No passwords, No popups, No cost, No AI:
we earn from 'affiliate link' purchases, making the site possible

Home /
T.O.C.
Fun
FAQs
Good
Books
Ref.
Libr.
Adver-
tise
Help
Wanted
Current
Q&A's
Site 🔍
Search
ted_yosem
Sound technical content, curated with aloha by
Ted Mooney, P.E. RET
Pine Beach, NJ
finishing.com -- The Home Page of the Finishing Industry

  The authoritative public forum
  for Metal Finishing since 1989
  mfhotline


  -----

Statement of conformance/non-conformance





2005

If I send a purchase order without referencing a specification accept/reject criteria, stating the part observed hours to white & red, (with an accompanying specification) and then an extended test hours, beyond the specification, as requested by the customer, then,

#1) Is it per ASTM B117 "understood" that the accept/reject criteria for the hours is zero allowed, and,

#2) Should the accompanying specification be disregarded due to the request of the extended hours?

Sandy Mcglade
employee - Jackson, Michigan



Sandy,

If your customer asks for it then you need to deliver, else your CoC will be invalid.
It is your responsibility to ensure that, to the best of your knowledge, you have complied with all parts of your customer specification.

Now, the customer is all important (maybe a little odd, bizarre or even downright wrong) and what he/she says goes.

ASTM B117 is a test method and does not impose accept/reject criteria on its users, that is normally set by the design authority. It is therefore valid for your customer to request the test to be carried out in accordance with ASTM B117 and then inspected to their requirements (as bizarre as this may seem).

Brian Terry
Aerospace - Yeovil, Somerset, UK
2005



2005

Certainly Mr. Terry is 100 percent correct. A customer could write their own spec from scratch without referencing any generally accepted spec, and it would be perfectly valid. Or he could save himself a huge amount of effort by saying: "Process per spec XXXXX and test per spec YYYYY except blah blah blah"; it's perfectly valid and may even be reasonable.

From the plater's point of view, this may end up being very good: Several times on these pages (e.g., letters 34235 & 31317) we have discussed the issue of who is supposed to be the expert--the buyer or the plater--and whose responsibility it is if parts perform poorly. If the parts don't perform well, but the buyer started with an industry accepted spec and then took it upon himself to modify it, it seems to me that he has implied that he knows precisely what he is doing, and has transferred to himself a large responsibility.

Ted Mooney, finishing.com
Ted Mooney, P.E.
Striving to live Aloha
finishing.com - Pine Beach, New Jersey




(No "dead threads" here! If this page isn't currently on the Hotline your Q, A, or Comment will restore it)

Q, A, or Comment on THIS thread -or- Start a NEW Thread

Disclaimer: It's not possible to fully diagnose a finishing problem or the hazards of an operation via these pages. All information presented is for general reference and does not represent a professional opinion nor the policy of an author's employer. The internet is largely anonymous & unvetted; some names may be fictitious and some recommendations might be harmful.

If you are seeking a product or service related to metal finishing, please check these Directories:

Finishing
Jobshops
Capital
Equipment
Chemicals &
Consumables
Consult'g,
& Software


About/Contact  -  Privacy Policy  -  ©1995-2024 finishing.com, Pine Beach, New Jersey, USA  -  about "affil links"