Twice a month, Heat TreatToday publishes an episode of Heat TreatRadio, a unique-to-the-industry podcast. Whether it’s AMS2750 or CQI-9, these episodes will boost your knowledge about all things heat treat. Listen to these four episodes to gain confidence in compliance. Enjoy this original content, and happy listening!
Justin Rydzewski Director of Sales & Market Development Controls Service, Inc.
Heat TreatRadio: Justin Rydzewski on CQI-9 Rev.4 (Part 1 of 4) – Pyrometry
In this episode of Heat TreatRadio, hear directly from a committee member involved in updating CQI-9. Justin Rydzewski, director of Sales and Marketing at Controls Service, Inc. sheds some light on the automotive equivalent to AMS2750: CQI-9. From translation issues and formatting to new process tables and caveats regarding thermocouples, this episode of Heat TreatRadio provides all the necessary information heat treaters need to use the new revision. It's about more than just pyrometry; it's also about heat treat system assessment and heat treat operation.
To get the run-down on CQI-9, listen to this episode of Heat TreatRadio.
"How like is one test to the next one? What is your means of collecting data and what is your response plan when that data is unfavorable? Having that predetermined, so that you’re not doing in on the fly, can be incredibly helpful."
Heat TreatRadio: Andrew Bassett on AMS2750F (Part 1 of 3)
Andrew Bassett, President, Aerospace Testing and Pyrometry
In this three-part episode, Andrew Bassett of Aerospace Testing and Pyrometry discusses all things AMS2750F. Questions on thermocouples, calibrations and thermal processing classification, SATs, or TUSs? This series of Heat TreatRadio episodes has the answers.
In this first episode, Andrew focuses on thermocouples and sensors and the different thermocouple types that AM2750 Revision F addresses compared to past revisions. The use of nickel/nickel-moly thermocouples and the use of resistant temperature devices are just two of the additions found in Rev. F.
To get an overview of the changes to AMS2750 made in Revision F, as well as to hear a bit about the process for writing the specification book, listen to this series of episodes on Heat TreatRadio.
"I’m an end-user, so I’m able give my input and say, 'Hey, this doesn’t make sense. What you want to add into the spec is not real world.' It’s nice that people such as us get involved with these specifications."
Heat TreatRadio: Reimagining Furnace Compliance with C3 Data’s Matt Wright
Matt Wright Chief Marketing Officer, C3 Data Source: C3 Data
The future of compliance could be in the palm of your hand. Matt Wright, chief marketing officer at C3 Data, describes how C3 Data has encapsulated everything required to be AMS2750 or CQI-9 compliant into one platform: a user-friendly system that can run on a smart phone. No more clipboards, spreadsheets, or post-it notes. Using optical character recognition, heat treaters can complete SATs in real-time. With QR codes, operators can scan thermocouples and access the appropriate table within a specification book.
To learn more about what C3 Data is doing to make compliance easier, listen to this episode of Heat TreatRadio.
"When I look at our industry, one of the things that is the biggest challenge is the flow of information — getting information from where it resides to where it needs to be in the format that it needs to be."
Heat TreatRadio: Justin Rydzewski and James Hawthorne on CQI-9 Rev.4 (Part 3 of 4) – Process Tables & New Resources
James Hawthorne Corporate Heat Treat Specialist, Acument Global Technologies
There's more new material in CQI-9 Rev. 4 than just pyrometry updates. James Hawthorne of Acument Global Technologies, zooms in on changes to CQI-9's process tables and new resources. One of these new resources, a glossary of terms used within the document, was created specifically because of end-user requests. Maintenance request forms, helpful illustrations, and informative figures are just a few other new resources added to the latest version of CQI-9.
"Read the document. Read as much of it as you can and try to understand as much as you possibly can."
To hear more about what's new in CQI-9 Rev.4, listen to this episode of Heat TreatRadio.
Heat TreatToday provides many different ways for you to keep current on heat treating technical content, news, trends, and specifications within the industry. Heat TreatRadio is one of those outlets. Publisher and Heat TreatRadio host, Doug Glenn, talked with James Hawthorne from Acument Global Technologies and Justin Rydzewski of Controls Service Inc., both of whom served on the committee, with Hawthorne being the chairman, of the latest revisions (Rev. 4) to CQI-9.
This column appeared in Heat TreatToday'sAugust 2021 Automotiveprint edition.
Check out this article for a summary of the topics and insights discussed during this four-part series, and then listen to the individual episodes to learn all you need to know about understanding and complying with CQI-9 Rev. 4.
Process tables from Rollout Webinar (Source: Rollout Webinar PowerPoint)
Heat Treat Radio:
Justin Rydzewski on CQI-9 Rev. 4
(Part 1 of 4) – Pyrometry
In this first episode, Doug Glenn and Justin Rydzewski provide an overview of CQI-9 and the “why” behind the new revision as well as talking down through the pyrometry section which covers things like sensors, thermocouples, calibration, SATs, and TUS. Rydzewski was an active participant in the writing of the new revision. His company, Controls Service Inc., is an ISO/IEC 17025 accredited provider of process control systems, calibration, maintenance, and services.
Here’s an excerpt taken from the transcript of the first podcast:
Doug Glenn (DG): Give us information about CQI-9. Give us a brief history. When did it start? Who owns it? Who maintains its updates? To whom does it apply? What is its scope?
Justin Rydzewski (JR): The best way I know to describe it (because, perhaps the most widely known pyrometry specification is AMS2750) is CQI-9 is the automotive equivalent of AMS2750. There are obviously some differences between the two documents, but, in a nutshell, that’s the comparison. It is a document supported by the AIAG, the Automotive Industry Action Group. They oversee the publication of it, the drafting of it, and supervise the whole thing through that process. CQI-9 is the number. Officially, it’s called the Special Process Heat Treat System Assessment and that kind of gets the nomenclature of CQI-9 that applies to automotive heat treaters, or any performing heat treat work within the automotive industry; and several processes fall into that category. It can be from commercial heat treat to in-house heat treat, to organizations like mine that support it. It applies to anyone participating in that effort of heat treat.
DG: Let’s talk about Rev. 4. You said as soon as “3” was out, you started on “4” and it took eight to nine years to get done with “4.” What was the main reason why you needed to abandon “3”?
JR: They schedule these things out to be rewritten on a routine basis. Like most specifications, they are reviewed on some established interval of time. The biggest difference between the second edition of CQI-9 and the third edition was that the third edition removed all references to AMS2750. When 2750 was in the document, it created a world of confusion, and the guidance and errata sheets that followed were just so numerous that they made it a somewhat difficult document to adhere to.
One of the ideas we brought to the table was that maybe we should just remove all reference to it [2750] and write our own specification. So, the third edition removed the 2750 references. In doing so, it ended up being a very well written document. It was effective. The OEMs—your GMs, Fords, FCAs—were happy with the results of the document.
The prolonged active interval of that document allowed us to collect a lot of really good data about what was working, what wasn’t, what was confusing, and where additional clarity was needed. The more data we collected, the more confident we were that the fourth edition would truly make a stride toward being a more effective document.
DG: What are the major sections?
JR: It is structured very similar to the way of AMS2750 in that regard. You have four sections that divvy up a pyrometry section: thermocouples, instrumentation, system accuracy testing, and temperature uniformity survey. But, unlike AMS2750, CQI-9 is a system assessment, it is a process, it is a heat treat management system. It encompasses more than just pyrometry. Where AMS2750 is a pyrometry specification, CQI-9 is a process specification; it encompasses everything. It also includes your heat treat system assessment, which is three sections of questions regarding your heat treat operation, then you have your pyrometry which is those four sections I mentioned. Then you have your process tables. Your process tables drive all of your requirements for your particular operation, in terms of frequencies and tolerances.
To listen or read more about the CQI-9 pyrometry section, go to www.heattreattoday.com and search “Heat Treat Radio CQI-9”
Heat Treat Radio:
James Hawthorne and Justin Rydzewski on CQI-9 Rev. 4
(Part 2 of 4) – HTSAs & Job Audits
In this second installment, Doug Glenn, Justin Rydzewski, and James Hawthorne of Acument Global Technologies discuss heat treat system assessments and job audits in CQI-9 Rev. 4.
Hawthorne is a heat treat specialist in Acument’s North American facilities and handles the heat treat systems, the system’s compliance, and quality assurance for heat treat within his organization. (Acument makes fasteners—nuts, bolts, rivets, washers— for the auto industry.)
Here’s an excerpt taken from the transcript of the second podcast:
DG: James, how would you explain CQI-9 to someone who has essentially zero understanding of what it is?
James Hawthorne (JH): CQI-9 is Continuous Quality Improvement. The purpose behind it is to put together a system that will help you manage and control your process, and at the end of it, the product that you’re delivering to the end user. The intent is to give you those guidelines to help avoid potential spills or escapes or whatever else may come with that.
DG: It’s mostly heat treat related, yes? Or is there more than just heat treat there?
JH: It is the entire system of heat treat. If you look at the heat treat system assessment, the first portion of it is quality based. The second portion (Section 2) is the floor responsibilities, things that are on task that are being completed. And third, you get into the maintenance and the pyrometry portion of it, very specific to the pyrometry and very specific to atmosphere control. At the end of it, there are some very specific induction questions, because when it comes to induction, there is no real furnace at that point, so you want to focus on those key elements of induction.
DG: James, we’d like to pick your brain a bit on this. Let’s jump into some questions on the HTSAs, as we’ll refer to them, heat treat system assessments, and job audits. Let’s go right to the basics: What is an HTSA and what is its purpose?
JH: HTSA, heat treat system assessment, is a tool that has been developed to help you evaluate how you manage your heat treat system for effectiveness: effectiveness in quality management and effectiveness in the floor responsibilities. Like I mentioned earlier, understanding that through aspects of training and training effectiveness and into the final section of atmospheric control and atmosphere management and reaction to those.
The purpose here is to have one system, one document that is the rules of engagement for doing heat treat in the automotive world. What this does is allows the automotive industry to give you one spec, one thing to follow. As opposed to having, say Ford, give you ten questions where none of them are exactly the same as FCA or nine of them are the same as Ford Motor Company, where one of them has a specific question. This encompasses all of those wants and needs from the auto industry to protect themselves, to protect the end user out there in the field that may be using that heat treated component.
To listen or read more about the CQI-9 pyrometry section, go to www.heattreattoday.com and search “Heat Treat Radio CQI-9”
Heat Treat Radio:
Justin Rydzewski and James Hawthorne on CQI-9 Rev. 4
(Part 3 of 4) – Process Tables & New Resources
In this third episode, the trio talks about process tables, their importance, and key information on how to read this revision of CQI-9.
Here’s an excerpt from part 3:
JH: The heat treat system assessment (HTSA) covers the heat treat system and its assessment. There are very unique processes that are covered by CQI-9 and are captured in the process table section of the CQI-9 document.
Process Table A covers carburizing, carbonitriding, carbon restoration, austempering, and precipitation hardening or aging. Section B covers nitriding and ferritic nitrocarburizing. Process Table C covers aluminum. Process Table D covers induction. Process Table E includes annealing and normalizing the stress relief. It goes up to process Table I.
AIAG Cover CQI-9 Edition, 2020
There is a process table for each unique type of heat treat that is out there in the industry and this allows some very specific topics to be covered in those types of processes.
The first portion of it is Process and Test Equipment Requirements. What are the rules of engagement for those items? The same thing for pyrometry. There are specific call outs in the process tables. If this is part of your system, you have to play by these rules. Some of them will point you to specific sections of pyrometry. So, if you’re looking at the thermocouple and calibration of thermocouples, the process table is going to tell you that you shall conform to section P3.1 which covers all of those.
It also covers the process monitoring frequency. How often do you have to check your temperatures? What are the rules of engagement? If you have a batch style furnace that covers that process, it has certain rules for you to manage your batch process.
Then you get into things like inspection – Section 5 of the process table covers things like quenchant and solution test parameters, and the rules for checking that.
What’s really nice about the document is that it’s set up in a way where you can go to the HTSA right from the process table to see if you’re compliant to what’s listed there as the shell statement and the requirements or the frequency for checking those.
To listen or read more about the CQI-9 pyrometry section, go to www.heattreattoday.com and search “Heat Treat Radio CQI-9”
Heat Treat Radio:
Justin Rydzewski and James Hawthorne on CQI-9 Rev. 4
(Part 4 of 4) – Expert Advice
In this final installment, Doug Glenn, Justin Rydzewski, and James Hawthorne field opinion questions as well as practical implementation questions of the new CQI-9 Rev. 4.
Here’s an excerpt from the transcript:
DG: Has CQI-9 been effective in the automotive industry?
JH: I think, 100%, Doug. It’s like IATF—all of the automotive industry has to be compliant to that. Same thing with CQI-9. It provides that commonality for all heat treaters in all the different processes that are employed at their facilities, or the multiple facilities that they may have. For a company like ours, we have eight companies in North America. For the North American side of things that have heat treat furnaces in them, we have induction furnaces, we have carbonitriding furnaces, and we have stress relief furnaces. So that commonality even helps us internally with our management system and how we take steps to provide that common approach and compliance to CQI-9.
JR: I think that also bodes well up the ladder for the OEs. The more people, the more sources that you can go to in order to have work done and have it what you expect it to be, from a quality standpoint.
I think one of the things that CQI-9 has done really well is they’ve made a concerted eff ort to make that document easier to understand and to simplify things down to just its bare bone necessities, whereas some of the other specifications that exist in industry can be lacking.
The intent of CQI-9 was, to a large extent, to be something that you can do yourself and implement yourself. We’ll provide you with the guidance, put it in simple terms, and give you all the research you need to support this on your own.
To listen or read more about the CQI-9 pyrometry section, go to www.heattreattoday.com and search “Heat Treat Radio CQI-9”
Welcome back to the show. Heat Treat Radio host, Doug Glenn, wraps up a four-part series on CQI-9 Revision 4 changes with Acument Global Technologies’ James Hawthorne and Controls Service Inc. Justin Rydzewski. In this final episode, both of these experts give their advice on how to navigate and comply with Rev 4.
The following transcript has been edited for your reading enjoyment.
Doug Glenn (DG): We're here today with Justin Rydzewski who is the director of sales and marketing of Controls Service, Inc. in Livonia, Michigan and also with James Hawthorne, heat treat specialist at Acument Global Technologies. Both of these gentlemen have been with us for two or three of the last three episodes that we put together. James, was the committee chair, I believe that's the right title, for the Revision 4, and Justin, of course, was right alongside on the committee getting things done. Gentlemen, first off, welcome back to Heat Treat Radio.
Justin Rydzewski (JR): Glad to be here.
James Hawthorne (JH): Thank you, Doug. Glad to be here.
DG: We've covered a lot of the major changes, a lot of the main points that people ought to know, on the first three episodes. We want to wrap it up today by asking a couple of very practical questions, a couple of “opinion” questions, but, I think, also a couple of very practical questions on implementation, and things of that sort, of the new CQI-9 Rev 4.
Justin, if you don't mind, I'd like to start with you and address an issue that I think you and I touched on in the very first episode, and that was the difference between the CQI-9 standard and AM2750F, specifically, about the automotive industry. Why doesn't it just adopt AMS2750F as opposed to having this separate CQI-9 standard?
Episode 1 of 3 of AMS2750 series
JR: I think that both specifications are appropriate for their industries. But, there are some significant differences between the two. First and foremost, one is intended for aerospace and the other for automotive. AMS2750F, as we've mentioned in a previous episode, is a pyrometry standard, whereas CQI-9 is a system assessment; it is a process-based approach to things, whereas AMS2750 is more equipment based. You classify things by temperature tolerances, by the instrumentation type that you have, whereas requirements within CQI-9 are generally based on your type of process and specific to your process, in particular.
I would say that the most significant difference between the two documents is AMS2750 is part of the NADCAP program and requires accreditation and an auditing body, PRI, to come out and say, “Yep, you're good to go. Here's your certificate. We'll see you in a year”. CQI-9 is intended to be a self-assessment. It's intended for heat treaters to implement themselves to provide them with a process of managing their heat treat and that doesn't require somebody to come in and accredit them and hand them a certificate.
There is a big difference between the two; they are not equals. There are similarities, especially in the pyrometry section. At one point, AMS was heavily sited inside of CQI-9. Since its removal, however, we've had success, and that success has been measurable; it's been significant. I would image that the OEs have been rather happy with what it is that they have there in the document, especially in the 4th edition, and I think that the thought of going to an AMS2750 and abandoning CQI-9 is well outside the realm of plausible.
JH: One thing I would add here is, if you read the headers for each section of the HTSA, section one is “Management Responsibility and Quality Planning”, section two is “Floor and Material Handling Responsibilities”, and section three is the equipment. On the equipment side, you're going to get more into the pyrometry side of things- the metrology and the maintenance specifics to that equipment, as well. So, the all-encompassing HTSA is a system that is a management system, or at least a system that you can develop a management system based behind, and ensure compliance.
DG: For those who are just joining on this episode, HTSA, heat treat system assessment, is one of the main parts of the CQI standard. Justin, I think your point is good. James, I think, as well, the point is well taken. CQI-9 is meant to be an internal tool, a continuous improvement tool that helps a company that is involved with heat treating to continually improve their process. AMS2750F specifically, is pretty much exclusively a pyrometry certification program, where you've got to have somebody coming from the outside. I remember, back in the day, when they were first starting one of the QS standards, they said, no longer are you going to have to comply or get qualified by this OE, or this prime, or this prime, now you can have one standard. Has that been the case here? Has it been effective in the automotive industry, CQI-9?
JH: I think, 100%, Doug. It's like IATF – all of the automotive industry has to be compliant to that. Same thing with CQI-9. It provides that commonality for all heat treaters in all the different processes that are employed at their facilities, or the multiple facilities that they may have. For a company like ours, we have 8 companies in North America. For the North American side of things that have heat treat furnaces in them, we have induction furnaces, we have carbonitriding furnaces, and we have stress relief furnaces. So that commonality even helps us internally with our management system and how we take steps to provide that common approach and compliance to CQI-9.
[blockquote author="Justin Rydzewski" style="1"]The CQI-9 intent largely was that this is something that you can do yourself and implement yourself. We'll provide you with the guidance and put it in simple terms and give you all the research you need to support this on your own.[/blockquote]
JR: I think that also bodes well, up the ladder as well, for the OEs. The more commonality that exists in the industry, the wider that, for lack of a better term, talent pool is. The more people, the more sources that you can go to in order to have work done and have it what you expect it to be, from a quality standpoint.
I think one of the things that CQI-9 has done really well is they've made a concerted effort to make that document easier to understand and to simplify things down to just its bare bone necessities, whereas some of the other specifications that exist in industry can be lacking. There is a real good reason why a lot of the work of some of those other pyrometry specifications out there are outsourced, because the expertise to adhere to those things and be confident that you're adhering to those things is possessed by an in-house team; they have to go outside. The CQI-9 intent largely was that this is something that you can do yourself and implement yourself. We'll provide you with the guidance and put it in simple terms and give you all the research you need to support this on your own.
Justin Rydzewski, James Hawthorne, and Doug Glenn (clockwise from the left) sat around the virtual screen to hash out a few final expert opinions on CQI-9.
DG: I'm pretty sure, based on everything we've talked about, that you guys really like CQI-9.
JH: 100%! I embrace it and our company embraces it.
DG: So, I know you guys like it, you're the main cheerleaders. What is your perception about companies outside of yourself? Has it, in fact, been embraced, or has it kind of been “Heisman trophied”, the stiff arm – “We'll embrace you with one extended arm”.
JH: If I may, I will say that it's been embraced across the industry through all heat treaters. I think anywhere that anybody deemed it to be a burden, I think with the changes to the format, the added clarity, the improvements to the document, the knowledge base that's now been updated in the glossary, it is all going to help those guys cross any bridge that they were struggling with and make it better for them.
I believe we touched on a little bit in one of the past episodes, or maybe it was when Justin and I were talking about this offline, but one of our customers, who is a non-automotive customer, embraces CQI-9 and our systems and our approach to our heat treat. That is a huge step because that particular company has a lot of internal specification as it pertains to heat treat, but CQI-9 is either equal to or exceeds what their expectation is. It makes it easy for them to embrace it. That was one of the things that was brought up in the roll-out presentation we did through AIAT – one of the other industries had mentioned they were following it.
DG: It sounds like, overall, it has been fairly well embraced and this Rev 4 is going to make it even easier to cuddle up with a cup of hot cocoa and feel comfortable with it.
JR: Generally speaking, in my travels, I have two categories of people that I come across. You have the sort that is looking to embrace it. They recognize that it's a “have to do” and they just want to know what the rules are. They want to make sure that they understand what the rules are and that they make sense. Maybe there is a point or two that they take exception to about, not fully understanding what the intent is of it, but, for the most part, by and large, they want to adhere to the requirements. They recognize that they need to.
The other category includes those who fight anything that they're asked to do, no matter what it is. “No, I don't want to do that. We've been doing it this way forever. Convince me, show me, that I'm doing it wrong. I do some sort of subsequent testing and it always come out fine. I've never had any complaints. Why do I have to go do this?” While that group is definitely the minority, I can tell you that that group, almost 100% of those people are going to be those types that you find more issues with than any other. That's because they fight it and they try to find ways to circumvent things. That's a real slippery slope there.
I think CQI-9 does a real good job at trying to keep things in its lane and recognize that if there's something that we're asking the heat treater to do, that that requirement needs to provide value on some level, or it needs to mitigate risk on some level, and a meaningful one at that.
You asked, “Do I like CQI-9?” I like AMS2750 too. There are some things in AMS2750 I like better than what we did in CQI-9. Talking from experience of having to write some of the requirements in the document, and how difficult that can be to say what it is you want to say but in a manner that makes sense outside of your own brain, it's difficult. I think AMS states some things very, very well. I like their thermocouple calibration certificate requirements better than ours; I think they're more detailed. But I think both work really well, and embracing it sometimes just requires a bit of an education or an understanding of the intent side of things, the purpose side of things.
DG: When was CQI-9 Rev 4 released?
JR: The last week of June.
DG: It's been going on for months now. How about timing? I would imagine that a lot of people that are listening to this probably know that they need to comply with certain aspects of CQI-9. What is the timing for them? When do they need to have all their ducks in order?
JH: During the roll out presentation, the OEMs made a joint statement. We did that roll out presentation in September, and they essentially said that the time between the June release and that (roll-out) presentation was the grace period. When the 3rd edition expired, you have to do 4th edition assessment and they will no longer accept 3rd edition assessments at that point. So, whenever your expiration is, you shall do it to the 4th edition.
JR: The 3rd edition is officially obsolete.
DG: So if you're doing another assessment, it's going to be a Rev 4 assessment. Are there any other timing issues that people need to be aware of?
JR: That should pretty much cover everything. If you're outsourcing an element of your service or of a material, you should be specifying adherence or conformance to the 4th edition at this point.
DG: So, James, I want to address this next question to you, if you don't mind. I know you said in your organization, you've got how many North American locations?
JH: 8 plants in North America.
DG: OK, 8 plants. And you've, obviously, rolled out Rev 4. How did you handle the transition? How did it go? What was complicated and difficult, and how did you address it?
JH: For me, I think it's a little easier, because I was in the room while we were writing the 4th edition. The heat treat systems for all of our locations, I wrote. So, I have a very unfair advantage. But, that being said, even knowing and being as intimate as I am with our own system and the 4th edition of CQI-9, we have made a concerted effort to slow down the process of doing the heat treat system assessment and slow down the process of doing the job audit and doing the process tables to ensure that we are capturing everything.
We've made this statement many times, whether it was here with you or if it was through our roll-out presentation, it is essential to read this document. It is essential to understand what's happening in it. If it takes just a little bit of extra time to read a little bit further to do the checks and balances, pop into the glossary, just to make sure that you are answering the questions as compliant as you possibly can, is the most important thing.
A wise man told me once, Compliance is a circle and if you're just outside the circle, all I want you to do is get you just inside the circle. And next year I'm going to tighten the circle a little bit and if you're still sitting outside, we're going to move you inside. You don't have to hit a bullseye every time, but you have to be inside the compliance circle. So, if you understand that, and if you manage it that way, it's going to make it easy and more effective. Then, you can stick to the intent of the document, and the intent of the document is within the acronym itself of CQI-9: it's continuous quality improvement. Never take your foot off the pedal.
Source: Heat Treat Today
DG: Right. It never ends. Justin, how about you? Same question. I know you're going in through your company into a variety of other companies who are trying to comply. What are you seeing, from their perspective, as far as the difficulty? How are they handling it?
JR: I think the most difficult aspect of things, I guess, is probably one of the most obvious: implementation. You've been doing it one way for the last 8-9 years and now we're going to need to implement something new. And when do you want to implement something new? It's really nice when you work for an organization that has process specifications and certain test specifications very well defined, because then you can hold onto them and say, “Here are the things that we were doing,” and you can go through them and see where things need to be different.
Where they're less defined, or they're defined in some manner that is not on the forefront of things – like I define things in a quote or in a purchase order – those become difficult. There could be elements of implementing something too soon, and now, all of a sudden, I violate something that they've done internally, or sometimes if they had it stated internally for a requirement.
For us, the most difficult thing has been the implementation side of things. It's meant a lot of conversations and trying to determine what this is going to look like, what things we are going to need to do differently, what things we want to check on, and the finally to, for lack of a better word, “coach” my customer along. Here are things you need to consider, here are things you might need to do differently, here's how I would state it for the new edition for making revisions. But to the horse that has been thoroughly well beaten, you have to read the document.
The CQI-9 audio book, coming soon, we'll have that on tape for you. Whether you're driving to work or putting your kids to sleep, it will work either way.
DG: Last question for you guys. For a company who's wanting to become CQI-9 compliant, what are some of those must do's and what are some of the practical advice you've got for them as they start down that path?
JH: If, I may, I think the first and most important thing there is to evaluate the talent that you have on site. Who is your in-house expert? Who is the guy that most fits what you need to be the driver of those next steps? As long as you have that, and that guy understands your system, then the journey can begin and I think your process is more linear with less hills and valleys. You start to win, and you start to win with less drop-off, and that's what you want to do. First and foremost, have the right guy in place.
[blockquote author="James Hawthorne" style="1"]First and foremost, have the right guy in place. [/blockquote]
DG: So, in your estimation, James, you're saying it's a personnel issue. Right away, make sure you do a good assessment and get the right guy in the spot to oversee the process.
JH: Right. You don't want to be a commercial heat treater and you just hired a quality manager from a widget factory to come be the champion of your heat treat. You want him to be a heat treater. You want to have a heat treater in place that knows his stuff.
DG: Right. And who has an attention to detail, I'm sure.
JH: I think it's important to the extent of what Justin was just talking about is, when that person talks to his suppliers, his service providers, you want to have somebody that has some wherewithal and understanding in that field so when that communication does take place, and you have folks like Justin and others in his field, trying to help educate the heat treater on what it takes to be compliant with, whether it's reporting, whether it's through the process or whatever, having that understanding is going to make even the service provider’s job easier.
JR: I think that organizations that struggled with the 3rd edition are probably going to continue to struggle with the 4th edition. If you're comfortable with the 3rd edition and you're doing well with the 3rd edition, the 4th edition is going to be relatively easy to adapt to and to implement. Like with any math story problem, you've got to write down what it is you know. So you go through the document itself, you start making notes on things, you start citing where things might need to be different, you start red flagging things, you review what you have, may do a Ctrl + F for any mention of 3rd edition and replace with 4th edition, or something simple like that. It is what you have created and try to continue on with the successes you had for the 3rd edition into that 4th one. If you've struggled with the 3rd edition, the likelihood that you're going to struggle with the 4th is also pretty great. It is likely that the document isn't the issue, the issue is likely a lack of awareness.
It cannot go understated how valuable it is to invest in training, especially if you're bringing some new guy on to champion the effort, or if you've got a team that's eager and hungry and looking to prove their worth – get them trained. It's readily available. Our organization offers it, the AIG offers training on the HTSA side of things; there are plenty of organizations out there that will offer this training. The benefits to working with a high-end service provider in many of these regards, is that they'll help you through the process as part of their service offering. That's how the true value of a good service provider can be measured is in these sorts of situations. I'd lean on your experts. Invest in your staff. Get the training to get everyone up to speed.
Again, if you fought it in the 3rd, and your plan is to fight it on the 4th, it's going to be an unenjoyable road and you might need to figure out ways to embrace what it is you know and acknowledge what it is you don't, and then fill those gaps in so that you can get to where you need to go.
Doug Glenn,Heat Treat Today publisher and Heat Treat Radio host.
Welcome toHeat Treat Today’sThis Week in Heat TreatSocial Media. As you know, there is so much content available on the web that it’s next to impossible to sift through all of the articles and posts that flood our inboxes and notifications on a daily basis. So, Heat Treat Todayis here to bring you the latest in compelling, inspiring, and entertaining heat treat news from the different social media venues that you’ve just got to see and read!
This week, we are looking at mechanical feats of engineering from precision engineered Ferrari parts, to continuous belt furnace epic videos, to dancing robots. What? Yes. Dancing robots. Continue reading for these stories and more in the world of heat treat on social media.
Check out the smooth process behind engineering Ferrari parts. “Highlighting the entire process to craft aftermarket parts, from CAD design, CNC machining, finishing and quality control, the new video also looks at GTO Engineering’s engine building suite as well as restoration of old parts. It also incorporates a range of Ferraris GTO Engineering has been working on and using components supplied by GTO Parts.” Read more about it here.
2. Heat Treat Ready
A few quick tours around your heat treat shops: what have heat treaters accomplished this past year? Have you done anything similar? Let us know and tag @HeatTreatToday on your next post!
Do you know anyone who has used these heat treating journals? “Journal of Heat Treating is a scholarly journal published in United States focused on Mathematical & Physical Sciences. This collection contains microfilm published between 1979 and 1991. The ISSN is 0190-9177.”
4. Reading and Podcast
Having a lazy Friday? Not to worry. Listen to or read a few interesting insights from around the industry.
ArcelorMittal and the Wheels of Steel
“Ford has been teasing fans with hardcore versions of the Bronco and has been revealing some interesting design characteristics, and now it has announced that industry giant ArcelorMittal has been selected as the sole provider of steel for the 2021 Bronco. Ford will be making use of the company’s Fortiform 980 GI steel, a third-generation advanced high-strength steel, making the Bronco the first car in the world to use this specific grade.” Read more here.
Not everyone can dance, but perhaps there are programs that can help you show off at few parties… At least, your pet robot. “The fun video offers the first glimpse at two Atlas robots working together while also highlighting just how quickly this technology is developing.” A mix of funny and creepy, we’re just going to leave it right here. (“Entire Boston Dynamics robot line-up dances in the new year“)
Despite the precariousness that has defined the majority of 2020 thus far, the aerospace and automotive industries have not let that uncertainty deter them from releasing two major revisions that directly affect the heat-treating industry. Both, the 4th Edition of CQI-9 and AMS2750F were released at the end of June (AMS2750F: Expert Analysis).
In this Technical Tuesday feature, Heat Treat Today reached out to the AIAG CQI-9 Heat Treat Technical Committee with questions about the newest edition and how it might affect the automotive heat treat industry. Specifically, we were interested in the significant changes within the 4th Edition and how organizations can best prepare to implement them.
Several CQI-9 Technical Committee members responded and provided us with some outstanding expert analysis in this Original Content article. Those CQI-9 committee members included: Rick Metcalf, Materials Engineering – Valvetrain PMT, General Motors Company; Medina Kaknjo, STA Global Core Technical Expert/Global Purchasing, Ford Motor Company;Ed Rahe, Heat Treatment Engineer – Metals Group, Fiat Chrysler Automobiles; Jake Sloan, Product Development Manager, AmeriTi Manufacturing [formerly of FCA]; James Hawthorne, current CQI-9 chairperson, Corporate Heat Treat Specialist, Acument Global Technologies; Bob Ferry, Vice President – Engineering & Quality, FPM Heat Treating, John Vander Woude, Metallurgist – Automotive Division, Benteler Automotive Group; and Justin Rydzewski, Director of Sales & Market Development, Controls Service, Inc.
CQI-9 4th Edition vs. CQI-9 3rd edition (photo source: Control Services Inc.)
The Automotive Industry Action Group (AIAG), the organization responsible for the development of CQI-9, cites the Special Process: Heat Treat System Assessment 4th Edition (CQI-9) as a comprehensive assessment, “… covering the most common heat treat processes employed by the automotive industry, intended to provide a common approach to a heat treat management system for automotive production and service part organizations.” Authoring the 4th Edition of CQI-9 was a collaborative effort, supported by a diverse group of individuals from AIAG member companies representing Tier 1 suppliers, heat treaters (both captive and commercial), and critical service providers within the heat treat industry. However, the force driving CQI-9 forward are the OEM’s – Ford Motor Company, General Motors, and Fiat Chrysler Automobiles (FCA).
It’s been nine years since the 3rd edition was released. Justin Rydzewski explains the timing, “The 3rd Edition was a really good document. It was effective and it served its purpose very well. The prolonged life of the 3rdEdition allowed us to collect a tremendous amount of data and feedback about the document– strengths, weaknesses, etc. This data allowed us to identify, with greater accuracy, where updates and changes were truly needed. Lastly, because CQI-9 is an international document, we spent a great amount of effort ensuring the clarity we were adding to the 4th Edition was not going to be lost when translated to other languages. As a result of this development process, we feel confident that the 4th Edition will be an even more effective heat treat system assessment tool than its predecessor.”
What do you believe to be the most notable change in the 4th Edition of CQI-9?
Justin Rydzewski and his colleagues agree on the importance of the digital changes, “Requiring all instrumentation to be digital by June 2023 (3 years after release of the document) is a very notable change. For operations heavily invested in analog instruments and paper chart recorders, this change could potentially result in a significant interruption to operations; especially in the absence of proper planning. However, we are hopeful the change will be a welcomed one as the advantages associated with digital instrumentation are far too great and numerous to ignore any longer.”
Rick Metcalf Materials Engineering – Valvetrain PMT General Motors Company
Rick Metcalf concurs, “I agree with Justin’s comments on digitizing the process controls. This allows for better off-shift monitoring of the process and provides the OEM with a greater confidence in the supplier’s ability to control the process. This is one of the most notable improvements to the 4th edition.”
Medina Kaknjo, Ed Rahe, and Jake Sloan also cited digitization as an important notable change.
The Heat Treat System Assessment (HTSA) question formatting update is another feature that is encouraging to both Kaknjo and Sloan. Kaknjo shares, “The first notable change users will notice is the new format of the document which now requires the assessor to assess every single requirement and rate it.”
Sloan further explains, “I fall in line with Medina [Kaknjo]. The formatting update is great, especially coming from the OEM side that needs to rely heavily on self-surveys. I believe it makes communication between the heat treater and Customer much easier. Not only does it require each requirement to be evaluated by the assessor, but I think it gives them a much better opportunity to give a full response. Hopefully, this will cut-out a lot of the back-and-forth that can happen when the person reviewing the survey was not onsite for the assessment.”
Medina Kaknjo STA Global Core Technical Expert/Global Purchasing Ford Motor Company
Bob Ferry also cited the reformatting of the HTSA questions as a notable change adding, “This effort allowed us to review each question and break down the long question paragraphs of the 3rd Edition. Now, in the 4th Edition, the requirements for each question are listed separately. With this new approach, the Auditee will not miss important requirements which, in the previous edition, may have been buried in a lengthy paragraph.
The alternative temperature uniformity survey (TUS) testing method revisions were tops for James Hawthorne. “The expansion of the Alternative TUS Testing Methods (P3.4.8) is one of the most notable improvements. The requirements now account for proper procedures and reporting for both property surveys and site developed testing methods. These improvements will allow the heat treater to develop a structured, repeatable, and documented solution based on the requirements of this section.”
John Vander Woude sees the addition of Process Table I – Hot Stamping as one of the most notable changes to CQI-9. “I was involved in creating Process Table I a few years ago, but it was released between revisions and seemed like the stepchild Process Table. So, personally, it is nice to see it incorporated in the 4th Edition.”
What change/update in the 4th Edition of CQI-9 do you think will be appreciated most?
James Hawthorne Corporate Heat Treat Specialist, Acument Global Technologies
Metcalf highlights the allowances for exceptions in the Process Tables: “I believe that the most appreciated change to the 4th Edition of CQI-9 is the increased allowance for exceptions to the requirements of Section 4 of the Process Tables. This will allow suppliers of large components to reduce the number of components required to be sectioned daily. However, this does require Customer approval and, ultimately, the OEM. These exceptions offer the heat treater the ability to reduce some of their inspections, provided the supplier can show the process is statistically capable.”
Qualities of clarity, fluidity, and guidance were mentioned multiple times as “most appreciated.”
Hawthorne shares, “I personally appreciate how fluid the document is now. The effort that was put into ensuring the flow of the document works across the different sections is a great benefit to the heat treat community. As heat treaters read and implement the applicable changes to their organizations, these changes will be appreciated by them as well.”
“The 3rd Edition of the document was already very good. But, I think the most appreciated change will be the even greater amount of guidance and the improved clarity of requirements within the document,” says Rahe.
Ed Rahe Heat Treatment Engineer – Metals Group Fiat Chrysler Automobiles
Vander Woude writes, “I think the most appreciated change will be the guidance portion of the element questions. This provides clarity, definition, and better understand to some questions that could be quite useful to many users.
Ferry’s appreciation lies in the pyrometry section, “The improved clarity of the requirements along with explanations, definitions of terms, and examples in the Pyrometry section.”
Kaknjo states, “I think the most appreciated change will be that document is now more user friendly as it is easier to use and follow due to the formatting changes that are done on this revision.
Rydzewski not only commends the formatting improvements for clarity and guidance, but also gives kudos to the reference illustrations. “I think the improvements to the formatting of the Heat Treat System Assessment Section 1-3 questions will be greatly appreciated. Question ‘Requirements’ and ‘Guidance’ are now cited separately.” He continues, noting that this change make it “much easier to effectively capture each requirement and to determine the expectations of each question specifically in terms of objective evidence. . . . [also] nearly every reference illustration in the document was updated/improved. Personally, I think they all look fantastic.”
What is something in the 4th Edition of CQI-9 that an organization should make sure they don’t overlook or misinterpret?
Rahe and Ferry both mentioned the importance of the Process Tables. Rahe states, “An organization should not overlook the specific requirements of the various Process Tables. They are an excellent “cookbook” type guide designed to produce best in class heat treated parts for OEM’s.”
Bob Ferry Vice President Engineering & Quality – FPM Heat Treating
“There was more attention put on the quenching section of the Process Tables with added requirements for quench media process controls including quench delay times, liquid quench controls, and gas quench controls. The intent is not only to control furnace temperatures but to also control cooling rates for consistency of quench and heat-treated product,” says Ferry.
Kaknjo advises, “An organization should not overlook that AIAG CQI-9 HTSA requirements are subordinate to Customer-specific requirements. This is not new for revision 4, but something that often gets overlooked.”
Jake Sloan Product Development Manager AmeriTi Manufacturing
Sloan cautions not to overlook the pyrometry section. “I would say do not overlook the new pyrometry section. The requirements have not only been improved, but it is also a great reference for when it comes to how to comply. Also, as Medina was saying, this document is subordinate to Customer requirements, which works both ways. This document allows exceptions to be given but, remember, there must be approval from up the supply chain.”
Socrates said, “The beginning of wisdom is the definition of terms.” Rydzewski shares this mindset as he highlights utilizing the glossary. “The ‘Glossary of Terms’ in CQI-9 is an outstanding resource that should NOT be overlooked or undervalued. In my opinion, the real key to mastering CQI-9 starts with ‘definition.’ When there is not a firm understanding of the terms being used, confusion and/or compliance issues are almost certain. So, for the 4th Edition, our team dedicated a significant amount of time and effort to enhancing the clarity and guidance provided by the ‘Glossary of Terms.’”
John Vander Woude, Metallurgist Automotive Division Benteler Automotive Group
Vander Woude concurs, saying, “Like previous edition, this edition not only focuses on heat treatment, but also on many areas that support heat treatment. Overlooking areas such as maintenance, training, document control, and testing (to name a few) may lead to difficulties ensuring compliance.”
“The examples in SAT section that are below the illustrations should not be overlooked. These examples provide guidance of what to measure and how to calculate. Use these examples and compare to your current reporting, it will help ensure compliance for your organization,” relays Hawthorne.
What advice would you offer an organization preparing to implement the 4th Edition of CQI-9?
What is the consensus of the experts when it comes to implementing this 4th edition? Read it. Digest it. Use it. It’s a powerful tool that has been a game changer to the automotive industry. Here are the experts’ final recommendations.
Ed Rahe: “My advice would be to read the document thoroughly and take advantage of the many, many years of heat treatment experience that are captured as best practices in this document. The knowledge base of those involved in the creation of this document is really quite impressive.”
Justin Rydzewski Director of Sales & Market Development Controls Service, Inc.
Justin Rydzewski: “Buy the document, read it carefully, and make notes. Big changes are going to standout, capturing those willbe easy. But, by and large, most changes made were minor or were merely intended to add clarity or guidance. Comparatively, these sorts of changes can be easily missed. And, invest in training where necessary. Now is a perfect time to do so. Invest in yourself and your team. If your organization outsources pyrometry services, lean on your service provider for guidance and expertise. Allow them to help. This is where the true value of a good partnership can be measured.”
[blocktext align=”left”]”The best advice I can give is to read the document. Several items were modified to make it easier to interpret and implement CQI-9.” – Rick Metcalf, Materials Engineering – Valvetrain PMT, General Motors Company [/blocktext]
Medina Kaknjo: “My advice would be to use the document as opportunity, as a tool of summary of best practices, lessons learned of many industry leaders to prevent heat treat process related issues that are often associated with significant cost.”
John Vander Woude: “Don’t underestimate the document. With the reformatting and “break out” of sub-requirements for many questions, I think organizations will find they are not compliant in areas they once thought they were compliant. The 4th Edition forces added scrutiny to questions that were often overlooked. Specifically, where many “shall” statements were once made within the same question in the 3rd Edition. In the 4th Edition, these “shall” statements are now separated and denoted individually. This approach makes it much easier to capture and provide appropriate objective evidence for each requirement.”
Rick Metcalf: The best advice I can give is to read the document. Several items were modified to make it easier to interpret and implement CQI-9. We also included more illustrations and a greater glossary in the 4thEdition to make it easier to interpret requirements and implement CQI-9.
Jake Sloan: “Like most people are saying, definitely read the document in its entirety so that your company has a full understanding of the requirements. Also, like Medina said, treat the document as a guide to improve on or maintain best practices. It is a great tool for doing internal reviews so that things don’t slip by the wayside between required assessments. Take advantage of the new format to give clear evidence of compliance instead of just treating it as a checkbox.”
Bob Ferry: “Read the Pyrometry section and make a list of the requirements that apply to your operation from thermocouples to instruments to periodic testing requirements. Set up your system for periodic testing and documented evidence, and then perform a complete CQI-9 HTSA Audit to identify and correct any shortcomings.”
James Hawthorne: “Use the Process Tables, Glossary, and the Job Audit as intended to ensure compliance while documenting your effective evidence in to the HTSA. Each section of this document is an invaluable tool that will help the heat treater remain compliant and effectively provide the objective evidence required.”
Twice a month, Heat Treat Today publishes an episode of Heat Treat Radio, a unique-to-the-industry podcast. Whether it’s AMS2750 or CQI-9, these episodes will boost your knowledge about all things heat treat. Listen to these four episodes to gain confidence in compliance. Enjoy this original content, and happy listening!
