specific process, flow down from the PO holder is where this requirement is established.
Establishing Flow Down via Contract Review
To become ISO certified, a company must have a contract review procedure. Contract review is typically used to establish flow down requirements to ensure that a supplier is able to meet the requirements a purchaser has requested. Utilizing the contract review process to establish flow down requirements ensures that the supplier will document, establish, and verify all flow down requirements stated on the PO, part print, and process specification prior to manufacturing.
Conclusion
Flow down, as it relates to AMS2750 as well as other variables, is an important step in successful manufacture and processing of aerospace, commercial, and automotive hardware.
Submit Your Questions
Please feel free to submit your questions and I will answer appropriately in future articles. Send your questions to editor@heattreattoday.com.
Within the aerospace heat treating field, Nadcap heat treat audits are a necessary part of doing business. The requirement to obtain Nadcap approval is “flowed down” from primes like Boeing and Airbus to sub-tier suppliers and these approvals must be maintained. Nadcap heat treat audits are typically more difficult than other audits and this is due primarily to the inclusion of pyrometry.
My name is Jason Schulze. I’m a metallurgical engineer with over 20 years in the aerospace industry. I’ve been exposed to Nadcap in multiple commodities, although often focused in heat treat. I work with companies to insource and improve special processes, perform gap-analysis and internal audits as well as gain Nadcap approval. I am also contracted by PRI as an eQualern Instructor and teach multiple courses including pyrometry.
In the upcoming series of Heat Treat Today articles, I’ll present specific subjects related to Nadcap heat treat audits and pyrometry. In subsequent articles, I hope to be answering your questions – questions submitted by our readers.
In this initial article, I’ll focus on AMS2750E comprehension as well as offering a Quality based perspective with regards to accounting for each requirement within the specification.
Understanding AMS2750E
As with any specification, it must be read carefully. It would do no good to read the specification and attempt to implement it if you do not understand the material. On a scale of 1-10, with 1being zero knowledge of pyrometry, someone reading AMS2750E for the first time would need to be at least a 5 in order to properly comprehend and implement the AMS2750E Specification.
Most quality engineers are familiar with the term “bubbling” as it relates to blue prints. Bubbling a print is a practice in which each requirement is assigned a sequential number. Once this is done on the print, it is then logged onto a form which contains the designated number, its associated requirements, the subsequent result, and an accept/reject notice. Typically, this is done on machined parts that may have an intermediate process (such as heat treat) involved in their manufacture. When an intermediate process is performed, the specification is simply listed as the requirement and an accept designation is applied. The specification itself is not bubbled, but read by an engineer, and the applicable requirements flowed down.
My method is to bubble the specification itself. Take each requirement out of the specification and assign it a sequential number. Let’s call them “Characteristic Requirements”. Some paragraphs may have several requirements within a single paragraph; each would be separated and assigned its own sequential number. Let’s look at an example of this:
AMS2750E PG 19, PARA 3.4.5.1:
“The displayed temperature indication and/or recording of the sensor being tested as used in production, with appropriate offsets or correction factors, at any operating temperature, shall be compared with the corrected temperature indication of the test sensor on a test instrument”
It may seem that a single requirement is being put forward; but there are actually 7 contained within this one paragraph.
The displayed temperature indication…
and/or recording of the sensor being tested…
as used in production…
with appropriate offsets or correction factors [option for either]
at any operating temperature…
shall be compared with the corrected temperature indication of the test sensor…
on a test instrument.
I have performed this task on both AMS2750D and AMS2750E. Revision E ended with 513 characteristic requirements, including tables and figures. Once bubbled, each requirement must be accounted for as they apply to your operations. For example, any requirement regarding a retort furnace would be designated “N/A” if your operation employed only vacuum furnaces. Of course, the continuing issue of comprehension arises at each step of this process. If you have a poor understanding of pyrometry it will be difficult to bubble AMS2750E, and nearly impossible to successfully complete the process of showing conformance.
AMS2750E Training
By training, I’m referring to comprehension of AMS2750E itself. Instruction on how to properly calibrate an instrument, perform an SAT or wire up a rack to perform a TUS will be much easier once AMS2750E is understood.
Several courses are offered through multiple companies. Choosing one where you will obtain practical and sound advice concerning your specific operation as it relates to AMS2750E is the key. Get pyrometry training from an engineer who not only has performed the work in accordance with AMS2750E, but more importantly, has been involved in the actual manufacturing of heat treated hardware and has been through a live Nadcap audit. Knowledge in pyrometry may be one thing; its real-time application within an actual production environment is entirely different – and invaluable.
Conclusion
Ensure your comprehension of AMS2750E is in line with Nadcap’s expectations; training will be the key. This will expedite your success in implementing AMS2750E as it applies to Nadcap.
Submit Your Questions
Please feel free to submit your questions and I will answer appropriately in future articles. Email your questions to Doug@HeatTreatToday.com.
