FINAL REPORT

Size: px

Start display at page:

Download "FINAL REPORT"

Maurice Harrell
6 years ago
Views:

1 PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAMME FOR CHEMICAL TESTING OF STEEL ALLOY [PTM/CHEM/02/14-15] FINAL REPORT ORGANIZED BY GLOBAL PT PROVIDER PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI PT SCHEME NAME : CHEMICAL TESTING OF STEEL PT SCHEME CODE : PTM/CHEM/02/14-15 PT REPORT NO. : C02AD/14/01 DATE OF ISSUE : 06/11/2014 AUTHORISED BY : MR. UMESH GUPTA (TECHNICAL DIRECTOR) Page 1 of 32

2 PT PROVIDER DETAILS NAME & ADDRESS OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROVIDER: GLOBAL PT PROVIDER PRIVATE LIMITED E-41, OKHALA INDUSTRIAL AREA, PHASE II NEW DELHI , INDIA TEL: , , COORDINATORS OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAMME: MR. RAM TIRATH PT COORDINATOR MS. SHIPRA AGGARWAL TR. PT COORDINATOR MOB: ADVISORY GROUP OF THE PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAMME: MR. KULDEEP DHINGRA REPORT PREPARED BY REPORT CHECKED BY REPORT AUTHORISED BY MR. ASIM DASH MR. RAMTIRTH MR. UMESH GUPTA PT COORDINATOR MANAGER (QA) TECHNICAL DIRECTOR Page 2 of 32

3 CONTENTS S. No. Description Page No. 1. Cover Page 1 2. PT Provider Details 2 3. Contents 3 4. Abbreviations used 4 5. Introduction 5 6. Objectives of Proficiency Testing 5 7. Participants 6 8. Design of PT Scheme 7-10 PT Programme Schedule Preparation of PT Items Parameters for the PT Scheme Homogeneity Testing Distribution of PT Items Stability Testing Submission of Results Analysis of Result 9. Subcontracted Activities Confidentiality in Proficiency testing Conclusion Summary of the test methods used by the participants Summary of Results [Data Tables] Robust Z-Score Chart: Lab Code Vs Z Score Outlier Results References: Intimation Letter (Annexure: I) Participant Instruction Sheet (Annexure: II) Sample Receipt Form ((Annexure: III) Result Sheet (Annexure: IV) Laboratory Summary Sheet (Annexure: V) Page 3 of 32

4 ABRIVIATION USED PT NABL ISO IEC PTM CHEM H & S C Si Mn S P Ni Mo Cu Cr PROFICIENCY TESTING NATIONAL ACCREDITATION BOARD FOR TESTING AND CALIBRATION LABORATORY INTERNATIONAL ORGANISATION FOR STANDARDISATION INTERNATIONAL ELECTROTECHNICAL COMMISSION PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAMME IN METAL CHEMICAL HOMOGENEITY AND STABILITY CARBON SILICON MANGANESE SULPHUR PHOSPHORUS NICKEL MOLYBDENUM COPPER CHROMIUM Page 4 of 32

5 INTRODUCTION Proficiency Testing has become an essential aspect of laboratory practice in all areas of testing, calibration and inspection. Participation in proficiency testing schemes provides laboratories with an objective means of assessing and demonstrating the reliability of the data they are producing. One of the main uses of PT scheme is to assess laboratories ability to perform test competently. This report summarizes the results of Proficiency Testing programme on chemical composition of low alloy steel. The elements determined in this programme are Carbon, Silicon, Manganese, Sulphur, Phosphorus, Nickel, Molybdenum, and Copper & Chromium. The chemical composition of low alloy Steel is routine analysis items for most laboratories. The function of the testing laboratories is to provide data. On the basis of this data the decision are made in the Trade and Commerce industry. Thus, the reliability of test data in the laboratories can provide quality services and practicing good quality management system. The results from Proficiency Testing Programme are useful to both participating laboratories and accreditation bodies. Successful participation in a specific proficiency testing programme may represent evidence of competence for that exercise. Similarly, unsuccessful performance may reflect a random departure from a laboratories normal state of competence. OBJECTIVES OF PROFICIENCY TESTING The main objective of the programme was to evaluate the performance of participating laboratories in the analysis of low alloy steel for the content Carbon, Silicon, Manganese, Sulphur, Phosphorus, Nickel, Molybdenum, and Copper & Chromium by means of interlaboratory comparison. Test results from participants are evaluated according to the statistical techniques outlined in ISO 13528:2005 Statistical methods for use in proficiency testing by inter laboratory comparisons. The z-score is used as a numerical indicator to assess individual participant s performance in the programme. Page 5 of 32

No. of Days PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 PARTICIPANTS Invitation of Proficiency Testing was done through Intimation Letter as given in annexure I.

6 No. of Days PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 PARTICIPANTS Invitation of Proficiency Testing was done through Intimation Letter as given in annexure I. Participants have sent their consent by submitting dully filled Registration form. PT samples were sent to each laboratory after their registration for this programme. Participants were advised to carry out testing of PT sample as soon as possible after receiving samples as per standard test method. The PT sample is to be treated by laboratory in the same way as routine laboratory samples. 28 laboratories have participated in this PT programme. DESIGN OF PROFICIENCY TESTING SCHEME PT PROGRAMME SCHEDULE: TABLE 2: PT PROGRAMME SCHEDULE S. No. PT Activities Actual PT Schedule 1. Invitation & Registration 30 th May to 20 th July Purchase of Raw Material 31 st May Material Verification 2 nd June to 4 th June Sample Preparation 5 th June to 9 th June Homogeneity Testing & Evaluation 10 th June to 30 th June Sample Dispatch 21 st July to 15 th September Stability Testing 30 th July to 30 th September Result Received 10 th August to 27 th September Data Analysis 28 th September to 11 th October Draft Report 13 th October to 15 th October Final Report Generation & Distribution 20 th October to 25 th October PT Programme Schedule Invitation & Registration Purchase of Raw Material Material Verification Sample Preparation Homogeneity Testing & Evaluation Sample Dispatch Stability Testing Result Received Data Analysis Draft Report Final Report Generation & Distribution PT Activities Page 6 of 32

7 PREPARATION OF PT ITEMS: The EN-24 material was procured in the form of hot rolled steel rod of 40mm diameter. Chemical compositions of 6 samples from steel rod were analyzed using optical emission spectrometer & randomly 4 samples were analyzed for microstructure by microscopic Analysis. 120 samples were cut into 40X25 mm pieces. The samples were grinded and the buffing was done on the samples. All the samples were marked. PARAMETERS FOR THE PT SCHEME: TABLE 3: PARAMETERS FOR THE PT SCHEME S. No. Test Parameter Test Method Suggested Range of Testing 1. CARBON (AS C), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-1) SILICON (AS Si), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-8) MANGANESE (AS Mn), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-2) SULPHUR (AS S), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-9) PHOSPHORUS (AS P), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-3) NICKEL (AS Ni), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-5) MOLYBDENUM (AS Mo), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-7) COPPER (AS Cu), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-15) CHROMIUM (AS Cr), % E 415:2008/IS 228 (P-6) HOMOGENEITY TESTING: Homogeneity Testing was subcontracted to NABL Accredited Laboratory. 20 samples were randomly selected from total samples. These samples were analyzed for the chemical composition using optical emission spectrometer. Two sparks were taken on the individual sample. The Analysis of Variance for homogeneity test (ANOVA) & Annexure-B of ISO 13528:2005 were used for examining the homogeneity of the test material. DISTRIBUTION OF PT ITEMS: Participating laboratories were supplied one sample of 40X25mm labeled as LS02. The samples were packed in plastic container with Sponge & bubble paper to ensure that no rust formation should be there on the surface of the sample. Samples were distributed to the participant by speed post and courier. Conformation of sample receipt was ensured through the return receipt of duly filled Sample Receipt Form from each participant. Participation Instruction Sheet and Receipt Form are given in Annexure II & III respectively. STABILITY TESTING: Stability Testing was subcontracted to NABL Accredited Laboratory. 6 samples were randomly selected in the month of August & September for chemical composition. The stability of the PT samples was checked as per Annexure-B of ISO 13528:2005. Page 7 of 32

8 SUBMISSION OF RESULTS: Participants were requested to perform the test according to the Instruction Sheet (Annexure II) and to submit their laboratories test results to the accuracy specified in the result sheet (Annexure IV). Reporting of test results were to be done by each parameter. In case of laboratory does not carry out of the specified parameters then indicate the same by marking the result columns for these parameters, with cross/any other mark. The results of the individual laboratories were received through duly filled Result Sheet format. The original data is tabulated in (TABLE 5-13). ANALYSIS OF DATA: In order to maintain the confidentiality of the participants of the PT Scheme, the individual participant laboratories were given unique Lab Code numbers in result sheet format. Robust Average is calculated from submitted results and used as assigned value as per ISO 13528:2005. Robust Z score has been analyzed as per ISO 13528:2005 for each laboratory for each parameter to keep the result free from disturbances due to the extreme values. DETERMINATION OF ASSIGNED VALUE: The Assigned values, x* and standard deviation of proficiency testing, s*( ) were derived from the consensus of the results submitted by the participants (Algorithm A, Annexure C of ISO : 2005 ). No results were excluded from the calculation of assigned value. PERFORMANCE EVALUATION OF PARTICIPANTS: The performance of the individual laboratory was evaluated by adopting Robust Z score technique given in ISO 13528:2005, as per the following formula: Z = Where, is the test result reported by the individual laboratory is the Assigned Value & is the standard deviation of the Proficiency Assessment. Page 8 of 32

9 INTERPRETATION OF THE PERFORMANCE: The calculated Z-scores are tabulated in the report alongside the corresponding results and the results are assessed based on their Z-Scores. The results of Z-Score are interpreted as follows. Z < 2 = Satisfactory 2 < Z < 3 = Questionable Z > 3 = Unsatisfactory. An Outlier defined as any results / pair of results with an absolute Z-Score greater than 3 i.e. Z >3 or Z<-3. The outlier criteria Z > 3 has a confidence level of about 99.73% i.e. there is less than 1% chance that the result is a true member of the population and it is for more likely that there is a problem with this result/ pair of result. Laboratories which have a Z-Score in the region 2 < 3 are encouraged to take a close look at their results. However the sign of the value of Z-Scores must be considered. The value > 3 indicate the both of results for pair is too high. Similarly negative (-3) indicates the results are too low. SUBCONTRACTING ACTIVITIES The following activities have been subcontracted for this PT programme as given below: Material Testing Sample Preparation Homogeneous Testing CONFIDENTIALITY IN PROFICIENCY TESTING In order to maintain confidentiality of participants of the PT scheme, each participant laboratories are given unique Lab ID which is only disclosed to that participant. Participant identity, performance and report will not be disclosed to any other party without the prior permission of the participants and written authorisation. Confidentiality will be maintained at all levels. The results of the PT can be disclosed to Accreditation/Regulatory body. CONCLUSION Total 28 nos. laboratory has participated in this PT programme. Out of twenty eight laboratories twenty six has participated in all the nine parameters. Out of twenty six laboratories sixteen laboratories have satisfactorily results in all the nine parameters. The no. of unsatisfactorily results from the laboratories in Carbon, Silicon, Manganese, Sulphur, Phosphorus, Nickel, Molybdenum, Copper & Chromium are 2, 1, 3, 0, 3, 3, 2, 2 & 1 respectively. The no. of questionable results from the laboratories in Carbon, Silicon, Manganese, Sulphur, Phosphorus, Nickel, Molybdenum, Copper & Chromium are 0, 2, 0, 3, 1, 0, 1, 3 & 1 respectively. Page 9 of 32

10 SUMMARY OF THE TEST METHODS USED BY THE PARTICIPANTS TABLE 4: SUMMARY OF TEST METHODS USED S. No Test Parameters C, % Si, % Mn, % S, % P, % Ni, % Mo, % Cu, % Cr, % IS 228 (P-1) 1997 IS 228 (P-1) 1997 IS 228 (P-1) 1997 IS 228 (P-1) 1997 IS 228 (P-8) 1989 IS 228 (P-8) 1989 IS 228 (P-8) 1989 IS 228 (P-8) 1989 IS 228 (P-2) 1987 IS 228 (P-2) 1987 IS 228 (P-2) 1987 IS 228 (P-2) 1987 IS 228 (P-9) 1989 IS 228 (P-9) 1989 IS 228 (P-9) 1989 IS 228 (P-9) 1989 IS 228 (P-3) 1987 IS 228 (P-3) 1987 IS 228 (P-3) 1987 IS 228 (P-3) 1987 IS 228 (P-5) 1987 IS 228 (P-5) 1987 IS 228 (P-5) 1987 IS 228 (P-5) 1987 IS 228 (P-7) 1990 IS 228 (P-7) 1990 IS 228 (P-7) 1990 IS 228 (P-15) IS 228 (P-15) IS 228 (P-6) 1987 IS 228 (P-6) 1987 IS 228 (P-6) 1987 IS 228 (P-6) 1987 Page 10 of 32

11 S. No Test Parameters C, % Si, % Mn, % S, % P, % Ni, % Mo, % Cu, % Cr, % IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 IS 8811:1998 Page 11 of 32

12 SUMMARY OF RESULTS [DATA TABLES] Page 12 of 32

13 TABLE 5: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR CARBON Carbon (as C) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-1) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-1) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-1) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-1) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Satisfactory Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 28 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 13 of 32

14 TABLE 6: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR SILICON Silicon (as Si) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-8) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-8) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-8) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-8) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Satisfactory Satisfactory Questionable Satisfactory Questionable IS 8811: Satisfactory Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 28 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 14 of 32

15 TABLE 7: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR MANGANESE Manganese (as Mn) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-2) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-2) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-2) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-2) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 28 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 15 of 32

16 TABLE 8: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR SULPHUR Sulphur (as S) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-9) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-9) Satisfactory Questionable Satisfactory IS 228 (P-9) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-9) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Satisfactory Questionable Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Questionable Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 28 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 16 of 32

17 TABLE 9: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR PHOSPHORUS Phosphorus (as P) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-3) Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory IS 228 (P-3) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-3) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-3) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Questionable Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 28 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 17 of 32

18 TABLE 10: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR NICKEL Nickel (as Ni) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-5) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-5) Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-5) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-5) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory IS 8811: Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 28 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 18 of 32

19 TABLE 11: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR MOLYBDENUM Molybdenum (as Mo) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-7) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-7) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-7) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Questionable Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 27 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 19 of 32

20 TABLE 12: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR COPPER Copper (as Cu) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-15) Satisfactory Questionable Satisfactory Unsatisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-15) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Questionable IS 8811: Questionable Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 26 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 20 of 32

21 TABLE 13: ROBUST Z-SCORE FOR CHROMIUM Chromium (as Cr) S. No. Reported Value (%) Test Method Adopted Z Score Performance Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-6) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-6) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-6) Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 228 (P-6) Unsatisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory IS 8811: Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Satisfactory Questionable IS 8811: Satisfactory Satisfactory Total No. of Participants 28 Maximum Reported Value (%) Minimum Reported Value (%) Robust Average (%) Standard Deviation of Proficiency Testing (σ) Page 21 of 32

22 ROBUST Z- SCORE CHART: LAB CODE VS Z-SCORE Page 22 of 32

23 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Carbon (C) Carbon Graph Carbon Graph 2 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 23 of 32

24 LS19 LS24 LS26 LS6 LS8 LS12 LS13 LS23 LS14 LS22 LS16 LS9 LS1 LS4 LS25 LS11 LS27 LS18 LS15 LS28 Ls21 LS2 LS3 LS17 LS20 LS5 LS10 LS7 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Silicon (Si) 4.00 Silicon Graph Silicon Graph 4 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 24 of 32

25 LS19 LS9 LS26 LS23 LS12 LS13 LS6 LS14 LS8 LS24 LS15 LS1 LS16 LS7 LS11 LS3 LS20 LS5 LS10 LS22 Ls21 LS28 LS17 LS2 LS18 LS4 LS25 LS27 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Manganese (Mn) 8.00 Manganese Graph Managanese Graph 6 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 25 of 32

26 LS10 LS1 LS20 LS12 LS13 LS17 LS6 LS8 LS5 LS2 LS19 LS28 LS18 LS16 LS3 LS9 LS11 Ls21 LS25 LS26 LS7 LS15 LS14 LS4 LS24 LS23 LS27 LS22 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Sulphur (S) 4.00 Sulphur Graph Sulphur Graph 8 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 26 of 32

27 LS19 LS27 LS26 LS12 LS16 LS15 LS14 LS1 LS10 LS20 LS13 LS5 LS9 LS11 Ls21 LS17 LS18 LS2 LS3 LS6 LS7 LS24 LS25 LS4 LS28 LS23 LS22 LS8 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Phosphorus (P) Phosphorus Graph Phosphorus Graph 10 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 27 of 32

28 LS27 LS11 LS3 LS6 LS12 LS28 LS7 LS1 LS8 LS18 LS22 LS2 LS5 LS17 LS19 LS20 Ls21 LS25 LS9 LS4 LS15 LS23 LS13 LS14 LS16 LS24 LS26 LS10 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Nickel (Ni) Nickel Graph Nickel Graph 12 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 28 of 32

29 LS22 LS24 LS14 LS12 LS13 LS23 LS15 LS11 LS1 LS6 LS7 LS8 LS18 LS28 LS10 LS5 LS2 LS9 LS16 LS3 LS25 LS4 Ls21 LS17 LS26 LS27 LS20 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Molybdenum (Mo) Molybdenum Graph Molybdenum Graph 14 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 29 of 32

30 LS10 LS22 LS1 LS13 LS12 LS14 LS23 LS5 LS18 LS2 LS11 LS6 LS25 LS28 LS16 LS17 LS3 LS20 LS4 LS24 LS15 Ls21 LS8 LS7 LS27 LS26 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Copper (Cu) Copper Graph Copper Graph 16 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 30 of 32

31 LS27 LS14 LS24 LS13 LS23 LS12 LS9 LS8 LS10 LS20 LS25 LS18 LS22 LS15 LS2 LS5 LS7 LS11 Ls21 LS28 LS17 LS1 LS6 LS3 LS16 LS4 LS26 LS19 PT Scheme: Chemical Testing of Steel Alloy Round: 01 Chromium (Cr) Chromium Graph Chromium Graph 18 Red Color Indicates Outlier Pink Color Indicates Questionable Green Color Indicates Satisfactory Page 31 of 32

32 OUTLIER RESULTS Overall 28 Laboratories have participated in this proficiency testing programme and the results are given below in tabulated form TABLE 14: OUTLIER RESULTS SUMMARY S. No. Test Parameters No. of Results Questionable Outlier 1. Carbon (as C), % 28 Nil 2 2. Silicon (as Si), % Manganese (as Mn), % 28 Nil 3 4. Sulphur (as S), % 28 3 Nil 5. Phosphorus (as P), % Nickel (as Ni), % 28 Nil 3 7. Molybdenum (as Mo), % Copper (as Cu), % Chromium (as Cr), % In case the Performance of the laboratory in the proficiency testing is not found satisfactory, the laboratory should find out its causes of inadequacy. Once the causes are analyzed it would be possible for the laboratory to identify the number of areas where improvement is needed. Page 32 of 32

FINAL REPORT

PROFICIENCY TESTING PROGRAM FOR TENSILE PROPERTIES OF STEEL [PTM/MECH/10/14-15] FINAL REPORT 2015-16 ORGANIZED BY GLOBAL PT PROVIDER PVT. LTD., NEW DELHI PT SCHEME NAME : TENSILE PROPERTIES OF STEEL PT